Another Ugly Republican

Cagliostro · October 8th, 2004, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by gae:
What I meant by "civil" is that it hasn't devolved into what other threads became when what'shisname was posting.

The whole gay thing is a really tricky issue, Reason. I had a gay great-uncle. Of course, back in the day, he was just called a "bachelor". You know about my married, fathered-three-children-pillar-of-the-community grandfather.

I think that part of the problem might be that too many straight people have never know anyone openly gay. Ergo, "gay" people are only the militants who get face time on TV. And I think that's a shame.

Which is all the more why some of reason's comments directed towards me for his case that I'm "gay" are all the more disgraceful. His thought process is based on stereotypes. He's pathetic, small minded and quite frankly I think along the way he has become quite stupid. He brings nothing to the discussions but sarcasm and leftist innuendo. I think the board would be better off without him. But I have him on "ignore" now so as far as I'm concerned he is gone. And the board is a better place to visit for me as a result.

[ October 08, 2004 01:18 PM: Message edited by: G L ]

**reason** · October 8th, 2004, 04:22 PM

Allow me to give you a real life example to demonstrate why lake is wrong.

My best friend is Tom. He's in his upper 50's, gay, has two twenty-something children - a son and a daughter. Tom was married for 17 years (don't know what his wife was thinking).

Anyway, Tom's daughter goes off to college, gets pregnant by one of the members of the football team. The baby is born and they live together.

As it turns out, the father is a real redneck and sexually abuses the toddler daughter.

Tom drains his savings of tens of thousands of dollars in court, trying to pry custody away from the father (by this time his daughter and the child's father are separated).

The courts refused. The courts were obstinate and allowed the sexually abusive father unsupervised custody of a 4 year old girl. (The other side, by the way, made use of Tom's homosexuality in court.)

I don't know all the details, but finally the judge allowed a psychological evaluation of the father, who was deemed dangerous. The court finally listened.

Now, in lakes mind, Tom is unfit by his mere homosexuality. He successfully raised two children (I just went to his son's wedding two months ago). But the other guy - the sexual abuser - gets a free pass right up front in Lake's book.

Not to mention that Tom's daughter works at a recreation center, so I guess that means lake would've fired her from her job at a time when she needed money to raise her daughter.

I can't believe I'm even having this conversation. It's a real jaw dropper.

Next I'll tell you about another close friend, "Robert" and how he tries to keep sanity in his 14 year old daughter's world in spite of an ex wife who offers no supervision...

[ October 09, 2004 08:26 AM: Message edited by: reason ]

**reason** · October 8th, 2004, 04:26 PM

Which is all the more why some of reason's comments directed towards me for his case that I'm "gay" are all the more disgraceful. His thought process is based on stereotypes. He's pathetic, small minded and quite frankly I think along the way he has become quite stupid. He brings nothing to the discussions but sarcasm and leftist innuendo. I think the board would be better off without him. But I have him on "ignore" now so as far as I'm concerned he is gone. And the board is a better place to visit for me as a result.

You are queerer than a three dollar bill. Your gay "friends" are imaginary. And all this right wing talk tough bullshit you've utilized doesn't change any of that.

So there, you Big Homo.

**gae** · October 8th, 2004, 04:39 PM

Pardon me for being stupid, Reason, but if Tom fathered the children, wouldn't that make him bi? I'm confused. I know a lot of gay men marry because it's socially acceptable, but I'm really confused on the children part. A lesbian marrying and getting pregnant I can understand, because her role could be, um... more passive. Email or PM if you don't want to talk about it here.

That said, the sperm donor of the Tom's grandchild should be tarred and feathered. Or worse.

I think it's absolutely wrong that Tom was deemed unfit because he's gay.

My children are all out of school now, but as a parent, I felt I had a say in the ignorance of their teachers, their politics and personal beliefs. I wouldn't have cared if a teacher was gay; I would have cared if a teacher espoused a certain lifestyle. Gay, straight, poly, whatever.

Cagliostro · October 8th, 2004, 04:50 PM

Gae you are asking the wrong person. He's a homophobe who just happens to be gay himself. Another J. Edgar Hoover. Bi-sexuality is probably something he fails to even grasp. He likes to paint with a wide gay brush and fails to realize how infantile it makes him look.

**reason** · October 8th, 2004, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by gae:
Pardon me for being stupid, Reason, but if Tom fathered the children, wouldn't that make him bi? I'm confused. I know a lot of gay men marry because it's socially acceptable, but I'm really confused on the children part. A lesbian marrying and getting pregnant I can understand, because her role could be, um... more passive. Email or PM if you don't want to talk about it here.

That said, the sperm donor of the Tom's grandchild should be tarred and feathered. Or worse.

I think it's absolutely wrong that Tom was deemed unfit because he's gay.

My children are all out of school now, but as a parent, I felt I had a say in the ignorance of their teachers, their politics and personal beliefs. I wouldn't have cared if a teacher was gay; I would have cared if a teacher espoused a certain lifestyle. Gay, straight, poly, whatever.

Tom is gay. How he managed marriage for 17 years, I do not know. But he says he's gay. I believe him. He would know best.

I don't know that the court deemed Tom unfit, but the family of the child abuser did and they made that known in court. I don't know that the court used this against Tom, but they weren't exactly friendly to his daughter. Remember the name Silvia Sieve Hendon. She's a bitch. She let a lot of this happen.

********

I don't believe a teacher should push one's lifestyle on others. But what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I wouldn't want a lake misleading my children. It should go both ways, but it doesn't.

Which is why I think public education sucks. It's been sucked into a climate where a teacher can't do anything.

[ October 09, 2004 08:22 AM: Message edited by: reason ]

[ October 09, 2004 08:24 AM: Message edited by: reason ]

**reason** · October 8th, 2004, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by G L:
Gae you are asking the wrong person. He's a homophobe who just happens to be gay himself. Another J. Edgar Hoover. Bi-sexuality is probably something he fails to even grasp. He likes to paint with a wide gay brush and fails to realize how infantile it makes him look.

What GL doesn't understand is that a exclusively gay man can father a child. Fathering a child doesn't make one straight, it doesn't make one bisexual, though there's an obvious correlation.

Y'know, a lot of gay guys got married because that's what they were taught to do. So they got married, fathered children, then presided over the breakup of their marriage because they're gay. Go figure.

[ October 09, 2004 08:23 AM: Message edited by: reason ]

**reason** · October 9th, 2004, 03:10 AM

Originally posted by G L:
And Raven what kind of response do you expect when the title of the topic is "Another Ugly Republican"???? Clearly it was posted to enflame/incite and divide. If there is any blame to be had blame the person who started this topic, not those responding to it.

Given the nature of the article GL didn't read, the title was entirely appropriate.

It's this element of the Republican Party that keeps me from being a Republican.

**gae** · October 9th, 2004, 03:41 AM

Reason,

I think you're painting with too broad a brush. Not all Republicans share that view. Just like not all Democrats are calling for riots in the streets if Bush wins.

And Raven, Lake is right. The world view changes when one has children. I know there are exceptions to the rule, but I think it's safe to say that life is very, very difficult for unmarried mothers. Hell, it's difficult enough if you are married.

I also don't understand what you mean when you say the board is showing its true colors. This is a civil discussion. Reason is on one side of the issue, Lake is on the other, and the rest of us are somewhere in between. There's been no name calling, and unless I missed something, no inappropriate comments.

You seem to have strong views of your own. I think the differences of opinion are one of the reasons this little board has survived so long. I really doubt that either Lake or Reason has lost any sleep at all because the other doesn't agree. [Reason and Lake, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.]

Lake and Mr. Lake are raising their children as they see fit. If/when you have children, you may raise yours differently. But I can tell you from experience that children don't come with an instuction booklet, so parents just do the best they can and hope for the best.

**reason** · October 9th, 2004, 03:44 AM

Not all Republicans share that view.

I never said they did. I am currently a registered Republican and was once a dues paying member of the Log Cabin Republicans.

But there is an ugly, ugly strain of the Republican Party that is unChristian and dangerous.

[ October 08, 2004 12:54 PM: Message edited by: reason ]

Thread: Another Ugly Republican

Thread Tools

Display

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions