I'm back! Was at Swing Camp (no, not "swingers camp") playing and learning jazz bass, vocals, and french horn.   And this thread has grown so monstrous that my laptop couldn't download it anymore.

Great to see that there's some 'fun' happening.

I've only perused the comments of the last week. But I want to respond to a question:

"I would be very interested in the views of Larry the Radio Guy, who instigated this thread, as it has become obvious who the "abusers" on this forum really are".

I think that if I were going to put myself into a position of identifying who is and who isn't an 'abuser', then I'd see that as being abusive.

What I've notice that perplexes me is the amount of time that gets spent by some of you in trying to 'prove' that another poster is somehow defective.........instead of spending time in first understanding their point, then deconstructing it (in terms of what it means in the 'big picture'), then putting forth your own point.

Does it really matter if a certain person said or didn't say something several months (or years) back?

Personally, I'm much more interested in what they are saying now....and wanting to make sure that any debate is addressing the point they are wanting to make (rather than the point I'm interpreting).   

With this in mind, I have a question for Guest From Sanity. (Please, no liberal bashing.....yes I'm a liberal and I'm totally willing to explain what 'liberal' means to me and why it's consistent with my values).

Do you really believe that homosexuality ......even knowing that only a very small portion of the population define themselves as homosexual.......is a serious threat to the sanctity of the 'family'?   (Sorry if I'm mis-representing what I thought you said during an earlier rant....but feel free to correct me).

And another related question........is there a distinction between a sexual orientation and a lifestyle?   I've made many gay people who are monogamous.....and have been most of their lives, and many straight people who are extremely promiscuous.   

And a question to everybody who wants to respond.   Is it possible to have respect for somebody who espouses ideas that appear totally bizarre, and, if applied, would be harmful?