Notes from New Sodom

... rantings, ravings and ramblings of strange fiction writer, THE.... Sodomite Hal Duncan!!

Friday, April 29, 2005

The Homosexual Agenda

Another one of those news stories in the blogosphere -- brought to my attention, in this case, by John Klima of Electric Velocipede -- has got me thinking. It's a story about how some bugfuck crazy fascist loon of a Senator in Alabama tried to pass a bill banning books by gay writers (or even just containing gay characters) from school libraries throughout the state. An All-American version of Section-28, this is another example of the idea that us evil faggots are out there "promoting homosexuality", preying on the kiddies, trying to twist their little minds and make them perverts, inverts... converts.

Yeah, I remember Section 28. I remember before it was passed, when I was a teenage faggot, growing up in Kill-me-fer-the-love-of-God-NOW (aka Kilwinning, Ayrshire, thirty miles South-West of The-Fuck-Out-Of-There, where I now happily reside). I remember that brainchild of the Iron Lady Thatcher when it was called Clause-28, and how fucking bitterly twisted it was that, you see, I was reading Catch-22 as the bill was going through, and, well, you remember that scene where Yossarian goes back to the raided whorehouse, and the old man's sitting alone? The American soldiers have been and taken all the whores away.

Why? asks Yossarian.

Catch-22, says the old man. All they said was Catch-22.

Did they show you this Catch-22?

They said they didn't have to. The law said they didn't have to.

What law?


See, myself and this girl called Alana (if I recall correctly), we were on this debating society and muttering between ourselves, we thought, hey, we could debate this hot topic. I mean, I'm not gay, oh no, not me, says I, but I know people who are mutter mutter mumble mumble cover tracks and look shifty and embarrassed. So we go to the teacher who's running the society and we suggest it.

Now he was a great guy, Mr Olaf Olaffson (great name too). He was one of the first people to encourage me at writing; took me aside one day to talk about how good he thought one of my compositions was, took the time to give the kind of encouragement that might just have changed my fucking life. I was to later submit that very story to a writing competition judged by one Duncan Lunan of the GSFWC, and though I didn't even come close to winning, I got a letter back from Duncan inviting me to join his evening class in SF Writing. As far as I'm concerned, if it hadn't been for those early words of encouragement I might never have took the plunge, might never have actually thought of writing as a serious option, might have never learned the discipline, the skills of critique I got from the Circle. Hell, I just might never have been bitten by the bug the way I got bit, just from hanging with a bunch of guys all serious about being pro writers rather than just hobbyists.

So my point is, I got a lot of respect for Mr Olaf Olaffsen. I don't blame him for turning round and saying, no, sorry, you can't debate Clause-28. It might be seen as an infringement of Clause-28, you see. Promotion of homosexuality funded by the Local Authority. All it would take after all, would be a few angry parents to put his job at risk. I don’t blame him at all. There's a point to anger but it should be pointed in the right direction. No, that’s just what you get when the bigots make the laws.

So we can't debate Clause-28? says I, a faggot Yossarian in the face of this absurdity.

No. That's the law.

What law?


As Yossarian might say, "That's some clause, that Clause-28."

So hearing about pretty much the same thing happening in Alabama makes my spleen rise. Frankly I don't care that the law got booted out because not enough legislators turned up to vote on it. Christ, that makes it worse. They didn't have the spine, the backbone, the fucking ethics to fucking turn up and say "No fucking way, Jose!" They were happy to just abstain, to stay neutral, to be complacent, complicit fucking cowards. Angry? It makes me fucking furious. I mean, I'm not into the poor-me oppressed minority attitude. I'm not yer rainbow-flag-waving, nipple-clamped, marching gayboy with a whistle in his mouth, tooting along to I Am What I Am. Really, I'm not the most community-minded person when it comes to the whole gay sub-culture thing. When I hear the words "gay village" I picture myself as Patrick McGoohan, running down a beach as a big white super-inflated condom comes bouncing after me.

I am not a disco number; I am a free man!

But now, oh yes, now, brothers and sisters, I can feel the fucking outrage, the fucking Relight-My-Goddamn-Fire burning bright and bolshie in my Big Gay Heart. This makes me want to carry the severed fucking heads of these fascist bastards down the streets, never mind sodding Gay Pride placards.

So Senator Gerald Allen thinks there's a "homosexual agenda". OK, motherfucker, you want a fucking homosexual agenda? I'll give you a fucking homosexual agenda.
I am faggot. Hear me snarl...

We declare ourselves opposed to YOU. Yes, YOU, Gerald Fuckwit Allen. You and everything you stand for. You and everyone who stands with you. You and your whole sad and pathetic excuse for a philosophy. Your time is past. You are old news, old man, and we are the shape of things to come, the shape of things to cum and cum and cum again in the great big circle jerk that is the future. You are the past, old man. Step aside for us. Step aside for the 21st Century Bois.

Because we will not just stand against you, Gerald Fuckwit Allen. We will not just draw “a line in the sand”, batten down the hatches and defend our way of life in craven terror, bigotry and paranoia as you do. No, we will hunt you down and take the fight right to your fucking doorstep. We will unleash the full force of our fury in a hissy fit the like of which you've never seen. Handbags at dawn, Gerald Fuckwit Allen. We challenge you. We call you out, if you’re man enough to face us. Don’t worry. We don’t want to fuck your scrawny ass. We just want to kick it into next year.

But, no, we will not hurt or threaten you if you are too fucking chicken -- though we would dearly like to bash your fucking head in -- but we will humiliate you, working on your own fears, dancing around you in provocative fashion, leering and jeering. We will wave ithyphallic dildos in your face. We will drive you mad as Pentheus. We’ll see you walking through the streets of Alabama in your mother’s dress, your sanity smashed by this world you do not, can not, understand. You are mad already, Gerald Fuckwit Allen. We will simply show you this.

We will raise allies amongst the feminists, the anti-racists, the radicals, the liberals. All the voices of the Ethical Egalitarians will be raised together to drown out your Moral Minority with its vitriol and hate. We will shout over you when you are there and we will whisper when you are not. We will conspire against you at every fucking opportunity. We will plan and plot against you. We will steal the moral high ground and drive your no-good cant and rhetoric of righteousness right out of town.

Then by the power of our tongues we shall corrupt your sons. We shall whisper sweet obscenities in their ears, seduce them to our sins of the flesh. We shall show them that the body is a temple to be worshipped in, that all the joys and sorrows of mortality must be appreciated in the knowledge that we are the flesh, that we are creatures, living things which breathe and bleed and fight and fuck. We’ll turn them gay in all senses of the word.

We shall become prominent in the arts and media, offering role models to the young and impressionable, flouting your fucked-up, neurotic, anal culture of repression. We shall strut across the world stage, spreading our message of freedom and equality and shameless sensuality. We will recover the sexual idyll of our race, restore the heathen hedonism of ancient days.

We will create fierce faggot warrior heroes in our fiction, vital and virile as the gay gods and great queers of the old myths - Apollo and Dionysius, Adonis and Heracles. Yea, even as the oldest of them all, great Gilgamesh, had his little furry fuck-buddy, Enkidu, so shall our characters sashay across the stage, the silver screen, the small screen, through the very subtexts of our books and plays and movies, tongues in each other’s ears, hands down each other’s pants. And your sons will see them and want to be like them.

We shall sing to your breeder boys, give them gender-bending stars to slink across the dance-floor to. We’ll have them dancing to David Bowie, singing along to 'Oh You Pretty Things' in their lip gloss and eye-liner, pouting and mincing with the best of us. And you won’t have time to disown them, Gerald Fuckwit Allen; before you know it, they’ll have disowned you.

We will make a New Sodom of this world, and if your God tries to destroy it, we’ll damn well fight back. We’ll raise every buttfucker now burning in the fires of your Hell, and we will march on Heaven with the Devil at our side, tear down its golden walls. Your Christ is a weak copy of our pansy-prince Tammuz, motherfucker, Tammuz, who the woman wept for in Jerusalem long before you nailed your sacrifice to the cross so you could wash your souls clean in his blood. You have your Shepherd. Well, we have our own, Gerald Fuckwit Allen. We have Matthew Shepard, who died for his own "sins" on a fucking Wyoming hillside, you cunt, beaten to death by the ignorants you condone.

We will slay your Moral Absolutes. These dumb, petty taboos, these cretinous dichotomies of Righteousness and Sin, these mere mimicries of enlightened ethical judgement, have killed our boyfriends, our lovers, our friends, and we'll exact our vengeance on them. We will murder your Divine Decrees and drag their bloody bodies round the gates of Troy ten times. Then we will bring the very walls of your fucking philosophy down. Remember. Achilles was one of us, Gerald Fuckwit Allen.

One of your fuckwit buddies in the Right-Is-Might Brigade once said that Scotland was a dark land ruled by homosexuals. And if we have our way, Gerald Fuckwit Allen, we will prove him right. We’ll take Scotland first, and after Scotland, we’ll take Alabama. We will conquer the known world, as the greatest Muscle Mary of history, Alexander The Great, once did. We will take your citadels of education, put your small town mentalities to the torch. We will burn your preconceptions to the ground and fuck our boyfriends in the ruins. Queer Nation? We don’t think so small, Gerald Fuckwit Allen. All your bases are belong to us, motherfucker. One day soon.

So that’s my “homosexual agenda”. Fuck them... these Nazi fucks better ban my books because if I can be any sort of threat to their precious way of life, I’ll be doing my fucking damnedest. They better fucking burn them along with Gore Vidal and Truman Capote and William Burroughs before I (shock! horror!) undermine their vicious little hate-spawned lies. And while they're at it they can put Federico Garcia Lorca to the torch beside me; I’d be proud to burn beside him. But then, would Gerald Fuckwit Allen even know about a not-terribly-famous gay writer shot by the Spanish Fascists?

After all, he’d have to read a book on the faggot to learn about that.

Labels: ,


Blogger Gary Gibson, science fiction writer said...

"One of your fuckwit buddies in the Right-Is-Might Brigade once said that Scotland was a dark land ruled by homosexuals."

Who said that? Can't imagine that one going down terribly well at half-time during an Old Firm match in Ibrox Stadium. Especially, say, if the person concerned were to wake up staked out in the middle of the pitch with the video of him saying this playing on a loop on big screens. Now that's the kind of entertainment I'd pay to see.

Hey, didn't you forget to mention something else that happened the other day?

1:12 am  
Blogger Hal Duncan said...

Pat Robertson said that. Can’t find the exact quote, but according to this website:

“On his 700 Club television show on May 18, 1999, Pat Robertson criticized Scotland for its tolerance of homosexuals, calling it a "a rather dark land." He added, "In Europe, the big word is tolerance. "Homosexuals are riding high in the media. ... And in Scotland, you can't believe how strong the homosexuals are. It's just unbelievable." (From the Wednesday, June 2, 1999 edition of the Washington Post)

“After the broadcast, The Bank of Scotland quickly cancelled a $48 Million dollar business deal it was negotiating with Robertson. “

3:49 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And the radical, queen-free gay rights movement is begun! You should get your publishers to send this guy a free copy of Vellum...

8:52 pm  
Blogger Hal Duncan said...

Aye. Him and every high school library in Alabama.

10:04 am  
Blogger John Klima said...

You'll be glad to know that when it came time to vote on the bill, there weren't enough senators to have a majority so it was thrown out.

8:59 pm  
Blogger Lou Anders said...

whenever my state is on the news, it's always for some backwards-ass shit like this. Ten Commandments, banning Ellen's kiss. 35% of us voted against Bush in the last election, and Birmingham (the largest city) has a very large, thriving gay community - something that always surprises people when I point it out. A lot of these lunatic fundamentalists are not taken seriously by even the "normal" right-wingers here. They don't expect to get their bill across. What they expect is to get the hayseed vote in whatever election they're going to be running in next. And it works.

2:02 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have been reading Plutarch's Lives, and I think you really ought to mention Alcibades, as the absolute prototype of the bitch-queen/mighty-thewed warrior...

12:27 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, okay, I guess Achilles was the *prototype*, but Plutarch's account of Alicbades is wonderfully genderfucked to the modern ear...

12:31 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wandered in by a rather circuitous LiveJournal path, through your SF post, and found this post as I explored your blog.

Excellent. Sign me up. Somehow I missed the Honorable Fucktard, um, Senator from Alabama's hateful little law when it happened.

Homophobia. I've long wondered "What the hell are they afraid of?" Now I know. It sounds good to me.

6:32 pm  
Blogger Farah said...

Nice post.

But of course, your reaction is precisely what happened back in 86/7. Total fucking backfire as the discos emptied onto the streets, the queens took to the airwaves and the Civil Service kept quiet about the fact that (thanks to earlier shennanigans) Clause 28 didn't actually apply to sex education.

11:10 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Please, come to my state.

3:17 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

(The greatest moral battle of our time)

"Lo, this only I have found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many

inventions." Ecclesiastes 7:29. Let's face it, the prophet is not talking about the wheel,

electricity or the i-phone. The word "inventions" is being used in the pejorative. In this

context, it stands for a "fiction." American Dictionary of the English Language –1828.

One of the "many inventions" confronting society today is that homosexuality is normal and


Although homosexuality has been practiced for centuries, its adherents have always

represented a distinct minority (around 5 %), which should tell us something about its

normalcy—if it were normal and good, wouldn't we see much more of it? Homosexuality

has also been reviled in every world culture at one time or the other. There is no record of

homosexuality being "celebrated" or "embraced" or even "tolerated" until very recent history.

In fact, in most cultures, homosexuality was classified as a crime.

In American history, homosexuality has been almost unanimously rejected by the public at

large. Not until the national media began promoting homosexuality through favorable

depictions—celebrity Ellen DeGeneres "outing" herself on a sitcom TV show, for example—

everyone understood it for what it was. It is despicable that the liberal media have made it

part of their agenda to bring homosexuality into the "mainstream" and force its acceptance on

everyone under threat of accusations such as "homophobic" or "intolerant."

The reason acceptance of homosexuals and their "lifestyle" was never an issue for literally

hundreds of years was because everyone understood homosexuality for what it was: a

deviant form of sexual behavior that is unnatural and immoral. Nearly everyone has an

instinctive aversion to homosexuality; and the sexual practices involved between

homosexuals are generally abhorrent to most people.

Often, when listening to a parent discuss their feelings about their child who is now a gay

person, they often say that when they first learned of their child's orientation, they were

shocked, and disgusted to learn what their child was doing. Later, through a process of

inculcation, perpetrated mainly by the media and other politically motivated individuals and

groups, they came to "accept" and "embrace" their child's "alternative lifestyle."

To argue that the initial negative reaction, experienced by most everyone, is "intolerant" or

"homophobic" is just plain stupid. We are talking about millions upon millions of good,

caring, loving, intelligent, non-judgmental people the world over, who, utilizing all the

principles they have learned in their lives about caring about others and treating people

equal, etc., instinctively feel that it is not right and not normal, and if propositioned by a

homosexual, would be naturally repulsed. Have all these people somehow, over a period of

centuries, gotten it wrong? Is homosexuality indeed "normal" and, thus, moral? That

question is more probative than whether homosexuality has a biological cause. Have we as a

society decided that we can't judge what is moral and not moral anymore? Do we share the

same type of unprincipled conscience as Pontius Pilate, who, when deciding whether to

concede to the demands of the Jews in their attempt to crucify Jesus, asked him "What is

Truth?" The politically correct and immoral of today would ask: "what is moral?"

It is interesting that liberals, the main defenders and promoters of homosexuality, almost

never assert that being gay is "moral." They merely declare that it is not a "choice." They

know that to take a position claiming that homosexuality is moral would be laughable,

because it would mean that, in all of recorded history, virtually everyone has gotten it wrong

except them. Their own premise (that being gay is not a choice) leads one to the conclusion

that homosexuality is not moral, which means that the position of gay advocates is based

solely on human and secular grounds. Most people naturally want to look to a higher

authority when deciding on such important moral issues.

The position gays take is: "we enjoy committing sodomy and other repulsive sexual acts

because we are attracted in that manner, but we don't choose to do what we do. We have no

control whatsoever. We were born this way. We are only expressing our love for another

person, so don't question what we do. More importantly, accept our actions; embrace and

cherish what we do or we will fight to silence you and accuse you of being hateful

homophobes" (their favorite incendiary terms).

As you can see, gays and their supporters can never defend homosexuality on moral,

spiritual, historical or religious grounds.

One of the most deceptive and persistent arguments made by gay advocates is that people

who oppose homosexuality are hateful and judgmental towards gays.They say that everyone

should "accept" gays. The majority of people who are against homosexuality do accept gay

people and don't hate them at all. They work with them, laugh with them and live with them

without discriminating against them or hating them personally. What they don't "accept" is

the idea, the concept, the notion, the thought of homosexuality. In other words, it is merely a

stand for principle and values, not a personal attack against any individuals. Contrariwise, it

is the gay advocates who regularly make personal attacks against, and don't "accept," people

who disagree with them.

How much clearer can it be? In addition to being inherently repulsive, homosexuality is not

expressed in nature, in either the plant or the animal kingdoms. If anyone was to witness two

female chimpanzees, for example, being intimate, or two male horses engaged in sexual acts,

the sight would be disturbing, would it not? What if it happened with regularity in the entire

animal world? Why is it any different for mankind? The evolutionists believe that man is just

an advanced species—a member of the animal kingdom, so why shouldn't we have the same

negative reaction when a man or a woman decides to have sexual relations with someone of

their own sex? I don't know about anyone else, but I do not cherish the day that, because no

one has the courage to resist it any longer, gays feel free to exhibit their "love" for their

partners in public. Imagine being in the line at McDonalds with your child, and two gay men

begin kissing in front of you. Or being at the movie theatre with gay people being intimate

right next to you. That is a society that is disgusting to contemplate. But, it will happen if

more people don't take a visible, vocal stand.

If homosexuality is normal, why does the physical appearance of many women who engage

in it change so drastically, so that they begin to look like men, and are very unattractive?

"Butch" is a term that has been used to describe this phenomenon seen in many lesbian

women. It's not just that the natural femininity of those women has been voluntarily

sacrificed; their sexual practices, rooted in their abnormal lusts, actually alters their physical

appearance. The same is true of homosexual men. They become effeminate looking, and

often their speech and gait change dramatically, especially in those who don't try to hide their

affliction. There is no way that these effects can be seen as anything other than unnatural in

the extreme. But you never hear gays or their supporters address this issue; instead, the

person raising it would be attacked as being hateful and mean.

It's interesting that gays want to frame the homosexual issue as one that concerns their desire

and right to merely have a loving relationship with other people of the same sex. This is just

a diversion. No one would take the position that a person of one sex cannot love another

person of the same sex. Most people are taught to love all men (generically speaking).

Gays want to hide their desire to have sexual relations with someone of the same sex under

the guise of "love," so that their orientation appears virtuous. There is nothing virtuous about


Also, the current attempt to gain civil "rights" for homosexuals as an oppressed minority is

just a screen to shame the rest of society into granting complete approval of the practice of

homosexuality, which would provide homosexuals the assurances they seek and strongly

desire, that they can continue their practices without any recrimination or guilt.

Gays currently enjoy legal protection for their private sexual conduct. State laws prohibiting

sodomy, which existed in nearly every State at late as 1960, were either repealed by some

States or were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 20003 (Lawrence v. Texas).

But gays and their supporters aren't satisfied. They now want everyone who would oppose

the practice of homosexuality on moral grounds to shrink and admit to being intolerant and

hateful. They want everyone to openly accept and even embrace their abhorrent behavior.

The vast majority of homosexuals do not enter into permanent, or even long-term

monogamous relationships. Statistics show that homosexuals, especially homosexual men,

average far more sexual partners over their lifetime than heterosexual men and women—

further evidence that homosexuality is a problem about one's choice concerning sexual

activity, not an inherited biological reality, and certainly not an emotional desire to just

express love or have a relationship with someone of the same sex. Homosexual men also

have a shorter life expectancy than heterosexual men, and are much more susceptible to

contracting diseases. These are widely known facts.

Men and women who are under this "gay" deception are otherwise good people. They are

smart, funny, creative, hard working and fun people. I have known many gay people and

have liked them very much. I have a close family member who is gay. Gays are not bad

people; homosexuality is simply an evil that some fall into and are deceived thereby.

However, due to constant guilt and society's downward trend in embracing and practicing

objective moral truths, gays have decided to aggressively demand acceptance for their

chosen sexual practices.

It is crucial that people see homosexuality for what it is: an abnormal sexual attraction and its

associated practices. I am sympathetic towards gay people who are confused and believe

that their choice is an unavoidable and natural one. However, studies have shown that most

gay people feel some degree of guilt about their actions, yet suppress those feelings.

However, many gays have actually faced the issue concerning the morality of their behavior,

and have changed it; demonstrating that it is, indeed, a moral choice.

People don't want to condemn or hate any of their fellow beings for any sin, especially when

all of us have done things that we know are wrong or immoral. I believe that some people

who condone homosexuality just want to protect gays from other people who would openly

judge them and hold them up to scorn and ridicule. No one who commits any type of sinful

act should be treated this way; but, neither should their actions be defended if they are

wrong. The ideal approach for society to take would be to condemn the sin, not the

individual, to love everyone, and to impersonalize the sin by realizing that the error being

committed is no different than any other error or sin men engage in. Its cause and ultimate

effect are the same, i.e., all sin results from temptation, and it can only truly harm the one not

resisting it. Gays should not be scorned or disliked. Their behavior should be. Likewise, the

gay community and its supporters should not judge or demonize those who are expressing

their deeply held beliefs about an important moral issue.

The much bigger problem facing society, and much more troubling, is the attempt by many

public figures and the media to sanction and legitimize this abnormal behavior, and to silence

and discredit those who consider homosexuality a moral issue. While demanding tolerance

for their cause, they simultaneously express intolerance for the views of anyone who doesn't

agree with them. In other words, they need to look in the mirror, preferably right after they

look up the definition of "hypocrite" in a dictionary.

For too long now, powerful and influential media organizations in this country have

essentially been very active advocates and strong supporters of the homosexual cause. This

is seen in the many films and television shows that portray those who practice homosexuality

and their lifestyle in a very positive light. The intent is to force people, through political

correctness and other forms of intimidation, to either accept homosexuality as a normal and

even beautiful, or to keep silent.

This is clear, calculated manipulation, and is virtually constant. Thankfully, there is a large

percentage of Americans that will never surrender their knowledge that homosexuality is an

evil that, if allowed to spread, will eventually cause great harm to our culture and our society.

It is a form of sexual deviance that undercuts the institution of the family, and demeans all

notions of normalcy and purity. It is truly a battle between concepts of good and evil.

For society to sanction homosexuality, either politically or in the minds and hearts of people,

or both, is a dangerous thing. It would be equally dangerous for society to sanction any

behavior that is wrong. Some societies sanction polygamy, and those societies never

prosper. Some societies have sanctioned bestiality, resulting in harmful effects. When and if

the tide of majority opinion shifts over to the side of granting homosexuality the status of

"normal" and even commendable behavior, our culture and society, as we know them, will

be doomed. This is not meant as a prophesy, just the realization that all purposefully wrong

activity has negative results.

The attempt to sanction and legitimize something so obviously immoral and abhorrent is

unprecedented in our history. There has never been something of this magnitude, which

threatens to undermine fundamental moral principles, decency and the family.

Many who promote homosexuality as an acceptable "lifestyle" are mistaken in their views

and demonstrate bad motives. Instead of seeking to secure fair treatment for gay people,

often what they really are seeking to do is to silence and discredit anyone who takes a stand

on any issue for moral reasons. Their motive is really to attack spiritually-based concepts

and goodness in general and those who express such ideas. They themselves know,

consciously or subconsciously, that they are not living up to standards of moral behavior that

they know about, so they strike out against those who are trying to stand up for moral

principles. Currently, the manifestation of this mentality is seen in its most fervent form

related to the issue of homosexuality.

For a large portion of our society not to see homosexuality as harmful is disturbing, but not

surprising. America is currently suffering from a huge deficit in moral clarity and courage.

It is also not surprising that people who stand up for truth and moral principles are often

persecuted by others for those ideals. Society sanctions extreme depictions of violence in the

print media as well as in movies and television. The same is true of depictions of alcohol

and drug use, the demeaning of women by rap "artists," etc., etc. America's moral mercury is

falling fast. Divorce is at all time highs; abortions occur in the thousands every year;

violence against women is high; corruption in virtually every corner of our society is

rampant; gross materialism is a defining hallmark of our society, and an addiction to

anything and everything sexual is apparent everywhere. America is sick, physically, morally

and spiritually, and is going downhill "like a snowball headed for hell."

The fight against having homosexuality forced down American's throats at every turn is an

important moral battle. The homosexual advocates are fighting hard to put down opposing

voices of morality and principle. The tide of homosexuality as an open, accepted and

embraced practice can be turned if people understand that experiencing repulsion towards

homosexual practices is a normal result of one's God-given intuition. People should not feel

guilty that they are repulsed by the idea of two men or two women engaged in unnatural

sexual acts. They should not let those who choose to support homosexuality intimidate them

or make them feel that by standing for something important they are "intolerant" or hateful

people. They should not be deceived by the lie that homosexuality is "not about sex," but

about men and women merely seeking loving relationships. They should act lovingly

towards anyone who is gay and not judge or condemn them, but they should also realize that

opposing this unnatural practice is not hateful; it is a stand for principle, and a moral


God created man "upright," but homosexuality is not part of that creation. It is perverted,

ugly, and contrary to nature. It is a conscious choice of individuals about who they want to

fornicate with, and it is wrong, regardless if its devotees are confused about the ultimate

cause of their abnormal attraction, or its appropriateness. America must wake up to this

attack and resist the intimidation and pressure being exerted unceasingly to silence voices of

reason and morality and to force everyone to accept homosexuality as good and natural.

Think of the consequences, and reject this "invention" of mankind.

Copyright January, 2007
David Cosson

8:17 pm  
Blogger Hal Duncan said...

Kiss my ass, David Cosson.

With tongues.

2:58 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Crossan wrote a polite, provacative and insightful piece. It's worth noticing that many of the homosexual authors and supporters on this site resort to foul-mouthed language. I beleive it is illustrative of the inner sickness that they suffer from. My advice to them would be to stop indulging the evil within you. You will benefit by being happier in your life if you stop practicing what you know in your heart is wrong.

10:47 pm  
Blogger Hal Duncan said...

No, Cosson (not Crossan... *Cosson*) wrote an insulting, arrogant and moronic piece, which I've responded to in a fair depth here. It's worth moticing that you, his anonymous cretin of a supporter, can't even spell the man's name right. I believe (Not "beleive", cretin. Remember: "I before E, except after C." Or haven't you reached that basic level of literacy yet in your clearly risible education?) this is illustrative of the profound ignorance you suffer from. My advice to you, mate, would be to stop indulging your craven, infantile addiction to authority, go grow the backbone required to actually make ethical evaluations rather than moralistic pronouncements, and come back when you can base your arguments on more than the unreasoned prejudice of what you "know in your heart" is "wrong".


4:01 pm  
Blogger J m mcdermott said...

Wow, what the fuck are those anonymous fucktards doing at Hal Duncan's blog?

I don't wander into the local chapter of Evangelicals R' Us spouting off about the fucktard absurdity of bilbobagginsical literalism.

The gay agenda is a myth. The anti-gay agenda is a very sad reality.

Any post that pulls those snivelling, half-literate fucktards from their Gideons long enough to get smacked in the brain is a good post.

11:12 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hear hear. Since friggin day one (since 1989 AT LEAST) we are bombarded with labels and boxes to try and force us into them. Too bad i'm not into that shit, O Western Soceity.

Cheers for Vellum, man.

7:24 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hal, your Agenda (however ironic) is a moving and thrilling piece, as provocative and stirring to me as a gay man, as both Vellum and Ink were to me as a reader and a fledgling writer. Between Vellum and Ink I have lived on The Prince Of End Times - without a doubt the most re-read piece of short fiction in my entire library.

As g.reddon said, Cheers.

And as for those who copy-and-paste every anti-gay fallacy ever invented into one long toilet roll of crap and post it on your site and then have the effrontery to claim copyright on it, well, Fuck that shit.

10:50 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

go jack flash :)

12:47 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You homos suck cock big time.Anonymous is the only one with a coherent and reasonable thought patern on this sissy blog.Oh hey Duncan asswipe,by using fancy words and name calling to refute the truth is really weak,especially from a self proffesed writer like yourself.Does anybody read that trash you write apart from your homo "kiss your ass" friends.Get a life, fuck some pussy for a change instead of pushing somebodys shit back up his ass.


11:49 am  
Blogger Hal Duncan said...

You homos suck cock big time... cocksucker,lol!

Duh! Get with the program, retard; that's not much of an insult, far as I'm concerned.

Sorry, does "retard" count as "fancy words" or "name calling", or is it both? I'm pretty sure it's an accurate descriptor given your moronic level of discourse, and it's not exactly high-falutin' as far as I'm concerned. But then, who knows what a retard considers "fancy"?

Does anbody read "that trash" I write? Heh, yup, and in a fair few languages in countries all around the world, baby. Friends and strangers from every walk of life. Only thing they've got in common is the wits you're lacking, retard.

And as for this "sissy blog", baby, the Geek Show's right here, sitting back with a cigarette in its mouth and blowing smoke in your weaselly little face, ready for you to bring it on, motherfucker. Or are you just going to flail at me ineffectually with your bad grammar and misspelled words, then run away back into the safety of your anonymity? Who's the pansy-ass panty-waist chickenshit here, Anonymouse? I believe that would be you.

Grow some balls, bitch. You want me to "fuck some pussy"? Well, you're the only pussy I'm seeing round these parts. So, if you want it, baby, come and get it. I'll give you it hard and fast, and I can go a whole lot deeper.

Come on. You know you want it. You know you want to be my bumboy bitch, motherfucker.

6:16 pm  
Anonymous Sulla said...

re: whatshisname.

Since you are obviously incapable of copy pasting properly I wasn't arsed with reading your whole piece of sillyness properly. But get this. You are wrong. I mean, your facts are wrong. Homosexuality exists everywhere in the animal kingdom. Ever seen a flock of baboons? THey do nasty things to each others bums, you know. Bonobos? They fuck instead of fight. With everyone. Lions? Yup.

You seem to claim that homosexual sex is inherently disgusting?
I don't know about you, bit to quote Bill Hicks: "the only thing more beautiful than a woman... is two of them".

"There is no record of
homosexuality being "celebrated" or "embraced" or even "tolerated" until very recent history."

Ok... Ever heard about ancient Greece? Rome? Macedonia. Old Japan? The Azteks? Oh, if it wasn't for Abraham and Aristoteles, what wonders woudn't we see?

You do know that "normal" and "good" are not synonyms? In fact, they have nothing to do with each other. For example, in nazi germany (as in your home, obviously) it was totally normal to be an evil idiot. They thought it good, too.

No, I got to go back to work now. But I had fun, although I know you shouldn't pick on retards (and if your facts are such blatant lies, you are a retard.).

2:36 pm  
Blogger Alice is not my Name said...

Please, please do not try and tell me what I know in my heart to be wrong. Are you in my heart Mr. Anonymous? Can you, Mr. Cosson, even fathom what it feels like to read your little tirade telling me, in my core, I am evil for simply loving in the only way I know how?

This guilt feeling you speak of gays having does not stem from what we do, but from the constant barrage of hate flung our way.

You say it is a conscious choice to be gay. I say you are sure as the sky is blue mistaken. Do you think if it was a choice, people would chose to be in the margins of society, barely tolerated, hated, the target of so-called rants on morality, and all too often the target of much, much worse? I think not. Believe me, no one is promoting homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle, as that would be rather counter to the fact that it is not a choice.

Now you, Mr. Cosson seem to think that using the past (or at least, your biased, not historically accurate, view) to justify your resentment of gays. If everyone throughout history found it repulsive, why shouldn't everyone today? I suppose you might also be of the mind that since Jewish people were historically persecuted and once upon a time it was pretty much a given that anyone you walked up to on the street would be anti-Semitic, that people should continue in this clearly backwards practice of religious intolerance....or do you simply draw the line at using history to back up your homophobia? I know it may be difficult for you to believe, being a right winger and a conservative who enjoys the status quo as much as the next conservative, but the world does change. Paradigms shift. Collective beliefs morph, grow, improve. People come to realize the errors of the past and work to change the future.

You say it is sexual deviance. You say it is impure. You say Dear God just imagine if some of "them" started being intimate in the movie theatre next to you. Well, I say I'm pretty sure you would not want a straight couple getting it on next to you in a theatre either....since seriously, that's just gross.

I am not asking you to accept. But a little tolerance would be nice. Maybe cut the hate business, stop telling me I'm some spawn of the devil for loving....

What you fail to see is that being gay is as much a part of the person as their personality, so if you hate the deed, you hate the doer. You can say "I have gay relatives who I love dearly blah blah blah" all you like, but those are really just empty words until you come to see that you are hiding behind moral reasoning to escape having to see the whole picture. As long as you have your God and morals, you don't have to see the pain you cause with your words. You're justified. You're right and normal, and you'll just throw the gosh-darned Bible at anyone who should disagree. And hopefully in so doing, knock them out before they can poison your ears with *gasp* the tolerance they preach.

And the looks changing thing is a common stereotype you would see is not always the case if you were not so blinded by morals. I very much look like a girl. I am a girl. I like girls who look like girls. I have not been altered by "abnormal lusts." You can't pick me out in a crowd of straights and say "that one, she's gay." Does that scare you? You clearly feel the need to label everything as virtuous or evil...does it worry you to know we're all around you, evil and unlabeled?

I hope you're having fun on your high horse. I hope you notice that the crowd of you up there is diminishing, slowly but surely being brought down to earth by a new wave of enlightened thinking. I hope you someday wake up from your moral dream land because once you do, once your mind is opened to all the beauty that surrounds you, you may not feel the need to spread hate.

God said "Judge not lest ye be judged." You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but save the judgments.
Jesus said "Love your neighbour." So ya, that includes gays dude.

8:36 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Homosexuality IS inherently disgusting to a lot of straight people...more even than the way we generally use the word inherently, I mean it is REALLY inherent, in that it is positively biological, at the very core of psychology for some (not all) straight people....and personally I believe that only a small part of that is society no matter how intolerant and evil society is, and most of it is just natural biology of the brain.

That said I loved your quote about the two women being even more beautiful, that rocks. cause you see I used to think all homosexuality was pretty gross, but much more with gay men than women. Then I got a little bi-curious (I'm a woman). By now although I'm not sure I can ever picture myself being with a woman, and still prefer men as a romantic partner, I can fantasize about women in romantic situations and I can watch lesbian love stories without flinching like I used to, it's actually nice.

I too am a girly girl and I like women that look like women, not men, maybe just a tiny bit spicy, if you know what I mean, but at the same time very very feminine looking. When it comes to men though, where my romantic dreams still lie, I prefer men who are fairly masculine looking and acting, just not huge beefcakes or cavemen. I don't really go for feminine type men though just because I like girls a little now. I like it one way or the other, I don't really go for androgyny (which I believe that some people that classify themselves as "gay", as liking either men or women, REALLY in truth prefer people that are somewhere in the middle, sometimes even smack dab-but I guess there's no word for that yet).

So now I'm pretty comfortable with the idea of two women being together and aware of the immense beauty that can be. However, although I'm slightly more comfortable with the idea of gay men, and even in some tv shows or movies or whatever I can be dragged into the romance of it...if there is anything to explicit, even especially passionate kissing, I still feel very very uncomfortable and grossed out. And that will probably never change completely. I don't know if it's because I'm jealous that I could never be a part of that (I believe when we watch movies, a big part of it is putting ourselves in the characters shoes)...or if it's just some sort of biological reaction.

But the main thing is that gay people at some point will just have to understand that reality for a lot of straight people..and some are just as grossed out by two women (although women's sexuality seems to be more "fluid" than straight mens, and there is the cliche of straight men loving to see two women together which I'm sure has some basis in truth).

But the real main thing is that no matter what "grosses us out" is not our place to place judgment on an activity between two consenting adults who have feelings that they can't change and must have been sent by God. Hey I understand what it's like to love men. I also understand what it's like to be a woman who loves women. so who am I to judge?

the grossed out thing is nothing personal. I'm also grossed out by beans and onions, and lots of people love those, doesn't mean there's anything wrong with them, or that it's gross or not beautiful and terribly romantic in God's eyes and many people here on earth as well. the love that is, not beans and onions, I would not say they are beautiful, but to each his own, lol.

I think we would all do well to understand eachother a little better. but people like the above noter that just think wrong is wrong, may or may not ever change, and if I were you I wouldn't waste my time trying to change them or even argue with them.


10:48 pm  
Blogger Hal Duncan said...

Anonymouse, with all due respect, it's very nice that you've made same baby steps towards not vomiting out your small intestines at the thought of -- shock! horror! -- two men kissing, and your self-absorbed witterings are a riveting study of (I'm guessing late-adolescent?) vacuity. But your peace 'n' kittens sentiments become candy floss on a shitty stick with this apologist balderdash about homosexuality being inherently disgusting.

So it just "IS", is it... for some anyway? Do you actually have any evidence for this assertion? Have you perhaps carried out some scientific studies the rest of the world hasn't heard of? Have you even the remotest idea of how the human nausea response works in relation to visual stimuli? Or are you just blithely and ignorantly excusing bigotry as a biological imperative? Validating homophobia as an innate disgust that, well, hey, we faggots just gotta learn to live with? Telling me that "gay people at some point will just have to understand that reality"? Telling me that I just have to learn to deal with it, suck it up? And telling Sulla not to get my back when the bigots come around? Just two days after the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots?

Let me buy you a fucking clue.

"We would all do well to understand each other a bit better." Yes, these are very nice words. You might want to try understanding how a mixed-race couple would feel if you proclaimed on their blog that some people DO just have an innate revulsion of miscegenation. Or how a Jewish person would feel if you said, well, those Nazis were just BORN with a natural hatred of the Jews. How a black person would feel if you said that, hey, some white people can't help joining lynch mobs. There's just no point arguing with them.

Go away and think about that. Please. Think about that, and about whether you really want to sound like an apologist for hate crimes with a head composed entirely of air or bone.

And after you've thought about it, if you do come back here, do not EVER use my blog to tell someone who is arguing with a fucking bigot not to do so.

Is that clear? Am I making myself clear here?

Bigot posts hate-screed on my blog. Sulla shows that he's a mensch by calling out said bigot for his bigotry. You tell Sulla, "if I were you I wouldn't waste my time trying to change them or even argue with them."

Well, in the name of every faggot who's ever had someone stand up for them, and every faggot in the world -- and by fuck there's so many of them still out there -- who's never had someone stand up for them, thank fuck that Sulla is happy to "waste his time" standing up against bigots where people like you are not. Thank fuck that he is not you. Thank fuck that I'm not you. Thank fuck that there are millions of people around the world that aren't you.

Frankly, the world would be a much better place if you weren't you.

2:42 am  
Blogger Z said...

Brilliant Blog I must say, something I surely could have never said better. I was also rather amused with the counter arguments presented via comments. Since its rather apparent no one should really take the anonymous seriously. Especially when one puts underwhelming arguments on the table and the other can not give any arguments truly their own.

8:24 am  
Blogger Mark said...

Where do these scumballs like Anonymous come from?

5:24 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home