So I'm watching MTV's The Queer World and the first thing I see when i turn on the TV is a one of the chicks and one of the guys in bed, so I'm thinkin, HMMM, turned it on just in time!  Then I hear her say something like, "yeah he's in his bed with his boyfriend."  Whaaaat?  So then it goes on to show this queer ass fudgepacker kissing and hugging and grabbing the other fag's ass while saying goodbye the next morning.  

Ok, so I was completely sick, but it gets better, the dike of the show starts talking about her new butch girlfriend and the episode degrades to a queer episode.  

Now I'm not a big fan of fags, but I can tolerate their existance without thinking much of it.  Is it MTV's agenda to push faggets in our faces until they THINK we tolerate them?  

Am I wrong folks, or is this shit f*cking wrong to be on during hours kids can be watching TV?

Does MTV have any morals left?

If Beavis and Butthead can be pushed back for kids lighting their apartment on fire, can they push fagget shows back if a kid becomes a homo?  

You are not wrong. This kind of shit pisses me off to. God forbid we see a bare breast but fags making out is OK ? That makes no fucking sense.

Yes, that is their agenda, exactly.
Been going on since Phil Donohue and just keeps gettin worse. Consider what the rest of the world thinks of us when they turn this shit on.

Correct. MTV has no morals. Its part of their liberal agenda. I agree, these shows that portray homosexuality [fags and lesbians] as just another acceptable lifestyle should be moved later for adult audiences. Everybody involved in putting this garbage on tv should be ashamed of themselves.

I could go on and on about this, but I'll control myself.

I want the kids in my house to know what the world is about, but MTV is one channel that I will not allow them to watch.

ABC is just as bad. It not be as graphic but it commonly portrays simular underlying gayity.

After they brainwash 90% of the population into thinking that being gay is normal, then they'll start in on something worse--- like adults who "love" children or something. I can hear it now, a 40 year old man with his 12 year old "girlfriend" screaming for "equal rights".

Of course, MTV has the right to free speech as much as you or I.

Good parents wouldn't have to worry about thier kids watching the stuff because they'd turn it off. By the time the kids are old enough to start disobeying and watching the stuff you should have given them a pretty good idea of the difference between right and wrong, so that they'll turn that sort of things off themselves.

What really pisses me off is that you can't watch hardly any show on TV that doesn't have a fag on it.  And they all are portrayed in a positive light.  I don't have anything against people doing their own thing.  If you want to be a queer then it is your own business.  I just don't like the promotion of the homo agenda in my face every time I turn around.  Pretty soon they will get their agenda accepted by all the liberals and you will be facing serious jail time if you utter the "Q" word!  

Funny thing is thatI go to a very liberal NYC law school with even more liberal drama and theatre undergrad students.  I make no attempt to be PC about what I think about fags on this campus, lesbians are different, they are more covert and private, faggets are just in your face about being gay and out and crap.  

Combine this with being stalked by a fag while in H.S. and jogging into a queer infested part of Central Park once and I've been left VERY jaded to the existance of gay guys.  I abhore them and will tell them that I do at any possible chance, unless they are respectful about the people around them.

Atleast god knew he screwed up when he made them, he also invented the cure....AIDS.

Anyone hear about the shows OZ and Queer as Folk?  What the fuck is happening here people?

You're right, "Empty-V" has no morals - just as the "sex-drugs-rock&roll" sixties hippie generation wanted it.

In the history of American debauchery since the sixties...

1st came women's lib and free love. ('60s)

Then abortion-on-demand. ('70s)

Then anti-family, anti-marriage attacks. ('80s)

Then homosexuality. ('90s)

[b]Next will be pedophilia[/b] - AND YOU CAN BET YOUR LIFE ON IT.

Like those progressive, open-minded Europeans, children will be sexualized as toddlers, taught that their bodies are for sex, and that older adult "[b]sex-mentors[/b]" are necessary to help "guide" them through childhood and puberty.  

Kids aged 8, 10 or 12 will be encouraged to explore their newfound sexual feelings and express them in the "safety" of an adult "tutor/counselor".



Watch for the coming signs:

* More "jokes" and movies and sitcom themes hinting at it (first we joke, then we confront, then we accept - it worked for gays)

* Political movements to increase rights for children (lower the voting age, drinking age, etc.) Kids these days are smarter than we were back then ya' know.

* Psychiatric "studies" indicating that "gentle and caring" adult/child sex is not as damaging to children as we previously thought.

* A few cases of adult/child relationships (adult women/young teen males will be the first) will be highly publicized, though not criticized by the non-judgemental Media. This is the watershed towards "progressive" discussions about "tolerating" some of these "loving and healthy consensual" relationships.


MARK MY WORDS - SHORT OF A CULTURAL REVOLUTION OR DIRECT INTERVENTION BY GOD, IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AS SURE AS THE SUN RISES IN THE EAST.

I don't really care. I don't think that MTV showing homosexual couples is any different from 'normal' people making out. (Puts on flame-proof suit)

how ironic that the first post i read after coming to AR15.com to get some sanity back is a posting lamenting about the prevalence of homosexuality.

as some of you know, i am getting married soon.  there's a website for wedding planning that i go to.  it's got a "community" board area too.  i go there for 2 reasons and 2 reasons only:  to get ideas (bigger, better, cheaper) and to bug the crap out of the liberal women.

so today i'm reading this post about this bride-to-be that wants to invite "Hanna" because Hannah is a great friend.  only Hannah is a lesbian and doesn't go anywhere without girlfriend.  bride is afraid she's going to have to watch Hannah and s/o make out.  bride is opposed to homosexuality.  BAM!!!!  she gets slammed.  and i can't tell you the number of times she was called intolerant, judgemental, a poor friend, you name it.

of course, i educated them on the meaning of tolerance and told them that as long as i let them do what they wanted, without interfering, i was not being intolerant.  i could hate it, disapprove of it, ignore it, even reject it.  but as long as i didn't stop them from thinking/acting/feeling the way they wanted to think/act/feel, i wasn't being intolerant.

needless to say, it won't go over well.  can't wait for the responses.  but this is why i call this home and you guys family.

i've seen the future my friends, and it ain't purty.

Are you saying that watching a man and woman making out has the same effect on you as watching a man and man making out??! [%|]

[s]ROFL[/s]... I mean, ROLF as in [puke]

WTF are you doing watching that steaming pile of shite channel in the first place?

You'd do better for yourself jamming an ice pick into the side of your head.

Sounds like a Dr. Laura call [;)]

If I had a gay friend at my wedding and he brought his "roomate" and they danced together, held hands, rubbed each other's shoulder's and smooched and made out as the champagne continued to flow... those images would be so seared in my brain so as to guarantee there'd be no "rockin' and rollin'" in the honeymoon suite that night from me [shock]

Luckily, I don't keep conspicuously gay friends so I easily avoid such uncomfortable dilemmas.

Every wedding has it's obnoxious drunk, loose-lipped gossiper, embarassingly-clutsy dancer, or unexpected party-crasher.  I guess now we'll have to add "disgusting fag/dyke makout session". [:D]

I keep recommending this book: [url=http://www.booksamillion.com/ncom/books?id=2157392967381&isbn=0895261901]Bias[/url] by Bernard Goldberg.  It has a lot in it about the media's agenda, including a whole chapter on how AIDS was "popularized" as a danger to everyone, because the media wanted tobe supportive of the gay lobby.

Regarding wedding memories, I occasionally think of, and feel sorry for, a young couple whose wedding was at a hotel I was staying at about ten years ago.  Apparently, a woman hopped into a closet to get laid with some guy she knew, and her husband caught them in the act.  Her husband beat her half to death;  she got carried out in a stretcher, covered in blood and unconscious.  I still remember the look on the bride's face as the ambulance crew rolled the stretcher out.

It was pretty much I turned the TV on and MTV was there.  I saw a guy and gal in bed and I'm thinkin, Mmmmmmmmm, puuntang!  Then I get an earful and very shortly after that an eyeful.  

This episode seemed like it was testing the homo market, it could be the predictor of things to come.  I'm honestly very very surpised at the time it was on more than it being on.

I've also gotten a kick out of that Real World v Road Rules show that's been going on.  Our channels are very limited here, otherwise I'd be watching Animal Planet, History Channel or something else to pass time til COPS came on!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quoted:
I don't really care. I don't think that MTV showing homosexual couples is any different from 'normal' people making out. (Puts on flame-proof suit)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll refrain from insults since it just looks like you're fishing!  Last time someone said something like this to me was at a college orientation 7 years ago and I blew up and told them that fags are abhorant and should be regulated and registered. (Previously mentioned HS incident.) I was called a homophobe and a bad person for thinking the way I do.  

That same orientation, they taught me the word "Rimming" anyone know the meaning of that one?

Minman72

You gave an idea for a new slogan for gun owners:

Register queers not guns!

MTV was in on this stuff all the way back to the first "Real World" with some fag who had AIDS.  Later he died and got the hero treatment.  If you can be a "hero" for being a butt pirate and getting some horrible disease and dying as a result, count me out.

Do you know how I solved this problem with MTV? First, I stopped watching it years ago.  Nothing on it for me now.  Then I had my satellite dish service ended.  Now I don't accidently find it. I've gone for four years without a television back in the 90's.  I can go for the rest of my life without cable or satellite.  Even basic service gives you nothing but commercial channels.  Funny thing is these channels make their money by advertising.  Why should anyone have to pay for them?  The only channels I received with my dish that were noncommercial were religious, university education, and an abomination known as Free Speech TV.  That channel had such memorable programming as, Dyke TV, Together we can stop Capitalism, War and Peace report, and tons of communistic bovine scatology.  I feel so much better without pay TV.

Nor, evidently, is it pur[b]i[/b]ty.


NEA Indoctrination
David Limbaugh
February 27, 2002

While the decades-long debate over school choice rages and a potentially landmark case concerning it is about to be decided by the Supreme Court, I thought I’d share with you a few tidbits involving recent trends in public schools. The National Education Association (NEA), the 2.6 million member teachers’ union and school choice’s most militant opponent, holds itself out as being "America’s largest organization committed to advancing the cause of public education." Put aside the fact that the union is lobbying to keep inner-city children locked in inferior schools. Instead, let’s look at one of its current initiatives.

On Feb. 8, the NEA Board adopted a plan it says will make schools safe and hospitable for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered students and education employees. Under the plan the union will ask school districts to protect homosexual students and staff by adopting policies that punish harassment and discrimination.

[b]The plan doesn’t stop there. It will also encourage schools to develop factual materials for classroom discussions on homosexuality.[/b]

The NEA’s press release reports that the union will endeavor "to provide students, education employees and the general public with accurate, objective and up-to-date information regarding the needs of, and problems confronting gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered students." Any such information would be "nonjudgmental in terms of sexual orientation/gender identification."

There you have it: the magic word "nonjudgmental." I wonder if it would be judgmental to impart the fact that AIDs is overwhelmingly more prevalent in the gay than the heterosexual community. I wonder, too, whether the "objective" information the union would provide will encourage condom distribution -- and imply that condoms immunize you from contracting HIV?

[b]I don’t know about you, but I don’t want teachers "educating" my children about the "objective" facts regarding homosexuality and so-called alternative lifestyles.[/b] Besides, I thought liberals believed that teaching those kinds of value judgments in public schools violated the Establishment Clause.

One of the main premises of the plan is that [b]negative attitudes[/b] toward homosexuality lead to violence against homosexuals. Only by [b]correcting those attitudes[/b] can we stop the violence.

This tactic of promoting the gay lifestyle under the guise of preventing violence ala Hate Crimes legislation is often used by gay rights’ advocates, and sometimes to an absurd degree. For example, the United States Students Association (USSA) is pressuring this country’s universities to provide single-stall "gender neutral" restrooms to protect transgender students from harassment and assault. A USSA spokesperson explained that cross dressers "have a problem with bathrooms" that are for men or women only because "they face a risk of being assaulted if another person in there doesn’t think they belong." If they aren’t safe in the bathroom, "they won’t necessarily be able to go to college."

cont.


California recently enacted the California Student Safety and Violence Prevention Act, which requires the state curriculum to be modified to enable students to acknowledge homosexual, lesbian, transgender and bisexual historical figures and events. Here again, the pretense is to prevent violence, but [b]the transparent purpose is indoctrination.[/b]

I’m sure that sounds innocuous enough to the enlightened, but not to everyone. The Washington Times reports that a group of parents is suing a Novato, Calif., public school district "for allowing their children to see pro-homosexual plays at school without any prior notice or parental consent." The school’s program is called "Cootie Shots": Theatrical Inoculations Against Bigotry."

[b]The plays exposed second through sixth graders to skits pushing homosexual themes. In one, a boy wears a dress and discusses cross-dressing; in the other, a female becomes involved with a princess rather than a prince.[/b]

The school district’s public information director stuck to the party line in defending the subject matter of the plays. "Providing a safe environment in our schools for everyone has and will always be our main priority." Hmmmm. I suppose this is why the plays were followed with question and answer sessions about what constitutes normal families and acceptance of those who choose the homosexual lifestyle.

A similar bill, "Dignity for All Students Act," is pending before the Florida legislature. It, too, would ban harassment and bullying on the basis of many things -- including "sexual orientation."

It appears that the real bullies are those who insist that their value judgments be forced on our children. Doesn’t this give you a warm and fuzzy feeling about developments in public education?


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let no one delude themselves, the agenda of those who make the premeditated decision to engage in the filth of homosexual sodomy is and has ALWAYS been the corruption and indoctrination of children. If anyone is not familiar with what it was that first started the Belloc/Rikwriter wars it was that I defended the Boy Scouts of America's position that those that decide to engage in homosexual sodomy should not be allowed to be scoutmasters. Rikwriter replied that I was being "mean spirited". I have known, and have been trying to point out on various forums for over 3 years now, that what was posted in the topic thread and what I posted above would come to pass. And as ARLady has said, this is ONLY the beginning. It is only going to get worse, trust me, much, much worse.

"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions."
G.K.Chesterton

MTV is the network owned by Summer Redstone (Murray Rothstein is his original Jewish name) and is one of the sickest things to ever hit American shores. From trying to turn white children into Wegroes, to pushing the gay agenda, it is harmful to America in the extreme.

Rothstein should be drawn and quartered for his efforts.

But you kept watching the episode, right? In my opinion, MTV accomplished their mission (at least from a business standpoint): get people to watch it. You have to admit, with the boundaries of morality and "unexplored territory" being widened every day, this kind of show would end up on TV sooner or later.

Robby

It must be that they can get away with it in this country... my wife is from England and she says that over there they have an MTV channel that has only the music, and not all the other PC crap. REMEMBER: MTV supported Klinton, and they are a "good" example of what HIS agenda was, as well. This is how liberals get their votes... by targeting all the left-of-center splinter groups. Totalled up, they equal a bunch of winning votes, never mind the fact that they certainly DO NOT represent the majority.

We are pretty open with our kids, but MTV is one thing that is forbidden on our TV. I have it censored out on the parental controls so we don't even accidentally stumble onto it. Part of it is the fag tolerance that they are pushing, and another part is that "gangsa rap" garbage. VH1 falls into this category, as well.

FITTER out

Voltaire the great philosopher once said “Prejudice is the reason of fools,” and he also said “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”  

The one thing MTV, homosexuals, and shooters have in common is their willingness to fight for our freedoms.

I will say that I don’t like seeing homosexual acts on TV, and I try to avoid them but it is nearly impossible.  There is a weapon that can be used to prevent seeing more than a second or two and it is your REMOTE CONTROL!!!!!

Every act of violence with or without a firearm hinders our freedoms so we need to support others in their fight and hope they will return the favor.

Maybe we as shooters should contact MTV because they have the show “Fight for Your Rights” and see if they will meet us at Camp Perry in July.

All support from any organization is welcome in my fight!

You know, considering that we gun-owners and gun-likers a dwindling population, we don't do a lot to make anyone else but other white hetero guys really want to take part in our fun.  

Try being a little less divisive and maybe we can lose our own stereotype... that of paranoid, prejudiced white guys who are afraid of anything and anyone that might deviate out of our little defined world.

(((OR!!!!!We could remain a moral folk, cherish our stereotypes and SHUN sexual deviancy and perversion! I like my option better than yours.
A lasting culture doesn't change with the political fads of the day.))))))

GungHo,

You are correct, what is wrong with changing our social norm.  I don’t care what anyone of you do as long as I don’t have to participate.

Jesred

The Quote “Common sense ain't that common” should be corrected to read "Common sense is not so common." The great philosopher Voltaire said it to!!

I thought you knew...... us redneck sorts are just chock full of bad grammar, even if we ARE ripping off Voltaire. :)

Redneck’s are all around me, and I have accepted them.  Just a little embarrassed that I know Voltaire so well.

It just shows you can read anything when bored at work, or forced at school!!

So what does that mean? Ask a fudgepacker to accompany me next time I take my son to the range? Ask a group of colon comandos if they would like to participate in an IDPA match?

All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing. MTV is total left wing propaganda, how it ever got there from where it statred is beyond me.

If you say some thing over & over & over & over & over & over & over the sheeple will soon believe that the world is flat. The media has been telling us for the last 10 years that:

Homosexuality is OK
Homosexuality is OK
Homosexuality is OK
Homosexuality is OK
Homosexuality is OK

It sounds like you have listened one time too many.

GungHo

I was a little taken back by your post.  Are you suggesting that we accept someone into our "club" just because they shoot AR15s?.  How about the fringe radical armed groups?  We may be dwindling in size but it is because the rest of the country is going down hill.  There are a few conservative values we should not compromise on.

Like I said in my earlier post.  I don't care what anyone else does in the privacy of their bedroom.  I just don't want them to push their agenda every time I turn around.

If I am a "mean, gun toting redneck, heterosexual, white guy" then so be it.  I can live with that.

Watching this show for anything other than a laugh will get you into trouble.  :)

I saw parts of the episode in question and summarily exercised my right to vote - with the channel button.

Some people buy into the story that homosexuals are just everyday folks like you and I, but they just do something different when they get home in the bedroom with their boyfriend or "husband." If that makes it easier for you to get through your day, by all means continue to believe that.

Those of us who have gotten a good look at what homosexuals are really like will have our opinions --which are backed up by facts and first-had experience, not wishes and egalitarian fantasy pixie dust-- and you can have yours.

The desire to have sexual contact with those of the same sex is a defect, like the desire to have sexual contact with children or animals. The fact that homosexuals find other consenting adults to practice it with, and the fact that society has begun to tolerate it as some kind of normal doesn't change that.

Agreed, unless we're talking about two HOT and YOUNG chicks. Then it's ok! [:)]

Lesbianism is every bit as disgusting as any other form of homosexuality.

you know, when you tell a story, it's not nice to leave out certain parts because it makes your point nicer or better.

we're a dwindling breed because every other person out there [i]not[/i] like us has forsaken the moral high ground that this country was founded upon.  we've got people who think they're modern day robin hoods, stealing from the rich and handing out to the poor all in the name of egalitarianism, so some dumb schmuck won't have to work hard for his dollars.  he'll just take them from the guy who did.  we've got people trying to convince us that the government knows better than parents how to raise our children and educate them.  we've got politicians trying to take away our liberties...all for a few extra votes.  we've got people saying it's okay to kill unborn babies, but by god don't take that serial killer's life.  people are trying to take away what makes the U.S. the U.S.  if i'm part of a dwindling population, i'll wear that badge with honor.  at least i know i'm one of the few who refused to bow and cower to the popular opinion.

i AM paranoid that these things are going to rip my little world apart.  these people are trying to make it happen.  i don't know about you, but i sure as hell don't want to live in a country where the criminals are allowed to have weapons and the citizens have to wait for the cops to mop up the blood and fill out the paper work.  i don't want to live in a country where i'm not allowed to raise my children as i see best.  i don't want to live in a country where victims are criminals and criminals are victims.

if i have to be more divisive to make sure that country never rears its ugly head, then by god i'll do that.  if i alienate the entire population, i will still sleep at night knowing i did what was right for me, my family, my country, and God.

everybody has to make a choice.  now you know mine.  i suppose we know yours.

First, a quite.  My wife's hairdresser and colourist Steven (a homosexual man) has said the following in my presence "I don't mind gays, but I HATE fags!"  

I agree with him.  

The average gay individual is much like the rest of us (hear me out, now) barring the mental aberration that causes him to prefer the "company" of other men.  I don't understand it, I don't condone it, but I can tolerate it.  I just don't want to hear about it (I will accept the fact that they are gay, I just don't want to know what's involved!)

However, there exists a significant number of gays who are otherwise conservative in their overall political outlook - witness the formation of the "Pink Pistols" - a group of gay shooters.  I can handle that as well.

But, it is not the otherwise conservative gays that clog the streets of our metropoli with their annual "Fag Shows" - better known as "Gay Pride Parades.  These have caused me to lose money on field jobs more than once, and I have HAD IT with that!  Consider also that one of these cities (I don't recall which) that allows the annual Fag Show denied a permit for an "It's Great to be Straight" parade, and it shows how much the "fag" has gained mainstream acceptance as the norm for that group.

As you have probably already figured, I have great issues with the forcing of the "out" gays that are increasing in numbers.  And how does that manage to happen - I can't figure out how they are breeding?  I digress.

I have no trouble eating at a table with someone I know - and even the whole room may know! - is gay.  When there are gays who have to STAND UP and ANNOUNCE it in the middle of dinner, that PISSES me off!  Those of you in areas where ACT UP was active know what I am talking about.

I have been places where people would get up and leave when this would happen.  Restaurants lose business, and the owner can't do anything for fear of being sued for discrimination.  Try it yourself and see what happens.

I prefer a time when closets were for keeping clothes in, not coming out of.

FFZ

Yeah, that's what we need wingnut, moral multiculturalism. You can keep your Hillary Clinton ideology. The Founding Fathers were just crazy ole white coots when they said only a virtuous people were capable of freedom and that the only protector of liberty was religion and morality, right? The fools. BTW I don't approve of child molestors or Nazis or the KKK either but I guess I am just being paranoid, prejudiced and afraid of those deviant lifestyles also.
If anyone want so know the dangers that this "lifestyle choice" poses  to the nation pick up a copy of "Homosexuality and American Public Life". As you read page after page of proof of how homosexual activity destroys the individual, the culture and finally the nation where ever it is "tolerated".

"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions."
G.K.Chesterton

First, a quite.  My wife's hairdresser and colourist Steven (a homosexual man) has said the following in my presence "I don't mind gays, but I HATE fags!"  

I agree with him.  

The average gay individual is much like the rest of us (hear me out, now) barring the mental aberration that causes him to prefer the "company" of other men.  I don't understand it, I don't condone it, but I can tolerate it.  I just don't want to hear about it (I will accept the fact that they are gay, I just don't want to know what's involved!)

However, there exists a significant number of gays who are otherwise conservative in their overall political outlook - witness the formation of the "Pink Pistols" - a group of gay shooters.  I can handle that as well.

But, it is not the otherwise conservative gays that clog the streets of our metropoli with their annual "Fag Shows" - better known as "Gay Pride Parades.  These have caused me to lose money on field jobs more than once, and I have HAD IT with that!  Consider also that one of these cities (I don't recall which) that allows the annual Fag Show denied a permit for an "It's Great to be Straight" parade, and it shows how much the "fag" has gained mainstream acceptance as the norm for that group.

As you have probably already figured, I have great issues with the forcing of the "out" gays that are increasing in numbers.  And how does that manage to happen - I can't figure out how they are breeding?  I digress.

I have no trouble eating at a table with someone I know - and even the whole room may know! - is gay.  When there are gays who have to STAND UP and ANNOUNCE it in the middle of dinner, that PISSES me off!  Those of you in areas where ACT UP was active know what I am talking about.

I have been places where people would get up and leave when this would happen.  Restaurants lose business, and the owner can't do anything for fear of being sued for discrimination.  Try it yourself and see what happens.

I prefer a time when closets were for keeping clothes in, not coming out of.

FFZ

So was Charles Manson. So what?

Are you that brainwashed to believe that militant gays are fighting for "our" freedom??

If so, you've become quite a "useful idiot" for your own destruction.

Will your children be given remote controls when gay indoctrination books, films or discussions are incorporated into their elementary school "education"?


More liberal collectivist bullshit lies!  

You're succumbing to the elitist lies of moral equivalency.  

My God man, can't you discern right from wrong anymore?

Should we also support the New Black Panthers, The Aryan Nation, Earth Liberation Front and The Communist Party of America because "hopefully they will return the favor" someday?? [%|]

Sodom and Gomorrah were obliterated NOT because the people opposed the rights of gays to practice as they wished.

Macallan, good post.




Quoted:
[b]The one thing MTV, homosexuals, and shooters have in common is their willingness to fight for our freedoms.[/b]
I'm not quite sure if total fu_cking idiot, moronic imbecile, and monument to stupidiy describe you well enough. But we're in the ballpark. So, "MTV" which brags about the fact that it helped get Clinton elected is fighting for "our freedoms"? Right. It's not like "MTV" is against the right to keep and bear arms or anything. It's not that there were perhaps a hundred or so of those "rainbow" flags at the MMM. I know, I live in DC. I saw them with my own two eyes.

[b]Maybe we as shooters should contact MTV because they have the show “Fight for Your Rights”[/b]
Truly yours is a vacuous cranium.
"Fight for your Rights"?! Well, I suppose if you define "rights" as MTV does, premeditated mass abortion, ever bigger socialist government, gun control, homosexual indoctrination of school children, affirmative action (i.e. reverse discrimination),and the full ideology of marxist militant feminism as espoused by Hillary Clinton, all the while givine full support to the liberal gun grabbing democratic party.

[b]All support from any organization is welcome in my fight![/b]
OK scooter. [url]www.aacap.org/web/aacap/[/url]
Give us a call when you have received some "welcome support" for a year or so from this fine "organization".

Gungho, I understand your point, but you fail to see the point of my post.  I saw this show at 7pm, not late night or times when children would be in bed.  We are discussing the proliferation of "gay is good" type agendas in the media, not of gays as a class engaging in the firearms sports.  

As far as being stereotyped...I'm not particularly concerned with the image of firearms owners in the media, mainly because everyone in the USA knows a gun owner and can draw his or her own conclusions, just the same as the fact that I draw independent conclusions of everyone I meet.  

I also do not tolerate people who tell me that the conclusions I draw are wrong because it is not PC to think the way I do.  

Everyone is right, its only a matter of time before schools teach about homosexuality in 7th grade sex ed classes or maybe even earlier with storytime books like "my two dads/moms" or something similar.  I await the day that people will have the backbone to draw the line of demarkation and say enough is enough.

Guess you did not see my post from the first page. Here it is again...

NEA Indoctrination
David Limbaugh
February 27, 2002

While the decades-long debate over school choice rages and a potentially landmark case concerning it is about to be decided by the Supreme Court, I thought I’d share with you a few tidbits involving recent trends in public schools. The National Education Association (NEA), the 2.6 million member teachers’ union and school choice’s most militant opponent, holds itself out as being "America’s largest organization committed to advancing the cause of public education." Put aside the fact that the union is lobbying to keep inner-city children locked in inferior schools. Instead, let’s look at one of its current initiatives.

On Feb. 8, the NEA Board adopted a plan it says will make schools safe and hospitable for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered students and education employees. Under the plan the union will ask school districts to protect homosexual students and staff by adopting policies that punish harassment and discrimination.

[b]The plan doesn’t stop there. It will also encourage schools to develop factual materials for classroom discussions on homosexuality.[/b]

The NEA’s press release reports that the union will endeavor "to provide students, education employees and the general public with accurate, objective and up-to-date information regarding the needs of, and problems confronting gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered students." Any such information would be "nonjudgmental in terms of sexual orientation/gender identification."

There you have it: the magic word "nonjudgmental." I wonder if it would be judgmental to impart the fact that AIDs is overwhelmingly more prevalent in the gay than the heterosexual community. I wonder, too, whether the "objective" information the union would provide will encourage condom distribution -- and imply that condoms immunize you from contracting HIV?

[b]I don’t know about you, but I don’t want teachers "educating" my children about the "objective" facts regarding homosexuality and so-called alternative lifestyles.[/b] Besides, I thought liberals believed that teaching those kinds of value judgments in public schools violated the Establishment Clause.

One of the main premises of the plan is that [b]negative attitudes[/b] toward homosexuality lead to violence against homosexuals. Only by [b]correcting those attitudes[/b] can we stop the violence.

This tactic of promoting the gay lifestyle under the guise of preventing violence ala Hate Crimes legislation is often used by gay rights’ advocates, and sometimes to an absurd degree. For example, the United States Students Association (USSA) is pressuring this country’s universities to provide single-stall "gender neutral" restrooms to protect transgender students from harassment and assault. A USSA spokesperson explained that cross dressers "have a problem with bathrooms" that are for men or women only because "they face a risk of being assaulted if another person in there doesn’t think they belong." If they aren’t safe in the bathroom, "they won’t necessarily be able to go to college."

 

(cont.)


California recently enacted the California Student Safety and Violence Prevention Act, which requires the state curriculum to be modified to enable students to acknowledge homosexual, lesbian, transgender and bisexual historical figures and events. Here again, the pretense is to prevent violence, but [b]the transparent purpose is indoctrination.[/b]

I’m sure that sounds innocuous enough to the enlightened, but not to everyone. The Washington Times reports that a group of parents is suing a Novato, Calif., public school district "for allowing their children to see pro-homosexual plays at school without any prior notice or parental consent." The school’s program is called "Cootie Shots": Theatrical Inoculations Against Bigotry."

[b]The plays exposed second through sixth graders to skits pushing homosexual themes. In one, a boy wears a dress and discusses cross-dressing; in the other, a female becomes involved with a princess rather than a prince.[/b]

The school district’s public information director stuck to the party line in defending the subject matter of the plays. "Providing a safe environment in our schools for everyone has and will always be our main priority." Hmmmm. I suppose this is why the plays were followed with question and answer sessions about what constitutes normal families and acceptance of those who choose the homosexual lifestyle.

A similar bill, "Dignity for All Students Act," is pending before the Florida legislature. It, too, would ban harassment and bullying on the basis of many things -- including "sexual orientation."

It appears that the real bullies are those who insist that their value judgments be forced on our children. Doesn’t this give you a warm and fuzzy feeling about developments in public education?"



"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions."
G.K.Chesterton

I tend to agree with GungHo. While the idea of guys making out is personally icky to me, it has precious little to do with shooting. We need more shooters, and a person's sexual proclivities really don't concern me that much.

Thanks Belloc, it isn't something I've encountered yet and hopefully I will not.  I hope that Bush's voucher program goes into effect that way the teachers union changes its super liberal agenda.  

Although I'm not pleased reading your post, I do like to know what's going on.  Thanks for the info!

SPEARWEASEL, although I didn't start this post as a gay gun owners post, it has touched on the topic and I've got to say that I'll respect any gay on the range with his pretty pink pistol! hehehe

I'll state it again briefly, my post was only to talk about the disgusting material being aired on MTV during hours when children watch and can be subjected to homosexuality in graphic form.  I don't associate with homosexuals, but only because of past horrible experiences.  I just stay away.

We, as a nation, need a return to a strong moral code. This moral code is best shown in the Bible. This may upset some of the 'less religious inclined' on this board, but we need to revert to a 'One Nation, Under God' mentality. As shown with the dissolution of the nuclear family, and rise of 'do what makes you feel good' liberalism, our country has moved away from a strong moral ethic to a social morass. I am afraid that we mat not be able to reverse the slide.
I heard an interesting supposition a long time ago, 'the percentage of homosexuals in this country has not suddenly increased, just the acceptance of that way of life, allowing this minority to masquerade as a majority or at least an accepted vaible minority'. If this is indeed true, then we as "normal" citizens have a duty and right to re-establish ourselves as the majority and demand that our country return to a strong moral position.

Or...

While the idea of [b]bestiality[/b] is personally icky to me, it has precious little to do with shooting. We need more shooters, and a person's sexual proclivities really don't concern me that much.

While the idea of [b]pedophilia[/b] is personally icky to me, it has precious little to do with shooting. We need more shooters, and a person's sexual proclivities really don't concern me that much.

While the idea of the [b]Militant Black Power Movement[/b] is personally icky to me, it has precious little to do with shooting. We need more shooters, and a person's political affiliation really don't concern me that much.

While the idea of the [b]KKK[/b] is personally icky to me, it has precious little to do with shooting. We need more shooters, and a person's political affiliation really don't concern me that much.

Yes, let's not be so "paranoid" and "divisive".

Let's start being more tolerant to anyone with a gun. [%|]


Sheesh... talk about your "single-issue" mentality!!  "As long as they are gun-supporters - I'll never oppose their other ideas they try to force upon society."

One of the reasons I own guns is to stop whackos from controlling Gov't and forcing me to "tolerate" (i.e. accept/celebrate) their perverse ideology.  

Like hell I'm going to support social misfits, perverts and degenerates who try to gain control of society JUST because they'll let me have guns - UNTIL they get so widely accepted and powerful that they then decide they can use force against me.