Thread: Abraham Lincoln was a gay atheist racist

That's what they said on the history channel last night. But the worst, is that he is responsible for the deaths of 750,000 Americans because of his policies to strip economic power from the southern states.

H2 doesn't just expose the republicans, they said that FDR was a coke freak and Elenore was a lezbo.

Originally Posted by gophangover

That's what they said on the history channel last night. But the worst, is that he is responsible for the deaths of 750,000 Americans because of his policies to strip economic power from the southern states.

You would not believe how hard I laughed at the title of this post.

The words "gay" and "racist" don't go together in the same sentence. Homosexuality is far more associated with anti-racists and liberals.

The History Channel told me last week that the pyramids in Egypt are actually giant space ships left behind by ancient aliens from the planet Zook.

The History Channel is a great place to get your information from. It can't be beat.

By the way, anyone seen the film Idiocracy? I highly recommend it.

Originally Posted by Zook

The words "gay" and "racist" don't go together in the same sentence. Homosexuality is far more associated with anti-racists and liberals.

The History Channel told me last week that the pyramids in Egypt are actually giant space ships left behind by ancient aliens from the planet Zook.

The History Channel is a great place to get your information from. It can't be beat.

By the way, anyone seen the film Idiocracy? I highly recommend it.

Zook, that is not at all true. In history, some of the more ardent racists were in fact homosexuals.

Originally Posted by Alif Qadr

Zook, that is not at all true. In history, some of the more ardent racists were in fact homosexuals.

Like who?

I'm really talking about today though anyway. Today is what matters, it's what's relevant. Hardly any racists I know are homosexuals and infact most racists oppose homosexuality. Where as I'd say around 99% of anti-racists are either homosexuals or strongly support it.

Personally I have no opinion on homosexuality. I neither think it is right or wrong. It's an issue that doesn't concern me and I don't really have a problem with it. Which is why I never post in the gay section.

Originally Posted by Alif Qadr

Zook, that is not at all true. In history, some of the more ardent racists were in fact homosexuals.

And liberals. Look at Al Sharpton.

Originally Posted by Unifier

And liberals. Look at Al Sharpton.

You know, being a liberal doesn't automatically mean someone likes Al Sharpton. The man is a bit too theatrical to take seriously, which hurts what he does.

Originally Posted by Zook

Like who?

I'm really talking about today though anyway. Today is what matters, it's what's relevant. Hardly any racists I know are homosexuals and infact most racists oppose homosexuality. Where as I'd say around 99% of anti-racists are either homosexuals or strongly support it.

Personally I have no opinion on homosexuality. I neither think it is right or wrong. It's an issue that doesn't concern me and I don't really have a problem with it. Which is why I never post in the gay section.

Like J. Edgar Hoover for starters. Try learning history and put your agenda to the side.

This is another perspective on behavior and rights:

Homosexual Argument - Homosexuality is like race. Homosexuals are a class of people like African-Americans.

Key Questions: Is there a difference between skin color and sexual behavior? Why should we classify people because of what they desire to do sexually?

Homosexuals want to be considered a class of people by depicting themselves as victims who, like blacks, have been denied civil rights. That way, they can make the unsuspecting public think that those who oppose their political agenda are discriminating against them rather than their behavior. According to them, conservatives are all bigots on par with racists—we are opposed to fairness itself.

But all of that is nonsense. First, the comparison of homosexuality to race is completely invalid. Skin color is benign, but sexual behavior is not. Having a certain skin color does not hurt anyone, but homosexual behavior can and does hurt others. Furthermore, sexual behavior is always a choice; race never is. You will find many former homosexuals, but you will never find a former African-American.

Second, homosexuality is not an identity or class; it’s a behavior. Homosexuals are not a class of people any more than heterosexuals are a class of people. We are males and females, not gays and straights. In other words, we are males and females by anatomy, but gays and straights by behavior.

Why not classify people by their desires as homosexual activists demand? Because if we start to classify people by what they desire to do sexually, then why not give people with all sexual desires special marriage rights? On what grounds should we say that same-sex marriage is fine but not marriage involving polygamy, incest, or bestiality?
“But those behaviors are harmful!” you say. Exactly, and so is homosexual behavior. So why is it legitimate to carve out a special case for homosexuality but not for those other behaviors?
Skin color and sexual desires do have one thing in common—they are both non-issues when it comes to law. Why should the law care about your skin color or desires of any kind? Laws should be concerned only with behavior.

People can desire to marry whomever or whatever they want, but the behavior of actually marrying a person is what the law is concerned with. As we’ve seen in the six-point case, the state has a compelling interest to keep laws that promote natural marriage and provide no option for government-backed same-sex marriage.