Wingnuts attack gay right to "love"

So now the winguts are after the artists who recorded a CD for the Human Rights Campaign.  Why?  Because the CD is named "Love Rocks" and Dobson has a problem with the word "love" in the title.

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=2416

But Focus on the Family's Melissa Fryrear, a former lesbian [!!!], said the CD's use of the word "love" is deceptive.

"'Love' is one of the Trojan horses for the acceptance of homosexuality," Fryrear, a gender issues analyst, said in an e-mail to Baptist Press. "Gay activists are trying to find an argument that carries emotional weight: 'love,' after all, sounds good to everyone.

"The problem, though, is their definition of 'love' is carefully camouflaged to mean more than Cupid ever meant it to mean. Their definition is meant to mean the acceptance and the celebration of homosexuality."

Ok, so they have attacked our right to marry.  Now is our right to love next?

And you can get to the CD from a link here: http://www.hrcactioncenter.org/actioncenter/our_love_rocks.html

•  How does Dobson know so much about gays?

  I mean, I'm just askin....

  by Dallasdoc on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 11:46:23 AM PDT

  •  Have you ever heard him talk?

    He sounds suspiciously like SpongeBob. There's a conspiracy theory for the tin foil hatters: SpongeBob and Patrick are actually based on a secret gay love hot sex affair between Dobson and Buchanan.

    by IndyLib on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 12:55:03 PM PDT

•  It baffles me that people actually

  aspire to be villians.

  by ablington on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 11:46:49 AM PDT

•  so now

  they think they can "reframe" the word love.

  I don't know much about God, but I'm pretty sure he's for love.

  Those "formerly gay" analysts they have working for them would be laughable if so many people did not believe them.  In science, they call experts that are willing to skew information they know is false to bolster a weak argument "biostitutes".  Wonder what these "gay converts" are called.

  by getmeoutofdixie on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 11:48:52 AM PDT

  •  The next Constitutional Amendment

    The word "love" shall be defined as pertaining to one man and one woman, or between them and their children, or between anyone and chocolate.

    by Dallasdoc on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 12:52:37 PM PDT

  •  God is love.

    Hard to get around that platform.

    by pastordan on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 02:17:31 PM PDT

•  I'm surprised...

  that they're not taking a vial of blood at birth, then track people down in their teenage years to see if any symptoms develop, and, if not, keep them in therapy until they're married, and if so, whisk them away.

  by ultrageek on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 11:52:50 AM PDT

•  I'm just finding it hard

  not to make fun of someone named "Fryrear."

  by folkbum on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 12:07:12 PM PDT

•  Sounds like

  Fryrear got dumped in a pretty big way by her last girlfriend.

  by IndyLib on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 12:11:39 PM PDT

•  You know , she might have something there...

   "a Trojan horse"
  "more than Cupid ever meant it to mean"

   I can't imagine the ancient Greeks could possibly have had same sex relationships in mind when they...

  Oh, wait!

   The ancient Greeks thought man-on-boy was the greatest thing since sliced olives.  Is an ex-Lesbiansomeone who emigrated  to Chios? She's still a Cretin in my book.

  (But not a Cretan, the ones in my town are generally fine people.)

  by sayitaintso on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 12:44:47 PM PDT

•  We all know gay love just isn't really love

  beacause the wingnuts say the Bible says is isn't...

  so no matter how in love two gay people, might feel, it just isn't love, because the wingnut worldview says it isn't.

  This is just regular old conservative common sense, of course.

  by DemDachshund on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 12:48:46 PM PDT