2,732
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 139:
Line 139: + +
no edit summary
Please also contain your ridiculous comments about the "homosexual agenda." The idea of a group working collectively, in secret, and evilly, is preposterous, unsupportable, and a conspiracy theory that rivals even your commonly overreaching assumptions. I would read the "homosexual agenda" article, but it's been locked to prevent opposing viewpoints, since long ago, where I first voiced my criticism of it.-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 20:24, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
Please also contain your ridiculous comments about the "homosexual agenda." The idea of a group working collectively, in secret, and evilly, is preposterous, unsupportable, and a conspiracy theory that rivals even your commonly overreaching assumptions. I would read the "homosexual agenda" article, but it's been locked to prevent opposing viewpoints, since long ago, where I first voiced my criticism of it.-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 20:24, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
:RobS, I don't get the import of the quotes you've added. They don't seem to say that homophobia isn't bad; just that it isn't as bad as liberals make it sound?-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 20:42, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
== Stop Editorializing ==
== Stop Editorializing ==