I am actually on the far right politically -- I just don't happen to think that you have to hate gays to be conservative.

Now you're getting off on tangents that have nothing do with this subject or that brochure."Trolling for sex" in the workplace? Get real. If anyone, gay or straight, did that, they should be fired.

Matt Barber is not homophobic? Oh, that's good for a laugh. He fits that description better than anyone I could name besides you, anderson.

From the "DOJ Pride" seal on the brochure, it appears to be something that was written by the gay employees as a guide for managers -- not a pronouncement from top management and certainly not a "threat."

Who has said anything about sex on the job? Being open about who you love has nothing to do with "sex."

In his usual homophobic fashion, Matt Barber has sensationalized something that was intended just to help managers manage their people. You'll notice that the brochure was labeled as "tips" for managers -- it was not 7 "edicts" but 7 "tips." On rightwingamerica.com, Tad Cronn even said there was "an implied threat of legal force" in it, but I can find nothing whatsoever in that brochure that comes close to being a threat. Being a Christian is no excuse for disrespecting a fellow employee, and if showing respect as outlined in that brochure is impossible for anyone, then they are working in the wrong place. Maybe their church will hire them and they won't have to deal with anyone who disagrees with their "Christian" homophobia. .

Transgender people do not keep their beards and mustaches. If you see someone who looks like that, he's just doing it for a laugh or for Halloween -- he's not a transgender individual and he's probably not going to use the ladies' room. I have personally stood guard at a bathroom door at a restaurant for a truly transgender person, because someone would have had a problem with it no matter which restroom she used. That is the dilemma such people face, and it would help a lot if people like you would attempt a little understanding about it.

Good article, but he kind of does the same thing he accuses liberals of doing. He IMPLIES that increased gun ownership has something to do with the lower crime rates -- the "common sense" answer. It's the fallacy of reasoning called "Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc" (after this, therefore because of this). A more likely explanation for the drop in ALL violent crime, including gun crime, is the aging of the population. Most crime is committed by young people, specifically young MEN. The baby-boom generation is no longer young. But that, too, is post-hoc reasoning, Better crime-prevention measures may have something to do with it. So the reason for less gun crime is probably all of the above, but LEAST of all the fact that there' more ownership of guns.

So, who taught her dog to say "yes"?

Well, if you believe in demons there's no hope that you will ever take a more realistic approach toward relating to gay people. Your idea of a "good" gay person is one who is denying his own feelings and claiming to be "cured" of his homosexuality. Sexual orientation does not change like that, so it would be better if you encouraged your friend to just be true to himself and be honest about it. I don't know anything about Orlando, but why does it surprise you that there are places where multiple sexual encounters take place? Most communities have closed the gay bathhouses that flourished in the 1970s, but there are some that are still open. However, most gay people consider the claims of "hundreds of partners" every year to be wildly exaggerated. They would have to be going there every day to reach those numbers. And what does any of this have to do with rights for gays anyway? We don't deny straight people the rights of marriage or a job or anything else if they belong to "swingers" clubs.