#27) I had no idea where Montrose was until Peter H. told us.

#45) I’ve never in my entire life heard anyone other than gays call any human being “diseased”. What a vile term.

But I have always thought the advice Condi Rice’s parents gave her — that she would have to be “twice as good” — is quite sage and applicable in our case.

Over time, that will get us to that point. But unfortunately, we are stuck with the legacy of thirty years of morons who have proclaimed to the American people that “gay” translates to “drug-addled, diseased, promiscuous, antireligious and antimilitary leftist”.

The place we have succeeded well is in business — where, thanks to the normal requirements of employment, hatemongering gay leftists have been screened out. Where we HAVEN’T succeeded is on the streets — where the screaming morons have been able to define us.

People like Van Helsing are our natural allies, although they don’t know it yet. We should be supporting them in their speaking out against “homosexual depravity”, thus pointing out to the world that being gay does not require you to be a promiscuous disease-spreading idiot and that the gays who do, or who whine and blame Reagan, are nincompoops.

In short, gay promiscuity HAS been the major cause of HIV spreading in the United States, and if you look at the CDC report, it has been the major cause of death from AIDS.

And where do I deny this? Yes, HIV is spread by homosexual depravity. No question. Lots of it. “The major cause”, just as you say. And, it is spread by heterosexual depravity as well, and drug-user depravity (of either orientation) as well. No question about that either. “The major cause”, is not ‘the only cause”. 10% (if it’s that low) is still one heck of a lot of HIV being spread by others. Hmmm, you could just say that AIDS is spread by depravity, period. That would be the most fair and natural thing to say, as well as the easiest (least amount of typing).

Adding “homosexual” as a qualifier, then, in pointed a way that *structurally omits* or *overlooks* the other contributing depravities, could be a sign of animus: of a desire to stigmatize all homosexuals on identity, rather than judge people fairly by individual character. Add it up with some other signs… and it is a sign.

there are gay and lesbian groups using our name to argue that sex with children half your age is common among gays

They’re psychically wounded morons - or worse. (There, I slapped ‘em.)

What he does need to be reminded is that there are those of us here that are in a war to take back the word “gay”.

Yeah. And, to have all people, good or bad, judged not by the [insert identity characteristic here], but by the content of their individual characters.

In San Francisco…..nine out of ten HIV infections occurs in gay men.

HIV/AIDS has had a particularly severe effect on California’s gay community, with 74% of all cases occuring among gay and bisexual men; nationally it is 58%.

In short, gay promiscuity HAS been the major cause of HIV spreading in the United States, and if you look at the CDC report, it has been the major cause of death from AIDS.

We do ourselves no favors by getting upset over people who point out the screwups. While his words may be less than kind, there is an important message in there, and it is OUR responsibility to take our lumps at this point.

Furthermore, as I have repeatedly pointed out, there are gay and lesbian groups using our name to argue that sex with children half your age is common among gays. Until these people are slapped and slapped hard publicly, he has every right to bring them up — and he ESPECIALLY has right to point out that these same leftist gays who are sueing eHarmony are the ones who promote and endorse this sort of behavior.

What he does need to be reminded is that there are those of us here that are in a war to take back the word “gay”.

“Anti-gay”, to me, is a term with a specific meaning. It means a person or action or statement that manifests, and seeks to promote, *identity-based* hatred or animus toward gays and lesbians *as a group*… thus failing to judge individuals by what Martin Luther King called “the content of their character”.

Easley’s comment clearly does not fall in that category. I seriously doubt he was trying to promote animus against anyone except Barack Obama.

What would fall in that category? Well, for example, if someone were spreading slanders about gays and lesbians. I came across this example just a few minutes ago, from Van Helsing over at Moonbattery:
http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2008/05/homosexual_mili_1.html

His points are right-on, about the absurdity and wrongness of the gay political militia trying to change eHarmony. But as a kicker, he throws in some undeniable slanders. Consider the following:

- He singles out ‘homosexual depravity’ for the spread of AIDS, thus omitting heterosexual and drug-user depravity (which also spread HIV). It would have actually been easier, and more accurate, to merely say “depravity”. In other words: throwing in the “homosexual” modifier was an extra little effort he went to… to stigmatize gays *as a group*.

- He contrasts dating options such as ‘man seeking woman’ and ‘woman seeking man’ with ‘pervert seeking boy’. Problem is, homosexual dating - whether it is a serious relationship, or just a bunch of one-night stands - isn’t ‘pervert seeking boy’. Pedophiles may sometimes claim to be gay, but in reality, they are a different breed. So Van spreads a gay=pedophile slander.

There’s something to be said for identity politics. It’s just not the end-all, be-all. And I think the word “pansy” is borderline and, being from NC myself, I get the colloquial connotation he was using. It isn’t pretty.

Also — it’s stuff like this that makes the left-wing gay rights movement powerful; they know how to work the news cycle and put their identity agenda up front. Unlike, say, gay conservative blogs. One might argue — as you have — that this controversy is overblown, but somehow I think they got a lot of free PR out of it.

Maybe we (gay conservatives) should learn how to do that!

I’m all for assimilation and not creating a “gay ghetto,” but I also prefer my own haunts where I don’t feel like everyone is staring at me and Hubby and wondering what we’re doing together. Maybe it’s just me.

Regards,
Peter H.

#30 - Vince, the Montrose is the gay neighborhood of Houston. However, at this writing, it is being taken over by young straight couples and upwardly mobile transplants. Most of us are now migrating into the Heights, just north of the Montrose and I-10.

And to put in my $0.02 about “Pansy-gate:”

1. The NC gov should just ignore the brouhaha. Apologizing for or trying to explain a non-issue will just result in more publicity. (Hello Mr Macaca?)

2. I’ve always said that the radical GayLeftLib movement was designed to allow effeminate men easier access into the mainstream of American society. Now I’ve got the proof of it. Anyone who is worried about being called a “pansy” should do a tour of duty in the Middle East and really learn about being oppressed.

3. Most gay men who spend at least a few days a week in the gym (if they’re not “standing and modeling” for hours) can kick some tail, yours truly included. And I’m not afraid to defend myself physically in case some neanderthal calls me a fag or pansy. It also seems like the intolerant ones are all leftist moonbats. But I digress.

4. Hillary did the right thing and not only ignored the NC gov’s comment (as well anyone should), but did not rush to kiss HRC or Aravosis’ collective glutes and decry such a “statement.” For once, I applaud her.

Regards,
Peter H.

It’s no wonder that political discourse in America has become so pointless.

Since any statement of substance is a minefield, pols are left to inane comments about their opponents (of course, another minefield).

I’m not offended by the word “pansy” because I don’t see myself as a pansy (or girly man).

No offense to pansies (the flower - see #3).

“If Gay American activists were constantly up in arms about the worldwide threat to our community by an organized group of murderous Islamists, I might have more sympathy to those “completely offended” by Gov. Easley’s “pansy”.

I am not. Grow up, and get over the victimization mentality, folks.

PS - And don’t even start with me about how the American Religious Right is akin to Islamists. If you do, you must provide videotaped evidence of American Christian groups beheading or hanging gays. There is no moral equivalence in a worldwide pogrom of gays being spearheaded by radical Islamists.”

Bruce, if more of the politically active and outspoken gays thought like you, I think y’all would be about 10x further along in the fight for acceptance and respect. Awesome.