Jauronimo

You don't have to put on the leather and fetish gear and lead the parade to support equality.

What is their cause again?

The one which demarcates unconditional parental love.

Go ahead. Explain your motivation for the post about how "ole Sam", an openly gay college athlete, isn't so courageous after all and the "cynic" (not to be confused with the now reformed homophobe in you) is skeptical that ole Sam would have come out after the draft. Where were you going with that one? I'm sure that post emanated from a place of love seeing as you've changed your ways. Your complete 180 on the issue in only 2 short years is nothing short of remarkable.

Still that yellow bellied 'mo was up to no good and Tim called it. Bet ole Sam woulda lived his whole life in the closet (aside from his whole college team who knew) and wouldn't have taken none of the abuse for his lifestyle he so rightly deserves. But them NFL fellas were too smart and figured him out and he had to fess up. Now ole Sam acts like he was being courageous, but you know he was just gonna try and live his life like a normal person and not tell no one he was gay or nothing and thats not right.

If I understand you correctly, you immediately contradicted yourself. Despite your outrage, you still agree with me. After a half dozen sentence fragments and non-sequiturs you need me to define bi-sexuality, and finally you think our cultural mores have changed for the worse but don't care to explain how? What the hell are you talking about?

So by that logic, you're not actually straight?

Can you PM me and bandit the Cliff's Notes?

Wow. What did I miss? Looks like a the server crashed halfway down page 16.

On the last bolded point we can agree. The first bolded statement would be easier to believe if I hadn't stumbled across your work on another website and wasn't staring at page upon page of evidence to the contrary. But I won't introduce any of that without your blessing.

I'm not referring to psychological studies and I'm not sure whats going on with your fixation on the poster Benjamin. The last time you attempted to set the record and world straight, I addressed each your arguments pertaining to genetics, evolution and twin studies in detail. Many others did as well. It was a futile exercise. After learning more about your worldview and politics, I get the impression that the only science you're interested in is that which supports your rather unflattering opinion of homosexuals, to put it gently.

Tim has been very clear on his position that homosexuality is a choice. He was more measured in his delivery this time around, but the message was there down to the same examples pulled from Tim's peculiar brand of science. I've already been through this process with Tim and he isn't interested in a discussion. In a darker corner of the internet, you might find a website where Tim drops the pretense about having an honest and open discussion and lets his real feelings regarding homosexuality be known. I was clear on genetics before. Why don't you post your diatribe again since I can't reference the original?

Clearly its a lifestyle choice. Didn't you read Tim's treatise on homosexuality? Were homosexuality a function of genetics it would have been phased out of the genome because any trait that is deleterious to the fitness of an individual is eventually phased out of the genome. Like albinism, dwarfism, sickle cell and everything else on this quick list of genetic disorders which also don't exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_disorders

Dude, it was Bally's. You're seriously in denial.

I liked your freshman bio take on homosexuality as choice a lot better the last time you trotted it out. This attempt was just flaccid.

Its truly remarkable what someone can do with just a little bit of knowledge.

You took away a nuanced opinion of the role of genetics, environment and nurture in defining sexuality from John's litany of examples involving nothing more than personal choices which are harmful to society??? How is that possible?

So we can agree that Sam did nothing more to make himself a distraction than A-Rodg. Sam didn't make himself a distraction. Tebow didn't make himself a distraction. The idiots covering them make the distraction. Lets assign blame properly.

The question that you should be asking is why a man's sexual orientation is only a "distraction" when he's gay? Why do we have 8 pages on Sam's orientation? Why wasn't this glossed over just like A-Rodg's comments?

Aaron Rodgers made public statements about his sexual orientation not long ago. Was that a distraction?

How did he make himself a distraction?

I've never found him funny and that has nothing to do with his politics. At least Bill Maher, as insufferable as he is, doesn't pretend to be impartial and occasionally has a decent one-liner.

Well...would ya?

Somehow the loving embraced turned violent after the brothers puked in each others faces. Outstanding.

He couldn't have done it alone. Look at the way he leaves the stage. He clearly nods and blinks as if delivering a non-verbal message to another conspirator. He must have had help from within the NFL and some level of cooperation from the MetLife security as well as Port Authority and New York Metro.