So I’m looking at the Google News headlines this morning, and once again I see that the militant gay agenda is being just too damn hard on people, and Mr. Adrian Sobers down in the Barbados takes exception to that…

I HAVE RESIGNED myself to the fact that the abuse of the word "intolerant" is a permanent fixture in this dear country of ours. Intolerant is now almost always (mis)used as a synonym for disagree.

I am "labelled" [sic] as "intolerant" if I disagree with the homosexual lifestyle (or the idea that all roads lead to Rome).

Has a catchy ring to it doesn’t it?  Sorta like "I am labeled as antisemite if I disagree with the international Zionist conspiracy."  "I am labeled as racist if I disagree with the Negro’s lazy shiftless watermelon eating way of life." "I am labeled sexist if I disagree with feminazis who should just shut the fuck up when a man is talking."

I am labeled as intolerant if I lump homosexual people into one big idiotic stereotype that I can easily feel superior to.  I am labeled as intolerant if I’d rather talk about homosexuals as if they were a bunch of empty dancing scarecrows then living breathing human beings who have the same human needs I do.  I am labeled as intolerant if all I want to see when I look at teh gay are stereotypes that stroke my pathetic bar stool conceits.  I am labeled as intolerant if I just don’t want to see the people for the homosexuals.  Woe is me.  Woe, woe is me.

Oh…and he goes on in his editorial to cite NARTH junk science as proof that homosexuals can change.   And he concludes with a brief but rousing pulpit thumping diatribe about godlessness and evil and atonement.  How anyone could think he’s an intolerant asswipe is beyond me.

No Adrian, all roads don’t lead to Rome.  Some of them lead straight into the gutter.  Yours, for instance.