13 Comments

Roger, the link in your post appears to be broken. It should be http://gaypatriot.net/2006/04/21/report-iran-executes-gays-following-false-charges.

Thanks. Fixed.

I don’t believe it and won’t until I see it in the LA Times, SF Examiner, Boston Globe, NY Times or Washington Post.

This is just another case of a right wing gay person (probably not really gay) trying to make us believe that our good Muslim brothers are evil. I’m not falling for this foolishness and the Bush extreme right wing people’s attempt to make me mad at my Muslim brothers.

Only when West Hollywood and SFO gets mad will I know it is true. They haven’t, so it isn’t.

The hard core leftists laugh at our concerns. We naive fools sadly fail to see the big picture. They believe that the Islamic nihilists are merely victims of capitalist exploitation. We merely need to eradicate capitalism and virtually overnight the radical mullahs and their followers will become left-wing egalitarian sentimentalists. Am I being a bit overly simplistic? Nope, thatís an exact description of their subconscious, if not even conscious mindset. It’s truly that insane.

Thomas Friedman tells us it is better for the Iranian Mullahs to secure nuclear weapons than it is for the U.S. under Bush’s presidency to stop them. I suppose Andrew Sullivan will next tell us it is better for the Iranian Mullahs to torture and execute Iranian homosexuals than it is for the U.S. under Bush’s presidency stop them.

And western and American liberals and Democrats undoubtedly will believe both Friedman and Sullivan.

Roger:
It is so nice to learn from promoguy that there is only one political view that “real” gay people can have. Your son is gay, you have some views that are not in line with the “real” gay outlook on politics, therefore your son isn’t really gay or you don’t love your son. Black conservatives are not black, gay conservatives are not gay. How is it that caucasions are allowed to have multiple political philosophies and no one questions their bona fides as caucasions?

Kevin, you’re one of the smarterest guys here. I guess next time I’ll put a bunch of smilies next to each sentence.

Promoguy:

Not smart at all. Rapid reading brings out the moron in me. No need for smilies, I probably would have missed those too.

promoguy, at first I thought you were satirizing, then, after reading Kevin Peter’s post, I reread the original article again, and thought that if you were serious then you had a valid point.

There’s no link provided to the source. Where did this article come from?

God, the original link was on Gay Patriot which Roger referenced.

I kinda thought that what I wrote was soooooo outrageous that, it wouldn’t be taken serious.

Now if Buddy Larson doesn’t get it than I know I’m in trouble.

promoguy, I know the link on Roger’s post is to the Gay Patriot site. But the Gay Patriot article has no link to the original source! Where did this article originate? I’m sure that Gay Patriot got it from some newslink somewhere, but since he doesn’t include it, it gives your original post a valid argument.

Okay, since I brought this business up about the Gay Patriot article not including a link, I decided to do a little sleuthing. The source cited in Gay Patriot’s article is a group called

Outrage!

I was hoping that my Yahoo search would have yielded something more substantial than a wikipedia source, and maybe there is, but I didn’t feel like wading through all the search pages. I only used the keyword Outrage!, and that also happens to be the name of game in the UK that has as its object the stealing of the crown jewels!

This terrible development is hardly surprising or new. Persecution as “others” is certainly well known to many groups, including Christians and Jews, and in this context, especially Bahiís.

However, I strongly object to the using term “homophobia” to describe any objection to homosexuality or anyìgay agenda”. It is about as accurate as “Bushhitler,” and almost as offensive. In the Iranian case, the motivation is certainly bigotry, not fear.

The term implies objection to any demand in the name of “gay rights” is “phobic”. In psychological cults such as Freudianism, itís from a hidden fear of one’s own unconscious homosexual tendencies. In general, this is nonsense ñ silly, in fact. It lends a pseudo-psychiatric patina to an intentionally misleading and pejorative use of language. The propagandistís technique: pin a word with negative connotations to your opponents, hoping it sticks.

Roger, I know you didn’t invent the term, and I suppose it’s so embedded in the culture that your usage is the easiest (only?) shorthand. Even Microsoft Word accepts the term in its spell-checker. Sadly, the propagandists have won.