Ad Showing 'Homosexual' Newborn Causes Stir in Italy

Ad Showing 'Homosexual' Newborn Causes Stir in Italy

www.rense.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
digg.com
news.ninemsn.com.au
www.#
www.nzherald.co.nz

I hate to say it since I know some of you PC types will mob me for it, but, I have to agree that this is carrying the homosexual craze throughout the world too far.

I have no problem with someone being homosexual, as I have stated on many occasions. However, I have a problem with ANY group that goes above and beyond to self promote themselves.

I have to wonder, if that same baby in that article had "Straight" on them if the gays of the world wouldn't rise up in fury about the "discrimination".

My main problem for things of this nature is the double standard it seems to cause. When exactly is it okay for one group to promote an agenda and when is it not? Would this be okay in the "politically correct" eyes in the world if this baby was an obviously labeled "straight" baby? I think not.


Jasn

www.rense.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Its crap! Plain and simple. Homosexuals are going to continue to push the envelope as far as they can. When someone says enough they will play the sexual discrimination card. How about just keeping your sexual lifestyle to yourself and not forcing it on other people.

I believe it's a hint on how people are supposed to be born gay/straight, and that it's caused by a chemical imbalance or something like that.

Which is utter b/s, if you ask me - i believe it's more down to how the child is raised than his nuero-chemistry.

EDIT: How the child is raised/whether the child wants to elevate above the crowd.

And yes, i agree that this has gone too far - all it will do is stir up a problem which is more or less settled.

No one gives a [profanity removed] about sexuality.



[edit on 25-10-2007 by Throbber]

Maybe the mother was homosexual and that's why they tagged him that way.

Peace

[edit on 25-10-2007 by Dr Love]

reply to post by Dr Love

---

Or the father!

Hmmmm that dosen't really work.

Ah! Turkey baster. should have put that on the little tikes tag!

MonKey

I don't think the homosexual community realized the implication that they were making. Throbber is much closer to the truth to say that the raising of the child has more to do with the sexual orientation than anything. It's offensive to suggest sexual themes on children. If you believe that children are born into a sexual orientation then you would obviously approve of this image.

external image

That's sickening, but the homosexual community wants you to accept this as natural and good.


[edit on 25-10-2007 by dbates]

It could, the mother could have been carrying the baby with plans to give it to two dudes when the baby is born.

Maybe they label them like that because they require more tests than other newborns.

Peace

reply to post by dbates

---

Unfortunately, i can see why people would dislike the idea of the method of raising being so important.

It suggests that these guys are not inherently gay/lesbian, and that's a big no-no in the gay community where people who claim they 'weren't always gay' are generally held in lower esteem by those who 'were gay, all their lives'.

There's an entire sub-society on our hands, with prejudice and hate going on within those groups - just like any other social group you have elitist scum.

P.S: If you're wondering, i used to be pretty good friends with a few gay guys/girls, but of course, that's in the past.

Images like that are inappropriate. Using children to push your agenda or personal preference is disgusting. Homosexuals are trying to sell the public on their sexual preference to make it more acceptable. Children at that age are too young to be having choices like that. They should be thinking about crayons and cartoons. Not being gay!
Its just bad advertisement.

while i agree with your point about the initial message, i disagree with it being about child raising/parenting.
this doesnt explain why one child from a several child family with normal moral, good and decent parenting values has one gay child yet the other children in the same family are not.
it deny's the persons true feelings while wrongfully blaming the parents for something out of their control.

its not about bad parenting and its not about rebelling or wanting to not be "the norm". its more deep seated than that which is why most cant supress or hide these feelings, it feels unnatural for them to do that.

i think this kind of message is going to the extreme, and one to deliberately cause a stir to get attention by using a baby to make their statement.

i see the whole gay pride movement of today as being like the black rights activists and protests which took place not that long ago when put in the grand scheme of things.

blacks were hung, beaten, threatened, had to ride at the back of the bus and eat/wash out of sight, treated like societies scum. anyone who sympathised and showed an ounce of humanity to them was an "n" lover and hated just as badly.

they eventually were pushed too far and had protests where they were further beaten but they refused to go quietly into the night, they stood their ground and said NO! we want equal rights and you cant beat us back into submission this time.

that was not that long ago, and now its happening all over again with the gay pride but on a slightly different scale (no hangings or street mob justice, etc)
their gay + lesbian mardi gras is a bold, in your face statement in itself, purely to desensetise you


[edit on 25/10/07 by Obliv_au]

Er.... Yes it does.

You're viewing child-rearing as a static method, that people can raise children in exactly the same fashion as they would any other child.

You're also ignoring the fact that i stated the child's OWN ideals have a part to play in this.

Granted, it's hard to remember back to when you were a little kid*, after all, i travelled to quite a few places when i was young - i even stayed in france for a little while, but i can't remember it.




*This is why i believe it isn't a chemical problem (although it may be), but rather that it's a psychological condition from the stages of infancy, when the child's mind is still developing.

That said, people develop in different ways, who am i to say that 'this is better than that' or 'that is better than this'?

[edit on 25-10-2007 by Throbber]

It's really sick to use a child to spread propaganda such as this... I'm not "homophobic" or any other phobic in regards to how people choose to live; their orientation is their business, no matter how much I disagree with it. However, to use an innocent child as your methodology to spread your propagandist garbage, that is below despicable.

The label some incredible idiot plastered on that perfectly innocent picture is absolutely disgusting.
It's all part of a propaganda campaign to indoctrinate young impressionable kids, and adults with the same power of reasoning, to accept this type of behavior as perfectly normal.
Indoctrination of the young is what this is. Brainwashing if you like.

I agree with you 1000%.
Kids should never be sexualized.
They're kids for chrissake.

Let them be innocent kids for as long as humanly possible.

Leave the adult crap to the adults.
Another bogus propaganda campaign in the works.
Great thread OP!

reply to post by Alexander the o.k.

---

I agree, but it's important to draw the distinction between ordinary, civilised members of society and what i like to call 'elitist scum'.

Although perhaps scum isn't the right word, seeing as elitists generally rise to the top.

I'm sure they would be patting each other on the backs on this one.


Then again, maybe it's All a Big Conspiracy

Although agreeing with 99% of your post, I think you've made an error here. Ever get the crap beat out of you on Christmas Eve for being gay? I have. How many people do you know that have been beaten to near death? I know plenty and two hands worth of fingers can not count them. Ever hear of Mathew Shepard? Who was beaten and left to die on a fence post for being gay? The hangings and street mob justice are still here. We just don't hear about it much.

No offense but I get irritated when the use of "problem" is associated with what your God made me to be. I am no more a "problem" than you are. Well, maybe less since I'm not out there impregnating every hussy that comes along. But that's a different story.



Now you've earned some respect in my book.

[edit on 10/25/2007 by Griff]

reply to post by Griff

---

I apologise for my misuse of wording.

However i'll just say that neither am i a 'problem' in god's book, considering i'm a virgin n' all.

But yeah, that's a different story.

I suppose i should blush, and meet the social requirement for being a virgin.

[edit on 25-10-2007 by Throbber]

In response to the comments about being beaten for being gay.

How many kids a day get the bejeezus beaten out of them for being fat?
or ugly?
or a sissy?
or not smart enough?
or strange?
or goth?
or emo?
or punk?


or any of those other things?


I'm willing to be FAR more than are beaten for being gay.


The difference? They aren't gay and therefore, it's not a good news story.





Jasn

reply to post by Throbber

---

NO WAY BUDDY!

Blush?? That's a sin against yourself and your morality.

I wish I were still a virgin haha, well aside from having my children and wife and all


Jasn