Comments on: On Gay Sheep and Shepherds

By: Lord Matt

Lord Matt — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 07:57:23 +0000

Didn’t we get a similar level of bullshit over identifying what makes some people have different coloured skin? Sure there have been unethical people that when let loose by thier governments have tried to change things like eye colour, race, sexulaity, religion, political views etc. But don’t we always hold these up as examples of evil to be opposed (usually by most of the known world). This is regardless of science which very often has to be ignored to start with.

I think the real problem here is the parts of the gay-lesbian community feeling insecure and scared that “the gay” is just a shortage of B vitimins or something.

“being black” did not turn out to be “cureable”, nor has creed, eye colour or any of the other things that the panic sellers have tried to push.

Besides, to be elietest about it: this argument is a varient on the logical fallacy argumentum ad ignorantiam (a google on that subject is very interesting).

By: Sprague D

Sprague D — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:45:10 +0000

Awww, I think she’s purty… in a “I lost my ministry for being a cranked out hosebag, and all I got was this lousy head dress” kinda’ way.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:21:12 +0000

That picture is the funniest/scariest/most wrong thing I’ve seen in a long time !….great post!

By: Shazzer

Shazzer — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 21:09:10 +0000

Great observations Rat!

By: Sarah

Sarah — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 19:28:10 +0000

Hey there,

I’m generally a huge fan of Saletan’s writing, but I found those comments — both what you quote and a comment he made in his follow up article: he asks, “What if science makes it possible to chemically reduce the prevalence of homosexuality without oppressing anyone?”

From a writer whose insight I usually admire, the underlying assumption there seems doubly ignorant: that someone seeking to “reduce the prevalence of homosexuality” would have a motive free of oppression in mind.