Jumping To Conclusions

Once again, John Derbyshire:

In reviewing the reactions he received from his diatrible yesterday, he writes:

"I got a strong impression, time after time, that the reader believed I SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SAY the things I said. A couple of readers said so flat out. Veiled threats to try and shut me down were common. ("Does Mr Buckley know the kinds of things you say on The Corner? Perhaps he should be told...") Make no mistake about it: there is a serious, strong current of thought out there that believes ANY objection to homosexuality is "hate speech" and ought to be criminalized--or, if it cannot be criminalized, shut down by any means that come to hand. I say again: there are many exceptions, and I thank those readers who, after identifying themselves as homosexual, went on to argue with me in a thoughtful and civilized way. But I now know something I did not know 48 hours ago, or knew only vaguely and imperfectly: gay fascism is real, and strong, and determined. If this Political Correctness cannot be stopped, we are going to lose our freedoms."

First off... the readers had no intention of shutting him off. They were going to tell his publisher and the publisher would or wouldn't make a decision. Is he scared of this? Of his publisher being aware of what he writes?

I'm not gay nor am I a facist, but cripes, isn't this last sentence ironic: "gay fascism is real, and strong, and determined. If this Political Correctness cannot be stopped, we are going to lose our freedoms."

Isn't Derbyshire the one entertaining the idea that homosexual acts should be criminalized? If Derbyshire gets his way, who is going to lose their freedoms?