From: robj@netcom.com (Rob Jellinghaus)
Subject: Re: to Howard Black a.k.a Mr. Chemistry (Re: WHY?)
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 23:44:22 GMT

In article <19DEC199215104810@zeus.tamu.edu> Zeke@homo.is.the.way.to.go.to.get.a.piece.of.pucker.hole.edu writes:
>In article <1992Dec19.070718.23582@netcom.com>, 
>robj@netcom.com (Rob Jellinghaus) writes...
>>I just figured out what this asshole reminds me of:
>>A Ku Klux Klan member who's whining that blacks are bigoted against him.
>
>     You make it sound as if the PRO HETERO facets of society are nothing
>more than white supremacists running around with burning crosses.  I do not
>think this analogy is very representative of the Hetero society. 

It depends on what you mean by "hetero society".  You seem to think you
are PRO HETERO, which means you put anti-gay symbols in your .signature
while claiming everyone _else_ is bigoted against _you_.  You're one of
the only heterosexual people I know that's enough of a jerk to post the
crap we've seen from you.  But you seem to think that when we insult you,
we are insulting all heterosexuals.  Kinda like a Ku Klux Klan member
claiming that the entire white race is being insulted when blacks protest
the KKK.

If you are PRO HETERO, and if PRO HETEROs do what you do, then yes, I do
think PRO HETEROS are a queer-negative version of the KKK.  (Not that the
KKK isn't queer-negative; the PRO HETEROs might well be a splinter group.)

>>Or a Nazi who's bemoaning the prejudice Jews have against him.
>
>     You make it sound as if the PRO HETERO facets of society are nothing
>more than storm troopers out to gas jews and pull out thier gold fillings upon
>their death.

Not yet, they're not.  But we've seen where religious crusades like the
CFV and OCA lead to... it's already happened this century, in Germany.

>     This particular person has implied that the racial discrimination of
>blacks and whites is equivalent to sexual discrimination of heteros and homos.
>This is a very dangerous implication because a black man cannot make the
>decision to become white (excluding some members of the Jackson family),
>brown, red, etc.  The HOMO has a choice (i.e. he can choose heterosexuality,
>homosexuality, and/or both at the same time)!

Yep, it's true.  Just like djk, the Zekester is basically unable to
read.  Here on alt.politics.homosexuality people have repeatedly said
that most gay people did _not_ choose to be gay, and can _not_ choose
_not_ to be gay.  All psychological studies agree that sexual
orientation is in most cases not a voluntary choice (in many cases it
is, but not all).  Could you, Zekester, choose not to be straight?
When did you choose to be straight?  You simply do not know what the
fuck you are talking about.

And whether or _not_ homosexuality is a choice for any particular person,
why _should_ they choose not to be homosexual?  What are the _exact
reasons_ homosexuality is inferior to heterosexuality as a sexual
orientation?

>Now since he can flip/flop back
>and forth (much like our president-elect will during the next four years),
>this gives him the ability to change to the sexual lifestyle of choice.

People like you are why the Republican Party lost so badly this year,
and why it will continue to lose badly unless it disavows the PRO
HETEROs.

>     This particular person has implied that ethnic discrimination of Jews and
>Nazis is equivalent to sexual discrimination of heteros and homos.  This is
>also a very dangerous implication because a Jew has a sense of moral judgement
>handed to him by Yahweh through his commandments and laws.  Thus, to equate an
>atheistic society bent on the destruction and genocide of an entire people, that
>have been chosen by God, to the afore mentioned sexual discrimination is
>nothing but pure rubbish.

What are you saying?  That because the Jews were religious, it was bad
to wipe them out?  Whereas in the PRO HETERO case, it is the PRO HETEROs
who are religious and have morals on their side, and the queers who are
the moral-less atheists?  You're saying discrimination against queers is
morally better than discrimination against Jews?  Even though Jews _can_
choose not to be Jewish?

You know, Zekester, we've been though this all before.  I've seen
bigoted gay-bashers like you come and go.  You storm in with ranting
and raving, we point out how stupid you sound, you try to defend
yourself, we pick your arguments to pieces, and eventually you have no
new arguments to make.  Every time you repeat yourself we quote your
own posts back at you with the answers we gave you the first time,
until you are reduced to dribbling insults and frothing at the mouth.
And then you go away, and we are still here, to deal with the next
bigot to come along.  It happened with djk, and it'll happen with you,
unless you wise up and quit while you're ahead.

-- 
Rob Jellinghaus    |  "Next time you see a lie being spread or a bad 
robj@netcom.com    |   decision being made out of sheer ignorance,
robj@xanadu.com    |   pause, and think of hypertext."
uunet!netcom!robj  |       -- K. Eric Drexler, _Engines of Creation_