..but thanks for labeling me a hate-mongerer anyway. His quote stands.

Cuz Ronald Reagan knew that in 1978 when he opposed the Briggs Initiative. In fact, his opposition is credited for it failing to pass. And, of course, this is the same Reagan who hosted the first gay couple to stay in the White House. And the one whose daughter reported:

My father gently explained that Mr. Hudson didn’t really have a lot of experience kissing women; in fact, he would much prefer to be kissing a man. This was said in the same tone that would be used if he had been telling me about people with different colored eyes, and I accepted without question that this whole kissing thing wasn’t reserved just for men and women.

Sorry, Phillips. But the real living breathing Ronald Reagan (not the imaginary icon of all things conservative) wasn’t hateful to gay folks. He had gay friends. And while he may not have been a big supporter of equality, he also opposed the sort of discrimination that you champion.

One would usually think that what follows has SOMETHING to do with the points. But, well, what does one expect from Cameron/supporter?

blah blah blah pedophile, blah blah blah AIDS, blah blah blah promiscuity and public sex. Nothing whatsoever about rights v. “super rights” (or even super duper rights). Sigh.

Legislators on FRI’s board? Please, Phillips, do tell who they are.

Do you have a cd?

1) The burden society’s tax dollars with a public health issue.

2) Considering agendas, the culture, and research your community is known for in the area of being attracted to the young, as well as the research that shows things like you being more apt to skip work, have health issues, etc., employers and school boards should have the right of discernment.

3) It’s not equality, it’s a devious lifestyle that you are seeking to label as an alternative.

“The greatest single victory of the gay movement over the past decade has been to shift the debate from behavior to identity, thus forcing opponents into a position where they can be seen as attacking the civil rights of homosexual citizens rather than attacking specific and (as the see it) antisocial behavior. President Reagan apparently recognizes this distinction: before his election he was quoted as saying, ‘My criticism of the gay rights movement is that it isn’t asking for civil rights, it is asking for a recognition and acceptance of an alternative life style which I do not believe society can condone, nor can I.'” – The Homosexualization of America: the Americanization of the Homosexual

4) Ever read “My Country, My Right to Serve?” While aimed at promoting you in the military, it really only details a gross amount of rape, sexual recruitment and insubordination among the ‘gays’ it covers. AIDS is 5 times more prevalent in prison (some legislatures – including some on FRIs board – have tried and failed to bass legislation aimed at prison rape), do we really want this in our military as well?

5) Poor kids. A typical foster case in Vermont: Though the parents strenuously objected, their hard to handle child was given to a gay couple. When the boy complained to the Department of the couple asking him innapropriate question, the Department concluded that it was a lie and that the parent’s had coached the boy to say it. Not two weeks later the 16 year old ran away to a local hospital when the “family” was out shopping in order to escape the couple after they had already had their way with him. (Rutland Herald, 6/21/02) Research shows that gays are much, much more likely to molest, as well as lead violent lives.

6) Gay marriage is just the next step for the gay movement to receive public recognition. Reserach shows most gays prefer to live alone and have multiple parterns, even when they bother to enter into marriage.

7) Interesting you mention ‘cubicle’, was that “Sparticus” that was a guide to public rest areas, parks, etc. that have been commadeered by gays?

‘Super’ rights, indeed.