In response to:

Conservatives and Gays

As a "conservative", Prager should know that character counts. One's decision to engage in perverted sado-masochistic behavior like homosexuality does not reflect well on one's character.
BonnyB Wrote: May 14, 2012 6:56 PM
Jenni2 Wrote: May 09, 2012 10:01 PM
Heterosexuals engage in all sorts of naughty sex acts too. Singling out gays in particular is myopic, if not hypocritical. Straight men, for example, as a matter of perfectly normal natural behavior, are attracted to a great many, and great variety of women. That does not mean it's morally okay for him to act upon every urge - but some do. Nor does it justify promiscuity, polygamy or bigamy. God makes no distinction between types of fornication, you do. Gay sex is the same as pre-marital sex. You must get that through your head.
Dreadnaught011 Wrote: May 10, 2012 1:30 AM


Do you intend then to change the definition of your Mommy and Daddy's marriage? For what? For the homosexual agenda of effeminate guys?

ManimalCrackers Wrote: May 10, 2012 2:44 AM
Absolutely agreed, Jenni. Sexual immorality is sexual immorality. Heterosexuals are by no means "innocent" when it comes to sexual perversion. However, that doesn't mean traditional marriage should be redefined.

In addition to labeling conservatives and Republicans "anti-woman" (for opposing government-mandated free contraception), "anti-black" and "anti-Hispanic" (for advocating photo identification for voting), and "anti-science" (for skepticism regarding the belief that man-made carbon emissions will destroy much of the planet), Democrats now regularly label Republicans "anti-gay" (for opposing same-sex marriage).

All these charges are demagogic. But when it comes to the "anti-gay" charge, conservatives need to clarify to themselves as much as to the general public where they stand.

As an opponent of the most radical redefinition of marriage in history (more radical than outlawing polygamy), I have argued...