5,580
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 24:
Line 24: + + + +
Talk:Homosexual Historical Revisionism (view source)
Revision as of 20:39, November 11, 2008
, 20:39, November 11, 2008→But but but: new section
There are three claims in the article that the purpose of claiming various figures are gay is to smear various groups of people, but this doesn't hold water. First of all, some conservatives think that being called a homosexual is a smear, but certainly gays wouldn't think that, right? So while you might think it is a smear, it is not an "attempt to smear". Second of all, even if it ''were'' their intent, there's not been presented any evidence to this fact. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 15:36, 11 November 2008 (EST)
There are three claims in the article that the purpose of claiming various figures are gay is to smear various groups of people, but this doesn't hold water. First of all, some conservatives think that being called a homosexual is a smear, but certainly gays wouldn't think that, right? So while you might think it is a smear, it is not an "attempt to smear". Second of all, even if it ''were'' their intent, there's not been presented any evidence to this fact. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 15:36, 11 November 2008 (EST)
== But but but ==
I was going to put this along with my above comment, but I think I will keep them separated for clarity. Every claim of "being gay" has a reference of someone calling that person gay, but none of them have references that show that these people were not, in fact, gay. In other words, it's not HHR to call a spade a spade, so in order to claim HHR we need to show that these people were not gay. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 15:39, 11 November 2008 (EST)