Gays, child molesters, atheists and Oscar

Addressing “gay and lesbian kids” watching the ceremony, …”No matter what everyone tells you, God does love you … very soon, I promise you, you will have equal rights federally across this great nation of ours.” – Milk writer Dustin Lance Black

Nothing like Hollywood targeting children for gay rights activism, huh? And that was just the warmup for a night of leftists on parade at Hollywood’s “the election is over, let’s stop pretending to be moderates” gala called the Academy Awards.

Make a film about a gay politician? Gold statues are in your future, including one for Sean Penn. His tirades calling to impeach Republicans must’ve scored some points, or maybe it was his pleading guilty to domestic assault of his wife. In Hollywood you can never be too sure.

Penn lectured America by saying, “I think it is a good time for those who voted for the ban against gay marriage to sit and reflect, and anticipate their great shame.”

Marriage between a man and a woman? SHAME on you. How dare we ticket-buying waifs support such a radical notion as a man marrying a woman. He thinks if only we reflected, we’d see that he is right. I think Sean Penn marrying Madonna counts as a same-sex marriage. I’m just not sure which sex.

It did make me wonder if he’d support domestic assault between same-sex spouses, or is that something he saves for his ladies.

But he does earn his second oscar, and just think if only surfer Spicoli liked dudes in Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Penn could’ve reached this zenith a quarter century ago.

Continuing the anti-religious rants was Bill Maher. With Obama safely in the White House, Maher took aim at those of us “clinging to our religion”:

“Someday, we all have to confront the notion that our silly gods cost the world too greatly”

Obama hasn’t commented on his supporters’ notion about “silly gods,” although I’m sure he’s glad they weren’t on national television saying it before a certain Tuesday in November.

If these are moderates, the new host of the View will be Tom Selleck. Even California defeated a ballot initiative for same-sex marriage. When Hollywood is even too leftest for California, you know they’re off the deep end.

Look at the films they chose to nominate. A priest molesting school boys, another waltz through Nixon and Watergate (what, no JFK screenplays laying around?), a mid-thirties woman sleeping with a teenage boy – these are just for Best Picture!

Hurray for Hollywood!

  • Ignatius

    When the world gets an enema they will shove the hose right into Hollywood.

  • Nat G

    Oh, be honest. Penn didn’t say a damn thing against men and women getting married. But you like to pretend that’s what the cause is, because if you don’t, you’ll have to admit that you’re calling for discrimination and for special rights for people like you.
    Hell, make that your bumper sticker: “Special rights for people like me!” Be proud of your bigotry! Let it out of the closet! You’ll find it a lot better than being a liar.

  • Gosh, the hate of the left. Is “Namecaller on board” your bumper sticker?

  • EJ

    Nat G and Brian,

    ““Special rights for people like me!” ”

    Personally I’m ok with gay marriage and the only thing in my mind where i do have some issue is that state taking a religious institution and mandating that it be changed. Ideally I would like for the state to NOT marry anyone and you just let all the religions and cultural forces decide for their own.

    But my whole point here is that I think a lot of the gay marriage debate and why both sides can’t see the other side, and therefore resort to calling the other bigots, etc, is that both sides are looking at what marriage is in a fundimentally different light. The left on this issue tends to look at marriage as only a secular contractual agreement. It’s when two people decide to make a commitment to one another. In this case, the state therefore has no right to tell two people they cant have this type of relationship and therefore it is descimination if the state decides otherwise.

    However, many on the right look at marriage as a religious custom. It is not just a commitment between two individuals. Its a relationship in the presence of God. Marriage by its very definition is a union between a man and woman. You can NOT have marriage between two same sex indivuduals. Just as an orange can not be an apple. And these people take the fact that the state is going to strip this insitution out of relgion and redfeine it as a violation of religious seperation as well as an over active state trying to culture engineer. It’s not desciminiation. Homosexual individuals have the same right to marry a different sex person as a heterosexucal individual; just because they have no desire to exercies that right does not change the equality of the right.

    This entire political issue would be a lot more civil and and mature if people would come to an understanding of how people come into viewing the very premice of the debate. This is why personally, as I stated above, I would prefer to get the government completely out of marriage and only stay involved in the legal contracts associated with it. Don’t ordain anyone as married and let the churches, cultural institutions, and individuals and couples decide what should and shouldn’t be deemed married. If the Catholics say no but the Unitarians say yes, let them figure it out. Where else in society does government try to control the evolution of our culture?

  • I tend to agree with EJ on the marriage issue. Government should only be involved with the contract portion of unions. Otherwise the law is giving moral sanction to polygamy in Utah. If a man is crazy enough to enter into a contractural relationship with multiple women….so be it.

    Let government recognize contracts. God can recognize marriages. Or if you prefer, gods, or chance, if you’re Bill Maher.

  • Britt Howard and EJ,

    Sorry, I think it is best for our society to encourage that which is best and most healthy for our society. It just happens that what is most healthy (at least in my opinion, and I vote according to my opinion) in personal relationships is monogamous, heterosexual relationships.

    Now that is not saying we should not be tolerant of homosexuality. But while tolerance (for the time being – and time might prove me wrong) is OK with me, I think it is dead wrong for society to switch to encouraging unhealthy behaviour.

  • That is part of the point David. There are legalized marriages in Utah where multiple partners are allowed correct? I think they shouldn’t be endorsed.

    If the govt. isn’t in the marriage business then it can’t endorse it. “Society” and societal pressures however, are outside of government. Expressing one’s opinion that Man & Woman is best, is certainly free speech. Personally, I agree with you that man/woman is preferable. Just my opinion. I won’t force it on anyone though.

    I appreciate the seperation of church and state. You never know when the tyranny of the majority will change from your preferred religion to one slightly different. Culture wars are pushing to embrace certain things. Getting govt. out of that and maintain the separation prevents that.

    Imagine a Baptist that favors prayer in school and uses “most people want that” arguement. Then later, immigration from south of the border tips the scales to Catholicism. How does the Baptist now feel about the govt. forcing his and other children to pray to Mother Mary? Perhaps the Baptist is of meager means and can not afford private schooling for his children.

    The same thing can happen in the future as Hollywood foists it’s own politically correct religion upon our culture/s.

    Govt. has no business in marriage or religion.

  • Britt Howard,

    While there are some people who practice polygamy in Utah, they are not officially recognized as legal marriages. Just like there is nothing in Virginia that prevents a man from having one wife and moving several girlfriends into his house along with his wife.

    Polygamy is NOT legal in Utah and because the practice has been dealt with such hostility in the state the most outrageous practitioners of the belief in polygamy have been moving outside the state.

    Now do you want to re-express your point without pointing to the polygamy is accepted (which it isn’t, not even in Utah).

  • Brian…I’m disappointed in you. I really am. First I was angry, but now I’m just disappointed. While you’re entitled to your opinions, which I respect; you’re not entitled to your own facts, and you crossed the line here.

    As mentioned, Penn never said anything was wrong with heterosexual marriage; only that denying equal rights to all people, as in the case of denying same-sex marriages, is wrong. It’s akin to slavery, the prohibition of women’s right to vote, and separate water fountains for the races. Our society cannot look back on those eras without feeling some shame for the misconceptions of those who came before us.

    While I know you’ve built your reputation on spinning perception and twisting words, I really wish you knew where to stop.

    And your title? I may be gay, but I am not a child molester, atheist, nor have I ever won an Oscar (yet). Not only am I deeply offended by this grouping, especially in regard to “child molesters”, I am personally hurt. I know it wasn’t your intention to call homosexuals child molesters, but it still hurts.

    At some point, the leaders of our nation are going to have to realize that barring same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, and actually protect the rights of the minority. After all, that’s why we have a Democratic Republic; it’s it not? To protect the nation from the whims of the majority? To prevent the rights of the minority from being trampled? When did we lose sight of this? How long does it take a nation to learn from the mistakes of their past, and correct the ones they are currently making?

    Your post was a rant about Hollywood, not about me; but it’s also representative of the attitude of those who fight against equality. In a different time period, you would have fought against emancipation, women’s sufferance, or civil rights for African Americans…and that disappoints me.

  • Joel, if you’re deeply offended by the grouping, talk to the Academy Awards folks. They’re the ones who grouped them.

  • Even lesbians have been trying to distance themselves from male homosexuals in response to that homosexuality is a public health threat.

    Lesbians are quick to point out that the increased percentages of sexually transmitted diseases (STD’s) from the homosexual community is only because of MSM (male sex with male) sexual encounters.

    I think the lesbians have a point. Lesbians as a group probably suffer at even a decreased level of STD’s then even the heterosexual community. However when the men are included in the larger group of homosexuals the instances dwarf society at large.

    Unfortunately we are not free to discriminate against male homosexuals while only giving our approval to lesbians. That would be called gender discrimination. Besides, if society ever said it was OK to be a lesbian, how could us heterosexual men ever get even one woman to ever, ever agree to marry us men? How could we men get the women to put with us if they are offered a better alternative?

    For the sake of society, for the sake of evolution and random joining of genes (all the lesbians are going to choose blonde haired blue eyed Norwegians for artificial insemination) we must continue to encourage monogamous heterosexual relationships.

    By the way. I am heterosexual because I was TAUGHT to be heterosexual. As a young male adolescent I remember having sexual desires for inanimate objects. It was only because I was taught to channel my sexual desires towards females (the healthy choice) that I am heterosexual today.

    It is not OK to be gay. And if the MSM (male sex with male) crowd does not get their act together on sexually transmitted diseases we may even have to end our tolerance and start returning to throwing their butts in jail.

  • Mark

    Why does the right hate individual freedom and liberty so much? Why do they hate civil rights and civil liberties? Why are they always trying to tell the rest of the country what is right and what is wrong – and why all citizens must bow to their superior point of view? Why is the right always trying to suppress dissent and disagreement?

    Gay and lesbian children are at among the highest risk for suicide of any groups in our nation – thanks to folks like you.

  • Mark, it was Hollywood that was trying to tell the rest of the country what is right and what is wrong. Did you even read my post?

    Unless you are saying that Sean Penn and Bill Maher are “the right”

  • Mark,

    Why does the left hate individual freedom and liberty so much? Why did the left increase taxes on my tobacco?

    Seems to me the increase rates of suicide amongst kids is not because all of the kids committing suicide are gay. I’m heterosexual because I was taught to be that way. When I was an adolescent I enjoyed (the sexual thrill) getting naked in front of anyone. The problem is with those of you insisting we send conflicting signals to our children.

    Better then half of our society still knows it is wrong to be gay. Even if one day we are in minority we are going to still continue to exercise our freedom of expression to smile and shake our heads no when confronted with the flaming f-word.

  • “When I was an adolescent I enjoyed (the sexual thrill) getting naked in front of anyone”

    Was that how you got your nickname?

    (sorry….had to)

  • Brian,

    Nope. My sexual member is big enough to keep my wife happy. If she thinks it is too small she knows enough to keep her opinion to herself. Grin.

  • OK, I guess I was wrong about Utah. That’s a good thing I guess.

    Still, my point remains. When we do get “gay marriage” you will be siding with me saying that govt. shouldn’t be invovled with marriage at all.

    If people want to say their married. Why would I care? If they have a contracted union that is similiar to marriage why is it a problem? Especially if it is monogamous.

    Fortunately, Little David you found yourself attracted to human beings. Inanimate objects are unable to consent as competent parties. Therefore, you can’t marry what ever object you used to find …….interesting. That would just be labeled as masturbation not a relationship. Running around naked is just exhibitionism.

  • Britt Howard,

    My own experience in sexuality serves only to prove (from one person’s experiences) that sexual desires can be channeled into that which is healthy for society.

    Homosexual practices are unhealthy for society. They lead, due to no limits on male sexual practices, to increased levels of sexually transmitted diseases. These are the facts.

    Some people decry the adherence to traditional morality. But those that taught the traditional morality in ancient times were not stupid. While they might not have been as learned, they were not stupid. From their observations, in their time, homosexuality was wrong. Now we know more. And still we can observe that male sex with male practices threatens our species.

    But I guess you are going to insist that there is more threat to our species from me putting a cigarette to my mouth then there is from a male putting a penis to his mouth? Facts prove otherwise.

  • Lol, Little David I’m not advocating alternative life styles. Maybe I’m more tolerant of people being different so long that they don’t injure others. (Not every gay (or straight) is a STD spreading slut)

    For the record, if you look through all the tobacco posts, you will see that I see the ban as an attack on property rights. I’m on your side with that one.

    I certainly don’t decry traditonal morality. I also agree that rules were made back in ancient times for the better of society and humankind. Homosexuality would logically be frowned upon much as masturbation was. The fact is, back then man needed to be fruitful and multiply. Now getting food, preventing disease, and other modern benefits will likely ensure that your children will live to old age. Does that change things? Maybe, maybe not.

  • Britt,

    However all diseases, including sexually transmitted diseases, are becoming tolerant of all the antibiotics we have available. Our medical researchers are finding it more difficult to come up with new medicines.

    Male sex with male activity is leading to increased transmission of sexually transmitted diseases. Even proclaimed heterosexuals sometimes engage in homosexuality because of the thrill of being extra naughty.

    Males are real dogs when it comes to sexuality. They engage in sex on the first date when the first encounter on the first date is a half finished drink left on the bar. This type of sexuality should not be encouraged.

    While you might state that not all homosexuals should not be thus judged, the facts prove that homosexuals suffer from sexually transmitted diseases at a far larger rate then society as a whole. I do not think it is too far a leap of logic to conclude that the none promiscuous male homosexual male is the exception and not the rule.

  • “Males are real dogs when it comes to sexuality. They engage in sex on the first date when the first encounter on the first date is a half finished drink left on the bar. ” -Little David

    Some males. I was never like that. I test the water before diving in.

    Yea, I have heard someone state something like what you did regarding std transmission rates. The form of sex would contribute to that but, also a driven subculture in the gay community that relishes rebellion and thrives on the excitement of multiple partners. Private apartments aren’t good enough for these guys, they gotta do it in public restrooms or in public parks. They give gays a bad name. It gives politicians reason to uphold laws that hurt straights that keep their business indoors.

    Eventhough the overturning of the Texas State sodomy law overturned ours, I think it is still a felony to have oral or anal sex in public. The public part was not struck down. That should be against the law and enforced but, still a career ending felony is a bit harsh. At least the vast majority of Virginia are no longer unconvicted felons. Prior to the overturning of the sodomy laws, even if you were married and had oral sex in the privacy of your own home, that was a felony. Bob McDonnell liked it that way. Never understood his reasoning.

    The self-destructive subculture combined with the type of sex is what is responsible for the larger transmission rates. Even if it is the majority LD, I can’t understand condemning the non-guilty responsible people that happen to be gay for what other gays do.

  • I just want to note that I said nothing derogatory about gay people, despite frequent and not-so-public accusations to the contrary I’ve received in the past 24 hours.

    The fact is that people by overwhelming majorities oppose gay marriage, even in intensely liberal states like California, and these Oscar winners chose to mock the American people with the Academy cheering along.

    It certainly should not be news that the Hollywood community has long championed things that are offensive to an overwhelming majority of Americans, but the second someone points that out, they demand that person be silenced due to their being offended.

    It’s that amazing double standard, that they are free to offend anyone, but the second that they are the offended one, others must be silenced, that I was, rather brilliantly, demonstrating in this regard.

  • Britt,

    I also think everyone has a right to privacy. What you do in the privacy of your bedroom should be between you and your partner(s), as long as it is between consenting adults.

    However this is not enough to satisfy gays. They will not settle for tolerance, they demand public encouragement.

    As for the half finished drink I was not referring to myself. Unfortunately for me I was never that sexually attractive to women to get that lucky.

    I do not think the sexual promiscuity evident in the male homosexual community is really a subculture, I think it is part of the larger culture. Buy yourself a CB radio and listen in on what goes on at some of the interstate rest areas even in the Bible belt. A male homosexual who engages in sex with multiple partners in the homosexual community is judged to be a stud just like in the heterosexual community. However the heterosexual stud at least has some difficulty finding a willing partner. However the homosexual stud has no difficulty engaging in sex with multiple partners night after night after night because his desired partner is a dog when it comes to sex just like he is. I sometimes wonder if these strangers ever even bother to exchange first names before they go into action.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.