BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 04:40 PM

Ake,

If medical science were to find a way to eradicate HIV and the threat of AIDS were no longer an issue, would you still be opposed to legalizing same-sex marriage?

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 04:28 PM

You're a fine one to complain about abuse, Ake. Read a few of your own posts. You do have a tendency to froth at the mouth.

But then, that's nothing new. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 03:46 PM

:0)   Up spake Sir Amos, and a goodly man was he!
      "Not Godly, but goodly!"

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Amos
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 03:33 PM

Ake:

It's not the huggery, its the buggery.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 03:32 PM

I'll be waiting for some relevant points to emerge from the pro-HM side, I'll just ignore the abuse for now......weeeell they've got to say something....haven't they?

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 03:01 PM

What John said, Ake. You're blinded by your own rabid prejudice.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 02:58 PM

""Leaving so soon Don?......run out of answers have we?""


No, not answers, just the patience to suffer brainless, bigotted fools.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 02:56 PM

Nothing worth responding to since my last post...just more misrepresentations by Mr Peekstock, who would be well advised to go back and re-read my posts,   he either lacks any comprehension, or is simply an outright liar.

Amos... I think you were making quite an interesting point, but I have serious problems understanding some of your posts, could you please try some plain English....The grand style may have been OK for Shakespeare, but has really got me scratchin' my head.

Mr Peekstock was being "tongue in cheek", when he is usually "Foot in mouth".

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: John P
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 02:15 PM

Sorry, Amos. I was being tongue-in-cheek. Obviously not obviously enough ;^)

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Amos
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 01:43 PM

John:

I quite disagree, and am surprised that that remark should be aimed at me. I was merely commenting on Ake's one-eyed interpretation of bad statistics and jumping to conclusions therefrom. I have no interest in controlling people. Educating them about health risks is quite sufficient.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 01:42 PM

"Let's put cameras in every bedroom!"

Judging by what's available on the Net lately, I think we may be almost there already, John P. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: John P
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 01:34 PM

Yes, Amos. Perhaps we should make anyone who has anal sex into second class citizens. Let's put cameras in every bedroom!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Amos
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 01:04 PM

Conflating contemporary events and calling them causes and effects is a risky business, a sure way to make statistics lie.

The correlation, I submit, is not in the sexuality of the couplings but in the frequency of anal sex. At least, this seems much more probable to me, as it obviates the need to discover some mysterious aspect of homosexuality that spontaneously generates the disease when it occurs. That's just magic-think--there is no evidence I have ever seen that there is some cellular or molecular kickback mechanism that makes AIDS happens if intimate same-sex contact occurs. Your numbers also do not differentiate between Male Sex with Males (high probability of using the anal approach) versus Female Sex with Females (lower probability of same due to easier plumbing).

Nor does your assertion take into account frequency between multiple-partner series and same-partner series, which is an important differentiator.

I think it far more probable that the correlated vectors would turn out to be promiscuity and anal penetration, rather than homosexuality itself.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: John P
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 12:18 PM

Oh, yes, Akenaton, if you're going to keep calling me things like "bottom feeder" and "one cell organism" you should say why you think I'm those things so we can debate the point. Just calling people names really doesn't do anything for your standing as an intelligent adult. Please note that all the names I've called you (bigot, pervert) have been supported by reasons -- based on your own statements -- for calling you those names.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: TIA
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 12:10 PM

""If medical science were to find a way to eradicate HIV and the threat of AIDS were no longer an issue, would you still be opposed to legalizing same-sex marriage?""

No point in further arguing or trading barbs without an answer to this simple question.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: John P
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 12:09 PM

Akenaton, yes, in fact I do think I'm debating with a fucking idiot. Well, an idiot, at least. You get really pissed when I talk about whether or not you fuck, even though you seem to think it's OK to talk about what other people do in bed. Didn't your mother teach you the Golden Rule?

Idiocy #1: You seem to be saying that I don't want to find a cure for AIDS, and that allowing gay people to get married will slow down research on a cure. This is a lie, and you know it is. Saying things like that makes you an idiot, both from the standpoint of rational debate (unsupported, illogical statements) and from the standpoint of using slimy lies to attack people who don't agree with you (a place you go when you are challenged on your unsupported, illogical statements).

Idiocy #2: You are saying that the fact that AIDS has hit the gay community harder than others means that it's a gay disease. Any small, closed sexual community that gets a disease will see it spread throughout the community. The widespread incidence of AIDS started in the gay community. That's the only conclusion that be drawn when talking about a disease that affects people of all sexual orientations and genders. The male homosexual community is also made of men, who are by and large promiscuous, gay or not. Add to that the fact that young men are almost by definition stupid risk-takers, and you have a bad mix. Attributing any of this to homosexuality, however, is not supported by the evidence. If AIDS had hit the rampantly promiscuous college campus community first, would you call it a student disease?

Idiocy #3: You are saying that we shouldn't allow gay people to get married until we have done a complete study of AIDS. You are, without real reason, separating AIDS from all other diseases that we don't understand and that kill lots of people. You might as well say that we should deny civil rights to cancer victims, smokers, drinkers, and people who talk on the phone while driving.

Idiocy #4: You object strongly to being called a bigot while advocating denying rights to a group of people. We get to call racists bigots for the same reason. If you don't want to be lumped in with them, don't act like them.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jun 09 - 02:58 AM

Is that really all you can say about the issue?
These figures are a shattering blow to your liberal stance on Homosexuality/Aids and you prattle on about
"If this data were in any way relevant, there would be no straight people with AIDS"....Do you think you are debating with a fucking idiot?

This is a relatively new out break. Aids has been almost nonexistant in Cuba, due to the Cuban governments strict quarantine policy.
Now that "Liberalisation" has begun to take hold, we see a rise in aids cases, almost exclusively among homosexuals....is there something you don't understand about that?

Every one on the planet knows that Aids can be transmitted by hetro-sex, but have you never asked yourself why it always starts in the homosexual community?
The homosexuals of Los Angeles have asked themselves that question and have come up with the answer that Aids is primarily a disease of homosexuality. These people don't care about your "Liberal right on" agenda, they want a full medical inquiry, they want to stop Aids dead......and to stop it killing their brothers.


"80% of all Cubans affected are homosexuals."

That ought to make you very happy, Ake. Let the buggers kill each other off!"


Don Firth you have gone to a new low.....keep it up and you may become a real "bottom feeder" like your ally Mr Peekstock....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 08:37 PM

By the way, Ake (since you're such a whiz with statistics), how many of those Cuban homosexuals are in committed, single partner relationships?

I didn't think so!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 08:32 PM

"80% of all Cubans affected are homosexuals."

That ought to make you very happy, Ake. Let the buggers kill each other off!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: John P
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 07:07 PM

Akenaton: Apparently the latest country to suffer an Aids outbreak is Cuba.
80% of all Cubans affected are homosexuals.

If this data were in any way relevant, there would be no straight people with AIDS. But who needs science or common sense?

Akenaton, it has long been obvious that you can't come up with any rational reason to oppose gay marriage. It all boils down to the fact that you don't like it.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 06:34 PM

AWRIGHHHHHTTTT!!!! I knew you could do it. 1500 blithering posts!

Bravo, cheers, congrats to all. I have won my free trip to Montreal in August. I am in your collective debt.

Dare I hope that you will march on resolutely now to 1600 posts?

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 06:12 PM

Leaving so soon Don?......run out of answers have we?
Not to worry about the loss of reasoning ability, at least you can still count!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 05:55 PM

1500

Can we go now?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 05:54 PM

99

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 05:54 PM

98

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 05:53 PM

97

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 05:51 PM

""If medical science were to find a way to eradicate HIV and the threat of AIDS were no longer an issue, would you still be opposed to legalizing same-sex marriage?""

OF COURSE HE WOULD!

He'd just find another specious argument as to why it would be right to do so.

And it would bear as much relationship to his real reason, as his current excuse.......i.e. ZERO!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 05:34 PM

Apparently the latest country to suffer an Aids outbreak is Cuba.
80% of all Cubans affected are homosexuals.

The very low number of Cuban Aids cases is said to be because of Castro's controversial quarantine policy in the eighties.
AIDS in Cuba

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 05:12 PM

Thought I might check back in... it is a civil rights matter. It's about the right of people to fuck off when they ain't got the right to say shit about what other people do.

But, everyone knows that. Most know that the perpetuation of this thread is only for two reasons. To educate the ignorant and entertain the trolls.

Odd that the trolls who would seek to disseminate their vile would actually help educate.

Ahhhh, sometimes, it all works out.... in the end.

Sorry... can't resist a joke, me. Heheheheee.

Right... see you in another hundred... thousand?... posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 05:07 PM

And I might add, Ake, that the only people around here who seem to be shouting in full caps, splattering their post with exclam points, and generally having a s**t hemmorage over the fact that it is a civil rights issue are you and GfS.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Wesley S
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 05:06 PM

That poor horse is still dead.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 05:03 PM

Don't have to shout, Ake. No all caps, no string of exclamation points. The whole matter is idiot simple.

It's a civil rights issue.

Simple as that. Exceedingly difficult for some people to grasp, obviously, but it's as simple as that.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 04:57 PM

Ake,

If medical science were to find a way to eradicate HIV and the threat of AIDS were no longer an issue, would you still be opposed to legalizing same-sex marriage?

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 04:53 PM

Well gnu the pros seem to have found their niche after all this time.
No attempt to address the issues just a lot of cliche ridden crap.

I'll check in from time to time just to call any lies,or misreprestations they might come up with......don't suppose there's much chance of any further serious debate, as their side of the discussion seems to consist of shouting as loudly as possible "It's a Civil Rights Matter!!"

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 04:18 PM

Hey! How are you guys doing getting this sorted anyway? I haven't read any of it since the last time I was here.

Hmmmm.... seems to me the last time I was here was to... oh... the drier just stopped. Gotta fold laundry.

Carry on. Smoke em if got em.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 03:01 PM

GfS, I just reread your post of 09 Jun 09 - 02:57 a.m. for the umpteenth time, trying to make some kind of rational sense out of it, and I can only come to the conclusion that you are simply raving. No one here is advocating all of the bullcrap that you are accusing them (us) of. And checking some of your posts on earlier, similar threads, you seem to be totally obsessed with how others should conduct their sex lives.

I have a pretty good idea of the source of your problem. In fact, you said as much way up-thread.
        
I think you need a long vacation. And I also think that you could use the services of a good counselor.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Jun 09 - 12:55 AM

You need to read your own posts, GfS, so you'll at least have an idea of what you said.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Jun 09 - 11:27 PM

You responded to my post, completely ridiculously. You answered things I never said, or alluded to. That's what I thought was so full of bullshit! I think the bias, is all in YOUR heads!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 09 Jun 09 - 10:01 PM

Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time, and it annoys the pig.


(I think Robert Heinlein wrote that, inter alia).


A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Jun 09 - 09:21 PM

". . . a huge bunch of shit. . . ."

WOW!! Now, GfS, that's what I call a really devastating refutation. So well thought out! So reasonable!

Or were you talking about the contents of your cranium?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Barry Finn
Date: 09 Jun 09 - 09:07 PM

"How can you justify 'because the animals do it, we can do it, and it's all fine'"

Opps, animals are a bit more civilizied than some of us humans

"After all, aren't we a little more advanced than animals"

Never heard of an animal getting arrested for rape, murder, kidnapping, stealing land, swindling old folks retirements, abusing children

"Do we roam around sniffing to see who we can sleep with, like dogs, and then think we are 'really great lovers'"

Humans can get down right dirty when it comes to sex & have dogs beat. Never heard of a dog getting it on with a dead mutt. Dogs have nothing on us humans, we could teach them all a trick or two

What's the difference betewwn a whore & a Lawyer? The whore will stop fucking her client once they're dead!

"Who cares, what they do??"

Then why do you protest so much?

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Jun 09 - 08:55 PM

What a huge bunch of shit, Don!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Jun 09 - 04:08 PM

Just one selected item out of a wide choice in that blob of blather you've just posted, GfS:

"Do we roam around sniffing to see who we can sleep with. . . ?"

Yes, GfS, as a matter of fact, that's one of the things that humans do do. Have you never heard of pheromones? Humans have them, too. There has been serious research done in this area in relation to sexual attraction. Very valuable to the perfume industry. Have you never heard of such things as scented after-shave lotions? Have you never heard of deodorants?

"Do we roam around sniffing to see who we can sleep with. . . ?"

Yes, normal, grown-up human beings do respond to smells.

For Chrissake, get a good book on sex and human reproduction and read it! I'm not talking about a "how to" book or "what every little boy and girl should know," I'm talking about—well, a good start would be something like Sex: A Natural History, by Joann Ellison Rodgers. And there are others.

For someone who claims to be a counselor, I am appalled at your abysmal ignorance!

And morals? What about the morality of poking your nose into other peoples' lives and trying to dictate how they should live, who they should mate with, and how they can and cannot go about it?

You're a bloody fine one to be trying to lecture other people about morals!

And you can deny it from now until Doomsday, but the issue of same-sex marriage IS a civil rights issue, and it will stay a civil rights issue, no matter how many temper tantrums you throw.

(Like my wise old uncle once said. . . .)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Jun 09 - 12:17 PM

Tell me, Amos!..I know!!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Amos
Date: 09 Jun 09 - 09:06 AM

It is amazing to me, after the major poinrs in question have been said so many ways, so many times, that you can jump up and haul off with such blarney all over again.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Jun 09 - 02:57 AM

You know, I'm reading this thread, and all over the place I see people rationalizing promiscuity, behavior of animals, homosexuality, so on and so forth...but leave out morality. Morals derived from generations of rules, as to what works, and what doesn't. Promiscuity doesn't work, without someone getting hurt, homosexuality doesn't work, in the long term, and comparing human behavior by basing our behavior by the acts of animals, is super folly! How can you justify 'because the animals do it, we can do it, and it's all fine', and still get angry at the acts of nations?...After all, aren't we a little more advanced than animals? Do we roam around sniffing to see who we can sleep with, like dogs, and then think we are 'really great lovers'? So let's knock off the bullshit rationalizations, and try thinking a little higher.
If you, who are married, think your wives, can be replaced with another man, or if you think you can be a better woman, than your wives, well, keep it to yourselves...or at least discuss it with your wives, before you announce it to the world!
In a free society, people can and do just about anything they want...but to go around trying to convince everyone else, that they have to 'like' or approve of what you do, to get you off, you might, and DO have a problem. I imagine for some guys, jerking off is fun, but do you walk down the street doing it in public, because it 'feels good'?...then expect everybody who thinks you're 'loony tunes' is a bigot, or a hater of 'mankind'?
If people want to live together, either sex, must they have to be fucking each other demand equal 'civil rights'?..Who cares, what they do?? There is nothing that people who live together, with or without sex, that denies them their rights, one way or another. Is there??? If however they are trying to legitimize some sexual dysfunction, and go about painting it as some 'noble cause', I'm sorry, a lot of other people, without that dilemma, just aren't going to buy...and it is NOT A CIVIL RIGHT ISSUE...it's more akin, to a common sense issue...and by the way, don't some of you see, that the homosexual community, has pushed their behavior, just a little to the 'extreme', flaunting their 'lifestyles'...don't you think they go a little bit overboard, to rub it in people's faces??..and THAT is one of the big things that the rest of society gets offended by!..That, and trying to have our children taught that this is just hunky dory, and normal as apple pie!..GET REAL!
Now most everything that has been said, about it, on both sides, has already been said, except for the late 'dropper inners'....if you think homosexuality is just so great, teach your kids about the 'wonders' of it, and raise them to be that way, and be proud of them!!.......but down deep, you know that's NOT what you'd wish for them......if you ever wonder why, you've answered your own question!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Jun 09 - 07:49 PM

"Now there's a post with lot's of....umm...blank spaces between the ears(?)"

That the best you can do, GfS? You still haven't answered my question. You know, the one I've asked you a couple of dozen times (don't tell me you don't remember!??).

Talk about "blank spaces between the ears." (!!)

####

John, your post just above is right on the money. This is exactly what these two have been saying all along. But they don't want to own up to the fact. Or quite possibly they don't recognize their own words when quoted back to them.

####

Germaine to nothing in particular, it's just a memory that, for some strange reason just came to mind:   a wise old uncle once told me, "My boy, don't waste your valuable time trying to argue with an idiot."

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: John P
Date: 08 Jun 09 - 07:41 PM

Akenaton: our "homosexual activists" who require that the whole world accept homosexuality as "just another lifestyle" regardless of . . . the religious beliefs of others worldwide

My paraphrase and comment: We should continue to make homosexuality illegal because we (here in the land of the free) might offend religious folks in other countries.

Akenaton: even "civil unions" are wrong until a proper medical study of homosexuality and AIDS has been set in motion and some conclusions reached.

My paraphrase and comment: Sick people should be denied basic rights until we know everything there is to know about the disease (what about all those cancer victims? Smokers engage in risky behavior but still get to get married).

Akenaton: severe promiscuity appears to go hand in hand with homosexual practice.

My paraphrase and comment: Men are promiscuous (duh!!). If it weren't for women not liking it, lots of straight men would be severely promiscuous. Lots are anyway.

Akenaton: there is no guarantee that homosexuals en-masse will wish to adopt either homosexual marriage or monogamy

My paraphrase and comment: If any homosexuals believe one thing, they all believe it (who needs common sense?).

Akenaton: The figures show a massive link in real percentage terms

My paraphrase and comment: The incidence of AIDS has more to do with sexual orientation than it does with membership in an affected community (who needs science?).

Akenaton: People like Peekstock and "liberal" opinion have another agenda, they don't really care how many homosexuals die from the disease by being simply allowed to live with it and die with it. . . . I have no respect for those who take social and sexual politics before the premature deaths of our brothers. . . . Aids deaths are incidental to one cell organisms like Mr Peekstock

My paraphrase and comment: People who want homosexuals to have the same rights as the rest of us also want them to die (huh?).

Akenaton, this last statement of yours is a vile lie. Have you no honor at all?

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Jun 09 - 06:25 PM

Before my message box is again inundated.....apologies to unicellulars everywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Jun 09 - 05:28 PM

Can anyone honestly make sense of that drivel.

A complete misrepresentation of what the anti's have been writing

The last refuge of a loser!

Mr Peekstock is typical of the "activists" I described earlier, the normalisation of homosexual practice in political terms is his "raison d'etre" and to acknowlege the elephant in the room would surely scupper his argument......Aids deaths are incidental to one cell organisms like Mr Peekstock.

I repeat, if he really cared for homosexuals he would support the homosexuals of San Fransisco in their campaign.