The gay left needs to take note of this

[Ballsyone]

The same people that the gay left is fighting for in this nation, namely the mooslims, needs to realize this: THEY WILL BE THE FIRST ONES TO GO IF THIS NATION GOES MOOSLIM!

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... _gays.html

[andeemac]

As against Gay Republicans , who are fine arnt they.
Including the Vice Presidents Daughter!!!

I see the Foley inquiry has been shelved till after the Election, convenient that isn't it.

You Republicans hate reality don't you

[WeaponOfMassInstruction]

I'm still waiting for someone on the Left to explain to me why they were soooo outraged by what Mark Foley did yet they are against the Boy Scouts because they don't want gays in positions of authority over kids.....

[Tiffany]

I'm still waiting for someone on the Left to explain to me why they were soooo outraged by what Mark Foley did yet they are against the Boy Scouts because they don't want gays in positions of authority over kids.....

Uh... and how come Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity are the only ones I've heard say anything about that one page's trip to Portugal? I have that right, don't I? It was Portugal... and that senator was a Democrat, wasn't he?

[StormnMormon]

As against Gay Republicans , who are fine arnt they.
Including the Vice Presidents Daughter!!!

I see the Foley inquiry has been shelved till after the Election, convenient that isn't it.

You Republicans hate reality don't you

Real classy there, trying to throw the vice presidents daughters lesbianisim in our faces.

Didn't a certian presidential canidate 's polls get slammed for doing the same thing?

[oxymoron]

hmmm, Ballsy, if you want to use that against Muslims maybe we should remove a great deal of people from this world. There are many Christians and Jews who are against homosexuality. Maybe I really should stop trying to explain to you that Islam isn't any more evil than any other organized religion.

[flyohiou]

I'm still waiting for someone on the Left to explain to me why they were soooo outraged by what Mark Foley did yet they are against the Boy Scouts because they don't want gays in positions of authority over kids.....

it's not really the same thing. one involves sexual misconduct of a minor; the other does not.

the democrats are against the boy scouts because the boy scouts are refusing to allow equal rights for gays. just being gay does not make one a pedophile

foley is different because he was hitting on minors. that, and the democrats were playing politics exposing republicans for their hypocricy

[WeaponOfMassInstruction]

For the Left to be consistent, they'd have to be against gays serving as Boy Scout leaders because, obviously, the leaders are in positions of authority (just as Foley was) over the scouts (or pages).

While what Foley did was reprehensible, there are no alliegations that Foley actually had sex with underage pages (unlike Rep. Studds (D) who DID). But the Left seems to be equating these lurid emails and IMs as being just as bad as the actual physical act.

That being the case, it would seem to me that they, the Left, would applaud the Boy Scots because they have taken proactive measures to prevent not only the act but any coomunications as well. That would be true only if the Left's actual end goal was to protect the children.

Of course, that isn't their goal at all. Their goal is to exploit for political gain an inappropriate cyber-relationship between a REPUBLICAN gay politician and a page, while they not only overlook but indeed reward a Democrat for committing and even more heinous act.

[DQT]

I'm still waiting for someone on the Left to explain to me why they were soooo outraged by what Mark Foley did yet they are against the Boy Scouts because they don't want gays in positions of authority over kids

Well maybe it's because simply being gay isn't wrong. But being a pedophile is. If the left was mad just because Foley is gay then you would have a point. But the part that is troubling is that he's a pedophile. The boyscouts not allowing gays in the boyscouts is discrimination. I mean if you seriously believe that just because someone is gay they shouldn't be able to be in authority over little boys then you need to open your mind. If that's the case then how about this. Female students can only be taught by heterosexual female teachers. And male students can only be taught by heterosexual male teachers. It is the exact same thing.

[flyohiou]

For the Left to be consistent, they'd have to be against gays serving as Boy Scout leaders because, obviously, the leaders are in positions of authority (just as Foley was) over the scouts (or pages).

foley didn't use his authority on those kids; he used his pedophilia on them

W what Foley did was reprehensible, there are no alliegations that Foley actually had sex with underage pages (unlike Rep. Studds (D) who DID). But the Left seems to be equating these lurid emails and IMs as being just as bad as the actual physical act.

since you like to play past blame games, i'll remind you of the GOP coming after clinton for trying to get laid by paula jones and being turned down - just like the pages who wouldn't play with foley


being gay does not equate to pedophilia. why is that so hard for you to understand?

[WeaponOfMassInstruction]

foley didn't use his authority on those kids; he used his pedophilia on them

But Foley was in a position of authority over the pages, just as a Scout leader is in a position of authority over the scots he leads. Using a positon of authority in order to coerce activity with a subordinate is illegal.

Again, if the Left is really interested in protecting kids from pedophiles, then it should support any measures that separate possible pedophiles from those upon which they might prey. Yet they do not....unless it happens to be a Republican committing the offense.

Being a Boy Scout leader is NOT a "right". The government has no business telling a private organization who they can or cannot include, nor should they have a right to deny use of public facilities to an organization that has such rules provided that the person being denied membership isn't a member of a Constitutionally-protected minority (and gays are not...yet).

since you like to play past blame games, i'll remind you of the GOP coming after clinton for trying to get laid by paula jones and being turned down - just like the pages who wouldn't play with foley

Paula Jones sued Clinton over an issue of sexual harassment- which is against the law by the way. The GOP, unlike many Democrats, is tough on criminals- including your hero Bill Clinton.

[WeaponOfMassInstruction]

I'm still waiting for someone on the Left to explain to me why they were soooo outraged by what Mark Foley did yet they are against the Boy Scouts because they don't want gays in positions of authority over kids

Well maybe it's because simply being gay isn't wrong. But being a pedophile is. If the left was mad just because Foley is gay then you would have a point. But the part that is troubling is that he's a pedophile. The boyscouts not allowing gays in the boyscouts is discrimination. I mean if you seriously believe that just because someone is gay they shouldn't be able to be in authority over little boys then you need to open your mind. If that's the case then how about this. Female students can only be taught by heterosexual female teachers. And male students can only be taught by heterosexual male teachers. It is the exact same thing.

The issue is whether the Left really cares about the children or if it's all for partisan political gain.

It seems to me that, when their base (the radical gay movement) is being 'discriminated against', then the Left sees nothing whatsoever wrong with the possibility that a pedophile might be enabled by being placed in a position of authority over children.

But when the Left sees an opportunity to score political points against a Republican, even when they have to accuse the gay Republican of being a pedophile with all the (properly) negative connotations that word has, then they are perfectly willing to toss gays under the bus, even though when a Democrat does not only the same thing with pages but actually has sex with an underage page, it totally excuses that person.

That's not exactly a consistent track record, now is it? Either Studds was wrong and should have been either forced to resign or expelled with the same speed that Republicans took care of Foley, >>OR<< there's nothing at all wrong with what Foley did and therefore Republicans should not be tarred and featehred as enabling a pedophile. Can't have it both ways, no matter how much you might want to.

[flyohiou]

they are perfectly willing to toss gays under the bus,

they didn't toss gays under the bus, they tossed a pedophile under the bus.

The GOP, unlike many Democrats, is tough on criminals- including your hero bill clinton

thanks for the laugh!





clinton is not my hero, but i do defend him because he was not a terrible president as you guys think he was. you only hate him because he is a democrat which is prejudice and ignorant.

IMO, the test of a good president is to look at his pros and cons. there is no doubt with open-minded people that clinton's pros outweigh is cons

[Ed S]

hmmm, Ballsy, if you want to use that against Muslims maybe we should remove a great deal of people from this world. There are many Christians and Jews who are against homosexuality. Maybe I really should stop trying to explain to you that Islam isn't any more evil than any other organized religion.

The difference being that Christians and Jews who are against homosexuality don't murder them when they are outed as our Muslim friends do.

[DQT]

Weapons, you are making it seem like just because a person is gay they are more likely to be a pedophile. The problem with Foley isn't that he's gay. It's that he's a pedophile. And you seemed to have completely skipped over my statement I made about teachers. I wonder why.