That seems to be the part of the quote that everybody remembers, but it is the words that follow that are even more important.
“That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…”

Our rights are not granted to us by government, they are ours by birthright.

I’m past the point where I care much about how the straight world thinks of me. I don’t much care whether they “accept” me or not. But I’ll be damned if I will accept anything less than full recognition of the rights that I was born with.

Ah, yes, I remember the good ol’ days; Sodomy as a capital crime, execution and imprisonment, sodomy as a non-capital criminal offence, fines and defamation, sodomy as a de facto abomination, vigilante ‘justice’, Aushwitz, Matthew Shepard, Anita Bryant, no political clout, no job security, shunned by all religious leaders; good times, good times.

You’re ‘imaginary golden-age’ fallacy is just barely worse than the well-poisoning/strawman/ad hominem trifecta that follows.

I’m not sure what exactly you mean by ‘modern revisionist gay dogma’, but I can walk down the street in my town, I can go to class in a Catholic college, and I can walk into a bar and buy a drink (…except that I’m 20 and a teetotaler…) without being brutally murdered. I tend to call that progress. Not as far as we can and will go (as long as the phrase ‘gay panic defense’ exists, what we’re experiencing is a parody of justice), but progress.

Josh – I hope you’re quoting this from somewhere rather than writing it, because it is a typical example of the mis-representation of the stonewall riots by the modern gay movement – the modern gay movement which re-invents the past to serve its own narrow contemporary purposes.

My first thought was that to be true to the history of the event itself the list should say “gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered and boyloving”. Then I realised that actually the words lesbian, transgendered and even bisexual (probably even ‘gay’) are totally anachronistic … not only the words, but probably the concepts as well. When the word ‘gay’ was originally adopted it included all those other categories (including boylover) and many more: the need for a list (LGBT and as many more as you feel politically-correctly-obliged to add) just shows how much the ‘gay’ movement has become impoverished and dulled and divided.

Read Destroyer – from the first to the current edition – to see how the contemporary narrow view of gay politics is self-persecuting, self-oppressive, dishonest about its own history, and the product of a ‘community’ in denial and at war within itself. For those who don’t know: destroyermag dot com.

- The Rimmer