The Day I Had to Tell My Daughter About Unnatural, Abnormal Homosexuals

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 7.29.34 PM

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 7.23.20 PM

The homosexuality debate will be one for the ages. Without even factoring in the same-sex marriage football, we are still, around the world, witnessing stupid, stupid people climbing over themselves to tell us how wrong (morally and naturally) homosexuality is. It’s not like this post is going to tell you anything new, but it might just change your perspective.

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 8.01.15 PM

The excerpt at the top of the page was taken from Melissa Dereberry’s blog. If you can be bothered trudging through the rest of her stagnant ramblings, you’ll see that she’s a self-congratulatory, award-winning author who is generally concerned and somewhat primarily occupied about children’s issues. Just reading this particular entry got me thinking however: what kind of child-blog typing parent has an eight year old who doesn’t know what homosexuality is? Has this child seriously been sheltered from the concept for this long? Has this child never heard the word ‘gay’ before or even considered the idea of same sex people loving each other? Obviously not. Because a ‘nice’ moment (watching TV at midnight together) was suddenly not a nice moment, because mother now has to teach her daughter about gays.

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 7.48.36 PM

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 7.55.15 PM

So we get to paragraph two, and the ‘I have nothing against gays’ line comes in. Being a God-is-great-and-I-am-full-of-love-for-all-except-those-like-me skeptic, I immediately scan the text for the word ‘but’, or ‘however’. I found it. And it was coupled with some emotive words, highlighted there for you to see. What can we glean from Melissa’s perspective at this point? Well it would seem that she believes that homosexuals are free to be homosexuals as long as they do their business away from the public eye, as that would force concerned parents to have to explain to their children how a person can love another person. See, once a parent has had an opportunity to explain that homosexuality is just not right at all, then the child will be more intellectually prepared and therefore less likely to have an emotional episode if it’s sprung on them while watching the box.

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 8.06.26 PM

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 8.11.30 PM

This is the part where the aforementioned ‘however’ really takes effect. Melissa Dereberry has nothing against homosexuals, but they’re just not normal or natural, and they don’t fit into the natural order of the universe. Pretty harsh words from someone who has nothing against them. I would love to be a fly on the wall as she tells her supposed many homosexual friends that they’re not normal or natural and that they don’t fit in.

Now, the first of Melissa’s arguments against the normality of homosexuals is because well, god dammit there just ain’t that many of ’em. They just ain’t the norm. I guess that would also suggest that pandas aren’t normal. I guess that would also suggest that men and women who remain celibate prior to marriage are also abnormal.

Next, she demands ‘science’ prove that homosexuals live in fear of being discriminated against if they come out. Along with the obvious chortling that accompanies a goofball God-girl asking for scientific proof of something comes the shocking reality that all across the world this is overwhelmingly the truth – especially in countries where being gay equates to a death sentence. In Australia alone, A 2008 study of found that nearly one in seven reported living in fear of homophobic violence. This fear was justified in that nearly 85% of respondents had been subjected to some form of homophobic violence or harassment in their lifetimes and one in two had experienced homophobic harassment or other non-physical abuse in the past two years. (Source)

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 8.18.37 PM

But here comes the big one. The oft-pushed argument that homosexuality is unnatural because homosexuals can’t produce and that there was Adam and Eve – not Adam and Steve. What a crock of shit. In the United States, a Pastor Worley of the Providence Road Baptist Church was quoted as saying that homosexuals should be caged behind electrified fences until they died out. Now, the logic behind this was that none of the gays would be able to procreate behind there and that eventually the homosexuals would die out. Of course, what the Pastor and our own Melissa Dereberry fail to recognise is that not only is ‘God’ producing gay people each and every day, as ‘He’ has done since the beginning of time, but those children are born to straight parents. Gay parents do not create gay children, no. Straight parents do. Why, in a world that is at dire risk of over-population, where millions live in poverty and without access to basic needs like food and water, does Melissa place such emphasis on the need for human beings to reproduce? Does she see celibate nuns as unnatural? Does she see women who cannot fall pregnant as abnormal? What about men who have low sperm count? How about selectively and non-voluntarily single people? What about those in relationships that do not want children? How about those who have given birth to stillborn children? Are all of these people failing to ‘fit into the natural order of the Universe’?

Look, don’t get Melissa wrong. She believes in free speech (not sure why she brought that up), but as soon as it ‘incites confusion’ in a child? Well that’s where Melissa draws the line. Can you imagine the educational journey of this woman’s child? Every single time this little petal sees something that confuses or offends her her mother, the ol’ Deneberry blog is going to kick right into gear and the American constitutional right to ‘freedom of speech’ is going to be used without a word of hesitation.

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 9.07.24 PM

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 9.12.25 PM

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 8.57.55 PM

Next, in one swift flick of her fingers, Melissa has compared same sex love to ‘eruptions’ of foul language and then spoken of how the naked female body should not be seen. I’m starting to get a good idea of what the inside of Melissa Dereberry’s daugher’s head is looking like. No wonder the poor child is confused. No, wait, hold on – the child’s only question about homosexuality to date has been in response to seeing two males kissing “Mom, they both looked like boys.” The dropkick parent has since spoken about being ‘speechless’, but we are all starting to see that the concept and reality of speechlessness are starkly different. This rancid woman has much to say on the topic and you can bet your bottom dollar that if she’s stupid enough to spout her nonsense on her shitty blog, then she’s stupid enough to espouse her values upon her poor, innocent child as well. Parent of the fucking year.

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 9.55.38 PM

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 9.18.29 PM

The gentle subtlety seeps through. Homosexuality is a choice. Yeah right. Did you choose to find the father of your children more attractive than females, Melissa? Did he choose to bump uglies with you instead of doing the horizontal folk dance with a dude named Dave from the bar? What will you do if your child ‘chooses’ not to be interested in the sexual company of the opposite sex one day? Will you tell her that it’s fine, and that she should ‘feel free’? May I ask though, how free does a person feel when they are told to celebrate their love and marriage behind closed doors only? Is that freedom? Or are we just pandering to your insecurities? I’ll tell you right now that your child is far more prepared to digest and process the simple notion of same-sex love than you are. You have prattled on with gay abandon the kind of passive-aggressive slander that your children will one day be shameful of. How dare you suggest that homosexuality is a choice that people freely make: a choice that people make without fear of persecution and discrimination? How dare you suggest that being gay is as offensive as swearing loudly in a park – something that is actually offensive and confusing for a child? How dare you suggest that gay people have no right to feel oppressed because they have the support of bigots like you who will give them what they want so long as you don’t have to fucking look at it?

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 9.31.24 PM

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 9.30.06 PM

A few things for you to consider, Melissa:

* Gays usually do understand their feelings. It’s the attitudes displayed by specimens of human chloroform like yourself that they find difficult to understand;

* People are born gay – it’s not something that you need to be ‘sure about’. Many people don’t recognise their sexuality until their late teens because sexuality itself is a new concept – regardless of the names and reasons for the people you’re seasoning;

* You may not think that the very real problems that homosexuals (and transsexuals and bisexuals) face exist but they do. The issue of homosexuality is mainstream conversation now, whether you like it or not. Craptacular blog posts like yours add to the debate too, whether I like it or not. And what your messages do is they reach out to gay people and find them in their hours of loneliness. When you tell your global audience (I’m writing to you from Australia FFS) that they are unnatural and offensive to adults and children, and that their freedom should only be extended to the insides of their houses, you are telling them that they do not belong in our world. You are no better than the Taliban in this respect.

* You may not understand why the prospect of ‘social punishment’ is so real for some people and not so much for others, and you may not understand why children, who are born without feelings of discrimination would use homosexuality as a target to hurl hatred towards, but I will tell you now that children listen to their parents. And their parents read blogs from respectable good Christians like your fine self. And that is just the tip of the iceberg as to how this world revolves.

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 9.42.13 PM

Note the key emotive platforms: children, education, television, legislation.

So to Melissa, I can only hope that one day your child teaches you a thing or two. It seems you have no issue with your friend douchebag Myers (Blue BOmb) sticking up for you in such a rational way. Both of you are stunning examples of mental incapacity and your words will be immortalised forever.

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 9.48.21 PM

Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 9.52.42 PM

127 thoughts on “The Day I Had to Tell My Daughter About Unnatural, Abnormal Homosexuals

  1. I’ll always remember the horrifying, life-altering conversation I had with my mother when she told me my brother was gay:

    Me: Why does (brother and his boyfriend)’s apartment only have one bedroom.
    Mum: Because they’re gay.
    Me: Oh. What’s for dinner?

    Clearly my 8 year old self was horrified and traumatised for life. Or that nothing changed. Something.

    • I know. There’s some belief out there that somehow knowing that gay people exist will cause harm for children in some way. I can only guess the fear in this case is that her daughter, upon knowing gay people exist will turn her daughter into a lesbian. Because if she didn’t know people could be gay, and then actually had lesbian desires, she’d repress them and get stuck in some loveless and sexless marriage where she would wait out her years until death. You know….like normal people do.

      Anyway, apparently the high rate of suicide, especially among young gay males in the western world due to the repression, shunning and alienating of who they are, is worth it to prevent little children from knowing people are different. I can’t wait until she extends it to say that disabled people, non-whites, and Jews should also hide in their homes, until she is ready to tell her daughter that such people exist.

      Incidentally, since finding out gay people existed at an early age, I didnt gain any attraction to men. Though I did start hugging my male friends-I can’t believe I was missing out! That shit’s awesome!

    • I found out that two very good friends of the family were gay, at the same age, just asked if it was still ok to bounce on their bed for a laugh. It was by the way, they both became god parents to my nephew and we all had a laugh at that because they told Dan he had a fairy god father lol didn’t harm me, or Dan or anyone else in our family ffs what is wrong with people?

  2. I’ve got gay friends and their names are Adam and Steve. Everybody I know loves them because they’re really nice people, and they’re actually non-fictional characters.

  3. The title of this site is “aussie freedom of speech and the people who abuse it.” Last time I checked, I live in America, which means I am not exercising my right to free speech as an Australian, but and AMERICAN. Stick to your own issues, please.

    • But it is our issue because so often we see our home-grown ignorant bigots repeating chapter and verse the rubbish they have gleaned from your home-grown ignorant bigots, to the extent that much of their dribblings are from US-based sites which preach hate, homophobia and intolerance.

      We will be charitable and say that with almost 312 million people the likelihood of your country having a large number of sludge-brained badly educated psychotically prejudiced idiots in it is greater than ours just on the basis of sheer demographics.

      So nothing special about you lady.

    • Melissa, have you talked to your gay friends, and asked them what they think about the opinion you recently broadcasted, that gay people are unnatural and should hide any forms of affection where no child can see it? have you started to ask yourself “Why” people are getting offended? Not just gay people, but others who have been told that the love they feel for another person is unnatural, or not normal, because the relationship is in the minority (Particularly mixed race couples), and are therefore “not normal” by your definition.

      You mentioned you just intended it to be light hearted, but then people twisted your words in order to become offended. That’s a cop out and we both know it, and pretending it never happened is just as bad. You said hurtful things because you didn’t think about how other people could feel. Everyone has done this at some itme, but you have done this on a blog that is available internationally. And now, with your friends who are gay, you have an opportunity to learn how they feel about your comments, find out why they are hurtful. Then, the next time your child sees two men or women kissing, you won’t feel awkward. You can tell her about your friends, how they’re in love, how they’re different, and how that’s okay.

      Learn from this experience, and grow, and everyone wins. Literally-there is no one who loses out by you talking, listening and finding out more about your friends (Except effort of course-but as a writer I know you are a person who can motivate yourself to improve) . Blame everyone else for the experience, or look for excuses to absolve yourself of guilt, and this will happen again and again.

    • As an American, you should know that “freedom of speech” applies only to our right to speak out against a government should it become tyrannical. It does *not* apply to hate speech. Like your blog. Furthermore, freedom of speech come with a price. If you don’t like people commenting negatively on your bigotry, don’t make it public! Hello?

  4. You are unfortunately, Melissa, since the internet has no geographical boundaries exercising your right to spew your toxic comments throughout the world and we will continue to combat such drivel. and drivel is a kind word.

  5. http://melissagreengrip.wordpress.com/ She has changed the name of the blog to GRIP….and here is the link.
    I think it is the same link but now she is going with her maiden name…talk about trying to hide…lol
    What is even more ironic her brother in law is gay and loved this post on my darlin’s page….
    Later…gater….PB

    • You live in America, the home of the trashy magazine, where people are denigrated on a daily basis for what they do in public.

      You wrote your blog, you knew it would be public. You knew it would be offensive to homosexuals and yet you proceeded. Are you aware of how many homosexuals commit suicide?

    • So it’s not offensive to publically attack an entire a group, only to go after individuals? So if someone said “I hate Jews” it’s fine, but saying “I hate this particular Jew right here”-that’s wrong?

      I think your ethics are mixed up. If you had written a post about how one particular gay man was unnatural I’d be willing to consider your opinion a lot more (I don’t know this hypothetical man-he might be unnatural for all I know).

    • It’s also illegal in Australia to incite hatred against a group on the basis of their (presumed or actual) sexual orientation. Just sayin’

    • Attacking large groups of people in the way you did is unacceptable. There is nothing in your post that wasn’t derogatory. Furthermore, your aim shouldn’t have been at homosexuals, but the media. You chose to watch the show, deal with its contents. Midnight is not prime time.

      Yes Melissa, they are your kids, so go back to wrapping them in cotton wool and feeding them bigotry. They’ll turn out just fine… Maybe.

    • You missed a wonderful opportunity Melissa to explain to your daughter about the many forms of love that exists here in our world today. To pass your prejudices of others onto her would be to limit her understanding of humanity and the beauty of our world in general. I hope your daughter is able to grow with an acceptance and appreciation of others that you yourself were not able to show. All the best.

  6. Also, you have used my personal photo and intellectual property (not to mention the invasion of privacy and propriety) without permission, which are not only violations of the WordPress terms of agreement, but are also crimes. Be prepared to answer for that.

    • Your blog and your photos have been made for public consumption by none other but Melissa Dereberry, who is now trying to pass herself off as Melissa Green (maiden name one would assume).

      When you take on the homosexual community on a public forum, then prepared to be called on it by the general public.

      Fool.

    • All information on the site was put on the public record by yourself. If you put a homophobic statement into the public it cannot suddenly be private because some people get angry. It would be like Michael Richards saying that his public racist diatribe is suddenly not a breach of privacy because one of the many witnesses reported it online.

      Take responsibility for what you said. Don’t start blaming the world because you wrote something very stupid and offensive. Start to ask your gay friends-why are they offended? How do they feel about being called unnatural, abnormal, etc?

      If you continue to blame the world when you make a mistake, you will never learn or grow from the experience.

    • Dearest Melissa,

      Now you are getting a taste of what it feels like to be gay in this world and the abuse and vilification members of the LGBTI community have to endure with on a daily basis. I hope you have learnt something.

      You publish your rubbish on the internet and then carry on about your IP and your personal photo?! If you don’t want your personal photo being used or copied then DON’T PUBLISH IT!

      As for your ‘intellectual property’ there isn’t any intellect coming out of your mouth Melissa dearest to claim as property in the first instance.

      I too feel sorry for your children. I hope they have other people in their life to teach them values and to be respectful of other’s belief systems.

    • I would say they are shaking in their boots after being threatened by a woman who isn’t brave enough to stand by her own, albeit bigoted, words.

      Suck it up princess, you said it, pay the price.

  7. I feel like with everyone trying to be ‘all-inclusive’ you are in fact attacking people (perhaps through no fault of their own) who are differently thinking to you. This anti bogan site is equally exclusive and judgemental as the bogans you are attacking….i would call my myself a fence sitter as i definitely would not want to be described along bogans or discriminatory people but i don’t think i would want to take part in this anti bogan movement as its just as discriminatory. Possibly necessary so that there is two extreme sides fighting it out so that i believe people like-minded as me can realise the middle ground and grey area. Plus on the anti bogan facebook page you liked a comment from one of your subsribers “go eat a bag of dicks” so anti bogan site is blasting a ignorant woman on homosexual issues but will ‘like’ an insult that has homosexual undertones?

      • You are all holding yourselves to be the moral superiors of others yet you are all contradictions and ready to burn people who do have differing opinions to yourself…just as bad

        • I just want to clarify that i am 24 yrs old, from sydney and am a non religious person. I have strong feelings towards the rights of any man, woman, child, animal of any race, orientation, mind mentality.

        • No one is shutting down anyone’s rights to anyone’s views, middle ground. But the right to free speech includes the right to criticise.

          And I think you agree with that. While you like to say you accept the rights of all mentalities-I think you’ll find you don’t. If someone wanted to talk about how children are sexual beings, would you be telling people they shouldn’t be criticised because those are just differring opinions to yours.

        • There is criticising and then theres online bullying and picking on one person that you are choosing to represent a whole. Furthermore, i work as a disability support worker in various factions which includes those with physical, mental & intellectual disabilities. It is fine to disagree with their thoughts/notions but it is not fine to attack people and bully them.

        • What kind of things would you say about a person who created a blog post saying that it should be legal to rape children? Do you think such a blog post would be offensive to victims of rape?

        • “There is criticising and then theres online bullying and picking on one person that you are choosing to represent a whole. ”

          But the site shows many people. Not just one. If this was a “We hate Mel” page I’d totally be objecting to it. It’s not. The site showcases racism, sexism and truly idiotic statements from all different people.

          “It is fine to disagree with their thoughts/notions but it is not fine to attack people and bully them. ”

          So I repeat-how do you demonstrate that racism, sexism and other such thoughts are not socially acceptable if this site is doing it the wrong way?

          I think you’re experiencing the Nirvana fallacy: “Your way isn’t working exactly perfectly-so we should just stop it”
          The problem with it is that it means nothing can ever change. This site is not going to change 100% of people’s views 100%, but it shows that certain behaviours are not to be tolerated in public, which is pretty good when all I’ve heard from you so far is “Do nothing until we solve impossible questions”

      • So you hide behind other well known people’s comments…regardless it is an insult and it has homophobic undertones. you seem to be trying to validate an insult because someone well know has said it…reminds me of the video of the women trying to validate that pastor’s electric fence comments seen above….

        • So, just ot be clear, “eating a bag of dicks” (Which isn’t a homosexual act and is almost certainly illegal in all countries-I mean, how would you harvest them), is the exact same thing as saying “We should put lesbians behind a wall until they starve and die”, is that right?

          Listen, if you’ve got a way to correct negative beliefs and behaviour which doesn’t just reinforce the same behaviours and beliefs, please please inform us all.

        • Which means the comment of “eating a bag of dicks” is equal in offensiveness to “all lesbians should be walled up and left to die”, right? So a truly ridiculous statement (And again-no gay person eats bags of dicks, or indeed a single dick out of a bag) is equatable to saying “All gay people should be left to die”?

          And I repeat:
          Listen, if you’ve got a way to correct negative beliefs and behaviour which doesn’t just reinforce the same behaviours and beliefs, please please inform us all.

        • if you don’t know the joke you don’t know the joke….no hiding behind anything…..my goodness…..

        • I’m not offended by it, i have said a lot worse to a lot of people. all i’m saying is that its a little hypocritical considering the high and mighty stance this blog is taking..

        • also this ‘bag of dicks comment’ is another example of how something written as a joke free of any real meaning or double meaning can be taken out of context or read in a bigger context and used against your character. who knew that writing ‘eat a bag of dicks’ could have caused such as debate …?

        • So it’s not an offensive statement, but it is compared to saying all lesbians should be set behind a wall and left to die.

          So, which is it? Are you saying that walling in all lesbians is not offensive, like the joke, or you’re saying both are offensive?

          ” is another example of how something written as a joke free of any real meaning or double meaning can be taken out of context or read in a bigger context and used against your character.”

          Sorry-where is the original blogger taken out of context? Where is the idiot pastor taken out of context? The point of the pastor is that there is no context than can justify his statements.

        • No you don’t understand me. I’m saying the JUSTIFICATION (you and that youtube women use) that it was just a joke/comment on the sly is the same. you are trying to validate a offensive comment with its a joke by a famous comedian and ignore that it does have a literal (although obviously illogical) connotation. Come on, it really isnt that difficult to comprehend?

          The Louie quote which one of you posted on the anti bogan fb page, was meant to be just an off the cuff remark to some gay hating asshole (it was said to a man so yes it does have homosexual undertones) once you combine that fb dick comment with this article it does come off as offensive and hypocritical.

        • No, but here’s the problem. When someone says “Eat a bag of dicks” they are not telling a person to get a group of men, chop off thier penises, and then put them in a bag. No one thinks that (Unless you’ve got something to tell us).

          When someone says “I’d like to put all lesbians behind a wall and starve them to death” while the operation is just as illogical, the fact that the person said “I’d like….” makes it so much more offensive.

          And I’ll just repeat:
          where is the original blogger taken out of context? Where is the idiot pastor taken out of context? The point of the pastor is that there is no context than can justify his statements.

    • Middle ground, just to be clear, you think that judging people based on their beliefs and actions, which can be changed and are controlled by a person’s free will, is at the same level as judging people based on their skin colour, culture, sexuality or gender, which are all largely unchangeable?

      Does that seem right to you?

      • I’m talking about the psychology behind it. People’s belief systems (conditioned and reinforced by family/culture etc) are just as heavily built in as the physical traits eg gender, sexuality etc. Thoughts/emotional responses etc are not changed overnight or by an attack from someone across the globe..if the human mind was that easily influenced there would be no drug addicts or murders don’t you think? At the risk of sounding like an idiot (which some of you no doubt deem me to be..?) this article from cracked can show how certain influences such as looking at alcohol can make you more racist (http://www.cracked.com/article_20132_6-things-that-secretly-make-you-act-like-jerk.html). Emotional/mental breakthroughs do not typically happen with personal attacks and un/intelligent word bashing. I am a very strong advocate for Homosexual rights (and yes have gotten into very heated debates with idiot bigots/bogans too) but even I know that people’s belief systems are largely based on socio-economic status, location, family influences, cultural influences etc. This women Melissa is a women who i assume loves her family, her children and her friends. Yes she may have slight(?) homophobic notions but she is not a murderer, molester..etc she probably would help someone who fainted in the street (prob regardless of age/sex/gender/orientation etc). Is it fair for her face and name to be blasted across the internet and assumptions to be made? No. What if she were to commit suicide from this attack on her personally? (re. 2day fm radio djs scandal) Did anyone learn something from that?!
        Don’t get me wrong i was furious with what she said/possibly implied and adding to that those youtube videos which makes me want to catch a plane just so i could bash the ignorance from that pastor…this article and the people responding to it as you want them to are you not being the same as the anti gay bogans you hate? Your article is full of propaganda and assumptions…

        • I see what yuo’re getting at, middle ground, but if we do not object to homophobia, racism, sexism, etc, then we are providing tacit approval. I agree people do not change their minds by appearing on this site, but they are shown that the beliefs they arep utting forward, however entrenched they are, are not acceptable.

          I’m sure these are beleifs she grew up with-but they are beliefs and unlike gender or sexuality, beliefs naturally change over time. If she received only positive feedback on her article, this would further entrench her views. If she received no response from her article, this would imply tacit approval, such as “What I said must be right, because if it wasn’t, someone would have told me” Even a message of “I disagree but will leave it” sends a message of “Your comment is acceptable” as if it were truly offensive, people would speak up.

          If we are not allowed to criticise unacceptable behaviour, how do we reduce it? I’m not meaning to be negative here, but I’d love to hear a better way to demonstrate proper social behaviour, and if you have one please tell me.

          “Is it fair for her face and name to be blasted across the internet and assumptions to be made?”

          Is it fair for gay people across the world to be told they are not normal and if seen are a danger to children? Which is more important, the needs of the many gay people, or the needs of one woman who posted without thinking about what she wrote?

          No one here blasted her name across the intetrnet. She did that herself. This is the clear difference between herself and the nruse in England. The nurse in England did not choose to have her words go international, this author did. And she, like all of us, need to take responsibility for our own actions.

          “this article and the people responding to it as you want them to are you not being the same as the anti gay bogans you hate?”

          But again, there is a difference between criticising a person for their beliefs, and criticisng an entire group of people for who they are. Again, if a person posted “I don’t like this particular Gay person” they are not going to be on the site.

          ” Your article is full of propaganda and assumptions…”

          Whati s being assumed that is false? She made homophobic and offensive statements-that’s the truth.
          What propoganda?

        • I am sincerely glad you see what i was trying to explain. The questions you ask of me and over my head to answer as they are the fundamental questions..Do we ignore people like her? Is ignoring people like her causing more harm then good? How do we make these changes so that everybody can live unashamedly and free of prejudice?
          These all all questions i wish i could answer, but could not. I will pose a final question “Can you force change when change is only possible in the minds and hearts of others?”

          Peace out.

        • “The questions you ask of me and over my head to answer as they are the fundamental questions..”

          Now, this is what annoys me. You come here and tell us “You’re doing it wrong!” and when I ask for the right way, you say “Dunno”

          Well, until you have a better idea, we’ll just keep on doing what we’re doing.

          And now, let’s answer some fundamental questions:
          “Do we ignore people like her?”

          No.

          ” Is ignoring people like her causing more harm then good? ”

          Yes, as it provides tacit approval.

          “How do we make these changes so that everybody can live unashamedly and free of prejudice?”

          We can’t. People can only change themselves. However, living in a society where they know their values and beliefs are seen as unappealign and unacceptable is a pretty big starting point.

          It can also stop an inherent belief from manifesting itself. If someone loses his job for hasslign a person for beign gay (As I know one man who waS), he’s still going to have a problem with gay people, but is lessl ikely to display the behaviour due to the risk of losing another job. The change has not become internal, but it has become external, and for the many gay people in the world-that’s a great change.

        • Who made you judge, jury & executioner though? Don’t you think change is already in process and that you are in fact (by angering and belittling housewifes) are hindering the process rather than ‘fast-pacing’ it.

        • “Who made you judge, jury & executioner though?”

          No one. But there are laws about discrimination, upheld in both Australia, America and by the UN.

          “Don’t you think change is already in process and that you are in fact (by angering and belittling housewifes) are hindering the process rather than ‘fast-pacing’ it.”

          What sign do you have that any change is happening? What evidnece at all do you have that this woman, by posting a truly offensive and ignorant rant about gay people, is not just going to be reinforced in her views that her beliefs are acceptable by not getting a response.

          I personally don’t think change was also in process. The blog read to me like a comment of a person who has deep anti-gay sentiment but doesn’t want to think of herself as anti gay, so she says stuff like “Be free to be gay” then says “Don’t do it anywhere anyone I care about can see it”, and that “I support gay people” followed by “It’s all a choice, you’re not normal and you don’t belong” But please, tell me of any sign you saw that in fact she was opening up to homosexuals, and for some reason to celebrate her tolerance she decided to write about how they were all weird and damaging to children to see.

          I’m really disappointed. First you come here, saying “You’re doing it wrong”, then say “I don’t know how to do it-we’ll need to solve impossible questions” and now you’re saying “Actually, we should do nothing, and everything will just solve itself”

          Tell me, please, tell me any case of a marginalised group becoming accepted, and ending prejudice by just accepting it and hoping it gets better. Hell, tell me of any progressive movement in history that’s achieved change by doing nothing and hoping for the best.

          And for a person who has come here criticisng others for being judgemental, you’re being fairly judgemental yourself. Or is it okay when you do it?

        • I don’t believe i said “you are doing it wrong” i just wanted to encourage readers and writers that the people they are attacking are real people too. I know how emotional this topic is, i have lost friends because i did not like how they refused my friends the same rights as straight people. I see the plight of gays, lesbians, transgenders etc the same as when women/black people were fighting for the right to vote and have the same equality as white men. To me it’s so clear that we are degrading a whole population of people and that needs to be fixed! Right now! straight away! however, unfortunately, it takes time. It is getting there. More and more states in the US are making gay marriage legal, it is only a matter of time before other western (hopefully not just )states/countries follow suit. As i said before i liked your facebook page because this whole notion seemed refreshing and ‘faith in humanity’ but after reading personal attacks and hypocritical rhetoric i immediately ‘unliked’ the page as i realised that smear and attacks is not positive, it’s not forward moving its just mean (i am NOT ignoring the fact the many homosexuals get attacked and treated like shit because of their orientation every day, every hour, every minute).
          I am not an enemy of this site. i am not a friend of melissa or whoever else. i am a girl that lives in sydney and is saying that i’m proud of people who stand up for the minorities and wish for peace and kindness but see individual personal attacks as cheap and harmful to the individuals and to the movement they are trying to initiate, which you can see as a facebook page now exists singling out people that like your page, (wonder where they got that idea from??) .

        • If you believe we are “high and mighty” then you don’t have to stay.

          For someone who doesn’t like us you’ve used an enormous amount of space to ramble on.

          You know if you think you are an activist it is pretty pointless sitting around and thinking about being an activist. So you would either take to the streets, write to politicians or start a blog like this one.

          Or all three. Some of us do all three.

          And I repeat – you want nice read women’s magazines or romantic novels.

          We are not nice.

        • I will continue to read this blog as some of it is interesting and though provoking. i did not intend to ‘ramble on’ and will think twice before entering in a ‘discussion’ in the future. I just don’t like to have my comments misconstrued. I would think that you would encourage a healthy dialogue as otherwise your blog would come off as biased, hypocritical and victim of the god complex.
          Once again i am somewhat of a interested party and agree with most of the values put across i just personally wouldnt throw differently opinionated women/men under the mardi gras bus.

        • “I don’t believe i said “you are doing it wrong” i just wanted to encourage readers and writers that the people they are attacking are real people too.”

          Okay, for the umpteenth time-how do we tell people directly and clearly that their beliefs and behaviours are unacceptable, inappropriate and offensive in a way that you would think is acceptable.

          “i have lost friends because i did not like how they refused my friends the same rights as straight people.”

          So….wait…..if someone is mean to your friends, then it’s complete cut all contact, friendship over. But if someone online says that all homosexuals are not normal, and should hide away from children-then they’re humans too and we should respect their opinions?

          Aren’t you being a little short sighted here? It sounds like that you’re trying to defend your friends, but if someone isn’t specifically attacking your friend, but attacking all people of your friend’s minority group then you don’t mind so much.

          Anyway, I truly believe you support gay rights, as the piece you stated after that shows. But that’s not what we’ve been talking about. It’s about how you respond to people who clearly do not support gay rights, and see homosexuals as abnormal.

          “As i said before i liked your facebook page because this whole notion seemed refreshing and ‘faith in humanity’ but after reading personal attacks and hypocritical rhetoric i immediately ‘unliked’ the page as i realised that smear and attacks is not positive, it’s not forward moving its just mean (i am NOT ignoring the fact the many homosexuals get attacked and treated like shit because of their orientation every day, every hour, every minute).”

          So we go back to the start again. Yes this site is negative. Yes it does not treat people kindly who have made racist/sexist/etc comments-but I have not heard a better suggestion from you or anyone else of a way to show people that such comments are unacceptable.

          If you have a better idea, then let’s do it! Until you do, I refuse to just accept racism, sexism, etc at a wide scale, ignoring it, hoping it gets better, just because the method we currently have is by no means perfect.

          “but see individual personal attacks as cheap and harmful to the individuals and to the movement they are trying to initiate,”

          So…again, what would you suggest this site be? You want a site that combats racism, sexism, homophobia and all that-what would that site look like if this isn’t this one?

          ” which you can see as a facebook page now exists singling out people that like your page, (wonder where they got that idea from??) .”

          Yes, true, but we don’t worry about that. Funnily enough, while people who post racist material tend to get in trouble from employers, academic institutions and friends, few employers, academic institutions friends or families tend to complain about people opposing racism online. Funny that.

          And let’s go again:
          1. What sign do you have that any change is happening? What evidnece at all do you have that this woman, by posting a truly offensive and ignorant rant about gay people, is not just going to be reinforced in her views that her beliefs are acceptable by not getting a response.

          2. Tell me, please, tell me any case of a marginalised group becoming accepted, and ending prejudice by just accepting it and hoping it gets better. Hell, tell me of any progressive movement in history that’s achieved change by doing nothing and hoping for the best.

          3. Whati s being assumed that is false? She made homophobic and offensive statements-that’s the truth.
          What propoganda?

        • I am not saying befriend gay hating ignorant people. i was hurt by friends harmful words and just did not initiate friendship with that person thereafter, i did not bad mouth that person, force that person to ignore their religious beliefs and take on my beliefs, i did not plaster their face all over the internet and get misguided people to hate on them.
          Dude this is going in circles, yet you complain to me about rambling…lol
          I simply suggest that (for example) the article written above needn’t have her full name, her blog details, the assumption she is a bad parent and certainly not her picture (if it was me i’d probs want to kill myself as the thought of people all looking at me, judging me and questioning my maternal or human abilities would cause me such anxiety).
          You can not force change in this Melissa woman. Change comes with education and experience (you can not blame her for that possibly a result of location and community influences). thank fully, children are being introduced to gay culture or even just anti bullying in most schools covers issues such as these resulting in new generations to be more caring considerate of others. It is moral evolution in progress.
          When have i ever said that people in the lgbt community should just accept it or hope it gets better. Never said it. No one should ever accept being treated like shit. But treating other people like shit wont make anything better.

          The propaganda i speak of is (this in truth is of your own prerogative) taking a blog from a women who is saying basically that her new years eve was tainted by her having to describe to her child what gay is. Not that scandalous (YES misguided, yes a few knocks back for lgbt community but as a whole it does not affect or even reach (before you picked the blog up) a large amount of people gay or otherwise). HOWEVER, by adding in circled emphasis on words (which to be honest i found to be quite a smart way of reading in between the lines) it did maybe(?) emphasise the wrong things. Furthermore, the video you put up this Melissa girl might not agree with or might herself find offensive BUT by linking it with her blog it makes your readers connect her to these over the top reactions to lgbt community.

          It really is just food for thought. I always believe that its better to let the readers make up their own minds then serving it to them on a gold platter.

        • “i was hurt by friends harmful words and just did not initiate friendship with that person thereafter,”

          But middleground-don’t you see, that’s still tacit acceptance. Saying nothing is the same as saying “What you believe is fine and totally non-offensive” While you may never have spoken to that person again, they went on saying “Well I know most people don’t have a problem with it, because middleground would have said something if she was offended”

          And here’s the thing. You were their friend. You could say “Listen, I don’t like you saying that stuff” without having to lose a friend. They don’t have to change their beliefs, but they learn that it’s not acceptable, at least to you. And that’s a start.

          ” i did not bad mouth that person, force that person to ignore their religious beliefs and take on my beliefs,”

          No, you didn’t even get them to listen to your beliefs. So as far as they’re concerned, you have the same beliefs as them.

          ” i did not plaster their face all over the internet and get misguided people to hate on them.”

          No, you did nothing. And nothing has changed as a result. The viewpoint has been reinforced.

          “I simply suggest that (for example)….”

          The reason it goes around in circles is because you don’t answer the question:
          How would you let the blogger know her comments were offensive, without reinforcing them?

          “You can not force change in this Melissa woman.”

          No one is trying to force her to change. We are just reminding people that racism and prejudice is not acceptable. When prejudice is not challenged, it is tolerated. And when it is tolerated it is reinforced.

          She will still have her negative views, but from this experience we hope she learns to think before stating such idiotic views. And again, if you have a better way to combat prejudice, please tell us all now.

          ” Change comes with education and experience (you can not blame her for that possibly a result of location and community influences).”

          Yes we can! Free will is a beautiful thing. She is connected to the internet, the greatest source of people from around the world, and proudly says she has gay friends, and this is what she thinks about gay people.
          She could, as I have suggested, talk to gay people about these issues, about how she’s feeling, try to figure out how they feel. She didn’t. That would have been worthwhile, but hard. Instead she brainfarted on the internet.

          I mean, how far would you go to accept behaviour without criticism (And you’ve no mention of how to criticise negative behaviour and views apart from not talk to a person and hope they get better)? Would you object to the pastor talking about starving lesbians-or would you just say it was just a result of location and community influence and stay quiet?

          Every progressive movement in history has had to fight communtiy unfluences, location and they way tihngs were. By just saying nothing and hoping it gets better-nothing changes. Ever.

          ” thank fully, children are being introduced to gay culture or even just anti bullying in most schools covers issues such as these resulting in new generations to be more caring considerate of others.”

          Great. So while we wait for these children to grow up (And hopefully not have thier school views discounted as heresy by parents), what do we do with the very real prejudice that homosexuals, and other minorities are facing daily?

          “When have i ever said that people in the lgbt community should just accept it or hope it gets better. Never said it.”

          You’ve yet to come up with any answer. All you’ve said is “What if we ignore it?” and “What about you treat them with respect (No mention of how)?” and “Maybe she was already changing her views about homosexuality, and if you didn’t challenge her she would have continued to change (With no evidence of this at all)”

          Again, if you have an idea of how to combat prejudice without reinforcing it, let me know. Otherwise, we’ll continue showing people that prejudice is not acceptable.

          ” No one should ever accept being treated like shit. But treating other people like shit wont make anything better.”

          Again, how would you recommend we inform people that their behaviour is offensive in a way that doesn’t reinforce the behaviour?
          And just to be clear-cutting off all contact with a person and ending a friendship isn’t treating them like shit?

          “The propaganda i speak of is (this in truth is of your own prerogative) taking a blog from a women who is saying basically that her new years eve was tainted by her having to describe to her child what gay is.”

          No, that’s not what it was. That’s how it started. And then it went into how gays choose to be gay, that they are essentially godless, they don’t belong in nature, they’re not normal, and if they want to show their affection, they should do it where no child can see them.

          “but as a whole it does not affect or even reach (before you picked the blog up) a large amount of people gay or otherwise).”

          But information doesn’t exist in a vacuum, middle ground. This woman, by posting this and not having her views challenged, has her view reinforced, strengthening herview of homosexuals as abnormal, and unnatural. Anyone who reads her blog will also have their view of homosexuals as unnatural strengthened. All in all the lack of a challenge continues to send the message that “Seeing homosexuals as abnormal, and not belonging is perfectly acceptable” which in turn translates into treating homosexuals differently (Because, didn’t you hear, they’re not normal and they harm children. Must be true-no one complained).

          “It really is just food for thought. I always believe that its better to let the readers make up their own minds then serving it to them on a gold platter.”

          Again, how would you like the site to be improved to make it better for the reader to make up their own mind.

    • Racism, sexism, homophobia need to be fought. If not face to face with people in your life, then people who broadcast these opinions need to be shown that what they believe is wrong.
      There is really no middle ground on racism, sexism, homophobia and the like.
      If it smells like a rat….

      • I totally agree. However, intelligent and thoughtful opposition is always more powerful than fighting moral high ground and ignorance with opposing moral high ground and ignorance

        • Ignoring, so I’ll repeat myself. How exactly would you respond to the original poster in a way that does not encourage and support her deeply offensive views and statements, yet not be negative?

          So far we’ve had: “I don’t know” “We need to solve impossible questions first” and “Do nothing and hope for the best”-let’s see what we have next.

        • Let me rephrase myself so we can get somewhere:
          How do you propose someone shows they disagree with the original blog post, that they are deeply offended, if not outraged by the comment, in a way that you would approve of?

          Ignoring just reinforces the belief.
          Saying “Agree to disagree” reinforces the belief as “Well, it’s not really offensive because they don’t seem to mind”

          So let’s see your answer, instead of just telling us what we’re doing wrong.

        • 1. I saw this article link on a friends fb page and i clicked on it as it interested me
          2. Read this article and at first agreed with it completely. This Melissa woman is hypocritical and does hold damaging viewpoints. Plus the addition of extreme videos such as Anderson Cooper and that pastor condoning beating the gay out of someone infuriated me as it intended to do so.
          3. Began to read comments both on fb and on the article. Interestingly enough Melissa bothered to stand up for herself & was subsequently shut down.
          4. Started to think ‘for myself’ instead of going with the lynch mob. I am a unique person with unique thoughts/values/opinions they similar/differ to many. I would hate for my face & name to be blasted on news articles/opinion articles/fb posts. It would cause such pain to me especially as it was meant to be passing thoughts between a certain circle of friends (although harmful i agree and yes posted publicly,most people do not recognise the power of the internet till they have been burned).
          5. As a person who recognises that people are people and most people (myself included) say stupid thoughtless things sometimes, i feel like people of the anti bogan wordpress made a thought provoking article yet it was not necessary to have large pictures of people and even using her surname is questionable.
          6. left my first message pondering whether this article was more harmful to humanity than when i first read it and got sucked into all the emotive ‘damn the anti gay people’..
          7. proceeded to get attacked by people that i’m sure i would have very similar ideals…this validated my previous cautions that this ‘anti bogan movement’ is just a witch hunt.
          8. I don’t think i ever said these issues need to be ignored..i posed questions as to whether if we ignored those with differing beliefs that are harmful to equality and safety of everyone would change come about..(?) How many of the people retorting me have gone to pro gay rallies? I know i have.
          9. I feel like when people attack people the real issues get ignored and it just becomes a big pissing contest.
          10. sites such as http://www.salon.com/ and many others are able to convey viewpoints which readers are able to come to the same conclusion without singling out people and attacking their ability to be a good mother. You don’t know this woman Melissa. When she wrote her misguided blog she did not know she would now be the leader of the anti gay movement.

          >>> I am not saying ignore, i am not saying agree to disagree. I am saying Intelligence and respectable non smear campaigning makes your point seem important and valid not in this case (and reinforced by comments) cheap and for thrills.

        • “Interestingly enough Melissa bothered to stand up for herself & was subsequently shut down.”

          How was she shut down? She was criticised here. And she didn’t apologise-instead stating that as she’s American no one on the site should care, then stated the website was attacking her religion. She didn’t accept any responsibility, but she was free to communicate.

          Apparently when people have free speech, you think they’re not allowed to be criticised if they respond, is that right? So even though she didn’t back down on anything she said here, didn’t retract anything, and blamed all offense on other people, you think we should have just accepted it and moved along?

          As I said before, accepting and tolerating prejudice is the same and failing to respond to it.

          “name to be blasted on news articles/opinion articles/fb posts. It would cause such pain to me especially as it was meant to be passing thoughts between a certain circle of friends (although harmful i agree and yes posted publicly,most people do not recognise the power of the internet till they have been burned).”

          So, we need to respect the right of people who post stupid things online, more than the right to the many people who can be hurt by either reading these thouhts, or by meeting someone whose beliefs are reinforced by this blog?

          Quick question-is there any limit to how bad a statement or act would have to be before you’ll accept ignorance of the internet as an excuse? I mean, if she had said all gay people should die, would that still be fine, because it was meant to be between friends?

          “yet it was not necessary to have large pictures of people and even using her surname is questionable.”

          She put her face and name to her own words. If a person shouts in the street “Gays are weird” are we meant to pretend we can’t see his face? So why are we meant to pretend that we don’t know a person’s name when they themselves put their name and picture to their words.

          “left my first message pondering whether this article was more harmful to humanity ”

          Because when repeatedly given opportunities to suggest how the site could be improved in a way that would not provide those who are homophobic, racist, sexist with overt or tacit approval, you refused to do so.
          As I’ve said before-it’s easy to complain-it’s hard to improve. But the hard path is the more worthwhile.

          “proceeded to get attacked by people that i’m sure i would have very similar ideals…”

          How have you been attacked? I have repeatedly asked you questions you have ignored. I’m trying to figure out how you think we can challenge and oppose racism and prejudice without shaming those who are themselves prejudiced. And I’d like to hear your answer.

          ” I don’t think i ever said these issues need to be ignored..i posed questions as to whether if we ignored those with differing beliefs that are harmful to equality and safety of everyone would change come about..(?”

          And I answered. No. No it wouldn’t. There has not been a single case of prejudiced groups receiving equality by ignoring those who refuse them that right.

          “How many of the people retorting me have gone to pro gay rallies? I know i have.”

          You make a lot of comments like this. It’s seems like you’re saying that you’re more caring than others, even though that’s never been a factor.
          As a matter of fact I have been to gay rallies-both in Australia and overseas. Lot of fun.

          “I feel like when people attack people the real issues get ignored and it just becomes a big pissing contest.”

          What’s the real issue here? Tell me, what have we been missing out on?
          “When she wrote her misguided blog she did not know she would now be the leader of the anti gay movement.”

          She either did not think at all about how other would feel, or she chose to offend people. Either way, she will think again before she makes those comments publically.

          Michael Kramer didn’t think he would be called a racist after his diatribe in a comedy club. He has now learnt from his situation. Are you syaing we should have hidden his face and just stated “Someone from somewhere said something racist”-yep, that’s going to stop repeated instances.

          I agree, the poor mother comment was low. But here’s the thing-you’ve only just mentioned that comment! That one comment a person made apparently was the cause of you to say this site is fighting prejudice in the wrong way (Right way not yet known to us). Why not respond directly to the orginal poster, rather than bringing it up at the last minute?

          “I am saying Intelligence and respectable non smear campaigning makes your point seem important and valid”

          Okay, and I am asking for yet another time, how would you respond to the above poster in a way that shows that her comments are offensive and unacceptable and does not further support them? You don’t like what’s being done here-how would you do it better?

        • I have repeatedly stated how to better your article and objectives by retorting their comments/thoughts/notions without attacking the individual person. Letting readers form their own opinions. You can not compare this women to kramer who is a celebrity icon and really the only reason it made world wide news. Kramer gets paid to be a celebrity/spokes person not this melissa girl. Plus is she did say all gay should die she is entitled to her opinion (although wrong/harmful) if she said it to her friends she has the right to say it. pity her dont put her on a pedestal.

        • ” by retorting their comments/thoughts/notions without attacking the individual person”

          Actually, that’s new. First it was “Don’t show their identity”

          When it comes to personal attacks, it’s something I agree with actually. But I don’t still hear how you think we let a person know their comments are offensive without accepting or reinforcing them.

          “Letting readers form their own opinions.”

          How?

          “You can not compare this women to kramer who is a celebrity icon and really the only reason it made world wide news. ”

          So, celebrities are not allowed to have as much free speech as everyone else? Celebrities need to be condemned more than the person on the street?

          “Plus is she did say all gay should die she is entitled to her opinion (although wrong/harmful) if she said it to her friends she has the right to say it”

          Absolutely she is entitled to this opinion. But you appear to think I am not entitled to my right to criticise opinions I strongly object to. The right to free speech is not the right to speak without any objections from anyone else.

          And again, to the point this is becoming a signature:
          how would you respond to the above poster in a way that shows that her comments are offensive and unacceptable and does not further support them? You don’t like what’s being done here-how would you do it better?

        • @Middle ground – I just wanted to let you know that I agree with most of you sentiments. Thank you for being a voice for compassion.

          @JM – You’ve avoided countering a great number of MG’s points, many by simply saying things like “if you’ve got a way to correct negative beliefs and behaviour which doesn’t just reinforce the same behaviors and beliefs, please please inform us all.” and “When it comes to personal attacks, it’s something I agree with actually. But I don’t still hear how you think we let a person know their comments are offensive without accepting or reinforcing them.”
          – i.e. ‘I know and admit what we are doing is wrong, but the onus is on someone else to come up with something else I can do instead.’

          I think that is avoidance of personal accountability. I will offer you a suggestion though: Contact people privately – explaining to them why you disagree or feel their views are offensive or dangerous – in a polite respectful manor. Or even being unnecessarily personal like you have here, and sending the critique privately as an email or comment on a person’s own blog would be better than this – ineffective because by being disrespectful and unkind you “reinforce the same bahviors and beliefs” you are trying to change – but at least you wouldn’t be digitally lynching people.

          The fact that you do this all so publicly, makes me concerned about your motivations for running this website. Please contemplate them, and ask yourself if you’re really doing this entirely for activist reasons, or does some part of your drive come from a more selfish need.

        • There is nothing “private” or “respectful” about homophobia. Why should we let public expressions of intolerance stand? Why should we be “respectful” when the prejudiced are not? We wouldn’t have known about this blogger’s fear and loathing of homosexuality if she had not displayed it at great length on the Internet.

          After all no one here is forcing anyone to either marry or to marry someone of the same sex.

          As they say

          “If you don’t like same sex marriage don’t have one.” That’s all opponents have to do.

        • We don’t run this website to educate the people featured here. Rather, they are the content for educating the people who watch this website.

          This website doesn’t try to change the minds of bigots.

        • Hang on AM, you think that people who have been offended should “…Contact people privately – explaining to them why you disagree or feel their views are offensive…in a polite respectful manor” but it’s ok to disrespect a whole group of people publically and to the world because they do not fit the norm?! Are you serious?!! She is the only one I see ‘lynching people’.

          By your own standards then, why didn’t she do the same thing and address her issues with her ‘gay friends’ who she supposedly loves?! The answer is because she’s a COWARDLY BIGOT and by addressing it directly with them would have made her bigoted views vulnerable to attack which in all liklihood would have seen the end to those ‘friendships’. If I had a friend like that, I wouldn’t need enemies! She fits the “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others” mentality.

          And as for praising someone for their compassion, I notice you haven’t exercised any for those that undergo this kind of treatment EVERY MINUTE OF EVERY DAY from bigots like Melissa! People like you just don’t get it. You prefer to defend her views by taking the standpoint of:

          1) We should show compassion for her – she has shown none herself.

          2) We should be respectful and kind in our disagreement of her – she has not been respectful and kind herself.

          3) We should not take the moral highground on these matters ourselves – she is the one acting as judge here by ‘not buying’ into the whole gay thang.

          If you agree with her then do so directly, but stop beating around the bush by preaching to others to forgive and forget!

        • Hi AM, The reason I repeatedly asked what a better alternative is not to avoid onus of personal responsibility, but because I have no idea of a better way to combat the prejudice and bigotry people demonstrate in day to day life. I would lovei f there was a better way to challenge those who wish to dehumanise and repress large segments of our population, but I’ve no idea what that better way is. And to do nothing is not an option.

          Middle groudn did not provide any answer, and this annoyed me. She came here, and told us we were all making things worse, but when pressed for how to improve things, either came up with vague thoughts (This is an impossible question we must all ask ourselves) or vague attempts to give up (What if we all ignored her?), That does annoy me, not just on this site, but generally, because I find it’s the easiest thing to do, easiest thing in the world, to turn up and say ‘I don’t like what you’re doing. You’re doing it wrong. Stop everything”-and the world in general, and the internet in particular is filled with lazy people too eager to knock down the work of others without actually attempting to do anything themselves.

          “Or even being unnecessarily personal like you have here, and sending the critique privately as an email or comment on a person’s own blog would be better than this”

          I did, actually. I thought, and still think, that unlike many people psoted on this site, she might actually listen and be willing to discuss (Compared to people who like to threaten violence who I would never attempt to contact privately-and I don’t think anyone, even you, would recommend we start). Twice in fact, one to the original article, and the other to ehr response to criticism (stating that it’s not fair that people are complaining about her opinion which she is allowed to voice). I was respectful, and I asked her to think about how her gay friends would think of that beleif. I also asked her to think about how mixed race couples were once thought of as unnatural and abnormal also, and that her definition of normal (ie the majority) would also define mixed race couples as abnormal, and asked her to consider why these comments would be offensive to others.

          She blocked the comments from being posted, and did not respond to anything, but then later posted on this site that criticising her beliefs on homosexuality somehow equated to declaring war on Christianity.

          “ineffective because by being disrespectful and unkind you “reinforce the same bahviors and beliefs” you are trying to change ”

          How? How is publically criticising an opinion on homosexuality reinforcing that opinion of homosexuality?

          And let’s compare results, shall we? The attempt you suggested lead to no change whatsoever, and fed into her belief that somehow people were attacking her religion (As a christian myself-she is wrong).
          The attempt of the above lead to her responding to the comments, shutting down her blog, and changing her tone for new blogs.
          Did this change her opinion on homosexuals?
          No, but then neither did the respectful and calm message.
          Did she learn that she needs to think before she blogs, and that her opinion on homosexuals may result in many people complaining?
          Yes.

          And if bigoted beliefs are hidden from public view, it’s not as good as if she changed her beliefs, but for the homosexual community it’s a pretty good result!

          “The fact that you do this all so publicly, makes me concerned about your motivations for running this website. ”

          But when people make public statements, isn’t it rigfht that the aggrieved party should also respond pbulically? Again, Michael Richards made a series of offensive statements in the middle of a comedy club, far less publically than this blog (The club only held a couple of hudnred people-literally everyone with an internet connection can read this blog). He was responded to publically-are you now telling us that Mr Richards should have been sent a strongly worded letter, but the matter never to be discussed publically ever again?

          Or is it a case that the regular public is allowed to be bigoted without criticism or complaint, but celebrities don’t have the same rights? It’s an interesting belief system when you think it through, isn’t it?

        • @mindmadeup

          re first reply – Someone’s unacceptable behavior towards you is not justification for repeating that behavior towards them. That is a basic concept of morality.

          re second reply – “We don’t run this website to educate the people featured here. Rather, they are the content for educating the people who watch this website.
          This website doesn’t try to change the minds of bigots.”

          I’m quite flabbergasted at this admission from you. Am I right in my understanding of what you just said?
          – we don’t educate or attempt to persuade the people featured here.
          – we don’t educate or attempt to persuade bigots.
          – we educate the people who read this website.

          I would have thought, and I think you just admitted?, that nearly everyone who reads this agrees with your views about discrimination and hatred in general and are not bigots as you put it.

          If you are not attempting to educate the people you feature or other bigots, as you claim, why would this website need to exist – to preach to the choir? What is all this public shaming for – enjoyment of belittling and humiliating someone, or watching it happen, because in your mind they deserve to be treated the way they treated someone else?

        • No you idiot. If people are aware that communities like ours exist, they are less likely to spout their hatred in public, knowing it’ll probably end up immortalised here.

        • @ Elysse

          re paragraph 1 – No and could you please point out where I said that what these people featured have done is ‘ok’? When you reread my comment calmly and carefully you will see that what I actually said, is that it is not ok to treat someone the way this website treats people, even if they have said something that offends you or many people.

          re paragraph 2 – I have no idea and I’m not sure it’s appropriate nor relevant for me to guess at the motivations of this featured person or any other in the context of this discussion. I am discussing theantibogan.wordpress.com ‘s behavior, not theirs.

          re paragraph 3 – Please consider trying to remain more composed and impersonal when you debate someone. It will help you in your arguments. I always know a unsound argument is coming when a “People like you” comes out of someone.

          I apologise if I came across as not compassionate to gay people. As I am gay I sometimes forget that my compassion for gay people and personal experiences of hatred are not obvious and I should probably mention them, especially in a textual form of communication.

          re points 1,2,and3 – Someone’s unacceptable behavior towards you is not justification for repeating that behavior towards them. That is a basic concept of morality.

          re paragraph 4 – No I do not agree with her. Again I am gay.

          This is a whole other discussion, but I frequently find I must out myself in order not to be immediately dismissed as a bigot when I criticise anything to do with anything to with being gay or queer, and I think that is illogical, unfair and possibly sometimes prejudiced.

        • @JM

          paragraph 1 – That is fair enough, I hope I did not hurt your feelings with my question.
          I do have some other suggestions – one is that organizing events preferably reoccurring that required the interaction with and spending of an amount of time with a gay person or several. I’m thinking of people being offered the chance to do volunteer at queer organisations in exchange for incentives that would depend on their issues – though money is usually a good one. And I’m thinking of social events – possibly just a desirable fun and free activity but preferably something interactive – for gays and people with issues with them. So they would be interacting frequently.

          paragraph 2 – Yes I know what you mean. It’s quite hard to tell though when someone is lazy and setting out to knock down, and when someone is legitimately concerned and legitimately interested in doing something, but is bewildered and unsure how.

          paragraph 3&4 – I’m glad to hear that you did contact her privately first and I apologise for presuming that you didn’t.

          I’m not sure I understand how it would necessarily be dangerous to contact violent people given the possibility of anonymity on the internet?

          Some people have differing ideas about respectfulness, so, to clarify – do you consider this article respectful?

          paragraph 6&7 – No I did not say that ‘publically criticising an opinion on homosexuality [is] reinforcing that opinion of homosexuality’. What I actually said in that quote (and the part you omitted) was that “being unnecessarily personal like you have here […in a critique…] is ineffective because by being disrespectful and unkind you “reinforce the same bahviors and beliefs” you are trying to change”. It makes a person feel personally attacked and vilified and afraid, and they shut down, so you no longer have any chance to get through to and persuade them. This is true whether or not you do so publicly or privately, publicly exacerbates it dramatically.

          paragraph 5&8&9 – In what way were her written responses to the private and public attempts different then? Please correct me if I’m mistaken, but as far as I can tell she didn’t retract or apologise in either, and in both she let you know she felt attacked in some way. It’s possible she was never going to respond to the private attempt and only did because of the public one, but we have no way to know that.
          If she removed her blog post, it’s not necessarily just because of the public attempt, and it could be a good thing – she could feel remorse about what she wrote – or it could be a bad thing – she could just feel humiliation and shame and/or fear and persecution. The first motivation is good because it may lead to personal growth and an examination of her beliefs. The second motivations are not good, because eliciting those kinds of emotions in someone in my experience most often leads to a person clinging harder to their beliefs, and in this case where her beliefs are negative things about gay people, and a website that is ‘pro-gay’ has – possibly in her mind – persecuted her and her religious beliefs, she may well become even more convinced that homosexuality is something she needs to protect her daughter from.

          paragraph 10- I wonder though if learning to hide a damaging belief is actually a good result at all. The person may be less likely to say offensive things in public, but they are possibly no or not much less likely to do offensive or harmful things, especially if it’s in a way that they won’t be caught. Except now you wouldn’t know the person had those beliefs or probably ever imagine that they could act in a bigoted way. You wouldn’t for example know that you should try to talk to them about voting against anti-gay legislation. I’m mostly imagining this would be problematic in the case of a person who was violent, that probably doesn’t apply here, but may to other people you have ‘featured’.

          paragraph 11 – Yes I do actually think personal correspondence would have been much more appropriate than the public shaming across television, radio, print and the internet he received. Most importantly because he would have an opportunity to respond, explain, and defend or apologise. He didn’t have that opportunity when every chat show was putting him on trial by media without his presence. I assume most at least asked him to appear, but presuming he was even mentally fit to, it wouldn’t have been possible for him to be on simultaneously live broadcasted programs at the same time. Not to mention that I’m pretty sure that kind of workload of many scores of shows and replying to hundreds of articles across even a whole week would be impossible for any person to cope with mentally or physically.
          It bothered me most of all because it appeared to me that he may be suffering some kind of episode of mental illness, I saw more signs of this when he was apologising on Letterman with Seinfeld. and I think this makes the way he was treated by the media very inappropriate.

          “in the middle of a comedy club, far less publically than this blog (The club only held a couple of hudnred people-literally everyone with an internet connection can read this blog)” – This is always interesting because it is true in one sense and not in another. It is true legally. In reality, while it is possible billions of people had access to it, the number of people who saw it would have been considerably smaller – what size readership did her blog have, and how many views did that post have (before you pointed it out)? And it’s interesting the mindset I experience (and I suspect most people do) when posting something on the internet such as in a forum, it often doesn’t occur to me that I am speaking ‘publicly’. I feel like I am just in a room at a party. Having a conversation with the people that I’m talking to, and anyone else regular from the forum is in the room and might overhear. I really don’t feel like I am in a public place or being recorded – though metaphorically I am.

          paragraph 12 – no. and no it’s just illogical.

        • “one is that organizing events preferably reoccurring that required the interaction with and spending of an amount of time with a gay person or several.”

          It’s a good idea. One aspect of it though. I used to be involved in something ismilar with asylum seekers. But the truth is that people are reluctant to meet people if they’ve already decided they are weird and not normal (Similar the asylum seeker social scheme was filled with volunteers who were all very supportive of asylum seekers generally). While money may convince some people, any person who holds strong anti-gay beliefs would be reluctant to meet with a gay person for whatever measly sum an organisation could provide. Then there’s the question of getting funds, and actually finding people to contact, both gay people and those with anti-gay views, to encourage themselves to involve themselves in the act (And ethically you’d need to fund the gay volunteers too, otherwise you’re essentially rewarding behaviour which should be the norm).

          I’m not saying it couldn’t work. Certainly the best way to fight prejudice is through first hand experience. We can see in Australia racism towards Asian Australians has dropped in the last two decades because people of my generation all know someone, or knows someone who knows someone, who is Asian Australian. This is where change is happening. However, this particular plan still needs more workshopping.

          “And I’m thinking of social events – possibly just a desirable fun and free activity but preferably something interactive – for gays and people with issues with them.”

          Again, I’ve been involved with similar things with my work with asylum seekers. There’s plenty of eventsi n Melbourne inviting asylum seekers and refugees and those from the Australian community to get together for a BBQ and picnic. But even when it’s free, and very enjoyable, people who hold even neutral views towards asylum seekers, let alone negative, never turn up.

          All in all these are good ideas. And they can work-I think in the case of school functions would be a good place to put them in, as they tend to be a good equaliser (Some sort of public school fundraising night-randomly mixed tables-so cliques cant’ develop within groups), but I think it’s only part of the answer. It’s the carrot, while sites like this one provide the stick. And to be honest, I think both methods need each other.

          This site, it is true, is not about redeeming or support bigots to change their view. It’s about punishing them for voicing a view, similar to how you’d punish a child for saying a naughty word. But if you only operate as a punishment, all you’ll get is people withdrawing their behaviour, without actually changing the underlying beliefs. However, it’s also true that this site is more ofcused on preventing these behaviours from being manifestedi n a way that can hurt people (And posting on a public blog is hurting people).

          While doing the things you are suggesting is great, and once I become involved in schooling I’ll work to introduce them myself (Love a good fucntion I do!), they are beyond the scope of this website. That’s why I do like and support this site.

          I do try to temper my criticism, refrain from name calling (Unless the person is completely unreasonable, making violent threats, etc-and let me make clear, I did not think this blogger was completely unreasonable), and admit I could do better. But I do think that criticising and shaming negative comments does teach that certain behaviour is not acceptable. Kinda like how smokers are, on the whole, nto treated particularly well in society. This won’t change their behaviour, but it gives them an incentive to stop.

          “when someone is legitimately concerned and legitimately interested in doing something, but is bewildered and unsure how.”

          That’s fair enough. But in the short term, it’s better to stick with one system, then get rid of it until something better coems along.
          Kinda how I feel about democracy. I don’t think it works well (Looking at Aussie or US politics at the moment isn’t particularly helpful), but would never want to get rid of it, because there is no better government system that I’m aware of.

          “I’m not sure I understand how it would necessarily be dangerous to contact violent people given the possibility of anonymity on the internet?”

          I’ve had people tell me they were going to come over and beat me, trash my house, etc. Now, that is probably all bull, but all the same I don’t feel I need to go through the experience of being threatened, or have my loved one’s threatened, because they’ve made highly offensive comments (This wasn’t just “This is unantural” it’s more along the lines of “All of x should die, and we should kill them”

          And I doubt how effective a discussion can be with a person who is threatening violence against people just because they disagree with them. I’d like to think explorign the beliefs of a violent person actively encouraging violence would be helpful, but practise has told me otherwise (I tend to try and remain calm, while they develop more and more threats).

          “do you consider this article respectful?”

          No, to be honest. But again, this site is not about respecting people how make bigoted comments-it’s about shaming them. And you cannot respect a person and shame them at the same time.

          “It makes a person feel personally attacked and vilified and afraid, and they shut down, so you no longer have any chance to get through to and persuade them. ”

          But there is no sign that the person would listen to any persuasion. At the end of the day, to any person psoted here, we are strangers on the internet. I don’t think anyone here would be able to convince this blogger to consider thinking further about her views and how they hurt, it would need to be someone who she is close to, who she trusts.

          That’s not us. And it can’t be us.
          People, in general on all sides of politics, are becomign more partisan. You can choose which side of the conversation you listen to and can ignore the rest. We are so used to talking to people who only think like us, that we can be lulled more deeply into becoming the false dichotomy of “Good vs evil”, and that results in people being increasingly likely to see an opposing view as not just disagreeing but being “against” them as a person.

          In this case, the blogger saw criticism of her belief, legitimate as it was, as an attack on her religion, which wasn’t mentioned.

          “Please correct me if I’m mistaken, but as far as I can tell she didn’t retract or apologise in either”

          She stated that she didn’t mean to cause offense, but people were twisting her words to be offended by on her blog. I’m not aware of any private resposnes apart from what is written here.

          “If she removed her blog post, it’s not necessarily just because of the public attempt, and it could be a good thing – she could feel remorse about what she wrote – or it could be a bad thing – she could just feel humiliation and shame and/or fear and persecution. ”

          These are both good things. If a person feels shame for what they haev written or done, then they have learnt that they shouldn’t do it again. It may sound harsh, but that is the basis of all social conventions we have as standard.

          Again, it would be great if she reexamined her beleifs, and that was what I was encoruagign in my messages to her, but that is beyond what this site can do. IT can, however, shame a person so they think twice before doing it again.

          “The person may be less likely to say offensive things in public, but they are possibly no or not much less likely to do offensive or harmful things, especially if it’s in a way that they won’t be caught. ”

          True, but the above system could be stated about any crime, or any negative behavior, and we still see it as a positive. But punishing robbery a person is less likely to rob in public, but is still as likely if they think they can get away with it.

          And posting on a blog is a way that a person, traditionally, has been able to get away with it. This site deals with people who hate other races, genders and sexualities-if you carry this belief with you in a workplace, you won’t be able to find a job, a relationship, or any way to live. The internet is a way a person with these hateful thoughts in a way that won’t lead to personal harm to themselves, thoughm ay hurt other people.

          This site is another way to plug one of these ways to “get away with it”

          “Except now you wouldn’t know the person had those beliefs or probably ever imagine that they could act in a bigoted way.”

          But that’s already true for everyone. So there’s little or no change. Like I said, I doubt this blogger would have said these comments to her gay friends to their faces-of course not, she’d lose her friends and experience social shame. By learning to hide these thoughts, she allows gay people to form relationships with her. And by removing another way to express these beliefs without social shame, there are fewer places where these negative beliefs can be expressed.

          “You wouldn’t for example know that you should try to talk to them about voting against anti-gay legislation. ”

          I don’t understand what you’re getting about with this. Surely if you don’t know their beliefs, you would talk to them as you woudl anythign else, starting a conversation about your respective beliefs-the very thign that can help change minds. If you presume that they’d agree with you, you’d encourage them to vote against legislation. If you presume they don’t, you may not talk to them.

          “I’m mostly imagining this would be problematic in the case of a person who was violent, that probably doesn’t apply here, but may to other people you have ‘featured’.”

          So, you’re worried that you wouldn’t know if someone may be violent if they repressed their negative behaviours? That’s fair, but it’s also true that you don’t know that about anyone.

          “Yes I do actually think personal correspondence would have been much more appropriate than the public shaming across television, radio, print and the internet he received. ”

          But how would that work? How can you respond to such behaviour without being aware fo it? How can you be aware of such behaviour without it being reported?

          “In reality, while it is possible billions of people had access to it, the number of people who saw it would have been considerably smaller – what size readership did her blog have, and how many views did that post have (before you pointed it out)?”

          True, it is a small number. But, going back to the partisan nature of thei nternet, blogs tend to get shared around. One person likes a view, and it gets reposted elsewhere. From there it gets more views, etc. Each person who reads that feels “I’m not alone-they are abnormal” and has the belief reinforced.

          “I really don’t feel like I am in a public place or being recorded – though metaphorically I am.”

          But, really, it doesn’t matter how you feel when you talk. The fact is, realistically, you are on the public record. And that’s the way the world is now. Bosses do check facebook before hiring people. Journalists do check the internet for prospective politicians beliefs and actions.

          It would be like if I was saying offensive thigns to a friedn on a tram. Sure, I may think I’m only havign a conversation with my friend-but the truth is, I’m not. I’m in a public place, and any comment I’ve made is now public.

          “paragraph 12 – no. and no it’s just illogical.”

          True. Sorry-I jumped the gun a little there.

          I’ve enjoyed this chat, AM. I really have. Thanks for treating my post with respect, and I hope I treated your response with the same respect.

        • So if you don’t agree with what Melissa has done, then you’re here to point out the error of THIS website and the manner to which it has named and shamed her? I think we all accept your stance so far in this regard and who am I to argue with that?

          But if the nature of this website offends you then unfortunately that it your problem. If Melissa is offended by the nature of the exposure and criticism of her bigotry, then that is her problem. So far, nobody here in her defence have managed to address the story at hand.

          And this website is not nice because the fruitloops featured here and what they say and do are not nice. If that offends your sensibilitites then the solution is simple – don’t read it. The admins here expose these people and forces them to take responsibility for their words because no one else will and people are generally all too willing to accept these views as being harmless. They are not harmless. They are not right. They should not be tolerated as they currently are in mainstream media.They are backward and hateful and in a world that is increasingly becoming more inclusive, her words are certainly exclusive to a proportion of the world’s population. And just because gay people are not the majority of the population, does not mean that they are insignificant or somehow a separate part of our society and that is exactly what she infers to in her blog.

          Reblogging what has already been blogged is not a crime.

          Quote AM: “I think that is avoidance of personal accountability”

          I think this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. I don’t see any kind of remorse from Melissa or any kind of acceptance of the fact that her words hurt people and have perpetuated the kind of irrational hate and fear of people that this website seeks to dissolve. This website seeks to expose those that are bigoted and her defence has been one of anger and regret at being called out, not of remorse for hurting others. I am criticising her views and her stance on the subject, not her as a person, not her as a heterosexual, not her as a female, not her as a mother. It is a shame that she did not extend the same courtesy to others.

          And I don’t care that you’re gay. I don’t care what religion you are. I don’t care about your beliefs and the principles that you hold dear. But I take offense to people that belittle others based on archaic attitudes to minor differences such as race, colour, sexual orientation etc. I care about people and their rights to be who they are, to practice what they choose to practice and to love who they choose to love and to do so without inflicting harm to others or being inflicted upon, belittling others or being belittled and being excluded from society or excluding others. This is what I am defending.

          My question is, why is that so hard to accept?

    • Your character has not been defamed. Your words defame gays and lesbians. That is what you are being rightly called on.

      Want us to quote the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jnr Act to you? It is a US Federal statute which in effect makes assault on gays and lesbians as well as including violence based on gender, gender orientation, race or disability a hate crime.

      It also has the potential to specifically target hate speech directed at these groups as an instance of conspiracy to commit a hate crime.

      Hate speech originating offshore is not protected speech under Australian law thanks to Gutnick v Dow-Jones (2000) and EU countries have specific legislation against hate crimes which includes hate speech. The Internet is international and also fulfils the “interstate commerce” criteria in US Federal legislation. So life might become very interesting if GLBT advocacy groups decide to take on hate blogs.

      You really don’t want a US Marshal tapping at your door with a Federal subpoena now do you?

    • How has your character been defamed? You’ve said deliberately homophibc and hurtful comments to homosexuals in a public place. Are we meant to just accept the hurtful statement because you say you have gay friends, who are presumably also abnormal, unnatural, and needing to be locked away.

      I say again, look into your actions. Talk to your gay friends. Learn from this, so you won’t find yourself in this situation again. People who respond this way actually have better lives. People who don’t carry this baggage around forever, just waiting for it to pop up again (Hence why we don’t see Michael Richards on TV anymore).

    • Discriminating against someone for their religion is hate speech and is also illegal. In our country anyway.

      Criticising the doctrines of a religion is not. Criticising fringe doctrines of fringe sects is certainly not hate speech.

    • Where is your religion being bashed? Where is your religion even being mentioned in the entire above post?

      Melissa, this is going to be hard, so sit down and be prepared for a shock: No one is trying to end your religion. Your religion is not under siege. You live in America, one of the most Christian countries on Earth-no one is trying to ban your religion.

      Here’s another shocking thing: you can object to a view of a religion or belief system in a way unrelated to the belief system. No one is criticising you for being a Christian. No even cares about your religion. Everyone is criticising you for making statements offensive to all homosexuals and those who care for them. Similarly to many of theo ther people featured on this site which come accusing others of racism: no one is posted here because they are white, they are posted here because they make racist comments.

      You seem to be sufferrign under some sort of victim complex. If anyone criticises you, well they’re twisting your words, and just hate you because you’re Christian (Incidentally-I’m a Christian too-never kept it secret, yet have never ever been bashed or discriminated against becuae of this).

      As you yourself have said-you have free will. You have responsbility. You chose to post offensive statements either because you wanted to hurt people, or because you didn’t thuink things through. This is not about your religion. This is not about people trying to be offended. This is just about you.

      I know it’s a bit odd for a mother to be told this-but grow up. If your daughter used a naughty word in front of you, would you accept the explanation of “Oh, you just wanted to be offensive” or “You’re only yelling at me because I’m a christian”-no, you would not. So why is it acceptable for you to try and diminish responsibility for your own actions?

  8. Melissa….I think you need to take a good har look at your soul and your actions on your blog.
    i have spoken to one other person from wordpress (one violetwisp) who has told me she only made one comment.
    Also while we were ‘arguing’ on your blog (someone, you claim it was not you) created a similar log in as mine and also a similar log on as violetwisp and commenced arguing your point of view and trying to make my arguments look like they came from a juvenile.
    simply, i do belive that is twisted behaviour.
    If it was not you….which I find very hard to believe since your readership was and is very small….I apologise.
    But I believe that you were trying to get a point across by belittling and taking on other names….as you did above with the ‘character defamation’ wordpress name.
    Worried about your mental health…..really.
    Talk to someone.

  9. @Paul. It wasn’t me. I can’t type that fast and I have better things to do. Yes, small readership on my blog. My blog is intended to share with my friends, not stir international conflict. Gee, i WISH i were that notorious. Your apology is accepted.

    • Melissa-you want to share a comment with your close family and friends, send it on an email. If you send information on a publically available blog, accesible to the world, then it is the same as you broadcasting it on television.

      And just to be clear, your comments, you think, are okay, because you didn’t intend for more people to see them? I don’t understand you here. Surely you believe your opinion on homosexuals, that they are abnormal, unnatural, and shouldn’t be allowed to display affection in front of children. If you do believe it, why are you worried if another site quotes you. If you are proud of what you said, having it reposted will not onyl be non-offensive to you, it would be something you’d be rpoud of-your opinion being spread to more people.

      Alternatively, if you’re not proud of these comments, and want to keep them a dark dirty secret that as few as possible people know…..then maybe you should ask yourself why you made these comments at all.

      So which is it? Are you proud of your comments, and therefore not minding other sites reporting them? Or are you ashamed of them, in which case you really onyl have yourself to blame?

      I await your answer.

  10. I’m done here, but good luck. Thanks for the evidently sincere attempt Paul, but some things just.. stay. Because, well they’re still there.

    • All i can think is that if a blog is created…and it communicates outside a locked down circle of friends…then people have to wear the mud that is tossed at them.
      Otherwise we are in agreement by not commenting.
      Simply, if someone makes a racist or homophobic joke, you speak up, in public and say, NOT FUNNY.
      The internet is not our backyard…it is the worlds backyard.
      So if you speak out of line….all of us have to expect whatever comes back at us …good and bad.
      If you don’t want that to happen….think very carefully about what you broadcast.
      The world is getting smaller everyday and many people are watching.
      It is going to be an interesting journey….

      • i fully agree! 100%
        However, when i made a suggestion to provide differently opinionated people with a tad of anonymity, i was shut down quite harshly. i’m sure you all do not just want lemmings to comment or read your words…

        • “However, when i made a suggestion to provide differently opinionated people with a tad of anonymity”

          Nope, didn’t mention anonymith at all. Incicentally-is that what you’d like? For names to be blacked out, so that people who made public comments are somehow entitled to those comments becoming private?

          No, Middle ground. You stated this site was just being judgemental and high and mighty. You were repeatedly asked for a better idea to combat racism, sexism, etc-or even to come up with how the site could be better. You did not do this.

          This is what annoys me. There actually is difference of opinion here. Yes, we all tend to be clusttered around a mean like all blogs are, but there are differences of opinion.

          But on core beliefs-there is no separation. And a core belief is that prejudice is not to be tolerated. You’re appearing to tolerate it-by suggesting maybe we should just ignore it and hope it goes away-is not going to be accepted.

          And so when someone comes and complains that while you agree with the ends, the means are doing harm, and you can’t actually name any better way-it annoys me. You know why? Because it’s easy. It’s lazy. It’s really the simplest thing in the world to do to knock down something else, to say it’s not working, to say it’ll never work. The hard thing to do is make it better.

          You don’t like the site? Fine-how would it be improved? No guff about “impossible questions” no “waiting until people get better by themselves”-you want to improve something, say how it would happen.

        • Perhaps someone that can actually comprehend a set of words stringed into a sentence since you seem to be missing quite a lot of my suggestions/comments perhaps go back and re read…

        • Above comment is apparently you not engaging in personal attacks or taking the moral high ground. What brilliant camoflage.

          Let’s try again:

          How would you suggest we inform people that their comments are offensive in a way that is acceptable to you, and would not end up reinforcing them?

    • The Internet is not a private place. Even if you “want to share it with friends”. Once it goes online, it stays online. Anybody can access it, use, abuse, distribute it. Regardless if you remove it – Google caches the page incase another backward somebody should wish to peruse it. I would’ve thought a repressed housewife like you, would’ve joined her school district PTA and discussed ‘The Dangers of Cyber Bullying’ and campaigned to have the Internet turned off to save your Children. I’m genuinely surprised you didn’t know this exceedingly trivial piece of Internet 101.

      And as for character defamation. You singled out many, many people in your bigoted diatribe online – where anybody anywhere in the world can read and respond to it – and called each and every one of us unnatural, abnormal and something that would confuse your Children. And you’re offended by our responses, our defending ourselves and our vainest of vain attempts to make you see the error in your ways? Let’s not go there. Let’s just not even.

      You’re genuinely worried that any GLBTIQ person (shall we include Black, Beige, Asian, Hispanic and other, too? Because you haven’t yet disclosed to your Children that people other than Straight, White, Christian people exist?) will confuse your children? Well good for you. Also good on you for passing on your narrow-mindedness and hateful view of the world to your poor kids. I applaud you. You might as well disconnect your Internet. There are many, many things out there that will confuse your Children or “damage them mentally” should they be unprepared when they stumble across something they aren’t ready for.

      As you so correctly mentioned in your blog post, there are Atheists and Agnostic people out there who don’t believe there is a God. I’m one of them. You also correctly insinuated that we have a scientific view of the world. There’s nothing wrong with looking at the bigger picture, as opposed to swallowing each and every single lie the Church feed you at Sunday Mass. Nothing at all. There’s nothing wrong with it. I find too that a lot of Gay people are Agnostic. You want to know why? It’s generally because of what the Church and its over-zealous followers and preachers tend to do toward GLBTIQ people in society. I’ll just name a few; Ostracise, abuse, attack, slander, discredit, ban, neglect and rape. Don’t even try to deny that clergymen everywhere, even in America – sexually abuse young boys (or girls, in some cases)

      How do we fit into the evolutionary chain? Here we have a typical attempt of a religious person to understand a scientific concept of which they are completely unable to comprehend. I have two Straight parents, go figure. Surprisingly, so does every other GLBTIQ person I know. This is of course excluding those whom have a sole parent, have a deceased parent/s etcetera. How about those people in the world, both adult and adolescent, both Gay and Straight, who just happen to be unable to fall pregnant, or those who choose, or are forced to remain Single for some reason known only to them?

      As the author of this brilliant response to your nonsensical and illiterate garbage-can-worthy blog post so rightly asked you; “Why, in a world at risk of over-population do you place so much emphasis on human procreation?” Well? You haven’t answered that yet. And neither can any religious person I seem to get into this argument with. They just stop arguing, because they vaguely recognise that they have indeed been defeated with reasonable and logical argument but more likely stubbornly cling to their idiotic ideals.

      Of course, at Sunday Church or at some other time, they’ll grovel at the feet of somebody (whom has no nearer a connection to any omnipresent ‘God’ than this rock I just picked up from my garden) all because they made the life-threatening mistake of disobeying one tiny facet of the drivel the Church make you swallow.

      In conclusion, bravo. You have succeeded in one thing – proving to the world you’re just as backward, hateful, homophobic, delusional, cruel, narrow-minded, zealous of your religious beliefs and pathetic as every civilised (and GLBTIQ person) believes!

      The complete opposite of what you wanted with that poorly written piece of prose you posted ever so kindly for our perusal, I’m sure. Again, bravo.

  11. Hold on….can lemmings read? (laugh now)
    Going in circles with the argument JM/Middle Ground….but I love the tenacity from both sides. Kudos!
    I do believe this is a valid way to combat ‘evil” on the internet using a forum.
    Since we cannot stop anyone with a computer saying what they want, and they say ‘evil’ in a public forum (ie www.) commenting on it and making it known is completely fair.
    Maybe we won’t have any impact upon the individual who made the comments, but by illustrating that it is wrong we show people that are in doubt or on the fence why it is wrong and that people are paying attention and will fight what we see as ‘evil’.
    Turning our backs on ‘evil’ is never a good thing.
    Collateral damage will of course occur….but that is what happens whenever you take a stance….that is wrong.
    You lose friends, you alienate people.
    Maybe….just maybe….you might doubt your original premise and become enlightened.
    If so, then the world is a better place.
    So, as always, be careful what you say in a very public place….
    Enjoy your morning….evening…and 2013!

  12. Well said. I am hopeful her son’s catching of frogs in the lake is a euphemism for something far greater, as this is how she will learn tolerance, unconditional love and acceptance.

  13. I was over at a client’s place today, working on her website and marketing plans when her 6yr old son overheard me talking about my wife- He asked me why I had a wife and not a husband, and his mother said “Well , sometimes when girls grow up they like other girls, and sometimes when boys grow up they like other boys. Just like when girls grow up they like boys, and boys grow up to like girls.”

    He looked at the ground and then to me and said, “oh. ok. Hey can you help me get past this boss on lego star wars?”

    Clearly my “unnatural lifestyle” has broken this young child’s fragile mind well before he was “emotionally and intellectually ready” to understand the birds and the bees……… Sigh.

  14. I remember when my friends brother told everyone he was gay. I was upset because I had a crush on him. It’s true what they say, all the good ones are gay or taken.

  15. Pingback: Yes Mellisa, there are gays and we can tell you how to speak to your children Insufferable Intolerance

  16. Metzo, your shortsighted assessment of damage is actually dangerous to the health society (based on several thousand years of human history–although I suspect you ignore anything you don’t want to consider from an honest perspective, if it might do damage to whatever self-indulgent tripe you need to repeat in your head to make yourself feel better). But thanks for being the voice of idiocy.
    While your story is “cute” for homo-activists (who try to equate it to things like racism…where there is no choice involved by the person in choosing which direction they will pursue), you have no idea what kind of damage it does to the idea of “normal” which is a core underlying necessity in civilized society.
    But hey, you’ve told yourself whatever you needed to in order to justify your abandoning of the bigger picture so you can do whatever “you” feel like.
    This whole site sounds like a little fringe element trying to lash out at people with plain-old-common-sense, because they CHOOSE to pursue “whatever I feel like” and don’t want to feel guilty about it…if it weren’t for all the normal people who find it obvious that it’s not normal.

What do YOU think about this?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s