What she says is historically and factually correct.
The people who are so offended by this have hurt feelings about it. That's really too bad, but it doesn't change the fact nor does it change history.
A greater threat than Islam? - - - A religon that would put BOTH you and I to the sword is as bad as what I do with the people I date?
That's the part that I really am wondering about.
And history? She's REALLY stretching here. . .Rome and Greece never officially condoned homosexuality. It was part of the culture, but it wasn't "legalized" per se. A Roman male could lose his standing for taking on certain roles with other men. One Roman Emperor was killed because he was a crossdresser. Yet many other rulers carried on with both sexes. At best, those cultures were ambivalent toward homosexuality. . .and their general corruption and complacency destroyed them.
She can say it, and has the right to say it - -I'm perfectly okay with that. But I think she is overstating her case, and I've given some reasons why. Just like the poor, gay people are always going to exist.(General statement follows) And just like the poor, many of the left tend to be hypocritical toward them, and many on the right hold them in contempt.
At some point (maybe it has passed, I hope not), gay people and everyone else are gonna have to sit down and rationally discuss what we can do to function in this society together so that we can get together and make sure we don't both get killed- -because there are people that would kill us BOTH.
*TKay*
