Michigan Republican National Committeeman, Dave Agema, has been under relentless and vicious attack from advocates of same sex marriage, solely on the basis of having reposted an article which proposes a number of health risks and social consequences the writer claims are associated with same sex relationships.

The article: Everyone Should Know These Statistics on Homosexuals, by Frank Joseph, M.D, suggests that their are a number of negative consequences to the lifestyle of homosexuality.

The author of the article also addresses what he calls The Homosexual Agenda, among other things.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with the opinions of the article, it is clear that the author poses some compelling points that are worthy of civil debates.

Dave Agema simply offered the article for such a debate to occur.

Nevertheless, in an attempt to suppress Agemas constitutionally protected right to freedom of speech, even some so called Republicans have publicly come out against him, calling for his resignation, accusing him of being a bigot, hateful, etc.

Allegedly. the Libertarian Party of Michigan has also called for Agemas resignation, accusing him of actions that are unacceptable, sickening and reprehensible.

All this, simply for posting a study on a facebook page?

Since when it is somehow a hate agenda to have a discussion about the potential risks of human choices or lifestyles?

If I were to post a study on the risks of alcoholism, would that mean I am intolerant and hateful? What about if I posted an opinion about the risks of having children out of wedlock ? Would that constitute being reprehensible?

Have we finally arrived to a place in society where some special interest groups can take aim at anyone they choose to in society, while they remain a protected class, with no one being able to so much as question anything they say or do?

In what way does intolerance relate to any American offering his or perspectives on a specific topic?

Most important, how is Dave Agema guilty of hatred and intolerance, simply for reposting the conclusions of a medical professional that are seemingly supported by Empirical evidence?

The fact is that no one has been able to specifically highlighted comments directly from Dave Agema that personally attack or demean those who self identify as homosexual or lesbian.

It seems to me that the lesbians and homosexuals see themselves as untouchables (meaning  exempt from criticism), who no one can call into moral question, lest they are subject to name calling, public and professional harassment, and relentless ridicule.

They appear to believe that anyone who refuses to endorse or support their views are somehow perverted, confused, etc.

Furthermore, they appear to try to bully and intimidate opponents of their lifestyle choices into conformity.

At the end of the day, if Dave Agemas critics are in disagreement with the information from a medical professional that was reposted on Agemas facebook page, they should respond with reasoned debate, seeking to  discredit the information shared, rather than trying to personally and professionally discredit Agema.

Eleanor Roosevelt was quoted as having said: Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

It seems to me that those who are outraged at Dave Agema for merely posting the opinions of a medical professional on the issue of homosexuality are perhaps guilty of small mindedness.  Rather than discussing the ideas offered in the article Agema posted and asking Agema his views on the ideas, they focus on attacking Agema personally.

Mrs. Roosevelt would likely be very disappointed by the reaction of what appears to be 21st Century untouchables.