Defending the Truth

LOL, spell police again hu?? ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ


Never mind the FACT that nearly everything on that list is TRUTH. You DO represent pound for pound the most std cases including over HALF of American Aids case. You DO harm children teaching them homosexuality is safe, moral. It is NEITHER. Its the TRUTH that homosexual sex is unnatural, and perverted, and its the TRUTH that there are several reffrences that back these claims. Thanks for pointing out the OBVIOUS.

But you aren't supposed to say it, you homophobe you.

Good one.
Typical Gary.

(coughing)

It's okay if you fall asleep reading my posts ... but it's a real shame you slept through spelling classes and English grammar classes.

It makes your know-it-all attitude such a joke, when you obviously know nothing about - well - almost anything.

I just love watching a dumb cow make a satirical essay into FACT. LOL

Skipped a few literature classes, too, eh? LOL

Point out my spelling all you want Trist, THE LIST IS TRUTH.


You act like every word I spell is wrong.

Here's the antithesis to that list...
1. SHOW UP WITH YOUR TALKING POINTS. Make sure you have something that you feel will show your opponents in a negative light, and make that the subject of the discussion.
2. DEMONIZE YOUR OPPONENT. Attempt to cover them with shame, the same way you would a 4 year old that touches his pee-pee.
3. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DOING #2 ABOVE, SUPPORT HIM IMMEDIATELY.
4. ACCUSE YOU OPPONENT OF SAYING SOMETHING HE DIDN’T. Attempt to define his statements in a negative light. Interpret them this way and state it as fact that he did actually say it. NEVER ask him…always TELL him what his meaning was.
5. CLAIM THAT IT IS “OLD NEWS” AND NOT WORTHY OF DISCUSSION. This applies especially when the discussion turns to the misdeeds of Democrat Party Leadership.
6. QUOTE AN UNSOURCED NEW ARTICLE. Always quote the article selectively, or describe it in a general manner.
7. IF ASKED DIRECT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NEWS YOU HAVE PROVIDED, RESPOND INDIRECTLY. Never actually answer the specific of the question.
8. IF ASKED TO SOURCE YOUR NEWS ARTICLE, IGNORE THE QUESTION.
9. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF A MENTAL DEFECT OR LACK OF INTELLIGENCE. Personal attacks of this sort are especially useful as the target will almost always try to defend himself, thus changing the subject.
10. IF THE PARTY LEADERSHIP IS ATTACKED, ATTEMPT TO TURN THE TABLES BY INFERRING THAT SOMEONE IN YOUR OPPONENTS PARTY IS JUST AS BAD.
11. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF NOT ANSWERING YOUR QUESTIONS. Try to do this before he has an opportunity to. Try to infer that it you have given him multiple opportunities to do so. Do it even if the question has been answered. If he misses the question and asks you to repeat it DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES REPEAT THE QUESTION FOR HIS BENEFIT).
12. RESORT TO INSULTS. Try to question you opponent’s masculinity, his resolve, ANYTHING, but try to diminish and demean him. (This is know as the “LBJ Rule” codified by him thus: “Accuse your opponent of being a pig fornicator, then make him deny it.) REMEMBER, IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO THIS TACTIC, IT MEANS YOUR OPPONENT IS WINNING!
13. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF BEING UNINFORMED. This works especially well when you are asked to provide your sources. It is especially effective if you work in a reference to someone you have already demonized. Rush Limbaugh is currently the Demon of Choice.
14. SPEAK CRYPTICALLY. Try to make it difficult for people to divine your meaning
15. CHANGE THE SUBJECT. Try to get it back to your original talking points (see #1 above)
16. APPEAR TO AGREE. You will need to do this in order to achieve #15.
17. CLAIM YOUR OPPONENT IS BEING UNREASONABLE OR WON’T LISTEN TO REASON, AND LEAVE IN A HUFF.
18. BAIT YOUR OPPONENT. Needle him, tease him, call him names until he makes an inappropriate post, then scream bloody murder to the Moderator.
19. DENY THE EVIDENCE EXISTS. Ask for evidence of wrongdoing by those you support. When that evidence is presented, continue denying that it exists.
Good Old Liberal Debate Tactics « Battalion S2

"Step 1: Set the stage. Most anti-gay tracts begin with a short opening section similar to mine. This is where you quickly dispense with the notion that gays and lesbians are actually human beings, let alone friends, family, neighbors and fellow citizens. Instead, gays and lesbians are portrayed as a faceless sex-obsessed hoard representing a dark and ominous force in American culture.
It’s important to set this stage right away — to make sure your reader is on board with the premise that the rich and complex lives of gays and lesbians can be reduced to one singular component — because it leads directly to the subject that many Americans find very uncomfortable: sex.

Step 2: Talk about sex. A lot. Most general-topic anti-gay tracts begin with a detailed description of sexual practices. There’s a good reason for that: no one looks good when their entire life is reduced to one-dimensional statistical descriptions of sexual practices.
Talking about sex can be rather gross, but don’t let that stop you. In fact, that’s the whole point. You want your audience to share your revulsion of gays and lesbians, and this is the easiest way to do it. Talk about sex as though it were the only thing that matters to gays and lesbians. Not love, not relationships, not commitment, not families – just sex.
To reinforce this point, anti-gay writers make extensive use of the term “homosexual” throughout their tracts. By constantly emphasizing “homosexual” instead of using the terms “gay” or “lesbian”, the sexual component of gays and lesbians are emphasized above all other aspects of their lives. And the more you portray gays and lesbians as sex-obsessed homosexuals, maybe your readers won’t notice the irony of your tract being obsessed with the sex lives of supposedly “sex-obsessed” people. "


Nobody who is worth taking seriously is going to take those steps to begin with, IMO.
First of all, many of us who sometimes argue "against" homosexuality know full well that gays and lesbians are people, just like anybody else. Hell, we might even know a few gays or lesbians we hold in high regard. Look, I LIKE some of the gay and lesbians posters here, and think we could have a great time going out, having some beers and playing pool together. In a totally non-gay way, of course. (...okay that was a bad attempt at a joke.....)

Anyhoo.. I don't really see anybody outside of Jack Chick, Fred Phelps and a few others on the fringes even trying to use the "gays are monsters" argument any more.

Secondly, on the homosexuals thing... well yes... I'm not big on P.C., and I like using the proper words. When we're talking about this particular subject, the root of it really IS sexual attraction to the same gender. Hence.. the word "homosexuality."

Because, IMO, at the very core of the matter is this.. we are a two-gender species that reproduces sexually.. hence the overall "cause" and underlying "reason" why human beings get... well... horny. Yes, all the love and romance and bonding for life and holding hands and skipping through a feild of butterflies in a basically non-sexual way is wonderful. But let's face it... what (in the general sense) makes you horny dermines who (the specific person) you fall in love with. So, with this whole two-gender, sexual reproduction thing going on.. some find it a bit "off" that a few people get horny over their own gender.

Everyting else, on both side of the argument, beyond that is just fluff and hype, IMO. Or as the old hicks would say.. "putting lipstick on a pig."