... it seemed a real danger that the boy being raised by the same-sex couple would bring to school something obscene or pornographic, or refer to such things in conversation, as they go along with the same-sex lifestyle, which--as not being related to procreation-- is inherently eroticized and pornographic. He might expose other children to such things, as he might easily have encountered them in his household...And here's his tag line at the end of the article:
Michael Pakaluk is Professor of Philosophy at the Institute for the Psychological Sciences in Arlington, VA, where he teaches courses on ethics and the philosophy of marriage and the family.What exactly is "philosophy of marriage?" And why is an idiot teaching it? EDIT: Ahh, that's why he's teaching it: The Institute for the Psychological Sciences is a Catholic insitution.
He later retracted the statement:
I wish to retract the third point in this column. I expressed what I wished to say poorly and in a way that might give offense. If it caused offense to anyone, I sincerely apologize.Of course, this isn't really a retraction. He doesn't think he was wrong, he's just afraid he offended too many people. Because he's a sniveling wuss. If you believe the homosexual lifestyle is inherently pornographic, then man up and say so. If you're not willing to say what you believe and defend it, then shut the fuck up.
I, for example, think Dr. Pakaluk is a ignorant bigot, who belongs to a dangerous cult of Jewish zombie (and the mother of said Jewish zombie) worshipers that condemns harmless homosexuals while protecting child rapists, all while stealing ridiculous sums of money from the gullible and indoctrinated masses. Dr. Pakaluk teaching a class on ethics is like Ken Ham teaching a class on evolutionary biology.
I won't be retracting any of that. And if you're offended by that statement, I have a video for you to watch.