December 17, 2012

"What is the gun community going to do about this tragedy?"

"I dunno. What is the gay community going to do about Penn State?”

306 comments:

1 – 200 of 306   Newer›   Newest»
John said...

Now that is going to leave a mark...

AF said...

Right, because gay people are to raping boys as semiautomatics are to killing people.

Fucking bigots.

Ann Althouse said...

@AF The comparison is "community" to "community."

AF said...

Professor Althouse, the comparison is absurd, bigoted and offensive any way you cut it. You should be ashamed of yourself for linking to it with approval.

phx said...

SEEN ON FACEBOOK:

Okay. Big game hunter I see.

TosaGuy said...

Yes, smearing millions of poeple who didn't do anything wrong is absurd, bigoted and offensive any way you cut it.

So why does the left engage in it so enthusiastically?

Kevin said...

AF, you're out of line. The bottom line is, if you're going to overgeneralize and judge a whole group on the outliers, the left has a lot of targets for that kind of bullshit too.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

30yearProf said...

Exactly on point.

The absurdity of it IS the point, @AF.

Sayyid said...

"Right, because gay people are to raping boys as semiautomatics are to killing people."

You're right, your mischaracterization is in fact a mischaracterization. The analogy you were looking for was perhaps "A homosexual man's penis is to homosexual rape what a semiautomatic is to killing people." Or, as Althouse points out, the other analogy is between the communities.

Common thread between the two: both analogies are improperly assigning blame -- in one case to the object used by an evil person, in the other case to the community the evil person belongs to.

garage mahal said...

Insta thinks rape = being gay.

I'm sure Palladian will be along anytime lecturing liberals.

chickelit said...

@AF: This is a teaching moment for all involved. Don't blow it.

Dr Weevil said...

AF:
Which is higher? The percentage of gun-owners (or, if you like, semiautomatic owners) who go on killing sprees with multiple victims at schools, or the percentage of gay people who are serial rapists with dozens of victims over many years? I don't know which percentage is higher, and I don't care, because I know that both percentages are minuscule - less than one-hundredth of one percent in each case. Get it? Or do we have to explain the comparison again?

Kevin said...

Garage thinks owning a gun = mass murderer.

Same diff.

Inga said...

Another weird false analogy, such grasping, overreach.

Coketown said...

As a homosexual, I find this comparison outrageous and deplorable. It is sickening and disturbing that someone as bright and blonde and foxy as Ann Althouse would link to this scurrilous comparison with approval. Her being a law professor--in Madison no less!--makes this even more difficult for me to swallow. Which says a lot, because I'm gay.


Hahahaha. I'm kidding! I find the comparison completely apt. We don't expect a group of law-abiding individuals to shoulder the burden of responsibility of some other group that bears only the most facile and superficial relation to the first group.

Pole smoking is legal in this great country for men and women alike. As is owning guns. Murder and pedophilia are not legal. The frivolous little nicety called "legality" is the threshold separating the Group from the Subgroup, and makes this a difference in kind and not in degree.

Shouting Thomas said...

Gay men are never responsible for the consequences of their actions.

It's always white hetero men's fault.

Including AIDS!

Inga, did your nurse's union require you to sit through "And the Band Played on"? You know, the movie that pins the blame for the AIDS epidemic on President Reagan?

Since I've been was in the pharma education biz for a decade, I know that that has been a common practice.

chickelit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
chickelit said...

There are lots of parallels:

The uppity atheists who are forever asking what are Christians going to do about Fred Phelps;

The rightwingers demanding what are ordinary Muslims going to do about Jihadists...

Palladian said...

I was just about to write "I wonder how long it will take for ShoutingThomas to pop in here and offer his stale and tangential opinion of gay men" and— what do you know?— he's already here!

Seriously, dude, I'm a faggot of the highest order and I don't think about queers half as much as you do.

chickelit said...

Inga said...
Another weird false analogy, such grasping, overreach.

And then there's Inga, always demanding that "we" do something about commenters who offend her.

Palladian said...

I'm sure Palladian will be along anytime lecturing liberals.

No, I like liberals. It's people like you I dislike.

Shouting Thomas said...

Once again, you are mistaken, Palladian,

I'm talking about the institutional attack on hetero white men, unfairly pinning the AIDS epidemic on them.

My gay friends find this practice deplorable, too.

You really need to learn how to make the distinction.

Coketown said...

I wonder how the GRE would frame an analogy question like this.

Gun owners : Murderers ::

A) Homosexuals : Rapist pedophiles
B) Canaries : Birds
C) Pasta : Italians
D) Coketown : Awesome

It's like that stupid bumper sticker you see on old Subarus that says, "If you don't pray in my school, I won't think in your church." If you answered the analogy

51) Church : Pray ::

C) School : Think

You'd get that question WRONG! It's 'learn.' You won't learn in my church. But then you sound like a close-minded, stuffy jerk.

Inga said...

Chickelit, talk about weird and false, how did you come to that conclusion from my statement?

AF said...

The reason the gun community has to answer for this tragedy is that the policies they advocate are coming under attack and they have to decide whether and how to defend them. Stigmatization has very little to do with it. I'm sure some lefties have said bad things about gun owners and if they hurt your feelings, I apologize on their behalf. But to draw an analogy between pedophilia and homosexuality on one hand, and guns and killing people on the other, is blatant homophobia. Which will always draw a hearty fuck you from me.

Shouting Thomas said...

Palladian, at one point in my career, I was forced to sit through that movie, as a job demand.

The "facilitator" went to great length to pound home the message that President Reagan was the one who was really responsible for the AIDS epidemic.

This is now a common assertion of young gay activist men.

Astro said...

Hey, what's the legal fraternity going to do about these terrible analogies that law professors make.

And when is the linguist community going to fix it so I don't type the word anal every time I mention an analogy.

It's hilarious when some people fall all over themselves missing the freakin' point. Oh, snap.

Coketown said...

"Stigmatization has very little to do with it...Which will always draw a hearty fuck you from me."

Right. So you expect gun owners to answer left-wing dribble with cogent reasoning, but you think an adequate response to gun owners is "fuck you."

Maybe this explains why liberals are so stunned to find that we already had this "conversation on guns" they're presently calling for. The country had the conversation. You weren't listening. You were telling your opponents "fuck you." So we had it without you. And look who won. Calls for gun control will get no farther than any other infant's screaming temper tantrum.

chickelit said...

@Inga: I wasn't referring to your comment in this thread but rather to many conspicuous examples here and elsewhere in the past. Statements along the lines of "when are you conservatives going to get rid of ...."

Shouting Thomas said...

The conversation on guns seems to have the same rules as the conversation on race.

In other words...

Shut up and we'll tell you what to think.

Dr Weevil said...

So AF thinks there's a difference between making sure that selected people are "coming under attack" and "stigmatization" of those same people. Looks like AF doesn't get the analogy because he's too stupid or too bigoted to get it.

Of course, we already knew that garage mahal was that stupid and/or bigoted. So far from Instapundit thinking that "rape = gay", the analogy only works if he thinks (or rather knows) precisely the opposite. The whole point of the analogy is that serial boy-rapists like Sandusky are a minuscule percentage of gays, just as spree shooters are a minuscule percentage of gun-owners. Is that really so hard to grasp?

Palladian said...

You know, neither "side" of the political spectrum has come out looking very good during the surreal orgy of nonsense that followed an isolated crime in small town Connecticut. For every so-called "liberal" braying about guns (no one has yet explained to me why liberals should be against guns as a general rule, by the way), there's been a so-called "conservative" advocating opening up State-run quasi-prisons for the indefinite incarceration of anyone denounced as "strange". But even though both positions seem different, they both flow from the same lame-brained reflex to DO SOMETHING!!!

Chip Ahoy said...

Gun community.

But guns a problem, you see, because

It fosters a society of atomistic individuals, isolated before power. And each other. dundunduuuuuh!

Tim said...

"But to draw an analogy between pedophilia and homosexuality on one hand, and guns and killing people on the other, is blatant homophobia. Which will always draw a hearty fuck you from me."

Your logic is broken, you idiot.

The analogy isn't "pedophilia is to homosexuality" what "guns are to killing people," you idiot.

The analogy is "homosexuals are to pedophilia" what "guns owners are to gun deaths," you idiot.

There's a point there, that logically stands, you idiot.

Put your thinking cap on and see if you can find it, you idiot.

AF said...

"Right. So you expect gun owners to answer left-wing dribble with cogent reasoning, but you think an adequate response to gun owners is "fuck you.""

No, my response to bigots is fuck you. I have nothing against gun owners.

Shouting Thomas said...

But to draw an analogy between pedophilia and homosexuality on one hand, and guns and killing people on the other, is blatant homophobia. Which will always draw a hearty fuck you from me.

Discussion of gun owners as a group is "critical thinking."

Discussion of gays as a group is "blatant homophobia."

Funny, but it always works out that way, huh?

chickelit said...

@Inga: But it was an unwarranted snark on my part, directed at you, for which I sorry (but I hope you got the point).

creeley23 said...

I'm rather astonished that there are multiple commenters here who can't grasp this analogy as a fair comparison between two unfair rhetorical maneuvers.

Inga: How did you come to your conclusion that the analogy was weird, false, and overreach?

Paul said...

"The reason the gun community has to answer for this tragedy is that the policies they advocate are coming under attack and they have to decide whether and how to defend them."

Penn and Teller did one of their "Bullshit" videos on gun control. It's up on Ace's blog right now and I suggest if you want to see the "gun community's" defense you watch it.

And do you even know what a semiautomatic gun is? I know you use the term because you think it sounds so scary, but even a revolver is technically "semiautomatic".

garage mahal said...

One regret I have is all the wasted time, money, and resources my side has spent on gay equality where it could have spent on something else.

Come to the conclusion that gays really are a nasty fucking bunch of people.

Inga said...

Chickelit, huh? What the hell are you going on about?

Whatever, how strange to bring it up in this thread. Why not stay on topic and quit dragging your personal grievances about me in here?

Shouting Thomas said...

And, young white men, as we know from reading Christy Whams the Pole, are out there in hordes committing violent crime in retaliation for being deprived of what they knew was rightfully theirs.

Sayyid said...

When did the left become unable to respond to nonliteral arguments, and start to resort to "your argument is offensive" whenever people provide them?

Because that was the day the left stopped being the "intellectual" party.

Inga said...

Garage, I do not "get" a conservative gay person. Some think they are classic liberals, but in truth are simply mixed up conservative/ libertarians.

Shouting Thomas said...

"House niggers" is the term you're searching for, Inga.

Coketown said...

Garage, I do not "get" a conservative gay person. Some think they are classic liberals, but in truth are simply mixed up conservative/ libertarians.

If you can't fathom why a gay person would be conservative, that's your handicap--not ours. But thanks for diagnosing us as "mixed up." We're just confused! Send us to rehabilitation. Maybe electro-shock therapy will cure us!

You really are a thin thread away from the very people you criticize. You dumb bitch.

Astro said...

What's NASCAR gonna do about those rednecks that get drunk and kill people?

Inga said...

Yep conservative gays are simply mean , nasty and confused.

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Michael Haz said...

When is the fat community going to do something about Chris Christie?

tiger said...

Looks like someone has gotten his nuts is twist.

Don't propose stupid rhetorical questions if you don't want snarky, rhetorical answers.

Idiot.

It is as absurd, bigoted and offensive to even ASK the question so you should be ashamed of supporting the idea that anyone who owns guns as a responsibility to deal with a situation brought on by a man who was insane.

Again, idiot.

n.n said...

This is an apt analogy because the Left has established standing to judge people by the "color of their skin". That is to extrapolate from the individual to condemn whole classes of people described by incidental and especially singular features, even when separated by generations, continents, etc.

As for murders, let's review the table:

FBI: Murder by State, Types of Weapons, 2009

The weapon of choice is a "firearm". Then knives (e.g. box cutters), other, and, of course, blunt force trauma. Well, people are resourceful, and criminals most of all.

Shouting Thomas said...

No, Inga, you are mean, nasty and confused.

I know almost entirely conservative gay men. "Birds of a feather," of course accounts for a lot of this.

Gay men like.... this is going to amaze you... men!

Many men don't fully identify as gay until they are in their 30s. So, they often were once married to a woman and have children.

The family courts do not treat these men well. At least, they did not in the past.

Inga said...

Well, at least the ones on Althouse that comment regularly. Who is that nice bald gay guy that had on the Mardi Gra beads, he was quite pleasant.

DADvocate said...

The absurdity of it IS the point,

Yep. But, curiously, few, if any of the lefties, get it. Either they're too stupid, too bigoted or too narrow minded. (None of those are good things. Just to let you lefties in on that.)

Paul said...

"Yep conservative gays are simply mean , nasty and confused."

And there folks you have as clear an example of pure bigotry as you could wish for.

tiger said...

garage mahal said...
Insta thinks rape = being gay.

I'm sure Palladian will be along anytime lecturing liberals.


Your ability - such as it is - to intentionally distort other peoples' points is truly something to behold.

It's interesting that any person could derive enjoyment from being so intentionally obtuse.

Inga said...

Ah, yes Shouting Thomas the expert on gay men, so how do the gay men here feel about Shouting Thomas speaking for them? Did y'all turn gay at 30 or so, like ST says?

Robin said...

Actually AF, you should be ashamed of your intentional misrepresentation of the point of the comment.

We know that george mahal is far beyond shame in his continuous misrepresentations and falsehoods.

garage mahal said...

But thanks for diagnosing us as "mixed up." We're just confused! Send us to rehabilitation. Maybe electro-shock therapy will cure us!

I agree with Palladian that rounding up "dangerous" people into state run mental health facilities is a horrific idea. Full stop. I also understand someone not wanting to be labeled or put into a political party or camp. I get all that.

Doesn't change the fact that you and Palladian are just insufferable pricks to the core. And it seems to be a gay male trait.

Inga said...

Nope I love liberal gay folks, I "get" them. They make sense.

garage mahal said...

Your ability - such as it is - to intentionally distort other peoples' points is truly something to behold.

Here is what Instapundit said:

"I dunno. What is the gay community going to do about Penn State?"

Obviously, he equated rape with being gay. If you disagree, what is your take?

Shouting Thomas said...

You don't read well, either, Inga, which I already knew.

"Many" does not equal "y'all."

Coketown said...

Doesn't change the fact that you and Palladian are just insufferable pricks to the core. And it seems to be a gay male trait.

You just feel that way because we disagree. See Inga's comment below yours. You two "get" and therefore like people who agree with you. All others are "pricks."

It's called bigotry. You should learn its symptoms. You spend enough time diagnosing it in others.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shouting Thomas said...

Not long now until Inga detonates in rage!

Gay men, for Christ sake, will you please be what Inga wants you to be?

You're so cute and cuddly when you do!

Inga said...

Muppet man, I don't speak for garage.

ST, rage? LMAO, you're too much.

creeley23 said...

Obviously, he equated rape with being gay. If you disagree, what is your take?

GM: Are you really this dense? Reynolds was equating the rhetoric of:

* calling out the gay community for a case of multiple rapes
* calling out the gun community for a case of mass killing

Reynolds, in case you don't get it, disagrees with both versions of this argument.

garage mahal said...

You two "get" and therefore like people who agree with you. All others are "pricks."

No, I'm saying most gay males, period, that I've been in contact with, are pricks.

DADvocate said...

Nope I love liberal gay folks, I "get" them. They make sense.

Wow. What a bigoted statement. I see the underlying bigotry there. Tell us about the "good" gays that know their place. I bet you even have one or two over for dinner ever so often. How good of you.

Dr Weevil said...

Wait, is garage mahal actually so stupid that he can fail to see a reductio ad absurdum right in front of his nose?

I'll try once more to explain it.

InstaPundit thinks that it would be absurd and ridiculous to blame all gays for the minuscule percentage of gays who are serial rapists. His whole point depends on us seeing just how ridiculous that would be. He is trying to get morons like AF and garage mahal to understand that is equally ridiculous to blame all gun-owners for the minuscule percentage of gun-owners who commit mass murders. But some lefties are so in love with the idea of calling all gun-owners and NRA members and Republicans mass-murderers that they are unable to understand a simple analogical reductio ad absurdum.

Shouting Thomas said...

Jeremy Lin returns to the Garden, and triumphs in the first half!

garage mahal said...

InstaPundit thinks that it would be absurd and ridiculous to blame all gays for the minuscule percentage of gays who are serial rapists

That's the same ridiculous excuse some Catholics use to excuse rapes by priests in their Church. "They were just gay!"

Inga said...

DaDvocate, has nothing to do with good or bad, has to do with understanding and respecting liberal gay people more, because they don't vote against their own best interests, kind of like many of you conservatives who are not millionaires do, or female straight conservatives do. They simply seem to HAVE more common sense, thus making more sense to me.

Marshal said...

garage mahal said...
Doesn't change the fact that you and Palladian are just insufferable pricks to the core. And it seems to be a gay male trait.


I think he's trying to tell us he's gay.

DADvocate said...

is garage mahal actually so stupid

Yes. And, even worse, intentionally so. He knows exactly what is being said. Not by Reynolds, he's simply quoting a reported Facebook post. But garage likes to play these games because he thinks...

Who knows what he thinks. He just likes to toss out the intellectual reasoning of a kindergartener and act like he's written "The Republic."

Shouting Thomas said...

Keep digging, Inga!

Dr Weevil said...

OK, I get it. The little picture to the right of garage mahal's name is an actual photograph of his brain.

Alternatively, he's a lying asshole who, for either hate or money, is doing his best to destroy the Althouse comments section by posting comments designed to lower its quality as much as possible.

His last doesn't make any sense at all. "That's the same excuse . . . ." In what sense is InstaPundit making an "excuse" for anything?

Palladian said...

One regret I have is all the wasted time, money, and resources my side has spent on gay equality where it could have spent on something else.

Come to the conclusion that gays really are a nasty fucking bunch of people.


See? The Democrat mindset! "You OWE us your fealty, faggot! Look what WE did for you! If you don't shut your mouths and support us, we'll insult you, bash you and do our best to fuck you up, you dirty little traitor!"

Well you can go fuck yourself. Gay people got where they got without your charity. You and your party, with your slave owner mentality, can go and find someone to fuck you, because you probably can't get it up long enough to fuck yourselves.

Garage, I do not "get" a conservative gay person. Some think they are classic liberals, but in truth are simply mixed up conservative/ libertarians.

And you're a brain-dead, drink-addled, frustrated old cow who pathetically skulks around here, littering comments with your "me too!" bullshit, sucking up to whoever will deign to give you the time of day, probably looking for a schlub that's desperate enough to throw you a fuck.

edutcher said...

When are black people going to do something about Al Sharpton?

Better yet, when are white people going to do something about Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm?

TosaGuy said...

Yes, smearing millions of poeple who didn't do anything wrong is absurd, bigoted and offensive any way you cut it.

So why does the left engage in it so enthusiastically?


Because they're absurd, bigoted and offensive.

AF said...

The reason the gun community has to answer for this tragedy is that the policies they advocate are coming under attack and they have to decide whether and how to defend them.

No, it's the policies of the gun grabbers that are under attack and they need to come up with a good reason why someone in that school wasn't armed and trained to use that firearm.

Inga said...

Keep on telling gay men how they feel ST, I'm sure they see the " truth" in your wise words!

Dr Weevil said...

Is gm gay? More likely, if gays who hang out with him are all assholes, it's because he's an asshole himself. I mean, like is attracted to like, but that applies to assholes as well as gays. If he were to start acting like a minimally decent human being, non-asshole gays (and straights) would be more likely to want to spend time with him.

Palladian said...

And, yes, I can be a base and nasty prick, to those who deserve it.

Coketown said...

I think he's trying to tell us he's gay.

Ha! Love it!

DADvocate said...

has to do with understanding and respecting liberal gay people more, because they don't vote against their own best interests, kind of like many of you conservatives who are not millionaires do, or female straight conservatives do. They simply seem to HAVE more common sense, thus making more sense to me.

More bigotry. You're saying they're selfish and only think of themselves when voting. Nice of you to recognize that conservatives can think of others and not vote out of selfishness. Apparently, selfishness is common sense to you. So many people only thinking of themselves on the "liberal" side. No wonder the world is so fucked up.

I'm a libertarian, btw.

Chip S. said...

I think he's trying to tell us he's gay.

Nah.

None of the gays I know would be caught dead in an "I Tapa Kegga" t-shirt.

Of course, none of them is from WI.

Inga said...

Palladian, quit being a neurotic bitch. You think these anti gay bigots here really LIKE you? Accept you? Dumbass.

AF said...

"Actually AF, you should be ashamed of your intentional misrepresentation of the point of the comment."

No, I didn't misrepresent the point of the comment. The point of the comment is that gun owners shouldn't be blamed for the fact that some people commit murder with guns. But the premise of the comment is that guns -- the defining characteristic of the gun community -- bear the same relationship to killing people as homosexuality -- the defining characteristic of the homosexual community -- does to pedophilia. And that is flagrantly homophobic.

Shouting Thomas said...

Keep on telling gay men how they feel ST, I'm sure they see the " truth" in your wise words!

Uh, that's what you just did, Inga!

This reminds me of the time you went into that insane spiel about how I loved my late wife because she was a submissive Asian woman.

She pulled down a six figure salary and was my partner in the music biz.

You are the one who holds that "stereotype" of Asian women, Inga.

You projected it onto me. You're doing the same now with gay men.

AF said...

"Doesn't change the fact that you and Palladian are just insufferable pricks to the core. And it seems to be a gay male trait."

garage, since I'm on the record as swearing at homophobic comments: What the fuck?

Shouting Thomas said...

Inga, you are so deliriously stupid that I sometimes feel bad about pointing it out.

But you seem to be a glutton for the punishment.

Shouting Thomas said...

Oh, well, time to watch the end of the Knicks game.

Normally, I'm a Knick fan, but I'm suspending that tonight in favor of Jeremy Lin and the Rockets.

Inga said...

ST, you are one weird man. Dontcha have an orgy to attend or something?

Marshal said...

DADvocate said...
has to do with understanding and respecting liberal gay people more, because they don't vote against their own best interests, kind of like many of you conservatives who are not millionaires do, or female straight conservatives do.


Interesting she admitted the left votes Democrat for the goodies. It's hard to stay in character all the time.

DADvocate said...

Palladian, quit being a neurotic bitch. You think these anti gay bigots here really LIKE you? Accept you? Dumbass.

That's right, Palladian. Toe the Democrat/liberal line or pay the price. Inga really likes you. That's why she calls you "dumb ass." (Corrected the "dumbass" spelling.)

AF said...

"Yep conservative gays are simply mean , nasty and confused."

Inga: What the fuck?

Bob said...

I don't know what the "gun community" is going to do. But I've bought bulk ammo and will be buying magazines because I can see those will be taxed or banned. Because showing that we're "doing something" is critical; doing something effective is optional.

Inga said...

Well I'm on record as saying Palladian is simply a neurotic evil bitch, doesn't matter if he has a dick or not.

dvlfish13 said...

So, Garage and Inga have come out as homophobes? Sheesh, the political venn diagrams are getting ... complicated.

Or is this one of those "he loved humanity but hated his own family" kind of things - where gays in general are, you know, humanity, and the ones around here are, er, family.

Lucien said...

It appears that Mr. Lanza may not have been a member of any affinity based community. In the Penn State situation, the rapist was a member of the football community and the coaching community, and I think both of those have tried to "do something" about it.
But it seem fair to say that Jerry Sandusky was not part of the "gay community" and Mr. Lanza was not part of the "gun community" -- so that it is unfair to ask what either of those communities is going to "do" about either situation.

DADvocate said...

But the premise

You've got the premise wrong. Both premises are wrong. That's the point.

Marshal said...

AF said...
"Actually AF, you should be ashamed of your intentional misrepresentation of the point of the comment."

No, I didn't misrepresent the point of the comment. The point of the comment is that gun owners shouldn't be blamed for the fact that some people commit murder with guns. But the premise of the comment is that guns -- the defining characteristic of the gun community -- bear the same relationship to killing people as homosexuality -- the defining characteristic of the homosexual community -- does to pedophilia. And that is flagrantly homophobic.


Maybe if you removed your sanitized "killing people" and replaced it with "murdering children" it would seem closer.

Palladian said...

garage, since I'm on the record as swearing at homophobic comments: What the fuck?

AF, I don't know anything about you, but you at least seem consistent, forthright and honest in your beliefs. To people like garage mahal, it's not a clash of ideas or values, it's a bitter, angry game of us and them. And when you become one of "them", then expect to be on the receiving end of whatever nastiness he can throw. These are the kinds of people who opportunistically use minorities like gay people as mere pawns in advancing their party, and drop us when we don't play along.

DADvocate said...

Well I'm on record as saying Palladian is simply a neurotic evil bitch, doesn't matter if he has a dick or not.

Inga, you've got me confused now. Do you hate men or gays, or both? What about transexuals with dicks? (How do transexuals vote, btw?)

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Chip S. said...

How do transexuals vote, btw?

They're always ready to cross party lines.

Inga said...

AF, I'm being honest, I can't stand stupid people who belong to a party that if it had it's way it way would make their very existence illegal.

To vote against your right to marry, to vote against your own equal human rights, no it doesn't make any sense to me. Being a conservative gay person does not compute.

DADvocate said...

I can't stand stupid people who belong to a party that if it had it's way it way would make their very existence illegal.

Exactly. That's why I'm not a Democrat.

Cap'n Chaos said...

I guess nobody has informed you folks that the vast majority of pederasts are in fact hetrosexuals?

Inga said...

Dad, I have nothing against penises.

Cap'n Chaos said...

I guess nobody has informed you folks that the vast majority of pederasts are in fact hetrosexuals?

dvlfish13 said...

"Being a conservative gay person does not compute."

Maybe, you could come up with some sort of therapy to cure them of their false consciousness (conservatism). Call it something catchy like, say, exodus or something.

Maguro said...

You ungrateful homos! After all garage has done for you! LOL.

Dr Weevil said...

Inga "can't stand stupid people"! How does she live with herself?

DADvocate said...

Dad, I have nothing against penises.

Been a long time, huh.

Inga said...

They have a right to be gay, they have a right to be conservative, they have a right to vote against themselves, I have the right to dislike that and call it out as nonsensical.

wyo sis said...

Althouse community : idiotic commenters :: gay community : pedophilia
How does that work?

Chip S. said...

I guess nobody has informed Captain Chaos of Bayes' Theorem.

(This is not an anti-gay comment. It's an anti-dumbass comment.)

SPImmortal said...

I guess nobody has informed you folks that the vast majority of pederasts are in fact hetrosexuals?

------------------

The vast majority of people are heterosexuals. Per capita would be what matters, if you cared to look into it.

But that's not the point of the post, obviously. It is just a means of comparison. And a biting one at that.

DADvocate said...

I guess nobody has informed you folks that the vast majority of pederasts are in fact hetrosexuals?

Nor that an even greater majority of gun owners don't murder people.

Dr Weevil said...

Not so well, wyo sis. Idiots are a much larger percentage of our community than pedophiles are of gays. Or maybe they just seem that way because some of them post their idiot thoughts so frequently.

Inga said...

Ah well, back to my crocheting. I'm crocheting a penis warmer for my male friend for when he goes ice fishing, as a Christmas gift. I'm very thoughtful that way.

SPImmortal said...

They have a right to be gay, they have a right to be conservative, they have a right to vote against themselves, I have the right to dislike that and call it out as nonsensical.

-------------------

Maybe they're all gay millionares or something.

Or maybe they're just afraid they and millions of others won't have a pot to piss in when Obama's through with America.

Gahrie said...

Obviously, he equated rape with being gay. If you disagree, what is your take?



Instapundit clearly was using what he thought, and what he expected his readers to think, was an absurd remark (homosexuals are responsible for Penn State) to illustrate an absurd remark (gun owners are responsible for school shootings).

Patrick said...

Granted, I've read only a few of the comments (to about 7:20 or so), but do the lefties here really not realize that the analogy works precisely because it is false that "all gays are responsible for Penn State" and it is also fault that "all gun owners are responsible for Newtown?

It is not bigoted in the least, and AF's assertion to the contrary (which may well have been corrected by now) are wrong. Garage too.

SPImmortal said...

Granted, I've read only a few of the comments (to about 7:20 or so), but do the lefties here really not realize that the analogy works precisely because it is false that "all gays are responsible for Penn State" and it is also fault that "all gun owners are responsible for Newtown?

It is not bigoted in the least, and AF's assertion to the contrary (which may well have been corrected by now) are wrong. Garage too.

----------------------

Whay bother explaining it? Either they don't get what is obvious, or they're intentionally not getting it.

Either stupid or malicious.

DADvocate said...

It is not bigoted in the least, and AF's assertion to the contrary (which may well have been corrected by now) are wrong. Garage too.

We all know the part about garage being wrong, even before he writes anything.

Chip S. said...

I'm crocheting a penis warmer for my male friend

Uhh, isn't every woman's crotch one of those?

At least in principle?

AF said...

"AF, I'm being honest, I can't stand stupid people who belong to a party that if it had it's way it way would make their very existence illegal.

To vote against your right to marry, to vote against your own equal human rights, no it doesn't make any sense to me. Being a conservative gay person does not compute."

Look, I don't disagree that all else being equal, gay people have more reasons to be liberal than conservative at this moment in time. But you are greatly overstating the case. And if your reason for insulting gay conservatives as a group is that you are so strongly opposed to homophobia that you can't help it . . . maybe you should rethink that logic.

Dr Weevil said...

"Either stupid or malicious"? False dichotomy, SPI!

kentuckyliz said...

I know conservative gays...they are the first gays I ever knew when I became aware such people existed. So, that, to me, seems normal.

How can gays be so lefty, when the left hates small business?! Many gays are small business owners!

Amirite or amirite.

AprilApple said...

Inga doesn't understand black conservativeness, either.

Inga said...

Sorry... Busy .... Crocheting. But I will take what you have to say into consideration AF.

AprilApple said...

How dare gay people step off the plantation to think for themselves? Come on. Rachael Maddow, the leftwing propagandist lesbian extraordinaire, has all the answers.
Don't think.

Dr Weevil said...

In what sense would any Republican office-holder even try to make gays' "very existence illegal"? Does Inga have the Republican Party somehow mixed up with the Muslim Brotherhood?

wyo sis said...

It's an obviously good analogy.
The reaction is coming from the liberals who are suddenly faced with the kind of ignorant conclusions they are prone to jump to. Conservatives, being constantly maligned unfairly, have learned how to make a decent argument, and accept simple truths.

Mark said...

Vapours. I smell vapours.

AF said...

"do the lefties here really not realize that the analogy works precisely because it is false that "all gays are responsible for Penn State" and it is also fault that "all gun owners are responsible for Newtown?"

No, I don't realize that all. Both statements are false, but the analogy is homophobic.

Inga said...

Mark, he who smelt it, dealt it.

wyo sis said...

Or maybe the analogy is gun phobic.

Mary Beth said...

Inga said...

DaDvocate, has nothing to do with good or bad, has to do with understanding and respecting liberal gay people more, because they don't vote against their own best interests, kind of like many of you conservatives who are not millionaires do, or female straight conservatives do. They simply seem to HAVE more common sense, thus making more sense to me.

12/17/12 7:49 PM


If you believe all of those people vote against their self interest you are either very arrogant or stupid. Maybe both.

Titus said...

Gross.

Mark said...

Seriously, considering every penis is a potential sexual assault weapon, they should be strictly regulated.

Hell, let's just ban that particular pound of flesh.

Maybe the government can offer a buy-back program. What do you think the government will decide a dick is worth?

Paco Wové said...

"the analogy is homophobic."

Why?

garage mahal said...

The ankle biting Althouse hall monitor Igor speaks. Takes after his flatulent little rodent/terrier that way I bet. All yip, and really do think they rule the world.

Submit & Obey!

Chip S. said...

It's worse than that, Mary Beth. She appears to believe David Axelrod.

That's a whole other level of stupid.

Mark said...

The problem with guns of course is their ability to do harm. How much harm through the ages has testosterone caused.

Off with their balls too.

creeley23 said...

No, I don't realize that all. Both statements are false, but the analogy is homophobic.

AF: And the other side of the analogy would then be -- gunownerphobic, yes?

Paco Wové said...

Can anybody decipher what GM is babbling about now?

AF said...

The gun community opposes banning assault weapons, which is about to be reintroduced as a direct result of this tragedy. What policy proposals arising out of the Penn State travesty did the gay community oppose?

AprilApple said...

I know "conservative" gays too. They are hilarious and smart and they understand business. They are not so much "conservative" as they are eyes-wide-open realists and they cannot stand the economic illiteracy on the left. They think homos who blindly sing the praises of the democrat party are idiots who vote against their own interests.

Mark said...

And of course, lady parts have led to wars and immoral behavior throughout history. Time for a lot of relatively minor surgery.

Hagar said...

It is my understanding that the statistics show that overall violent crime, including shootings, is down in the U.S. over the last 50 years.
However, the incidence of "mass killings," defined as more than 4 deaths are on an upward trend.
That is so, despite very much stringent gun laws being enacted and enforcement put into practice over the same period.

So, I would say that there is someething else going on here that our liberal "friends" do not want to look at, and that is why the fingerpointing and hullabalou about the "gun culture."

Seeing Red said...

--has to do with understanding and respecting liberal gay people more, because they don't vote against their own best interests, kind of like many of you conservatives who are not millionaires do, or female straight conservatives do. They simply seem to HAVE more common sense, thus making more sense to me.---

Vote your privates.

Is that how you define "your own self-interest," Inga?

Seriously, who are you to tell me what my own best interest is?

Who died and left you boss?

Mark said...

AF, sarcasm is biting you in the ass.

AF said...

"Why?"

Because the premise of the analogy is that guns -- the defining characteristic of the gun community -- bear the same relationship to killing people as homosexuality -- the defining characteristic of the homosexual community -- does to child rape.

creeley23 said...

However, the incidence of "mass killings," defined as more than 4 deaths are on an upward trend.

Hagar: Cite? That's my impression too.

I was arguing that point with a friend and could have used an outside source.

Shouting Thomas said...

This entire thread should become a South Park episode.

Chip S. said...

This entire thread should become a South Park episode.

I was just thinking that it had become one.

creeley23 said...

Because the premise of the analogy is that guns -- the defining characteristic of the gun community -- bear the same relationship to killing people as homosexuality -- the defining characteristic of the homosexual community -- does to child rape.

AF: I'll bet you didn't do well on the SAT analogy section.

chickelit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
chickelit said...

The indignation expressed here by lefties has little to with feigned outrage at perceived homophobia. Lefties don't blame gun owners; rather, they perceive gun owners as impeding their "do something" instincts. Gun owners continue to obstruct gun control.

Of course gays were not responsible for Penn State, but good lefties were seen as scheming to remedy it; indeed some Progressive Sullivanists called for banning or decreasing emphasis on college (and professional) football altogether.

That's what a good hypocritical lefty does when confronted with a problem--ban something.

AF said...

"AF: I'll bet you didn't do well on the SAT analogy section."

I'll take that bet. But perhaps you could explain where I've gone wrong in this case.

Mark said...

I would argue that guns are NOT the defining characteristic of the "gun community."

I don't own one, yet I support mass gun ownership.

On the other hand, everyone has an asshole, and most men have dicks, but that doesn't mean I have to support buggery. Mind you, I don't oppose it between consenting adults, but that's a choice I make and not a compulsion.

We are defined by our actions. The child killer isn't defined by his gun. The child raper isn't defined by his genitals.

Grow a mind.

Mark said...

AF, I guess I took a side bet and didn't know it.

You probably did pretty well on the SAT. Too bad once you got the score you decided to let the skill rot.

Paul said...

"What is the gun community going to do about this tragedy?"

Offer a bill to allow teachers, if they get training, to pack a gun.

Offer a bill to allow institutionalization of insane people.

Offer a bill to give life sentences to those conspiring to kill anyone at a school or mall.

Offer a bill to allow nation wide recognition of any state CCW.

Offer a bill to give jail time to anyone who sees a blog or post threatening to kill people and failing to report it to the police.

See there are plenty of things the gun community can do!

chickelit said...

@AF declares: Because the premise of the analogy is that guns -- the defining characteristic of the gun community --

You Sir, are a bigoted "misogunist."

Paco Wové said...

"Because the premise of the analogy is that guns -- the defining characteristic of the gun community -- bear the same relationship to killing people as homosexuality -- the defining characteristic of the homosexual community -- does to child rape."

No, I don't think so. The premise is that both are absurd -- the gun "community" (whatever that is) is no more responsible for crimes committed by people with guns than gays (as a "community") are for people who commit homosexual assaults.

You could rephrase that with all sorts of groups and all sorts of crimes; I assume gays were chosen because they're a liberal pet group du jour.

MadisonMan said...

Someone who was a member of the Gun Community committed the crime in Connecticut (where the Gun Community is defined, I guess, as someone with a gun).

The analogy works if Jerry Sandusky is a member of the Gay Community. Is he? And if he is, why? (I ask that because he is apparently happily married (to a delusional woman, but still....), which argues against his homosexuality.

creeley23 said...

AF: Your setup is way off. As I explained to GM, the analogy is between two false rhetorical arguments that have the same structure.

* The gay community must answer for the gay rapes at Penn State
* The gun owner community must answer for the gun killings at Newtown.

Note the symmetry. The fallaciousness is the same in both cases.

* Gays as a community don't support gay rape.
* Gun owners as a commuity don't support gun murders.

This is the opposite of homophobia. It's a refusal to smear the gay community for the crimes of a demented individual.

Paco Wové said...

Neither analogy works very well, so I wouldn't spend much time on them.

AF said...

Mark, I agree that the gun community is defined by political support for gun rights, i.e. opposition to gun control.

Which is precisely why the analogy fails so miserably. Like it or not, the Sandy Hook tragedy is reigniting a debate over gun control, particularly a ban on assault weapons. The gun community has historically been on one side of that debate. That's why the gun community has to figure out what to do about this tragedy. It's not because individual gun owners are being held personally responsible for the murders. But the gun community is being drawn into a public debate.

What public debate was the gay community drawn into, or should have been drawn into, out of Penn State?

Paco Wové said...

"That's why the gun community has to figure out what to do about this tragedy. "

This is where you're not seeing the point.

Patrick said...

Because the premise of the analogy is that guns -- the defining characteristic of the gun community -- bear the same relationship to killing people as homosexuality -- the defining characteristic of the homosexual community -- does to child rape

No, not at all. It analogizes one bad thing (homosexual rape) done by a very small percentage of homosexuals with another bad thing (murder) done by a very small percentage of gun owners. It is the killing, not the gun ownership that is bad, and it is the raping, not the homosexuality that is bad. There is no suggestion at all that rape is a defining characteristic of gays.

If you've read Instapundit, you know enough that he is a supporter of gay rights, gay marriage and gays themselves. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that your misreading is not willful, but you do have this wrong.

TexasJew said...

It's an an absolutely perfect analogy

Great grab by Instapundit!

Patrick said...

Like it or not, the Sandy Hook tragedy is reigniting a debate over gun control, particularly a ban on assault weapons.

But the assertion of the analogy is (and I believe it is correct) that it makes no more sense to hold the gun community responsible for Sandy Hook than it does for the gay community to be held responsible to do something post Penn State.

Patrick said...


This is the opposite of homophobia. It's a refusal to smear the gay community for the crimes of a demented individual.


Had this been at the top, this thread would (or at least should) be a lot shorter.

Maguro said...

Which is precisely why the analogy fails so miserably. Like it or not, the Sandy Hook tragedy is reigniting a debate over gun control, particularly a ban on assault weapons. The gun community has historically been on one side of that debate.

Maybe because banning "assault weapons" is a stupid idea and wouldn't have prevented this guy from killing a bunch of people.

Perhaps what you have in mind is a ban on all private firearm ownership? If so, just come out and say so instead of hiding behind bogus half-measures like banning "assault weapons".

Mark said...

A crime was committed. A hideous crime. Why is the "gun community" in any way responsible for that?

BTW, there is no such thing as an assault weapon, except as defined by law. What was used on those kids, as defined by law, wasn't an assault weapon. Look it up.

You, smart guy that you are, might also look up "Reductio ad absurdum".

cubanbob said...

All this trash talk about gays and guns is just that, trash. Be it on this thread or in the infinite number of blogs and blog comments its still trash. It's a distraction from the real issue of how we as a free people and a decent society handle the intractable problem of what to do with those who are truly crazy and dangerous along with those who are truly evil and dangerous.

A gun is an inanimate object. It's incapable of loading itself and positioning itself in a place to kill an individual or scores of people. The killer did that. Sandusky is a serial child rapist. Whether he raped boys or girls is besides the point. What he did is no more related to being gay than a serial rapist of girls is to being heterosexual. Sandusky might be in a clinical sense crazy but there is no doubt that he is evil.

Lanza was without doubt clinically crazy and his actions are without a doubt evil. Indeed if the press reports are correct the CT gun control laws did in a fashion work. He tried to buy a gun legally and was refused the purchase. But for his mother enabling him and she paid for that with her life, he could not have done what he did with a legally obtained gun. Had the school not been a gun free zone someone might have been able to stop him before he killed so many children. Truly it would have been a case of fighting fire with fire. In China last week a nut stabbed 22 kids. Most fortunately didn't die but the relative lack of deaths was t due to intent but rather the relative inefficiency of the weapon. But those that died are no less dead for being killed by a knife instead of a gun. Would the Newtown massacre been any less horrific and evil if the kids had been killed by a knife? Or if Lanza had somehow ran them over with a truck? Or killed them with a bomb?

Again what do we do in a free society to protect ourselves from the evil and or dangerous crazies without destroying our freedoms in the process?

Hagar said...

creely23,

There is an article on "Lucianne.com" right now.

wyo sis said...

No matter how you strain at it, it's still a great analogy. People with normal reactions and no gay agenda get it perfectly.

dvlfish13 said...

"Sandusky wasn't homosexual.
He was a pedophile."

And Adam whoever wasn't a gun owner, he was a murderer. Is this starting to sink in?

AF said...

"If you've read Instapundit, you know enough that he is a supporter of gay rights, gay marriage and gays themselves. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that your misreading is not willful, but you do have this wrong."

Well, it's a terrible analogy. If you're telling me that people believe it out of stupidity rather than bigotry, I guess I can't disprove that.

bagoh20 said...

"This is the opposite of homophobia. It's a refusal to smear the gay community for the crimes of a demented individual."

Which clearly shows who the real bigots are. The right did not blame homosexuality for Penn State, but the left cannot resist it's bigotry against gun owning citizens defending their rights - rights guaranteed clearly in the text for 2 centuries.

The bigots screaming about bigotry is kinda funny.

John Cunningham said...

It's way past the time to open up the lunatic asylums and commit seriously deranged people. we need to get a couple of million deranged boobs into the laughing academy.

Mark said...

Mind like a brick.

bagoh20 said...

"Sandusky wasn't homosexual.
He was a pedophile."


Oh C'mon, grow up. He was both. He's queer, he's here, deal with it.

Also true is that the shooter was not a gun owner. He stole them. So that's where the analogy goes awry.

Hagar said...

creely23,
I don't remember that article citing statistics, but I know I have read this several times. Usually in connection with Britain's rapidly rising violent crime rate, including gun crimes, and there they have come to the point that they are confiscating pocket knives now.

Palladian said...

It's way past the time to open up the lunatic asylums and commit seriously deranged people. we need to get a couple of million deranged boobs into the laughing academy.

Yes! Lock up anyone that acts "funny"! Lock up anyone who "bothers" anyone else! And trust in the State to make those decisions, and trust in the State to pay for the "couple of million" people!

That's the conservative way!!!

Palladian said...

Oh C'mon, grow up. He was both. He's queer, he's here, deal with it.

There is no evidence that Sandusky evinced any attraction to or interest in sexually developed men. That's not homosexuality, that's pedophilia.

MadisonMan said...

Also true is that the shooter was not a gun owner. He stole them.

Doesn't say owner. Just a member of the Gun Community (however that is defined)

hombre said...

Inga wrote: "Garage, I do not "get" a conservative gay person. Some think they are classic liberals, but in truth are simply mixed up conservative/ libertarians." 7:19 PM

What in the world are you talking about? What does being conservative, classic liberal or libertarian have to do with being gay - or not? (The question is rhetorical, because the answer is obviously, "nothing.")

cubanbob said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dr Weevil said...

"That's not homosexuality, that's pedophilia." False dichotomy alert! Did Sandusky have any interest in underage girls? If not, he was in fact a homosexual pedophile, just as Roman Polanski seems to be a heterosexual pedophile, who likes to screw little girls but not little boys, and Jimmy Savile (the BBC guy) seems to have been a bisexual pedophile, since he is reported to have had underage victims of both sexes. The gay community is no more responsible for Sandusky than the straight community is for Polanski (except for those who do support him, I guess) or the bisexual community for Savile (again, except for those who knew what he was up to and did nothing). It's really not complicated, unless you are trying to make it complicated.

chickelit said...

Sandusky wasn't homosexual.
He was a pedophile.


To use the PC lingo, he was a MSB which is a different flavor than MSG. Just ask Umami.

garage mahal said...

The analogy works if Jerry Sandusky is a member of the Gay Community. Is he? And if he is, why?

Better question: What did Sandusky get arrested for? Being gay?

But we'll just have to wait for the One True Enlightened Liberal to weigh in now won't we?

Any old liberal won't do either. And luckily, the One True Enlightened Liberal happens to be gay. Sa-Weet!

bagoh20 said...

"There is no evidence that Sandusky evinced any attraction to or interest in sexually developed men. That's not homosexuality, that's pedophilia."

There is no evidence that the murderer owned a gun, belonged to the NRA, or supported responsible gun ownership.

Sandusky sucked cock, and liked anal intercourse with males, not females.

If a grown man likes young girls, does that mean he's not straight?

n.n said...

Here's another problem for the Left. Not only have they established standing for "judging people by the color of their skin", but they also have selective standards for statute of limitations.

The problem is that communists, socialists, and other left-wing ideologues, were responsible for the mass murder of over 100 hundred million and enslavement of over a billion people in less than one century.

The problem is that their eugenics, "Roe vs Wade", and reproductive rights agendas are responsible for the abortion of human life before it literally has a voice or means to protest its premature termination.

The problem is that the history of murder and slavery committed by left-wing regimes can only be reasonably compared with the Caliphate (i.e. imperial) Muslims, but what the latter group achieved in a period exceeding one thousand years, the former groups achieved in less than one century.

There is a simply reason for the universal failure of left-wing ideology. It is designed to consolidate capital and power under the control of a minority interest (e.g. government), which selectively redistributes and grants favors in order to preserve the political, economic, and social standing of its minority leaders. The marginalization and evisceration of competing interests prevents peaceful avenues for accountability, which necessitates bloody revolutions in the spirit of the French Revolution.

So, what is the left-wing community -- mostly atheist or secular -- going to do about the commission, past and present, of the greatest civil and human rights violations in the history of mankind?

Perhaps it's time to step away from this certain, terminal path.

chickelit said...

There is no evidence that Sandusky evinced any attraction to or interest in sexually developed men. That's not homosexuality, that's pedophilia.

Unless he evinced attraction for little girls what reason is there to neutralize his attraction? Neuter him yes, but not a neutered descriptor.

WHat am I missing?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 306   Newer› Newest»