Innocence Lost, Sanity Found

Today there was a story in the NYTimes discussing “opposition” to appointment of James W. Holsinger as the new Surgeon General of the United States. This kind of controlled “opposition” is typical: there is some media coverage of the opposition then the candidate is slipped in, sometimes without any fanfare at all. There is no doubt in this writer’s mind that the plan is to nominate him.

Here is an excerpt with its citation:

Surgeon General Nominee Is Assailed for Church Role

By Neela Banerjee

Published: June 9, 2007

WASHINGTON, June 8 — President Bush’s nomination of Dr. James W. Holsinger Jr., a Kentucky cardiologist, to be surgeon general is drawing criticism from gay rights groups, physicians and lawmakers who say they are troubled by opinions critical of homosexuality that Dr. Holsinger has voiced in nearly 20 years as a high-ranking layman in the United Methodist Church.

Dr. Holsinger’s friends within the United Methodist Church and the medical community, however, are defending him as a professional who does not discriminate against people in his congregation or in his care.

The critics said they were worried that Dr. Holsinger might not serve gay men and lesbians fairly as surgeon general, the nation’s chief health educator, largely because of a report he wrote in 1991 for a United Methodist committee that essentially described male homosexuality as unnatural.

They also point to his service on the board of a Methodist group that in 1998 criticized the “radical homosexual/lesbian lobby” for trying to force the church “to grant approval to the practice of homosexuality.”

Critics have also cited Dr. Holsinger’s leadership of the Judicial Council of the United Methodist Church, the denomination’s highest court, which in late 2005 decided to reinstate a pastor who had been suspended for refusing to allow a gay man to join his congregation, a decision the church’s bishops later rejected.

“If he says, ‘In my religious tradition, homosexuality is considered sinful, unnatural,’ that’s his right,” said Joel Ginsberg, executive director of the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association. Citing opinions by medical associations that homosexuality is not a disorder, Mr. Ginsberg said, “But if he says it is pathological, he is speaking from a discredited scientific viewpoint.”

A good prong in the strategy of this red-herring article was to cover a fake “demonstration” (probably set up by one of various intelligence agency (“peace movements”) accusing him of being anti-gay because he wrote a letter one time to some religious organization saying that sex between men was “unnatural.”

This serves the purpose of telling the public that, to the media and other concerned organizations, this issue of whether or not this guy said he thinks gays are unnatural is very pertinent and totally important. It serves to paint the illusion that things as mundane as moral statements are as much of homosexuality as anyone in the media is even aware of; after all, the illusion goes, they are all totally innocent and naïve when it comes to gayness.

Accept when large numbers of high ranking sophistos are caught red-handed with thousands of credit card receipts from Washington D.C. underage call boy services, like happened in 1989.

Well, what they say to that history is: nothing. They just shut up about it. Then they put out these stories about extremely less interesting issues and act like those are at the pinnacle of newsworthiness, as racy as things can get, and act totally incredulous with a totally straight face at the appalling nature of what this guy wrote down about gays!

Since I am not sensitive anymore to the immorality of slanderous speech (the media is the Kingdom of Unfounded Libelonia), I can ask these questions. What about what he possibly sticks in the anus of gays? Do they even care? No, because, they are all living an extremely sexually liberal lifestyles while they prescribe genital-guilt to the unwitting masses who know nothing of tantric bliss, kama sutra, or "sex majick" with infants and toddlers. The masses must remain so monogamous that natural curiosities we have about others should make us want to self-flagellate

I would have to say that the fact that this guy was a high-ranking member of a Christian church, which puts him in the company of many people who not only know plenty about homosexuality but actually train young boy in the art, is much more newsworthy than his feelings on gayness.

There is really an issue with his being a supposed "radical homosexual" hater though. Will he promote even more AIDS “prevention” and target gay people with “life-saving” AIDS drugs? Probably, or he would not be being nominated, stupid.