Fighting for “Equality”—Or Obsessed with Sex?
by Peter Sprigg
October 14, 2009
It seems that homosexual activist groups can’t even raise money without using sexual innuendo.
I happen to be on the email list for “Equality Maryland,” the state homosexual activist organization (it’s always good to know what the opposition is doing). They are planning to raise money with a “Jazz Brunch and Silent Auction” on Sunday, October 18 in Baltimore.
But I was startled by the poor taste (and the poor proofreading) of the subject line for an email invitation to this event that I received on September 28. It read: “Care to engage is [sic] some ‘Four Play’?” (The gimmick was that you would get a discount when purchasing four tickets.)
I wondered if they would be embarrassed or get any negative reaction—but apparently not. On October 7, I received a follow-up email with this subject line: “Forget ‘Four Play’ . . . how about a ‘Threesome’?” Offering a discount for the purchase of only three tickets this time, the message came complete with a publicity photo from the old “Three’s Company” TV show.
When homosexuals promote their political agenda in the public square, they argue that it’s not about sex. It’s about love, families, equality, justice, etc., etc. They don’t want people thinking about two men or two women having sex. (This is why they prefer the term “gay” rather than “homosexual.”)
But when talking to each other, the agenda becomes more clear.
It’s about sex.
Family Research Council is a 501c(3) non-profit organization. If this post has been helpful to you, please consider a gift to help us continue to advance Faith, Family, and Freedom.
Comments
Many homosexuals do find that kind of advertising to be demeaning. I don’t really find their openess about sex suprising though. A lot of time and money has been spent to remove their attractions and relationships from any sense of sexual morality. Many don’t fall for it, but for those that do … why should they not flaunt sex and give it freely? They think Chriatians already believe them to be practically the worst thing they could think of, so there is no point for them to not do the very things those people expect of them … and what is obviously judged and publically condemned far more less harshly in others (the treatment they would get if being with the same people and doing the same things but having a different gender).
We live in a world surrounded with sexual innuendo; especially in advertising. Pick up a magazine or turn on the TV and its EVERYWHERE. Why should any such innuendo (meant in good fun) from a gay perspective be different? Either you are against all sexual innuendo in advertising or you’re not!
No, you moron. It’s about people who are not afraid of who they are and consider human sexuality to be as beautiful and as normal as breathing. Unlike you and your kind, most homosexuals celebrate their humanity rather than hide in fear from it.
Of course, when gays attempt to marry, they’re also contributing to the decline of culture for their desire for stability and permanence somehow.
The FRC just amazes me: to them, the only appropriate “solution” for gays would be to ship every one of them off to an island somewhere where “decent Christians” wouldn’t have to be bothered with hiring them or leasing their apartments to them or otherwise acknowledging their existence. Why else would they fight hate crimes legislation (which already protects one’s “religious lifestyle choices”, btw) and employment and housing protections for gays?
“They don’t want people thinking about two men or two women having sex.”
Clearly, this is projection on the part of the writer. In any rate, isn’t the thought of most people having sex somewhat unappealing? If I went on to describe marital relations between two very heavyset people (or two very elderly people), wouldn’t many people find that just as much of a turnoff? Personal taste shouldn’t be the deciding factor in influencing legislation.
By: Scott | October 14, 2009 at 11:04 am
I swear Peter, you probably know more about gay sex than I do (and I’m gay).
Are you sure your last name isn’t really LaBarbera?