So you oppose teaching children under the age of consent that they should not be having sex with adults?

Figures. Why is it that gay liberals demand that underage children be taught sexual techniques in schools? Is it because you think it’s not rape if they’ve been “informed” in advance when you force yourself on them?

And of course, since you can’t answer, you try smearing those who point out what you and your fellow NAMBLA supporters like Jennings do to children.

Citing Gateway Pundit and Mass Resistance as your unimpeachable sources might impress the rubes who follow your every word, but in the real world, the world in which actual evidence and not mere claims count for something, your post here rates a fail.

And there has been ample evidence provided of how Jennings and the gay left believe in sexualizing underage children through the schools.

You simply are incapable of condemning pedophilia. That’s your problem. One would think that you wouldn’t have any trouble doing it if pedophilia weren’t inherent to your sexual orientation, but the fact that liberal gays like yourself not only teach pedophilia, but demand that sexual techniques be taught to underage children, adamantly oppose teaching children not to have sex with adults, and refuse to report to the law cases in which gay people are having sex with underage children, makes it obvious that pedophilia and its support are inherent to being a gay liberal.

So you’ll be calling for the resignation of any elected official who wants abstinence taught in the schools when, exactly?

Furthermore, when we follow the links from this site, to Gateway Pundit, to their ultimate source, we find Mass Resistance and Mass News, two organizations with a history of lies and deceit at their core. Anyone remember Brian Carmenker’s immortal “a kid got beat up on the playground because his parents are anti-gay activists” routine? Of course not. The irony is that the “fisting” kit portrayed at Mass News has an illustration showing its use as a dental dam for oral sex between lesbians. The “fisting” claim is made up by those wishing to sensationalize this matter–”ohhh…look at what those icky gays do!” But that’s par for the conservative course. Lie, lie, lie, sensationalize, demonize. Citing Gateway Pundit and Mass Resistance as your unimpeachable sources might impress the rubes who follow your every word, but in the real world, the world in which actual evidence and not mere claims count for something, your post here rates a fail. Nice work though, trying to get some of the crumbs from the wingnut gravy train.

Really?

I can name at least twenty people who are dead, twenty who are seriously disabled, and fifty who are medication-dependent for life due to HIV infection that they acquired through promiscuous sexual activity with older men during their teens.

That’s on you.

But you don’t care about those kids because you can’t blame their deaths on conservatives, Republicans, and religious people. in fact, you openly state that you don’t care if promiscuous pedophiles and child-sexualizers like Jennings damage children.

The charge that Jennings is doing damage to kids isn’t real, or if it is real it is vastly exaggerated as a tool for political gain.

Oh, it’s real all right.

New HIV diagnoses for gay and bisexual men under the age of 30 have increased by one third over the past six years in New York City, according to the city’s health department. Furthermore, new diagnoses have doubled among gay and bisexual men between the ages of 13 and 19, while the rate has declined by 22% for men over 30.

And this is in New York City, a liberal bastion in which GLSEN and their promiscuous-sex curriculum teaching gay teens how to fist, have sex with adults, and “use a condom” has been in place for years.

In short, you don’t care that kids are being damaged by Jennings’s behavior. You are dead-set on supporting Jennings, no matter what happens. You blabber about pedophiles being “criminals”, but when confronted with clear examples of gay pedophiles and pedophile supporters like Jennings, you refuse to criticize them or condemn their behavior, even as your support of sexualizing and preying on children leaves more and more of them dead, disabled, and drug-dependent.

Indeed, one wonders if the only thing that troubles you and Jennings about gay teens killing themselves is that it takes another trick out of your pool. You certainly don’t seem to care about the ones you kill through your promotion and support of promiscuity; maybe it’s because you were able to use them for your own gratification before they died.

So, a 15-year-old boy informs a teacher that he was picked up in a bus station restroom by an adult man who took him home and had sex with him and the only non-bastard way to deal with that scenario is to say to the kid, “I hope you used a condom”? Fascinating. Since you “work with lots of young people,” what’s the non-son-of-a-bitch way of handling it, ice9? Handing the kid a pack of Trojans and a bottle of poppers?

When gay liberals like yourself argue that it is synonymous with teaching fisting to underage children, taking children to sex fairs dressed as sexual slaves for an “educational experience”, and demanding that children as young as five be taught gay sex, then yes, it IS “strange, bizarre, or unnatural”.

The problem here, ice9, is that gays like yourself, Jennings, and your friends over at Media Matters simply can’t bring themselves to be open about their need to sexualize and have sex with underage children, and instead need to try to smokescreen it by claiming that all homosexuals do this. Then, in a charming attempt to make sure that no one disagrees with you, you’ve started this whole screaming fit that, if you object, self-loathing gay. Not unlike how your fellow liberals insist that, if you don’t support government-controlled health care, you’re not really black, or if you don’t worship Barack Obama, you’re an “oreo”, “house slave”, and “Uncle Tom”. In the world of liberal bigotry, homosexuality isn’t confined to simply to whom you’re attracted; it’s an all-over experience that dictates what you breathe, wear, eat, support, endorse, spend your money on, and vote.

The amusing thing is that gays like yourself and Dr Zen insist that we turn the other way and not judge pedophiles who want to sexualize elementary-school kids, but then wonder why people don’t think gays should teach in schools, adopt children, be in law enforcement, or hold elective office. You simply are making it clear that your sexual orientation is incompatible with life in a civilized society.

Feel free to point out these outrages, and watch how quickly you find out that condemnation of pedophiles is universal regardless of their sexual orientation — except among gay liberals, of course. But for some reason, poor Media Matters is never able to do that; instead, they sit there like a whining child who is claiming that everyone else’s mother lets them smoke crack.

Meanwhile, as for Media Matters, the simple fact is that Media Matters is paid to lie about and propagandize against conservatives, just as they did when they publicized and pushed the forged Bush ANG documents, just as they did when they spread the Barack Obama lie that Trig Palin is not Sarah Palin’s son, and that Kevin Jennings was “proved” right when they produced a photo of a fake ID with no picture, no name, no address, no number, and a random birth date with no ability to link it to any specific person, living or dead. It’s not the facts; it’s the need to attack and try to destroy conservatives over imaginary slights, while ignoring the real behaviors their fellow Bushitler screamers are doing, that makes them such a laughably-hilarious modern counterpart of Goebbels and Baghdad Bob.

Thanks!

Two options suggest themselves. One of course is the idea that you are above the fray, an idealist (a Patriot, perhaps? Oh, how hot!) That suggests principle, altruism, etc. I suppose it’s a possibility, but your foamy exgurgitations and malleable logic suggest otherwise. the good Dr. and I think another option is more likely–that you are a limited person who sees no contradiction in these views, and so contorts freely and happily toward the conclusion that will keep the commenters, who by the way hate and fear you according to their doctrine, happily though cautiously approving. See, in ConservativeLand, one counterexample is sufficient to void an entire class of people into second-class anything.

That’s not “showing how”–a childish demand anyway. Show me how you’re not a Dick–That’s just Occam. You’re hopeless. If you tomorrow strip your gears and come across to Code Pink, I wouldn’t care, because it’s not about individuals. It’s about community, country, and law. In a judicious discussion of reversing a multimillenial injustice, you’re the person who argues for maintaining that injustice, and does it with inflammatory, hairsplitting character assassination based on wrong facts. That you are yourself gay is simply irrelevant. It’s not that you hate yourself; it’s that you hate other people who are evidently more deserving than yourself of unqualified membership in our society.

Zen–how’d I do?

ice9

For those of you who operate under the assumption that homosexuality is strange, bizarre, or unnatural, it is clear that any “measured” discussion is impossible. That goes for the host of the blog, who by his acquiescence to the claim disqualifies himself from any journalism about it. This is logical by the same mechanics you use to condemn Jennings himself. If gay people are dangerous, we must act. If they are in any way or in any proportion a threat to, say young children or livestock or patriotic statuary, then you should promulgate a law to jail or execute them or otherwise curb that awful behavior. Instead we see this middle road, where gay activists are pilloried for various minor infractions or faked-up outrages. The same people never notice the frequent parallel outrages committed in the heterosexual population. Why such an interest in gay people? Why the histrionics? Answer: the people you despise as individuals are proxies for the class or group. That is bigotry, by definition. You are bigots.

“Media Matters is unreliable.” So too must be any source which contradicts the pattern of wisdom? All, or just one? Because Media Matters is not alone in, for example, demonstrating that the Jennings allegations are hairsplitting at the very worst, and complete BS in average.
No, what you mean is Media Matters stings. It’s perfectly reliable, though like many news organizations its articles create controversy and they are not always (nor do they ever claim to be) the arbiters of perfect truth. MM makes a convincing case that you (ie archetypal archconservative haters) live in a strange world clogged with biases, claims, and assumptions that are materially and obviously false. (that, by the way, is also a kind of bigotry if we call it bigotry to despise people who lie and quibble to destroy reputations and therefore create political power.) If you don’t think or ‘believe’ that you are operating on lies, then MM is going to need to be ignored or explained away. Easily done in a closed chamber such as a minor political blog with a sycophantic comment line.
MM does feature commentary, but most entries are documented and sourced and consist of the presentation of two simple pieces of information–typically a clip or excerpt from a show or article placed next to evidence of some weakness or fault. It takes a major leap of arrogance to wave that away as unreliable; it’s quite simple. If you believe fundamentally that, say, Glenn Beck is always right, then MM is either unreliable or you are a psychopath. A simple evaluation of fact renders the “MM is unreliable” claim not just false, but clear evidence that you are unhinged.
If you don’t want to be contradicted by Media Matters, then I suggest you avoid subscribing to concepts, like the Jennings smear or “death panels” or the like, that are so easily and completely debunked.

ice9