posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 01:03 PM
Originally posted by SkipIntro
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Wanderer777
OP.... Stop before you dig yourself deeper....and I don't mean that in ANY WAY as joining everyone else in dumping on you. I mean it in having BEEN
you very recently. I think half of ATS got a good kick on the poor rabbit here for trying to highlight the same thing with the same organization from
a different angle.
It could be almost anything ELSE...but the moment the word "Gays" comes into it? All logic is out the window as if it grew wings and got sent off at
It seems ...whatever the means are, when the Gay community (and a few others) are the subject? The ends justify the means...BY ANY means necessary.
Now I don't think most people here actually believe that as a blanket idea ...but the fact I found is simply that homosexuality is FAR too
emotionally charged an issue to even consider attacking methods used ...because again, the passion means the ends justify it.
So... CRAZY as it is? You actually see people here who would call for Obama's head on a pike if he tried forcing almost anything else ...anything at
all...on a private organization. Except THIS thing. Crazy huh?
I really thought that you were bigger than that. I'll concede that I was wrong. I guess that I'm not good at reading people even at my age.
Well, to be fair and straight about this, you're not the first one to say that and you won't be the last. It bothers me a bit....but not that much.
To be clear though, I don't HAVE a specific ideology I have "Loyalty" to, let alone a party or political side. I LEAN right...and I self identify
as conservative. I USED to consider myself Republican but since I can't even define that anymore...I sure can't feel loyalty to it. I'd make a man
like Elliot Ness think he's downright soft on crime when it comes to that topic. At the same time, I'm a big softie on Animal Rights and cruelty to
ANY living thing. (While I hunt every Season I can get out to fill my freezer for a few months) Flip around again and I'm pro-life but absolutely
feel exceptions for the common outrages need to be built in. No if's ands or buts about it.
So.... Yeah, you read me wrong. On the BSOA issue? I COULD CARE LESS that it's about gays. It could be about purple polka dotted midgets born on leap
year for all I care.
If the BSOA had fought HARD for their right to exclude those Purple dotted folk on principle ......suffered an extended period of boycotts, public
derision and hate leveled by such a minority to extort change ....and then CAVED to it for that
reason? I'd still look down on them as having
If they'd shown an evolution of thought to come to this point, the point they've reached would be moot. They didn't though, that I've seen and I
HAVE been sensitive to watching while I've debated whether to let my son join. They caved for the almighty dollar and public relations. Well..
Cool... I hope that does them well. They *USED* to be about not compromising values...whatever those were defined as and irregardless of outside
opinion. It's a shame to see one of the last American institutions to have that position, fold like a cheap suit.
Now...on the Gays specifically? Hey.... Great.. I hope they enjoy what they succeeded in busting their way into by force of public pressure. It's
nothing like it was at it's peak and won't receive support from me again. ....but to some, it will always and ONLY be about the Gays. That's
summing the whole conflict up in a nutshell. Form over Substance...to the bitter end.