Alan Keyes, the only true conservative in the race

[Josquin des Prez]

I'm an atheist. Alan Keyes would put me in camp. With something like Glaube macht frei over the wrought iron fence.

Considering his constant harping for the sovereignty of the people and the defense of our constitutional rights i don't see where you got the idea Keyes is some sort of nazi. Hell, he just left the Republican party precisely because they have been running counter to those principles in this last few decades.

[Bulldog]

This is just plain stupid. What does that even mean? There is no dint of logic behind this statement, you are just speaking emotionally. For the record, i don't share the religious view that homosexuals are degenerates and that their sexual preference is akin to bestiality and other such fetishes (even though many of them are trying their darn best to prove eitherwise), but it's pretty obvious to me the logically speaking, there's nothing normal about homosexuality.

That link is a hoot.  Just some guys doing what comes naturally (to them).  Wasn't Todd Palin in a few of those pics?

[(poco) Sforzando]

Somehow, that strikes me as an attempt to inflate the list of homosexual composers to drive the point that "gays" are perfectly normal even further. Correct me if i'm wrong.

You're wrong. Wrong, that is, in the sense that you're making an ad hominem argument, i.e., basing your rebuttal solely on your assumptions concerning the motives of those who argue Schubert was gay. The only issue is whether or not the available evidence confirms Schubert as gay or straight. (In other words, if a video of Schubert turned up showing him schtupping some cute little Ganymede he picked up on the Prater, the list of homosexual composers would be definitively augmented, regardless of whether anyone considers homosexuality perfectly normal or not.)

[adamdavid80]

I made no statement regarding whether homosexuals are "normal" or not, and your emotional outburst here betrays your real motives for lying about Schubert.

This is just plain stupid. What does that even mean? There is no dint of logic behind this statement, you are just speaking emotionally. For the record, i don't share the religious view that homosexuals are degenerates and that their sexual preference is akin to bestiality and other such fetishes (even though many of them are trying their darn best to prove eitherwise), but it's pretty obvious to me the logically speaking, there's nothing normal about homosexuality. It's amusing how liberals always harp in favor of science against the irrationality of the religious right, but science for them always stops short of dealing with such "sensitive" issues.

Dude...woooow....

"I make no claims that homosexuals are degenerates, but here's a link to a site that supports this concept".

What is illogical about homosexulaity?  Explain please.  You're not going to make that idiotic claim that even electrical appliances have "male" and "female" demarcations, are you?  

Yeah, it's an emotional issue when someone all but calls a large population abominable, immoral, illogical, destined for hell, etc.  Crazy, but jews during nazi germany got a little emotional about concentration camps.  Weird, but Japanese Americans got a little upset about internment camps during WWII.  Yeah, totally irrational, but African Amercians people got a little upset with being hanged for the color of their skin.

You DID say several posts down that Jay was trying to prove that homosexuals are perfectly normal.  I am apparently not the only one who interpreted that as you saying that OBVIOUSLY homosexuals are something other than normal.

I respect your right to say it, I overall am glad that you are at least forthright about your position, but I am sorry to see that someone with viewpoints like this can even still exist in this day and age.  It's more than a little heartbreaking.

[Jay F]

That link is a hoot.  Just some guys doing what comes naturally (to them).  Wasn't Todd Palin in a few of those pics?

That's hysterical, especially this one guy who's "all balls." And pissing on people, OMFG. Eeewww. What can I say? This is SO NOT my life, nor do things like that have anything to do with my life. Not representing, as the rap children say.

However, I can't help but wonder why the person who posted it happened to know about both the event and the webpage.

[adamdavid80]

I can't help but wonder why the person who posted it happened to know about both the event and the webpage.

Yikes!  Hey, Josquin, don't look now, but it looks like you just got fucked in the ass!

[Josquin des Prez]

However, I can't help but wonder why the person who posted it happened to know about both the event and the webpage.

I found it while browsing the Classical Music Guide forums. To be frank, i'm surprised it has gotten so little exposure. More proof of liberal bias in the media i guess. I'm also sure a lot of people living in San Fransisco took notice, particularly since it was shoved right in front of their eyes. I wonder if there were any passerby families in there. Amusing that liberals like to show so much outrage against the "bigoted" right but are so hush and quite when their own ranks engage in acts of dubious morality.

[adamdavid80]

I found it while browsing the Classical Music Guide forums. 

Suuuuuuuuuure that's how you found it.   

Question:  have you been able to pull your pants back on for a single second since finding that link?

[Jay F]

I found it while browsing the Classical Music Guide forums.

Proof?

[Josquin des Prez]

Proof?

Bottom of first page:

http://www.classicalmusicguide.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=23267&p=228331#p228331

[mozartsneighbor]

I already know the facts of the "controversy", which is why i was surprised when Jay F included Schubert in the list of "gay" composers even though there is no real proof. Somehow, that strikes me as an attempt to inflate the list of homosexual composers to drive the point that "gays" are perfectly normal even further. Correct me if i'm wrong.

Obviously there isn't any definite proof since Schubert lived in the early 19th century. What were you expecting? A period engraving showing Schubert at the head of the 1825 Vienna Pride Parade?
Homosexuality was illegal at that time and place and homosexuals were subject to police harassment and jail -- so Schubert, if he was homosexual, wouldn't have been shouting it from the rooftops. For most historical figures who lived prior to the 20th century and are suspected to have been homosexual, the proof is never totally conclusive and mostly circumstantial.
I read the Solomon article years ago and besides the interpretation of the "peacocks" quote there is other evidence that makes the question of Schubert's sexual orientation at least worth posing -- I don't remember all the details, but I remember that several in his circle of close friends were arrested on morals charges by the Vienna police relating to their homosexuality. Also, Schubert did live with Johaan Mayrhofer, a poet who is in fact known for certain to have been homosexual, for several years. They had what people reported to be a very intense relationship, of whatever kind it was, and they parted because a passionate quarrel and didn't see each other again. This together with the fact that Schubert is not known to have had real relationships with women raises the question, though it doesn't prove anything.
And if you read that letter exchange in the NY Times that Sforzando posted bellow, it is evident that these facts also stoke some suspicion in such eminent and reasonable scholars as Charles Rosen -- so, on the whole, it doesn't just seem like a Homintern (if there is actually such a thing) plot to take over Schubert's reputation.
In the 20th century composers it is much easier to answer these questions as evidence is more plentiful. So these we can known with a great degree of certainty were homosexual: Barber, Bernstein, Copland, Szymanowski, Saint Saens, Britten, Menotti, Diamond, Rorem, Wuorinen, Henze, Poulenc, Britten, Corigliano, Maxwell Davie, Adés, and Tippet, to mention a few.

[Jay F]

Bottom of first page:

http://www.classicalmusicguide.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=23267&p=228331#p228331

Obviously, SaulChanukah has a well-thought-out gayhating agenda: "How can you be an activist for a crime? for an offense? for an immortal act?"

I wonder if it is gay sex, or simply being a gay person, he considers immortality-making.

EDIT: Y'all should click this link, and go to the very bottom post, by a self-described woman who thinks the worst thing that ever happened was women's getting the vote. Her name is Chosen Barley. It was she who posted the link to that Penis and Piss Parade.

EDIT: It sounds as if "Josquin" might be "Anton Webern" on classicalmusicguide.com. "Anton Webern": "Spoken like a true liberal: emotionally laden, no real substance. You are appealing to feelings rather then reason."

[(poco) Sforzando]

Obviously, SaulChanukah has a well-thought-out gayhating agenda: "How can you be an activist for a crime? for an offense? for an immortal act?"

I wonder if it is gay sex, or simply being a gay person, he considers immortality-making.

He is generous enough in his hatred to encompass both immortal alternatives.

[Bulldog]

Who's to say what's sexually normal.  Many heterosexuals engage in sexual activity that the more conservative heterosexuals would consider abnormal.  My view is that gays are fine, and I have no problem with their getting married to one another; the "civil union" idea is just a cop-out.

[scarpia]

Just looking at that thread at CMG gives me a queasy feeling.  That we share our country (or world) with such hate-filled people is unsettling to me.

[Jay F]

Just looking at that thread at CMG gives me a queasy feeling.  That we share our country (or world) with such hate-filled people is unsettling to me.

A lot more unsettling than one guy dragging another guy around by his dick (or even the pissers and pissees). I did not feel compelled to join that forum. I guess this is why a lot of forums don't allow "off-topic" conversations. I'm a member of one that wouldn't have let this one get past Post #1.

[Josquin des Prez]

Who's to say what's sexually normal.

You seem to be a bit confused on this issue. There's a difference between arguing that homosexuals are normal people (as opposed to sexual deviants) while also arguing that the act of homosexuality is as normal a sexual function as heterosexuality. I don't see the logic in that.

[Florestan]

I am sorry to see that someone with viewpoints like this can even still exist in this day and age.  

This and other posts here are simply mind-boggling. It seems like the "Liberals", while paying lipservice to diversity, long for a Brave New World in which the strictest uniformity will be enforced by a Thought Police which will have life-and-death rights upon any dissenter.

Who are the real Fascists here, I wonder? Josquin, who just expressed his views (in an admittedly strong, but nevertheless polite fashion --- and always leaving room for discussion), or the members of the ideological firing-squad unleashed at him?

[Joe_Campbell]

My favourite line so far:

There are a few posters here that I dislike, but until now I'd never consider doing bodily harm to any of them, given the chance to meet them. Just hope that we never meet in person.

Everyone's tough online, but this is amazing.

[scarpia]

You seem to be a bit confused on this issue. There's a difference between arguing that homosexuals are normal people (as opposed to sexual deviants) while also arguing that the act of homosexuality is as normal a sexual function as heterosexuality. I don't see the logic in that.

The fact that you are sure of everything does not imply that your opinions have anything to do with reality.  In virtually biological organisms populations are heterogeneous, from bacteria, to yeast, to oak trees, to rabbits, to people.  It is not normal for all individuals to be the same, it is normal for different combination of genes to produces variations.  The fact that homosexuality is a relatively infrequently occurring phenotype does not mean it is deviant or abnormal, it is just part of the variation of the human organism.  It is advantageous for  population to have such heterogeneity, since this allows it to react better to changes in the environment.  To label it as deviant, abnormal, etc, is a manifestation of crude thinking worthy of a cave man, not someone who lives in an advanced society.