John Cloud, a writer for Time magazine has just written a lengthy cover story for the October 10 edition that cleverly promotes the homosexual agenda. Though not mentioned in the article, Cloud is a long-time homosexual journalist and activist who has been given several awards by homosexual organizations for his "gay" affirmative reporting.
In September, 2005, Cloud was given a second place award for "The Governor's Secret Life" by the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association. And, in 2004, he was given an award by the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) for his article, "The New Face Of Gay Power." And, in a Columbia Journalism Review weblog (April 21, 2005), Cloud admits to having a "boy friend."
In 2000, Cloud wrote an article on the Boy Scouts, comparing them to the KKK and asking whether or not the Boy Scouts had the right to freedom of association. The Media Research Center reported on Cloud's homosexual activism disguised as journalism in its April, 25, 2000 issue.
In Cloud's latest homosexual activism disguised as journalism for Time magazine, he portrays "gay" teens in a sympathetic light and cites the growing influence of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) in promoting homosexuality on high school campuses. He also downplays the role that ex-gay ministries contribute in helping individuals struggling with unwanted same-sex attractions.
This piece not only promotes a destructive agenda, it highlights the dishonesty used to advance the homosexual cause. By not informing the reader of a obvious conflict of interest. TIME has chosen to misrepresent itself and prevent anyone who reads this from making a truly informed decision.
7 comments:
Gotta wonder how long before they try to make Romans 1:26-27 hate speech and try to close churches that reference it.
Go to Canada. It's already happening.
I know Canada passed a law that the Bible technically fell under, but I wasn't aware of any enforcement of the law because of biblical speech... yet.
I'm too angry to even be logical right now. You're such a fucking prick.
I find it interesting to note that you spend 2 paragraphs putting forward evidence to convince us what is hilariously evident – John Cloud is gay. I find it amusing how you seem to think this is in some way discreditory to him. You go on to say his homosexual activism is “disguised” as journalism. Disguised? Perhaps you need a definition of journalism, but then again perhaps you also need a kick in the sac if you believe this is supposed to be an intellectual argument. It doesn’t matter whether you agree with it or not – its still fucking journalism you tit. You tell me this promotes a destructive agenda. Oh really? How is that? Is it destructive to highlight the oppression of minority which is persecuted by its own families for something it cannot choose? Oppressed by fools who believe they are following their religion by an intolerant campaign when Jesus only direct commandments was to love thy neighbour and to love thy enemy like thy neighbour? I agree the piece was bias. Yet it would have been no more bias were it dealing with the oppression of the Negro or the Native American or the poor. I will leave you (for now) with a last thought (although I would enjoy continuing this dialog) : wither you choose to accept it or not, scientifically 1 in 10 people are gay (including lesbians – this is often omitted). This means that someone (probably more), in your family is homosexual (trust me you will not know about it until they let you – apart from the obvious there is no “gay” characteristics as the sad fucking pretentious camps in my sexuality would have you believe). Whilst your ignorance is funny to me, to your homosexual relatives, it is hurtful beyond your imagining.
I read your comments. If you would like to have a respectful debate I will be happy to oblige. However, if you wish to attack my views with foul language and verbal abuse I must decline.
What I write are my own beliefs. The reader is not required to agree. Same goes for Mr. Cloud. However, when a person is professional reporting, full discloser is in everyone's best interest. Mr. Cloud failed to do that.
His piece was published in news publication. The bias is very evident to me. True journalisim presents to facts (all the facts) and lets the reader decide. Once agin Mr. Cloud failed.
Homosexuality is destructive. Look at the facts sir. It tears apart the family structure, shortens life spans, is detrimental to children and outright imoral. I would also repesctfully disagree that it is not a choice. Many folks have left the homosexual life and have come to speak out against it.
If you want to discuss the Biblical aspects if it I will refer you to some scripture. You can find it here http://powerballplace.blogspot.com/2005/10/dear-powerball.html#comments
I do not oppress anyone. I speak the truth in love. I do so because I do love thy neighbour.?
I'm glad to hear we both agree the piece was bias. I'd like for you to cite the study that says 1 in 10 people are gay. I often here that, but in all my research I have never found creditable evidence of it.
I have members of my family who are homosexual and I share with them the same thing I'm telling you. What is hurtful is for me to ingnore a person who is on a destructive path. I doubt you have a true picture of me. I suggest you read this post.
http://powerballplace.blogspot.com/2005/10/fred-phelps-church-of-hate.html#comments
I do thank you for sharing your comments and hope that we can come to a better understanding of each other.
Certainly sir, I shall have a respectful debate. I apologise if you were offended by the language I used, but all it meant was a simple good-humouredness as is I am used to debating with on the internet. Nevertheless, I shall refrain.
Homosexuality is not destructive. You purport several arguments. I shall deal with each in turn.
1. You tell me it tears apart family structure. How so? If you refer to the social model of the nuclear family, then I respond by asking on what information have you come to the conclusion that this is the best model. Every independent scientific study into this in the last 10 years has found that on the basis of providing healthy children and a stable home no single structure has precedence over any other with the exception of single mother families which trail significantly (a result of the increased likelihood of poverty and depravation). I do not understand sir, how does it tear apart family structure – it simply creates a different model. And not one which is abhorrent to society. I will refer here to the gay community in Los Angeles were the crime figures are 0%. 0% sir. It is a crimeless society.
2. In what way does homosexuality shorten life spans? You generalise sir and in the words of the genius and artist William Blake “to generalise is to be an idiot”. I do not call you an idiot sir but rather your view here is idiotic. There may be elements within the culture which contribute to an averaged shortened lifespan, but this is not the result of homosexuality in itself. Similarly there is a culture of obesity within America which shortens lifespans, but this is not an argument for claiming all Americans are sinful.
3. The point here about homosexuality being detrimental to children I take extreme exception to sir. I do not comprehend your reasons for why this is possibly so. Please elaborate.
4. Your final point that homosexuality is “outright immoral” is not an argument sir. It is intellectually devoid while debating the angle Homosexuality is Immoral to argue “homosexuality is immoral” It is tantamount to saying “that’s bad because its bad”.
I read the scripture extracts you referred me to and all are easily refuted. I will avoid lengthily debate here by referring yourself to John Boswell’s 1979 speech which summarises most of what I have to say on the subject:
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
Sir you do oppress. You support an agenda which aims for the eradication of the rights of a minority. I did not refer to you as THE oppressor. You are part of a culture which is oppressive. Indeed sir, ask your gay relatives if when they were growing up they felt oppressed because of their sexuality. Ask them to cite proof. Sir a simple undisputed statistic sums it up. Homosexual teenagers are 3 times more likely to commit suicide. That is not the result of a culture which loves. For indeed my attack is more on the culture of which your views are a proponent than you yourself. But you contribute.
You were correct sir in one point. I did not have a true picture of you. My only excuse for my somewhat foolish presumption is I had been on websites for an hour researching right-wing views on the subject and encountered some of the most despicable beliefs and unfortunately it was on your site I got the opportunity to comment. I thereby wrongly attributed some of their beliefs to you ( incidentally the anonymous comment before mine calling you a prick had nothing to do with me).
Nevertheless, your view that I am destructive for something I cannot help is wrong. Who are you sir to believe you know better than someone who is gay to say they can choose. The so-called “ex-gay” argument is farcical. Do you seriously believe every homosexual on the planet born into a homophobic society does not try through tears, anger and depression to “make” themselves straight. I have. You can not, with your ignorance of what it is like to be homosexual tell me that I have a choice when I KNOW I do not. It is not a matter of possibility. It is a certainty. I have tried every conceivable method to test my attraction to woman. In any case, scientifically there is significantly more evidence to argue it is biological than otherwise.
Ultimately, I am happy to continue the debate and as you said so eloquently “hope that we can come to a better understanding of each other”. I look forward to your rebuttal ( or concession – well it could happen).
John
Post a Comment