Homophobes Say The Darndest Things!
Love Doesn't Necessitate Bodily Fluids?!
Virginia resident John Stec takes issue with The Roanoke Time's consistent support of gay rights and "equality". The engineer apparently doesn't believe gays should have, deserve or need any such things. Nor does he seem to understand the full extent of homosexual inclinations:
A man or boy can love another man or boy without the exchange of bodily fluids. I love my father deeply. Affection is physically given and proven by an appropriate and occasional embrace and a kiss. I love some of my friends deeply. They know it. They know it by my conversation, my commitment to their well-being and by the things we enjoy together. And they know it without having to disrobe to perform sex.
…
If your "equality" means equating the ages-old institution of traditional marriage with two men doing disgusting, highly unsanitary things, then I couldn't disagree with you more. But if you meant giving homosexuals similar employment opportunities as heterosexuals, then that's OK, as long as they keep their physical affectations to themselves, just as heterosexuals must, in the workplace.
At least he's not entirely irrational.
Scroll Posts
Amy's New Ad Blows « Next — Prev » No Criminality In Dean Johnson Drug Death
Queerty Team
Editor
Japhy Grant Editorial Director
David Hauslaib Publisher
Jossip Initiatives
Our Network
Jossip The gossip's gossip sheet
Mollygood Splaying celebrities from A- to D-list
Stereohyped Once you blog black, you never go back
About
Advertise
Privacy
RSS
Copyright 2008 Jossip Initiatives LLC
Well, I guess I may never be able to hold a job. I can't seem to help myself from having sex with my coworkers in the office.
It fascinates me the way straight men think! From the trash talk of straight guys I know to almost every straight porn moview I've ever seen, it appears straight guy love performing anal intercourse, so why is a woman's butt any less disgusting than a man's butt? And give a straight guy the opportunity to get a bj (by woman or a man) and you would think he died and gone to heaven. Maybe the problem is that straight men are more prone to hypocrisy.
Does anyone else think this sounds oddly like the "precious bodily fluids" speech from "Dr. Stangelove"?
Anyway, so you mean that being gay doesn't have to include an exchange of our 'bodily fluids'?? Someone better tell Treasure Island Media that Dawson's out of a job… LOL.
(mmmmm…. precious bodily fluids)
>>>they know it without having to disrobe to perform sex.<<<
Whoever said you have to disrobe to perform sex?
When I hear or read something so over-the-top, I can't help thinking… yep, he's gay.
Does this mean it is not okay to piss on each other in the workplace?
And as far as the nasty factor goes…is he aware that sometimes the bodily fluids that are produced by a man and woman having sex can sometimes make a woman's pussy flow with ALL KINDS OF VILE SMELLS AND JUICES that would make any garbage collector puke in a NY minute?!
"If your 'equality' means equating the ages-old institution of traditional marriage with two men doing disgusting, highly unsanitary things, then I couldn’t disagree with you more."
But what if it's two chicks doing hot, highly unsanitary things?
I demand an answer, Mr. Stec!
Don't be silly, Que, everyone knows lesbians don't exist. If they did, the Bible would have mentioned how totally nasty and unsanitary they are.
By the way, if we're thinking biblically, levitical law considers the majority of bodily functions 'unsanitary' (included on the list of Shit That Squicks God Out are menstruation and male discharge). So why do the heteros get a free pass on the neat-and-tidy clause?
i wonder if he's cute
I did the reckless thing and clicked the link. Man is he c r a z y.
I bet he's gay ;)
I too clicked on the link. Shame Queerty didn’t let us know over 1/2 of the text was Christian fundamentalism from this guy. Since he is so righteous and accuses the paper of “not telling the whole truth about “equality” - because it would lead to same sex health benefits etc. How about the Bible prohibits divorce, recommends stoning for children who don’t behave and prohibits the charging of interest? Here’s a fun tidbit - when I worked for an HMO, of course the member, spouse and children under 18 were covered on the (heterosexual) family plan. Guess what Mr. “Morals” Stec? If the child had a child, we covered him/her also, free of charge! I have never heard any “moral outrage” about this! Wonder what else goes on the majority of us don’t know about? I would have never known that if I didn’t work there. And try to get credit card companies to stop charging interest!