Bent over and stuck up the ass

[Stonecutter]

(literally)

From Politics1.com

http://www.politics1.com/

OUTED AS GAY, GOP CONGRESSMAN QUITS. A shocking series of revelations about conservative Congressman Ed Schrock (R-VA) forced him to retire late Monday. Gay activist Michael Rogers posted a story on his BlogActive site outing Schrock as gay on August 19 -- and it slowly began to gather attention on the net. Schrock holds a 92% approval rating from the Christian Coalition and a 0% rating from the Human Rights Campaign. What drew Rogers' ire was that Schrock voted for the Marriage Protection Act and also signed on as a co-sponsor of the Federal Marriage Amendment. Rogers detailed how Schrock -- whose district contains Pat Robertson's Regent University and nine military bases -- would use an interactive phone sex service to hook up with other men (BlogActive even posted a recording today of Schrock using the phone sex service). The whispering grew so intense that Schrock finally released a written statement that he was immediately withdrawing from his race for re-election. Without ever directly addressing the allegations, Schrock said they have "called into question my ability" to serve in Congress. "After much thought and prayer, I have come to the realization that these allegations will not allow my campaign to focus on the real issues facing our nation and region," he said. Schrock, a 63-year-old retired career Navy officer and Vietnam War veteran, was first elected to Congress in 2000. Rogers has no regrets for outing Schrock, noting that during the 2000 campaign Schrock said he wanted to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" so that potential enlistees could be questioned about past homosexual experiences in order to bar them from serving. The Second District Republican Committee will hold a special meeting Tuesday night to select a replacement nominee. State Senator Ken Stolle and State Delegate Thelma Drake have both expressed an interest in the GOP nomination. Iraq War veteran and attorney David Ashe is the Democratic candidate. Rogers, meanwhile, says he will next focus on outing another Congressman and highly placed officials in the Bush Administration. "The time has come for these gay homophobes to step up or be outed. Schrock is the first -- more will follow," vowed Rogers.

Take THAT! you stupid ****ing bigot.

[Ace195]

Hrm harsh no ? Wow they outed a 60 yr old man who was raised that way and probably wasn't a bad person I bet half of his voting population was the same way.. Congratulations to you MR.Rogers.. If we found gary and ace would you join up with them and be the ambiguously gay trio ? grrr.....

[Dylflon]

Gay homophobes?

Are they afraid of themselves?

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Dylflon

Gay homophobes?

Are they afraid of themselves?

In short... yes.

I kind of find this a little disgusting that Rogers would sink this low, actually. But I guess if Clinton's BJs are fair game, then Shrock's gay relationships are too. But then again the article never said Shrock lied under oath to Congress about being gay...

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Dylflon

Gay homophobes?

Are they afraid of themselves?

I think they are afraid of the idea that they are gay.

The type of guy that remarks " Im not gay" after everything, is usually one of them.

[Jonbo298]

Rogers is the reason America is becoming the 1960's/70's all over again except with a different issue but the core is still kind of the same.

Outing people because they are gay should be considered racism or some form of it. This is completely unacceptable and I feel sorry for Shrock being outed because people in America seem to think that gay people are evil like we thought how black people were back in the 1960's and earlier. Gay and Lesbian people are no different from your average Jane or Jack. They have different tastes but it doesn't mean they are evil things that have come to ruin the US.

**** you Rogers. I hope you burn in hell getting raped by Satan.

[Professor S]

The funny part is that Rogers is a gay activist. He fights for gay rights, and I guess outing political figures who disagree with him is a part fo that. Kind of reminds me of "pro-life" activists that murder people.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Jonbo298

Rogers is the reason America is becoming the 1960's/70's all over again except with a different issue but the core is still kind of the same.

Outing people because they are gay should be considered racism or some form of it. This is completely unacceptable and I feel sorry for Shrock being outed because people in America seem to think that gay people are evil like we thought how black people were back in the 1960's and earlier. Gay and Lesbian people are no different from your average Jane or Jack. They have different tastes but it doesn't mean they are evil things that have come to ruin the US.

**** you Rogers. I hope you burn in hell getting raped by Satan.

Heh, wow.

Sexual preference and Race are two different things. One is a choice, the other isn't. One you can hide, the other you can't. "Well they shouldn't have to hide Sexual preference" What if Mr. X likes to have sex with monkeys and girls who are old enough to be his grand children? *kicks him out of office too*

As for the "Gay homophobes"... its possible. Just like there are murderers who think killing is wrong, and thiefs who think stealing is wrong. Just because you do it yourself doesn't mean you have to think it is right.

*runs out of gas to toss on flames* Damnit.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by TheGame

Heh, wow.

Sexual preference and Race are two different things. One is a choice, the other isn't.

Game, do you consider your heterosexuality a choice, or an inherent part of who you are?

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by The Strangler

Game, do you consider your heterosexuality a choice, or an inherent part of who you are?

Thats an interesting question... I consider it a chioce though. But I also consider it a part of who I am. Just like other things I "chose" to enjoy.

[Professor S]

A choice implies that you have had to make the decision between at least two things. So have you ever had the inclination to be attracted to men? If so, then you have a choice to make. If you've never been attracted to men, then there is no choice as there is only one option.

Pick one.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by The Strangler

A choice implies that you have had to make the decision between at least two things. So have you ever had the inclination to be attracted to men? If so, then you have a choice to make. If you've never been attracted to men, then there is no choice as there is only one option.

Pick one.

What in the hell.... >.>

Just because I've never been attracted to men doesn't mean I didn't have the option to be. Think of anything in the world that you simply don't like and never have. You are saying you didn't chose not to like it? Think of food and music.

Now... you are probably thinking "I tasted the food, and I listened to the song before deciding I didn't like it." Well, before one has sexual intercourse, how do they decide who they are or are not attracted to?

I looked at a girl's ass I was like "Yes, melikes" I looked at a guy's ass and I was like "Hell no" I look at an ugly girl's ass "No thanks"

So I made a desicion. What one choses to like or dislike and love or hate is a part of who they are too. By your logic, I didn't have a choice to if I enjoyed Video games or not, it was just a part of me. Heck I was playing and loving my Mario Bros before the thought of sex even crossed my mind.

So, yes, I see it as a choice, AND as a part of who I am.

[Professor S]

For there to be a choice in this, you have to have two options. If you cannot get an erection from the idea of having sex with a man, you cannot have sex with them, so there is no choice.

Its a part of who you are. Arguments about choice in homosexuality are arguments that attempt to justify bigotry and the illusion that gay people could become straight anymore than I could have sex with another man even if I "chose to".

EDIT: Game, please don't mistake me for calling you bigotted. I just think you might be listening to a lot of rationales from those who are. Its my personal belief, and I think the logical one, that we can't expect gay people to change their sexuality any more than we could change ours. Sexuality is integral to who we are as people, much more so than music or movies or culture. To deny our selxuality is to deny ourselves.

[Rumpelstilzchen]

This is true, being homosexual is not by choice.

But... do you choose what you like in any circumstance? Or is it simply how you were made?

Perhaps choices are illusions of control, when they are merely alterations of your natural design, and rather the shackles latched to those who "choose" "originality"

[TheGame]

For there to be a choice in this, you have to have two options. If you cannot get an erection from the idea of having sex with a man, you cannot have sex with them, so there is no choice.

No, there is a choice. I chose who/what gives me an erection based off of certain qualities they posess and the situation.

An erection is a part of sex, you don't have an erection then chose your target. You chose your target then you have an erection. Same case scenario for men and women. There are girls who can't give me an erection just like there are guys who can't give me an erection, but they are all options. I chose not to have sex with a guy because I'm not attracted to him, just like I chose not to have sex with a girl because I'm not attracted to her.

Just because a guy has never given me an erection before doesn't mean I'm incapable of getting one from a guy. I've just never experienced that. (And because I think it is immoral I won't act on it... or try not to at least.)

Its a part of who you are.

Yep, that is what I said in my last post.

Arguments about choice in homosexuality are arguments that attempt to justify bigotry and the illusion that gay people could become straight anymore than I could have sex with another man even if I "chose to".

Did I ever say gay people could become straight? NO. Did I ever say you are capible of having sex with a man? NO. I'm not trying to argue that. You like what you like and you don't like what you don't like... may it be girls, guys, elephants, small children, or your hand. Do you chose what you like and what you don't like? Well, do you believe in Free will? However you answer the second question is how you answer the first.

Is it my right to think what you like is immoral? Yep. Is it your right to think what somone else likes it immoral? Yep.

(Edit: Also, I'm not trying to argue against gay people. You asked me if I thought my own sexuality was a choice, and I see it as a choice. I don't think gay people can beome straight unless they suddenly prefer women to men... which isn't likely. Just like it isn't likely for me to completly change what I like over night.)