Ever since I announced my bid for the United States Presidency, I’ve been questioned about some of my more radical political opinions. Most of those questions have dealt with my proposed economic policies – for example, the abolition of the IRS and the implementation of the Fair Tax. Today, I offer an answer to questions about why I am opposed to the idea of gays adopting or teaching children.
Several years ago, I began writing columns questioning the so-called gay rights movement. I prefer to call it the “gay privileges” movement because gays are not presently deprived of anything that is rightfully theirs. A gay man has the same right I have to marry a woman. His waiver of that actual right does not allow him to substitute another “right” he deems more suitable to his needs.
At the time I decided to express such criticism of the gay agenda, I was not fully opposed to gay adoption. Nor was I absolutely opposed to hiring gay grammar school teachers. My criticism of the gay agenda was narrower than it is today and the tone of my criticism was far more subdued. That all changed when the homosexual rights crowd started to circulate some of my early columns.
Frequently, the criticism would come en masse from gay groups who would post my columns on PRIDE websites or chat rooms at universities like UNC-Greensboro, which is also known as UNC-Gonorrhea. They would work themselves into a fury over my well-reasoned essays and then respond with a flurry of obscenities unfit for reproduction in this column.
Before long, readers identifying themselves as “gay” were threatening to cut off my genitalia, burn my children, rape my wife, and, just to top it all off, kill me, too. Good thing these readers were all “gay.” Otherwise, they might not be so happy.
So, of course, I took the time to survey a number of other conservative columnists to find out where most of their profane and threatening hate mail comes from. The answer is always the same: Without hesitation, they all say it comes from the “gay” community.
Despite the volume and intensity of this gay vitriol, I have always refused to reciprocate with threats of violence or strings of profanity. Instead, I have relied on the far more powerful tool of heavy sarcasm. And that refusal to respond with profanity or violence has had a predictable effect on the gay activists. It has made them much less gay (less happy, that is) and also much more active.
One of their more recent stunts was to get together on a gay website to hatch a plan to destroy my marriage. Actually, they started their plan on one of the Transgendered websites. Since the Transgendered people are so angry, I suppose they are technically classified as “gay,” too.
Group White House Says Doesn't Qualify as "Terrorists" Kills Three Americans in Afghanistan | Katie Pavlich