Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Map of the day

Andrew Sullivan (who else?) posts this map showing levels of online interest in homosexual dating by people calling themselves straight. Right. The level of activity goes from blue to green to yellow to orange to red -- that is, from Mayberry to Babylon.

Note the urban islands of homosexual interest in the otherwise straight areas of the old Confederacy -- which reminds me of these observations from Thomas Jefferson:

"I view great cities as pestilential to the morals, the health and the liberties of man. True, they nourish some of the elegant arts; but the useful ones can thrive elsewhere; and less perfection in the others, with more health, virtue and freedom, would be my choice."

"A city life offers you indeed more means of dissipating time, but more frequent, also, and more painful objects of vice and wretchedness."

So how do you explain Canada? Like this:

Bookmark and Share


At October 13, 2010 at 10:22 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's this, a new Canadian musical, Broke Back Mountie?

At October 13, 2010 at 10:35 PM , Blogger Old Rebel said...


That's the spirit!

At October 14, 2010 at 1:46 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

In the grand scheme of American society, shouldn't Andrew Sullivan be put in the same category of the recently outed pedophile Alex Knepper?

Am I too "retro", am I too old-fashioned? After the faggots and dykes, who will be the next "oppressed minority" that the leftists wail over? It's a tie between sheep-lovers and child molesters.

I'm sorry to be so blunt and brash but it's the truth.

At October 14, 2010 at 1:53 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Alas poor Nell. Since Dudley quit Doin'-Right she'll never be the same. Y'all do remember Dudley Do-Right don't you?

At October 14, 2010 at 9:52 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dutchy sez,

The cities all over remind me of pox pustules. And what's with New Mexico?! Too many isolated artist colonies up in the mountains?

God bless the Mississipians - isn't it the "poorest" state? I think not...

At October 14, 2010 at 5:55 PM , Blogger david7134 said...

This is really a well researched scientific effort. Ater all the data was accumulated from an online dating service. These people must be the same that are gathering the data for the climate warming "science".

On old saying that may be appropriate:
Montana (and likely Canada due to proximity) a country were men are men, women are men and sheep are nervous.

At October 14, 2010 at 8:33 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

It means nothing...all it says is that places in the south have the least amount of internet connections...

At October 15, 2010 at 1:50 AM , Anonymous Mike Foster said...

What a load of BS. I'm ashamed to see it on this site.

At October 15, 2010 at 8:13 AM , Blogger Old Rebel said...

Mike Foster,

I think we need to keep up with what our enemies are saying. Sullivan calls himself a "conservative" who wants same-sex marriage legalized as normal. I disagree with him. It's a sham argument, and we have to confront it, like it or not.

At October 15, 2010 at 12:28 PM , Blogger david7134 said...

There is a purpose behind this "marriage" thing and the don't ask don't tell policy. I am not sure exactly what is trying to be accomplished or why but I know that the whole truth is not on the surface.

I have a gay friend and recently asked him about the "marriage". I pointed out that all a marriage was just a contract between two people and that as far as I knew he could do the same here in Louisiana. His respose was that the gays wanted the state contract because of the cost. If they went to a lawyer the cost was very high. Now I am pretty good with people and could tell he was lying. I pointed out that you didn't need a lawyer for a standard contract and that the state contract was something that even heterosexuals tried to avoid or modify. That was not good enough.

The same goes for the military policy. I know enough of the military to realize that if you are projecting yourself sexually, even as a heterosexual, that you will get in trouble. I know many in the military that are gay and you can spot them a mile off. No one gives them an ounce of difficulty. Yet here they want some special consideration.

Special consideration is wrong for any person or group. In the military it can be death to someone or very disruptive. The underlying aspect of this movement needs to be fleshed out and exposed. I don't know anyone in my community that give a flip if someone is gay. Nor do they really care if gays are out dating or together. So what is the real issue. I do know churches that make it an issue, but I avoid those folks as they would likely find something wrong with me as well.

At October 15, 2010 at 1:53 PM , Blogger Old Rebel said...


I disagree that marriage is "just a contract between two people." Here are my thoughts on that topic.

At October 15, 2010 at 8:41 PM , Blogger david7134 said...

Perhaps I should have been a bit more explicit. Marriage is a sacrament of the church. As such, the church is the entity that determines who can and can't be married. But some how or another the state interjected themselves in the process and it is to the state that the gays are apply their efforts. The state defines marriage as a contract. If you have ever been through a divorce you would readily understand that contract and the nature in which the state imposes itself in private affairs. I readily agree that marriage is more than a contract. But that is exactly what gays are apparently arguing for. Otherwise, many churches would marry them and they can have a civil union via contract in almost any area. My point is that they want something more and that is not readily apparent to heterosexuals.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home