 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Riginslinger Date: 09 Jan 09 - 10:51 PM The topic is Proposition 8. It was passed because voters are simply not capable of thinking for themselves. Whoever raises the most money wins. This is a much greater problem than the proposition itself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 09 Jan 09 - 07:25 PM Is that as 'intelligent' as you get????...You must not have read earlier, where name calling is used to avoid an intelligent reply. Then again, you haven't posted one, anyway....I've already got your act. Some people never get a clue. Say something, on topic, that relates an idea for further discussion, rather than childish name calling. You are embarrassing both yourself, and your "tragically 'liberal'(?)" political bent. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,hg Date: 09 Jan 09 - 02:15 PM From GFS: "To answer your question, I'm a musician, sound engineer, screenplay author, and composed a soundtrack for a film, and when I originally stumbled upon this forum, which was by sheer happenstance, I found it extremely stimulating, and interesting. Being as I also am a marriage and family counselor, I was drawn into some of the discussions, with a certain passion, if you will. My post explains my reasons for remaining a 'Guest' In addition, I have personal information on here, that is highly confidential. Hope that answers your question. Re-read my last post, if you need clarification. Thank you. ...and a bigoted musician, sound engineer, screenplay author, soundtrack author, and marriage and family counselor at that.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Riginslinger Date: 09 Jan 09 - 01:56 PM "However, he (Madison) thinks "the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property." But the Neo-Cons beat the system by convincing large numbers of poor people that if the pray hard enough, they too will have large holdings of property. So they support the property holders in spite of the fact that they are beggers themselves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 09 Jan 09 - 01:28 PM Hg, and you are disguised as....ummm, what? Haven't been on much the last few days, but after going over the posts, a lot of you have seemed to drifted from the topic, into thinking that those who oppose homosexuals 'marrying' is a direct affront, of your political views, as a whole. This is a singular issue. No where, on here, do I see any compassion for the individuals, who are confronting the inside ins and outs, of the turmoil that lives within them. Nor do I see ANY of the ideologues, caring about anything, but how THEY are perceived, by 'like minded', cold, and uncaring debaters. You care about your opinions(maybe), but not one ounce about the fellow human beings that you pretend to be arguing about. To me, if that is an indication of a particular 'party', that you subscribe to, and that 'party', reflects you, then a re-examination of your motives, and your 'party's' motives, is certainly in order! Amos, is the only one, who, in his opposing arguments even alluded to, homosexuals having 'God given' feelings, or anything of the sort...yet, if there is a separation between church and state, or 'God given', and humans, then I have to ask, just who makes up this 'party', and the' party line'...a bunch of inanimate objects???? Because that is the way a lot of you act!! Akenaton, on the other hand, a self described 'atheist', has quoted another point of view,(the Pope's), demonstrating an openness, that you 'self thought of' liberals, should be applauding. However you have become more closed off, and more closed off than the, furthest conservative, right wing nuts. Look at what you've become!!! Though Amos and I have had our disagreements, and probably still will, I sense that he, at least, does 'some' research, in regards to his viewpoints....which, may indeed, allow him to change his position, IF, he finds supporting data, to another point of view. This other personalized nonsense, of attacking each other, by some on here, armed with nothing but an uneducated opinion, with no research to back up anything you spout off, is indicative of the 'mob rule', that was brought up, earlier. Unless many of you, just don't stop...take a breath...and think that considering any other data, would enlighten you, into caring more for your fellow humans, then you've become hard, brittle, and certainly not 'liberal'..but rather more like fascistic,..more than you'd ever admit! Your opinions, then become, just mental chewing gum, rather than, anything resembling care!!! Also, Amos, in light of this post..compare that to your post,.."By the way, GfS, it is most disingenuous of you to pose as one who rings the bell of freedom and the hammer of justice in order to squash a group of people of whom you have a derogatory opinion."...Not only are you arguing my point.....I am the one who favors freedom and justice..but basing on truth...not a mob, of uninformed, uneducated, heartless clones. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Amos Date: 09 Jan 09 - 10:37 AM "Federalist No. 10 continues the discussion of the question broached in Hamilton's Federalist No. 9. Hamilton there addressed the destructive role of faction in breaking apart the republic. The question Madison answers, then, is how to eliminate the negative effects of faction. He defines a faction as "a number of citizens, whether amounting to a minority or majority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." He identifies the most serious source of faction to be the diversity of opinion in political life which leads to dispute over fundamental issues such as what regime or religion should be preferred. However, he thinks "the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society." He saw direct democracy as a danger to individual rights and advocated a representative democracy (also called a republic) in order to protect what he viewed as individual liberty from majority rule, or from the effects of such inequality within society. He says, "A pure democracy can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party. Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." Like the anti-Federalists who opposed him, Madison was substantially influenced by the work of Montesquieu, though Madison and Montesquieu disagreed on the question addressed in this essay. He also relied heavily on the philosophers of the Scottish Enlightenment, especially David Hume, whose influence is most clear in Madison's discussion of the types of faction and in his argument for an extended republic." (Excerpted from Wikipedia) The present issue is a classic instance of factionalism as a danger to individual rights. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,hg or haggard or whatever! Date: 08 Jan 09 - 10:09 PM I'm talking about GFS not aken. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Riginslinger Date: 08 Jan 09 - 10:04 PM Ake - I agree. Tribalism is at the root of a number of problems. Root out tribalism, and the world will be a better place. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 08 Jan 09 - 08:56 PM AYe, Ebbie, he's not using it in the American tradition. Canny wee bugger, he. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Ebbie Date: 08 Jan 09 - 08:35 PM Question: Since you, ake, are Scots, in what way are you using the term 'liberal'? I suspect that your nuts and bolts are metric. Also, to all: I don't think Akenaton cares a whit about the American Constitution. Why would he? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 08 Jan 09 - 07:30 PM Trouble is Rig, we keep thinkin' in groups, I don't "believe", but I like the way some of the "believers" are thinkin' We've got to start learning how life actually feels again, we have lost contact with reality. We have two extremes which in real terms are actually quite close together and in the middle a great heap of shit. Political speak, psycho-babble, outright lies, misinformation etc and in this shitheap live the "liberals" burrowing and digesting deaf and sightless, but ready to devour any "extremists" who recognise shit by the smell. They fuck us up!....our "Liberals"!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Riginslinger Date: 08 Jan 09 - 05:48 PM I think you're picking on the wrong group, Ake. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 08 Jan 09 - 05:20 PM Harpgirl.....Ma dear ah didnae ken it wis you....Is yer erse still hingin' thegither?? Amos....Godwins law already!....and it's only Thursday...I take it your last message was typed with "hands held high" :0) Don....Thanks mate,you are a Conservative and a gentleman...a rare breed! In answer to you query, I often get "het up" about things which don't affect me personally, I think it's something to do with my political up-bringing, a hangover from the days when I thought socialism and I could change humanity. However I promise to try to kick the habit, I don't suppose you've ever been troubled by this sort of thing so no point in asking advice?? For the umpteenth time.....no one can be "against" homosexuality it is a fact of life! I am against the agenda of "normalisation" "manipulation" and "subversion" by a small but very powerful minority and the "useful idiots" who support that minority...Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 08 Jan 09 - 02:28 PM If you are referring to Akenaton, Harpgirl, he is a long standing and respected member of the Mudcat, and while I very often disagree with his point of view, he is most emphatically NOT a troll. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,hg Date: 08 Jan 09 - 01:32 PM Why are you all arguing with a troll whose fake identity is a bigoted Christian, homophobe? Nothing else to do? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Amos Date: 08 Jan 09 - 12:02 PM As I have striven to make clear over and over here, Ake, I support equality under the law, and the granting of equal civil rights. You interpret this as being "pro" homosexual marriages, but you are mistaken. I am "pro" marriage, in general, but I do not care, and I do not think anyone should care, what the plumbiong of the participants looks like. I think there is a lot of rather perverse obsession with the subject and in some ways it reminds me of the equally obsessive interest and equally perverse in racial eugenics which once informed so much dialogue in this country, before it was exported to Germany in the first decades of the 20th century. The compulsion to categorize other human beings into "bad" pigeonholes is a deep human neurosis, out of which we all must somehow grow; even you. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 08 Jan 09 - 10:32 AM Ake, I am puzzled at the vehemence of your "non bigotted" opposition to something which has absolutely NO impact on YOUR life, health, well being, nor in fact your financial condition. In general, I am uninterested in how others conduct their lives unless affected in one of those areas by their actions. I don't understand why the decisions made about THIS ONE SUBJECT should elicit the fiercely emotional response we see from you and GfS. What, I wonder would be your response to that kind of interference, were you on the receiving end? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 08 Jan 09 - 05:08 AM Don...I am indeed an atheist, and I don't need your arrogant sort of tolerance. The fact that Benedict Ratzinger has been made leader of the Catholic Faith does not mean that he is incapable of addressing social issues with commonsense and reason. I will listen and learn from anyone that I think is talking sense, be he a Pope or a tramp. Pope Benedict has gone further than I would in his perception of the destructive nature of homosexuality, but his fears about humanity's view of the life force and for our place in the future of the planet stand up to scrutiny...Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 08 Jan 09 - 04:13 AM I was of course referring to the expediency of "pro-homosexual marriage" posters to this forum, who,due to the way this issue has become politicised, feel the issue is an excellent chance to throw shit at "conservatives" Unfortunately the penny has not yet dropped with these people, that they themselves are the "reactionaries" on this issue....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Joe Offer Date: 07 Jan 09 - 09:49 PM I have to say that during one of the presidential debates, I was surprised to learn that both Barack Obama and John McCain opposed gay marriage. I can't say I really believe in gay marriage or that I like the idea of it, but I don't think it is something that should be prohibited by government. If gay people want to get married and aren't hurting anybody by getting married, then I don't think the rest of society has a right to stop them - even if a majority votes against gay marriage. I think of both McCain and Obama as moderates, and I thought they would agree with me. I guess they're more closely aligned with the Pope than I am. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don Firth Date: 07 Jan 09 - 09:18 PM It would seem to me that it is more "politically expedient" to come down on the side of supporting Prop 8. Especially for politicians who want to get re-elected. But there is the matter of the Constitution. That is the check on the abuses of the majority, and Prop 8, since it discriminates against a minority, is clearly unconstitutional. And supporting and preserving the Constitution is just common sense. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Jan 09 - 07:50 PM I find myself smiling tolerantly at the mental image of a committed atheist, adducing support for his views from the supreme representative of an entity in which he does not believe. The blind leading the blind is a phrase that springs instantly to mind. ""Perhaps my views seem extreme because they are opposed by so many here who on this issue are motivated more by political expediancy than common sense....Ake"" Not political expediency, Ake, more a respect for the LAW in this country, and the Constitution in the US, both of which forbid the discrimination you espouse. Until either or both are repealed, you do not have an argument. End Of Story. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 07 Jan 09 - 06:57 PM Amos....I believe you are an atheist like myself, so you should know that these guys speak in code, the code in this address is pretty easy to decipher.................."One must reread the encyclical Humanae vitae with this perspective: the intention of Pope Paul VI was to defend love against consumer sex, the future against the exclusive claim of the moment, and human nature against manipulation." Well done Amos, you homed in on the biggie, "Manipulation" is the word which cuts through all the bullshit like a hot knife through butter...Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 07 Jan 09 - 06:03 PM Ake: You've added a lot of weight of your own to what the Pope said. "Since faith in the Creator is an essential part of the Christian Creed, the Church cannot and should not limit itself to transmitting to its faithful only the message of salvation. She has a responsibility for Creation, and it should validate this responsibility in public. Note the complete absence of the words "transsexual" and "homosexual" or anything about "saving the world from gays." Maybe Reuters balked at having to report the stuff denouncing "manipulation."" (SF Examiner) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 07 Jan 09 - 12:45 PM Thanks for that Joe, I did wonder what your take on Pope Benedict's comments would be......Pretty measured, as I would have expected from a man with his feet in both camps. I of course disagree with some of what you have said,the speech is unequivocally against the practice of homosexuality...any speech which condemns homosexuality in today's social/political climate, is a strong statement. I agree with your other comments on the "ecology" of humanity, as i grow older, I find myself becoming disgusted by the way in which "life" is viewed by most people, from disgarded foetuses to disgarded octogenarians. I am disappointed that you find my position on this issue "extreme" I did not intend it to be so. It is certainly less extreme than the position held by Pope Benedict Perhaps my views seem extreme because they are opposed by so many here who on this issue are motivated more by political expediancy than common sense....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Joe Offer Date: 07 Jan 09 - 06:18 AM My opinion of Pope Benedict is that is is indeed an old man in a funny hat - but he is generally a very wise and rational old man who speaks in well-reasoned paragraphs that frequently get condensed and sensationalized by reporters into irrational sound bytes. Reuters really got this one wrong, I think. Ake paraphrased it, "that the practice of homosexuality is as much a danger to humanity as the destruction of the rain forests." That's not exactly what Reuters said, but it's close. Here's the exact quote:
Google says this horrendous misquote appears in 750 places on the Internet, and it most probably appears in countless newspapers. I found the cited speech at the Vatican Website, www.vatican.va. I also found This San Francisco Examiner article, which provides a view of the speech that is quite different from the Reuters perspective. See also this Irish Times article. No, it's not a speech in favor of homosexuality, but neither is it the silly statement that Reuters attributes to him. My summary of what the Pope said is that we have to practice an ecology of humankind as much as we practice ecology of nature - that we must treat both humanity and nature as sacred. That includes our attitudes about many aspects of human life, including marriage. The message does make it clear that the Pope believes marriage should be between a man and a woman, but it certainly is not the strong statement against homosexuality that Reuters portrays. Ake, I'm sorry, but I don't think that the Pope would agree with your extreme position. He wouldn't agree with the extreme on the other side, either. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don Firth Date: 06 Jan 09 - 07:54 PM But it seems that I did get up somebody's nose. Hence the quite savage responses. Such as yours and Guest from Paranoia's. But— Some astronomers are carefully following the orbits of several ECA's (Earth Crossing Asteroids), of which there are many. The earth has been struck before with cataclysmic results, and Near-Earth Asteroid (99942) Apophis [2004 MN4] is considered very dangerous, dangerous enough to cause a number of astronomers to urge preparing for an asteroid rendezvous mission in order to alter its orbit enough so that it will miss the earth when it approaches in 2029. Wolf-Rayet-104 is a gamma ray burster. It's highly unstable, ready to explode-implode into a supernova at any time, and when it does, it will emit an intense burst of gamma rays jetting out from its poles. This could extinguish life on any planet in line with either pole. And the earth is in line with its axis of rotation. We are staring down the barrel of the gun that could kill us all. At any moment. But forget all that! There are more imminent, more catastrophic dangers!!! There are gays among us who want their civil rights recognized!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: gnu Date: 06 Jan 09 - 07:51 PM I guess the lads are like me. Can't be arsed any more. Pun definitely intended. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 06 Jan 09 - 06:18 PM You flatter yourself Don, you couldn't hit a "coo on the erse wi' a stick.....if ye were haudin' it by the tail"...Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don Firth Date: 06 Jan 09 - 06:12 PM Guest from WHERE!?? See ya, folks. I'm outta here. (You know, when I suggested that some folks look in a mirror and ask themselves "Why do I care?" I guess I really hit a raw nerve.) Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 06 Jan 09 - 04:27 PM Amos.....You are neither "civil" nor "right".....:0) How's that for a double homo....graph missus!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Amos Date: 06 Jan 09 - 03:06 PM Nah, I yam done here, Gnuzer. These folks don't speak Civil Rights. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: gnu Date: 06 Jan 09 - 03:02 PM Just thought I would poke me head in the door and see if youse all are still having a pissing contest. Ahyupah. Nearly got wet! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Amos Date: 06 Jan 09 - 01:24 PM By the way, GfS, it is most disingenuous of you to pose as one who rings the bell of freedom and the hammer of justice in order to squash a group of people of whom you have a derogatory opinion. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Nick Date: 06 Jan 09 - 01:01 PM >>In addition to your post, history shows us, and shows us clearly, for those scholars of world history, as you have alluded to. that homosexuality, and the open acceptance of it, has ALWAYS proceeded the fall, of world powers, and powerful nations. Now, before everyone gets their knickers in a twist, do your homework, (as Amos so wisely did) and argue with history...not me.....(I've gone through enough of this shit to bring to you the truth) The fall of nations has always been preceded (I presume you meant something that comes before not something that "moves on in an orderly fashion". Proceed is going forward. Precede is something that happens before. It makes a nonsense of your comment) by an increase in the price of fruit as well. You are confusing coincidence with causality. Alternatively you are trying to link unconnected things to try and prove your argument. It doesn't work. If you are going to dispense or present 'truth' you need to firstly hone up your logical skills, secondly try to use the correct words, and thirdly try to come to terms with the use of the humble comma; especially the difference to sense that a malformed sentence makes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,TIA Date: 06 Jan 09 - 06:28 AM I have observed male nautiloids inserting their spermatophores into other males. Clearly the nautiloid lobby has joined the conspiracy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 Jan 09 - 03:39 AM pdq, thanks for your observations.....now for something you may never see from those 'windbags'>>>>>>>> 'Perhaps you're right!' Ake, Really????????....give me a call!!!!! come fly with me..(as the song says)..or,....Fly the friendly skies of United......... Don, (and I wasn't going to reply to your nonsense anymore, after your ridiculous statements before) bot, I'm sure he was censured, it wouldn't surprise me. Do you actually think the medical organizations are free from bias, from those whose message runs contrary to their policies, and corruption????? Whoops! there goes another pig flying overhead....and it has 'restless leg syndrome'! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Ebbie Date: 05 Jan 09 - 10:35 PM Clever wordplay, pdq. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: pdq Date: 05 Jan 09 - 10:05 PM GUEST,Guest from Sanity ...perhaps you are a slow learner. You persist on spending your Mudcat time tilting at windbags. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Ebbie Date: 05 Jan 09 - 09:26 PM Adams, Henry E. (1996). Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal? Journal of Abnormal Psychology 105(3), pp. 440-445. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don Firth Date: 05 Jan 09 - 09:26 PM A google search on Richard A. Cohen shows that this "gay-conversion therapist" was expelled in 2002 from the American Counseling Association for six violations of its ethics code, which bars members from actions which "seek to meet their personal needs at the expense of clients, those that exploit the trust and dependency of clients, and for soliciting testimonials or promoting products in a deceptive manner." Of course, he claims that he was expelled from the American Counseling Association because of its—as Cohen maintains—adherence to the "gay agenda." Quelle surprise! Cohen claims that he was gay until twenty years ago, but now he is now straight. One phase of Cohen's treatment is to "cuddle" his male clients. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 05 Jan 09 - 09:23 PM My opinion on Pope Benedict is that he is an old man in a funny hat, and if you think the people in Gay Pride parades dress strangely, I think the high jinks of the Council of Bishops and Cardinals doing their ritual obeisance to His Holiness is easily on a par. Let me point out that bemoaning the decline of society has been a favorite pastime since the days of Socrates. As for the illogical assertion that tolerance toward homosexuals has preceded the fall of every historical civilization, I would argue that this is an absurd statement. The Incans did not condone their homosexuals, although I am sure they had them. The Greeks did. In both cases, through political miscalculations, they lost their lands to invaders. Obviously homosexuality is not the common denominator here. But let me make myself perfectly clear: I do not give flying fuck if you welcome or shun homosexuals in your personal lives. I DO care that you choose to deny them a civil status which you are happy to grant to the most perverted heterosexual pairings. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 05 Jan 09 - 09:00 PM Nick...to answer your question, it is not a liberal of any known species, but more akin to a genetically modified vegetable! Guest.....I dont just say it!!:0) Sorry but the link you left didn't work, perhaps you could re-post....thanks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 05 Jan 09 - 08:52 PM I have written the truth as I see it Amos, and if homosexuality is in part psychological and in part learned behaviour,do you really think that there were as many homosexuals around in the forties and fifties?....Just look at the high profile homosexuals in the entertainment media, and the effect they have on confused youngsters. I have no nausea or indignation personally towards homosexuals and the decline of society is surely accepted by everyone....would you like a few examples? I have said on many occasions that the criminalisation of homosexuals was wrong....so try to confine yourself to the truth...evenwhen your argument hits the rocks. And your opinion of Pope Bednedict is???. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 05 Jan 09 - 08:43 PM Ake, Jeez, I thought I was the last person on the planet still using that expression..'Flying fuck'!! In addition to your post, history shows us, and shows us clearly, for those scholars of world history, as you have alluded to. that homosexuality, and the open acceptance of it, has ALWAYS proceeded the fall, of world powers, and powerful nations. Now, before everyone gets their knickers in a twist, do your homework, (as Amos so wisely did) and argue with history...not me.....(I've gone through enough of this shit to bring to you the truth) Oh, by the way, TIA, I just drove my SUV to the Pacific Ocean, about 1500 miles west, off the coast of South America, where the ocean floor has been heating up, so I could re-fuel up, to bring that 'warmth' back to the continent, and deliver a fresh batch of 'global warming'...but that's a different subject for another thread! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Nick Date: 05 Jan 09 - 08:38 PM >>Don, As I posted in an earlier post, political pressure was applied to get the medical community, and its training, in the professions, to change homosexuality from a dysfunction, as all living things on this planet primary attribute is to survive and reproduce, to merely an 'orientation' or 'preference'<< What a wonderful post. A lot of zoologists would agree with you that the urge to survive and reproduce is pretty fundamental. At the same time they marvel at the choice that living things have to choose not only their orientation but also their sex and reproductive choices - eg sex choices I presume that means one of a few things * they are wrong * they are misguided * the clownfish and wrasse have political friends in very high places * to generalise ("all living things on this planet...") is to invite others to test your hypothesis/ theory / blanket statement and test it with obvious things first and more detailed criticisms after * the zoologists have been nobbled * the theorists evolved to confuse things Or that you didn't mean what you said. My name is Nick by the way and I at least have the wherewithal to not hide behind the sadness of a guest. If you believe in something at least have the bollocks to stand up for it. As an aside from somewhere in this thread - "most Mudcatters are liberals". That came as a shock to me. Is that an American liberal or a proper British one? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 05 Jan 09 - 08:27 PM It is not a question of "liking it", Ake. It is a question of pinning down the truth as well as we can. The point where civil rights become involved is when the public seeks to set aside the State Constitution in order to express a bias against a minority. Your moral indignation, or nausea, or your sweeping generalizations about the decline of society, have no bearing on the issue. Let me point out that there were just as many homosexuals per capita during the more-conservative Fifties--but they were suppressed into hiding in fear. You think that would be an improvement, I suppose? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 05 Jan 09 - 08:18 PM The Pope, leader of the worlds billions of Catholics, has said that the practice of homosexuality is as much a danger to humanity as the destruction of the rain forests. Pope Benedict is reckoned by the experts to be the most learned Pope in history, but I would disagree with his opinion. My view is that homosexuality is in our society, strongly promoted by a vociferous pressure group and we must accept that fact and try to deal with it fairly. However society should not allow the practice to become "normalised" through apathy, fear, or coercion, The male homosexual life expectancy and health statistics should be a warning to society that "normalisation" as in "marriage" (the word), or the fostering of children, is not in the interests of all. AS no proof whatsoever has been brought forward on a genetic link, I am inclined to agree with guest that the condition is largely psychological in nature, and a symptom of a society in decay. That is my view as an atheist....not a religious fundamentalist and if you "liberals" don't like it I dont give a flying fuck. If you think either guest or myself bigots, what is your opinion of the leader of the Catholic Faith? If my friend Benny had said "Liberals" are a bigger danger to humanity than deforestation, I would certainly have agreed with him....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 05 Jan 09 - 07:53 PM Heinlein, is pretty good too |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Riginslinger Date: 05 Jan 09 - 07:23 PM Sometimes Norman Mailer doesn't make a lot of sense, though! I'd settle for Raymond Chandler. |
