Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Now I remember, THIS is why I strongly oppose the gay agenda

The other day I was reading the Fishwrapper and I noticed the name "Savage." With fond thoughts of Michael Savage in my mind I started reading the article and was absoulutely disgusted by what I read.

Dan Savage, is the mouthpiece (no pun intended) for the gay movement in Seattle and his comments are the prime examples of the social degeneration that liberals, and gays in particular, want our society to embrace.

Some excerpts:

Savage -- who with his boyfriend, Terry, adopted their young son D.J. from a homeless Portland birth mother...

I'm sure they'll seize on the not-necessarily-monogamous stuff... This country has totally unrealistic expectations about monogamy. What are the odds of straight couples being totally monogamous over 40 or 50 years?
Good idea Savage, set the expectations low.

D.J.'s mom is on the streets. She was the most responsible drug-and-alcohol-plagued street kid I've ever met. She stayed clean for her entire pregnancy, and I feel very protective of her. But now, we don't know where she is.
I know that I'm always describing drug plagued street kids as responsible...

Straight people, the fins are sticking out of the water and the shark is coming for you, too.
Threats from the tolerance crowd.

Anyway, I brought this up even though it was a couple days ago because this idiot is also in the Portland Mercury.

What prompted so many young straights to run off and live like homos? I have a theory: A lot of the early opposition to the Gay Lifestyle was motivated by envy. Straight people resented gay people for giving themselves permission to do what a lot of straight people wanted to do but couldn't—have fun while you're young, sleep around while you're hot, and live someplace more interesting than the suburbs.

That sounds great! Doing drugs, have anonymous sex, no limits and no rules! That's what everyone should want! Thank goodness that there's no such thing as lasting consequences...

My point is, they gay movement is all about selfishness, a lack of responsibility and a tearing apart of the social fabric. They celebrate absolute anarchy while pretending to want happy families. (Two dads to their son: don't forget to "sleep around while you're hot")

11 comments:

Tony said...

A study in the journal "Adolescence" found that "A disproportionate percentage -- 29 percent -- of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only .6 percent of adult children of heterosexual parents having reported sexual relations with their parent...Having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of 50" --P. Cameron and K. Cameron, "Homosexual Parents," Adolescence 31 (1996): 772

Another study by the journal "Children Australia" compared a sample of 174 primary school aged children, 58 from married hetero couple, 58 from hetero couples living together, and 58 from gay couples. The researcher found that the children of married couples did the best overall, and the children of gay parents did the worst, in 9 out of 13 standards:

Language
Math
Sport
Sociability
Attitude to School and Learning
Parent-School Relationship
Sex Identity (gender roles)
School Related Support (parents help with homework, e.g.)
Parental Aspirations (for child's education / career)

They did best in:

Social Studies
Child's Personal Autonomy
Household Tasks (child's contribution to)
Sotirios Sarantakos, "Children in Three Contexts: Family, education, and social development," Children Australia, Vol 21, No 3, (1996), 23

(I assume the children of gays did better in Interior Design, Fashion, and Hosting a Faaaabulous Dinner Party too...but I digress).

This and other well documented facts are available in the family research council's publication "Getting It Straight: What the Research Shows About Homosexuality". www.frc.org

Children of gays are 50 times more likely to be a victim of incest, but don't dare suggest that or you will be called an evil homophobe. Or dont suggest that it might not be the best spot for the healthy development of a child...

Just close your eyes and accept the politically correct nonsense. Shame on the media for refusing to print stuff like this and give people the ugly truth.

Gunslinger said...

I like how the article refers to the birth mother as a "Kid." What the hell? So if I read that correctly, they used a young street junky to have a kid, then cast her back to the streets? Wow, that is really helping her. Awesome. I blame that show "My two dads" for starting all this.

Anonymous said...

I would assume by tony's digress, that he simply found a single article that bolstered his one way agenda. Otherwise, why digress into a meaningless stereotype of homosexuals. Poor taste.
And that research does show that a child is more likely to be molested by a heterosexual known to the child than by any homosexual.

Here are some findings from the scientific peer-reviewed journal, "Pediatrics" published in July of 1994. The study was done by Dr. Carole Jenny of the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center. The subjects were 269 sexually abused children seen at Denver Children's Hospital over the course of one year.

*1 in 219 girls was molested by a lesbian * 1 out of 50 boys by a gay male.*About 8 in 10 girls were molested by a man who was or had been in a heterosexual relationship with the child's mother or another relative. *3 out of 4 boys were abused by males in heterosexual relationships with female relatives.

2% of the boys in the study were molested by gay males.

98% of the boys in the study were molested by heterosexuals. Of that number, 75% were molested by heterosexual males KNOWN TO THE VICTIMS in an incestuous scenario.

0.05% of the girls in the study were molested by a lesbian.

99.5% of the girls in the study were molested by heterosexuals. Of that number, 80% were molested by heterosexual males KNOWN TO THE VICTIMS in an incestuous scenario.

Furthermore, being a victim myself i can attest, that in my scenario, a hetero male was the perpatrator.

Don't be as blinded by your preconceived notions that you'll find whatever words you can to satisfy your point.

Tony said...

My point stands.

Yes, you are correct, that a child sex abuse victim is more likely to be victimized by a heterosexual, and that is because of the much greater number of heterosexuals in the community at large.

However, as the study points out, a child of homosexual parents is still 50 times more likely to be a victim of abuse by their homosexual parent than is a child of heterosexual parents.

Your response was apples to oranges. I spoke of a select group, the children of homosexual parents, and you broadened the scope to all child sex abuse victims.

My point in bringing up the study is not that gays are bad people, but rather that there is danger to the acceptance of a notion that children are just as well adjusted and safe, on the average, in a homosexual household. They aren't.

Gunslinger said...

If a male "hetero-sexual" molests another male, doesn't that make him gay?

GayRightsWatch said...

Tony you are absolutely ridiculous. Your 'facts' are nothing but misconstrued percentages put together by one of THE MOST ANTI-GAY organizations out there.

How in the hell can you present these studies as factual? It's preposterous and only makes you look like a ignorant jackass. You should have prefaced your comment by saying "From the Family Research Council" so people could simply skip that BS.

Bryan H.
Gay Rights Watch

GayRightsWatch said...

Tony,

Also do you persoanlly know ANY gay or lesbian couples that have children?

You also said "shame on the media for not printing this"...

The media doesn't use BS studies like this simply for that reason - they are formulated, biased and produced for a single reason--to promote their own anti-gay agenda.

Tony said...

So, Bryan, you are completely objective and not biased by your own opinion, and in that you believe that the journal Adolescence is biased against gays and made the study up?

And the journal "Children Australia?" Yep, biased too, gay hating homophobes who invented their own study results to fool the world into thinking that the perfectly healthy and happy kids of gays were really not adjusting as well.

FRC simply compiled the studies into book format, and the authors include, with each statement, a bibliographical note as to where they came up with the information, so you can go find the study and debunk it if there were scientific errors.

But there werent. So my question, if it is really true that kids are at greater risk, if it is true that they are less well adjusted, would you even care? Or is it more important that you advance a political agenda that requires all people everywhere be forced to approve of your sexual behavior?

I ask because you simply dismiss the information provided as hateful or "anti-gay", with no regard to whether or not it might be true.

And I have childless gay relatives that I love very much. And like my heterosexual relatives, I dont approve of all of their behaviors and opinions, and I dont require them to agree with mine as a condition for accepting them.

So who is relaly the intolerant one?

Steve Westphal said...

I like your site. Come visit my site at Drug Rehab Newsand leave some info or articles about alcohol withdrawal
.

Roberto Iza Valdes said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Terry said...

HEY! I had no idea...for the record, I am NOT the Terry who is, um, associated with that Savage guy. (He oughta change his name...)