In article >,
Batman > wrote:

> The real danger, and what *** people really seek, is for their
> lifestyle/orientation/choice to be accepted as a morally honorable
> way to live, and for that lifestyle to be ingrained in education.
> Until the education system has "gayness" throughout, it will never be
> deemed full accepted by society. I'm guessing we're 1-2 generations
> away from that. Around 40 years maybe. By gayness I mean that in
> English Lit you may study a few stories about hetero couples, then a
> story or 2 about *** couples. And students that have an awkwardness
> towards the opposite sex (and who doesn't at that age?) will find it
> easier finding a mate with the same sex. Easier psychologically that
> is. But if that *** aspect wasn't so prominent, they would just
> tough it out more, be more patient and be well rewarded with a far
> more satisfying relationship. Why are most gays so much more
> promiscuous than most straights? Obviously because of the
> unsatisfying nature of their present relationships.
>
> There's a basic moral structure we all have at birth that seems to
> get a little skewed in the growth process. We all know its right to
> tell the truth, not to steal, not to hurt people, not to seek
> revenge, and to basically care for the people around us because
> that's what we would want from them, our neighbors. And morally we
> know the indescribable peace and contentment felt by snuggling with
> someone we love of the opposite sex cannot possibly be replicated by
> anyone or anything else. Other behavior can be rationalized, but
> sadly never equaled. Pity your *** neighbor. So much richness of
> life is denied to him or her.

Basically you are proposing the "natural law" argument in favor of the
superiority of heterosexuality. There are a few problems with your
claims:

Tthe current generations under age 40 have mostly already accepted
homosexuality as a non-problem; English literature classes have already
had stories about *** and ******* couples in the curricula for
centuries; people don't choose sexual orientation- about 90% of the
population in heterosexually oriented and about 10% is homosexually
oriented, with a small percentage of bisexually oriented people- and the
research is clearly finding that this is wired from birth; according to
the last research I saw a few years ago, *** men are on average only
slightly more promiscuous than straight men but this varies dramatically
between individuals; *******s are less likely to be promiscuous than
straight women, straight men or *** men. And, of course, promiscuity in
a heterosexual man is lauded whereas promiscuity in a homosexual man (or
in a woman of either orientation) is condemned.

And: there is no demonstrable inherited moral structure present at
birth; and while you or I may prefer to snuggle with the opposite sex,
homosexuals feel just as much contentment snuggling with their honeys.
Because of the prejudices against homosexuality, many ***/******* people
are profoundly unhappy- this is less the case now than it used to be,
but the point here is that this is inherent to social rejection than to
the qualities of *** relationships. *** people who try to force
themselves to be straight tend to be the unhappiest of all.

In article >,
"BaJoRi" > wrote:

> "Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article
> > >,
> > evadnikufesin > wrote:
> >
> >> In article >,
> >> "Andrew McGee" > wrote:
> >>
> >> > So, let's get this straight (so to speak).
> >> >
> >> > If these militant gays would cease their activities, you would
> >> > start to support single-sex marriage.
> >> >
> >> > Just confirm that that's right, would you?
> >>
> >> Quit mixing issues. We're talking about hatecrimes here from
> >> fascist groups.
> >>
> >> Totally unamerican.
> >
> > Dude- or dudette as the case may be- fascism in the United States
> > is from the Right Wing, which believes that it has the right to be
> > the moral police
>
> Are you not the same, pushing your agenda, to force through ***
> marriage (which to a great many people is a moral argument) and the
> *** lifestyle?

Nope. First, I'm straight and married for 14 years so far. Second, I
believe in the freedom of people to make their own choices in this
matter. There is no "forcing" of *** marriage or the "*** lifestyle" on
anyone who doesn't want it (BTW it's not a lifestyle, sexual orientation
is wired before birth). Supporting the guarantee of equal civil rights
for all is anti-fascism.

> > and to set up a theocracy. People like James Dobson are
> > the American proto-Taliban. Groups supporting *** marriage are not
> > fascist, because they are not trying to force people to marry
> > homosexuals; it's that anti-*** marriage groups that are fascist in
> > their tendencies (hiding, as fascists always do, behind facile
> > slogans like "Country First").
>
> YOU have done NOTHING to differentiate yourself from those people.

Eh, dude, I'd say I'm plenty differentiated from Dobson and his ilk. I
support personal freedom, whereas Dobson & Co. think they should make
your choices for you because you can't be trusted to make the "right"
choices (that is, the choices they think you should make).

On 2008-11-17 19:02:45 -0600, Michelle Steiner > said:

>> s.
>
> Non sequitur there, sport. But you wingturds are good at that.
>
> But using your logic, Christians blow up and/or burn health-care
> facilities, murder doctors, murder gays, murder Jews, burn
> African-American churches, and murder each other for not being the right
> flavor of Christianity.


1.God, the mass murderer. Gen.7:4, 19:24
2.God tells Abraham to kill his second son for a burnt offering
Gen.22:2, 10
3.God threatens to kill the Pharaoh's firstborn son Ex.4:23
4.God murders the Egyptian firstborn humans and animals Ex.12:30
5.God drowns Pharaoh's army Ex.14:27-28
6."The Lord is a man of war." Ex.15:3
7.Children who strike their parents are to be killed Ex.21:15
8.It's OK to beat a slave as long as he lives a day or two "for he
is his money" Ex.21:20-21
9."Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." Ex.22:18
10.You must kill those who worship another god Ex.22:20
11.If you make God angry, he will kill you with his own sword
Ex.22:24
12.Sabbath breakers must be killed Ex.31:14-15, 35:2
13.God tells every man to slay "his brother, companion, neighbor."
Ex.32:27
14.God kills Aaron's sons for offering "strange fire before the
Lord." Lev.10:1-2
15.Children who curse their parents, adulterers, and homosexuals
must be killed. Lev.20:9-12
16.Woman with "familiar spirits" must be stoned to death. Lev.20:27
17.The unchaste daughters of priests must be burnt to death.
Lev.21:9
18.Cursers and blasphemers must be stoned to death. Lev.24:16, 24
19."Ye shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it."
Lev.26:16
20.God will "send wild beasts among you, which shall rob your of
your children." Lev.26:22
21."And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your
daughters shall ye eat." Lev.26:30
22.Strangers are to be killed. Num.1:51, 3:10, 3:38, 18:7
23.God kills Aaron's sons for offering "strange fire before the
Lord." Num.3:4, 26:61
24.Don't touch or look at "any holy thing" or God will kill you.
Num.4:15, 20
25.The law of jealousies Num.5:11-31
26.God hates whiners. If God hears you complain he'll burn you to
death. Num.11:1
27.Don't gather sticks on the sabbath day. Num.15:32-36
28.God buries alive Korah and his family. Num.16:27-35, 26:10
29.God burns to death 250 men. Num.16:35, 26:10
30.God kills 14,700 with a plague. Num.16:41-50
31.God sends "fiery serpent" to bite the people. Num.21:6
32.God's people will "rise up ... and drink the blood of the slain."
Num.23:24
33.God will "eat up the nations of his enemies, and shall break
their bones, and pierce them through
with his arrows." Num.24:8
34.God tells Moses to "take all the heads of the people and hang
them up before the Lord." Num.25:4
35.God's hero (Phinehas) thrusts a javelin through a man and his
Midianite wife's belly. Num.25:7-8
36.God kills 24,000 (23,000 according to 1 Cor.10:8) in a plague.
Num.25:9
37.Moses tells his men to kill all the males and non-virgin women,
but to keep all the virgins alive for
themselves. Num.31:14-18
38.God hardens King Sihon's spirit and then kills him and all the
men, women, and "little ones" in his
kingdom. Dt.2:30-34
39.God delivers Og into Moses' hands, who then kills every man,
woman, and child in every city.
Dt.3:3-6
40.God tells the Israelites to kill everyone in the lands that that
they conquer and to "show no mercy
unto them." Dt.7:2
41.Kill any prophets or "dreamers of dreams" if they say or dream
the wrong things. Dt.13:1-5
42.Kill any friends or family that worship a god that is different
than your own. Dt.13:6-10
43.Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that
worship differently than you.
Dt.13:12-16
44.Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than
your own. Dt.17:2-7
45.Kill anyone who refuses to listen to a priest. Dt.17:12-13
46.Kill any false prophets. Dt.18:20
47.Kill all the men and boys in the cities that God "delivers into
your hands," but keep the women for
yourself. Dt.20:13-15
48.Kill everything that breathes in the cities that God gives you
for an inheritance. Dt.20:16
49.Kill rebellious or disobedient sons. Dt.21:18-21
50.Women, be sure to keep the tokens of your virginity. Otherwise
the men of your city may stone
you to death. Dt.22:13-21
51.Kill adulterers. Dt.22:2
52.Kill rape victims if they fail to cry out loud enough.
Dt.22:23-34
53.You must cut off a woman's hand if she touches the "secrets" of a
man who is fighting with her
husband. "And thine eye shall not pity her." Dt.25:11-12
54.If you misbehave, God will make you eat your sons and daughters.
Dt.28:53, 28:55 28:56-67
55.Don't make God angry or he'll burn or starve you to death. If
that fails, he'll have some animals eat
you or snakes bite you. As a last resort he'll kill you with "the
sword without, and terror within."
He'll "destroy both the young man and the virgin, the suckling
also with the man of gray hairs."
Dt.32:23-25
56."I [God] will make mine arrows drunk with blood and my sword
shall devour flesh." Dt.32:42
57.Joshua killed "everything that breathed" in each of the cities
that he conquered, "as the Lord God of
Israel commanded." Jos.6:21, 8:24-26, 10:28-29, 10:32-33, 10:35,
10:37, 10:38, 10:40, 11:8, 11:11,
11:12, 11:14, 11:21
58.If you happen to see "the accursed thing," don't touch it. If you
do, you, your family, and all of
your animals must be burned. Jos.7:1-26
59.God gets right in and fights with the Israelites. He "slew them
with a great slaughter" and even
"chased them along the way." What a guy. Jos.10:10
60.God threw down "great stones from heaven" so that he could kill
even more people than the
Israelites "slew with the sword." Jos.10:11
61."The Lord fought for Israel." Jos.10:14
62.Cutting off the thumbs and big toes of 71 kings. Jg.1:6-7
63.Ehud's message from God. Jg.3:20-22
64.Jael drives a tent stake through her guest's head. For this she
is "blessed above women."
Jg.4:17-23, 5:24-26
65.Jephthah sacrifices his daughter to God. Jg.11:29-39
66.The spirit of God comes mightily upon Samson (and he kills
things). Jg.14:6, 14:19, 15:14-16
67.Samson catches 300 foxes, ties their tails together, and sets
them on fire. Jg.15:4-5
68.Samson kills 1000 men with the jawbone of an ass. Jg.14:15-16
69.The Levite and his concubine. Jg.19:22-30
70.God smites the Philistines with hemorrhoids in their secret
parts. 1 Sam.5:9
71.God kills 50,070 men for looking into the ark of the Lord. 1
Sam.6:19
72."I will make a covenant with you, that I may thrust your eyes
out." 1 Sam.11:2
73.The spirit of the Lord comes upon Samuel so he hacks some oxen in
pieces and sends the pieces to
all the coasts of Israel. 1 Sam.11:7
74.God orders Saul to kill every Amalekite "man and woman, infant
and suckling, ox and sheep, camel
and ass." 1 Sam.15:3
75.David buys a wife with 200 Philistine foreskins (twice the asking
price). 1 Sam.18:25-27
76.Killing those that "****eth against the wall." 1 Sam.25:22, 26:34

77.David kills all the Amalekites again (see 15:7-8 where Saul kills
them all the first time). 1
Sam.27:8-11
78.Smiting "under the fifth rib." 2 Sam.2:23, 3:27, 4:6, 20:10
79.David has his "young men" kill people, cut off their hands and
feet, and hang them up over a pool.
2 Sam.4:12
80.Whoever kills the lame and the blind "that are hated of David's
soul" shall be made "chief and
captain." 2 Sam.5:8
81.Uzzah is killed by God for trying to protect the ark from
falling. 2 Sam.6:6
82.To punish David for having Uriah killed, God kills David's
newborn son. 2 Sam.12:15, 18
83.David tortures people with saws, axes, and fire. 2 Sam.12:31
84.Hanging dead bodies up "unto the Lord." 2 Sam.21:6, 9
85.God kills a couple hundred thousand people to punish David for
having a census. 2 Sam.24:15
86.Solomon kills 22,000 oxen and 120,000 sheep when dedicating the
temple to his bloodthirsty God.
1Kg.8:63
87.God kills everyone "that ****eth against the wall." 1 Kg.14:10,
16:11, 21:21
88.Those that die in the city will be eaten by dogs, while those
that die in the country will be eaten by
fowls. 1 Kg.14:11, 16:4
89.Killing everything that breathes for a loving God. 1 Kg.15:29
90.Laying the foundation for a city using your firstborn child and
using your youngest son to set up
the gates. 1 Kg.16:34
91.When many people are needlessly slaughtered, you will know that
the Lord is God. 1 Kg.20:28
92.Stoning blasphemers to death. 1 Kg.21:13
93.God's dog food. 1 Kg.21:19, 21:23
94.Elijah proves that he is a man of God by burning to death 102
men. 2 Kg.1:10, 12
95.God sends two bears to rip up 42 little children for making fun
of Elisha's bald head. 2 Kg.2:23-24
96.Elisha makes his servant (Gehazi) and all of his descendants
lepers forever. 2 Kg.5:27
97.God answers Elisha's prayer by smiting his adversaries with
blindness. 2 Kg.6:18
98.Mothers boiling and eating their own children. 2 Kg.6:28-29
99.God sends a famine on the people that lasts for seven years. 2
Kg.8:1
100.God has Jezebel thrown off a wall and feeds her body to the dogs.
2 Kg.9:33-37
101.The 70 sons of Ahab are killed and their heads are put in
baskets. 2 Kg.10:7-8
102.Jehu shows off his "zeal for the Lord" by murdering everyone in
Samaria. 2 Kg.10:16-17
103.God, the divine physician, strikes king Azariah with leprosy. 2
Kg.15:5
104.God sends lions to devour the Samaritans because "they knew not
the manner of the God of the
land." 2 Kg.17:25-26
105.An angel of the Lord kills 185,000 men while they sleep. "And
when they arose, behold, they were
all dead corpses." 2 Kg.19:35
106.God kills Uzza for trying to keep the ark from falling. 1
Chr.13:9-10
107.David tortures all the inhabitants of several cities with saws,
harrows of iron, and axes. 1 Chr.20:3
108.God kills 70,000 men because David had a census. 1 Chr.21:7-14
109.Esther has two men hung on a tree. Est.2:23
110.Esther has Hamam hung. Est.7:10
111.Esther has Haman's ten sons hung. Est.9:13
112.God (or Satan) kills Job's children in a windstorm. Job 1:19
113.Satan (or God) smites Job with boils from the "sole of his foot
unto his crown." Job 2:7
114.God will hit the heathens with a rod of iron and "dash them in
pieces." Ps.2:9
115.God will rain fire and brimstone upon "wicked" people. Ps.11:6
116.The God of Peace teaches us to kill our neighbors in war.
Ps.18:34
117.If God doesn't like you, he'll burn you to death. Ps.21:9
118.If you forget God he will tear you in pieces. PS.50:22
119.If you don't trust God, he'll kill you, and while you're dying
the "righteous" will laugh at you.
Ps.52:5-6
120."Break their teeth, O God, in their mouth, ... let them be cut
pieces." Ps.58:6-8
121."The righteous" will rejoice when they see "the wicked" being
dismembered by God. They'll "wash
their feet in the blood of the wicked." Ps.58:10
122.God will "wound the head of his enemies" and the righteous will
dip their feet in their blood.
Ps.68:21, 23
123.God will "fill the places with dead bodies." Ps.110:6
124.God is praised for slaughtering little babies. Ps.135:8, 136:10
125.Happiness is smashing your little children against rocks.
Ps.137:9
126.A prayer that God will burn people to death. Ps.140:10
127.The God of Peace teaches us to kill each other in war. Ps.144:1
128.Beat the hell out of your children. Pr.13:24, 19:18, 22:15,
23:13-14, 29:15
129."The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil; so do stripes the
inward parts of the belly." Pr.20:30
130.Beat your slaves just like you do your children. Don't try to
correct them with words. Pr.29:19
131.If you mock your father or disobey your mother, the ravens will
pick out your eyeballs and feed
them to the eagles. Pr.30:17
132. If you associate or gird yourself God will break you in pieces.
Is.8:9
133. God will make every man kill his brother and then force him to
eat "the flesh of his own arm."
Is.9:19-20
134.If God can find you, he will "thrust you through," smash your
children "to pieces" before your
eyes, and rape your wife. Is.13:15-18
135."There stink shall come up out of their carcasses, and the
mountains shall be melted with their
blood." Is.34:2-3
136.God's sword is "filled with blood." He plans to kill so many
people that the "land will be soaked with
blood." Is.34:5-8
137.God will make people "eat their own flesh" and be "drunken with
their own blood." Is.49:26
138.God's clothes will get stained with the blood of humans.
Is.63:3-6
139.God will "plead with all flesh" with his fire and sword. "And the
slain of the Lord shall be many."
Is.66:16
140.The carcasses of those killed by God will be piled high. They
will rot and burn forever. Is.66:24
141.God says he "will send serpents, cockatrices, among you, which
will not be charmed, and they
shall bite you." Jer.8:17
142.God will kill the young men in war and starve their children to
death. Jer.11:22-23
143.God's sword will "devour" everyone until "no flesh shall have
peace." Jer.12:12
144. God will make everyone drunk and then "dash the fathers and the
sons together." He vows to "not
pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them." Jer.13:13-14
145.God promises to kill everyone by war, starvation, and disease.
Jer.14:12,24:10, 29:17-18, 42:17-18,
22
146.God will destroy by famine and sword those who are misled by the
prophets. Jer.14:16
147.God plans to kill people with swords, tear their flesh with dogs,
and feed their bodies to the birds
and beasts. Why? Because of something some former king did.
Jer.15:2-4
148. God has ordained that everyone "shall die of grievous deaths,"
and that they shall neither "be
lamented" nor even buried, but "they shall be as dung upon the
face of the earth." Jer.16:3-4
149.When the people ask why God is killing everyone, God answers by
saying, "Because your fathers
have forsaken me." Jer.16:10
150.Jeremiah asks God to kill the young men in war and the children
by starvation. Jer.18:21
151.God will make parents eat their own children, and friends eat
each other. Jer.19:7-9
152.God will kill everyone, "both man and beast," with a "great
pestilence." Jer.21:6
153.God will force all of Israel to "be drunken." Then, he'll kill
them all with a sword. Jer.24:27-28
154.God will kill so many people that the entire earth will be
covered with their dead bodies. No one is
to mourn them or even bury them, "they shall be as dung upon the
ground." Jer.25:33
155.Even those Jews that flee to Egypt will not be spared. God will
hunt them down and kill them all
with war, famine, and disease. Jer.44:12-13
156.On the day of the Lord, God's sword will become drunk with blood.
Jer.46:10
157."Cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood." Jer.48:10
158.God will cause the daughters of Rabbah to be burned to death.
Jer.49:2
159.God will "break in pieces" pretty much everyone and everything he
can think of.. Jer.51:21-23
160.If a good person does something wrong after God "lays a stumbling
block before him," then God
will kill him. "He shall die in his sin" and whatever good he has
done will be forgotten. Ezek.3:20
161.God will cause fathers to eat their sons and sons to eat their
fathers. Ezek.5:10
162.God plans to kill everyone with plagues, famines, and wars. But
if any still survive, then he'll send
beasts to devour them. Ezek.5:17
163.God plans to decorate the land with human bones and dead bodies.
Ezek.6:5
164. God marks the foreheads of the men who will be saved. To God
only men are worth keeping. All
of the women and unmarked men are to be slaughtered. God will
"fill the courts with the slain" and
will have pity on no one. Ezek.9:4
165.God deceives some of his prophets and then kills them for
believing his lies. Ezek.14:9
166.God gets all excited about cooking human flesh and "scum."
Ezek.24:3-10
167.God kills Ezekiel's wife and tells him not to mourn her.
Ezek.24:15-18
168.God will cause every man's sword to be against his brother. By
doing so he will magnify and
sanctify himself and let everyone know that he's the Lord.
Ezek.38:21-23
169.God is preparing a feast for the birds and beasts. He's going to
have them eat human flesh until
they're full and drink human blood until they're drunk.
Ezek.39:4, 17-20
170. Nebuchadnezzar decrees that anyone who says anything against the
Hebrew god "shall be cut in
pieces, and their houses shall become a dunghill." Dan.3:29
171.Nebuchadnezzar orders those who accused Daniel (including their
wives and children) to be cast
into the lions den. Dan.6:24
172.God assures Hosea that he will "slay even the beloved fruit of
the womb." Hos.9:16
173.God will rip humans apart and eat them like a lion. Hos.13:7-8
174.God promises to dash to pieces the infants of Samaria and "their
women with child shall be ripped
up." Hos.13:16
175.God will "sell your sons and your daughters." Jl.3:8
176.God says to "prepare for war" by beating "your plowshares into
swords, and your pruning hooks
into spears." Jl.3:10
177. The divine pyromaniac sets fire to Hazel, Gaza, Teman, Rabbah,
and Moab. Am.1:4 - 2:2
178.God will "slay all the princes" of Moab. Am.2:3
179.God sends the pestilence, kills young men with the sword, and
makes the "stink of your camps to
come up unto your nostrils." Am.4:10
180.God will kill "the last of them with the sword," and any that try
to escape by diving to the bottom
of the sea will be bitten, at God's command, by a serpent. God
will set his "eyes upon them for evil,
not for good." Am.9:1-4
181.Plucking off skin, flesh from bones, eating human flesh, flaying
off skin, breaking bones, chopping
bodies in pieces, making human stew. Mic.3:2
182.God says that "the fire shall devour thee, the sword shall cut
thee off, it shall eat thee up like the
cankerworm." Nah.3:15
183."Before him [God] went the pestilence, and burning coals at his
feet." Hab.3:5
184.God plans to kill every living thing. Zeph.1:2
185.God will "bring distress upon men" so that they "walk like blind
men." He will pour out their blood
like dust and "their flesh as dung." Zeph.1:17
186.God will kill the Ethiopians with his own sword. Zeph.2:12
187.God brags about destroying a city and killing all of its
inhabitants.Zeph.3:6
188."All of the earth shall be devoured with the fire" of God's
jealousy. Zeph.3:8
189.God will make the horses and their riders be killed by "the sword
of his brother." Hag.2:22
190.God will "set all men one against his neighbor." Zech.8:10
191.God will mercilessly "feed the flock of slaughter" by making
every one kill his neighbor.
Zech.11:6-7
192.God wants everyone to eat "the flesh of another." Zech.11:9
193.God will open his eyes and smite "every rider with madness ...
and every horse ... with blindness."
Zech.12:4
194.A prophet must be killed by his own parents by "thrusting him
through when he prophesieth."
Zech.13:3
195.God will smite the people with plagues that will cause their
flesh, eyes, and tongues to rot away.
Zech.14:12
196.God will make everyone fight and kill his neighbor. Zech.14:13
197.God sends his plagues on animals too. Zech.14:15
198.God will "smite the heathen" with a plague.Zech.14:18
199.God wants the good folks to "tread down the wicked." Mal.4:3
200.Jesus recommends that to avoid sin we cut off our hands and pluck
out our eyes. Mt.5:29, 18:8
201.Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn't
the slightest objection to the
cruelties of the Old Testament. Mt.5:17
202.Jesus says that most people are going to hell. Mt.7:13-14
203.Jesus sends some devils into a herd of pigs, causing them to run
off a cliff and drown in the waters
below. Mt.8:32
204.Families will be torn apart because of Jesus. "Brother shall
deliver up the brother to death, and the
father the child: and the children shall rise up against their
parents, and cause them to be put to
death. Mt.10:21
205.Jesus condemns entire cities to dreadful deaths and to the
eternal torment of hell because they
didn't care for his preaching. Mt.11:20-24
206. Jesus will send his angels to gather up "all that offend" and
they "shall cast them into a furnace of
fi there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." Mt.13:41-42,
50
207.Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands
before eating. He defends himself by
attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to
the commandment: "He that curseth
father or mother, let him die the death." Mt.15:4-7
208. Jesus sends the devils into 2000 pigs, causing them to jump off
a cliff and be drowned in the sea.
Mk.5:12-13
209.Any city that doesn't "receive" the followers of Jesus will be
destroyed in a manner even more
savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. Mk.6:11
210. Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient
children according to Old Testament law.
Mk.7:9
211. Jesus tells us to cut off our hands and feet, and pluck out our
eyes to avoid going to hell. Mk.9:43
212.Jesus kills a fig tree for not bearing figs, even though it was
out of season. Mk.11:13
213.Jesus says that those that believe and are baptized will be
saved, while those who don't will be
damned. Mk.16:16
214.God strikes Zacharias dumb for doubting the angel Gabriel's
words. Lk.1:20
215.John the Baptist says that Christ will burn the damned "with fire
unquenchable." Lk.3:17
216.Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the
inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for
not "receiving" his disciples. Lk.10:10-15
217. Jesus says that we should fear God since he has the power to
kill us and then torture us forever in
hell. Lk.12:5
218.All of the vicious Old Testament laws will be binding forever.
Lk.16:17
219."Bring them [those who preferred not to be ruled by Jesus]
hither, and slay them before me."
Lk.19:22-27
220.Those who, for whatever reason, do not believe in Jesus are
tormented forever in hell. Jn.3:18
221.Jesus says that the wrath of God" is on all unbelievers. Jn.3:36
222.Those who do not believe in Jesus will be cast into a fire to be
burned. Jn.15:6
223.God will torture forever those who don't know the password to
heaven. Acts 4:12
224.Peter and God scare Ananias and his wife to death for not forking
over all of the money that they
made when selling their land. Acts 5:1-10
225.The "angel of the Lord" killed Herod by having him "eaten of
worms" because "he gave not God the
glory." Acts 12:23
226.Paul and the Holy Ghost conspire together to make Elymas (the
sorcerer) blind. Acts 13:8-11
227."The wrath of God" is on all unbelievers. Rom.1:18-20
228."He that doubteth is damned ... Whosoever is not of faith is
sin." Rom.14:23
229.Those who disagree with Paul's religious views are damned.
Gal.1:8-9
230.Jesus will take "vengeance on them that know not God" by burning
them forever "in flaming fire."
2 Th.1:7-9
231.Jesus will "consume" the wicked "with the spirit of his mouth." 2
Th.2:8
232.God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls
to hell. 2 Th.2:11-12
233.God makes people evil and then condemns them to hell. Jude 4
234.Jude reminds us that God destroys those who don't believe in him.
Jude 5
235.God gave power to someone sitting on a red horse "to take from
the earth ... that they should kill
one another." Rev.6:4
236.God makes some horse-like locusts with human heads, women's hair,
lion's teeth, and scorpion's
tails. They sting people and hurt them for five months.
Rev.9:7-10
237.Four angels, with an army of 200 million, killed a third of the
earth's population. Rev.9:15-19
238.God will have people killed by fire, plagues, and beasts. There
will be dead bodies rotting, unburied
everywhere. And those that are not killed by God (the
Christians?) will "rejoice over them [the dead
nonchristians?] and make merry, and shall send gifts to one
another." Rev.11:5-10
239.God will send an earthquake that will kill 7000 people. Rev.11:13

240.Those who receive the mark of the beast will "drink of the wine
of the wrath of God ... and shall
be tormented with fire and brimstone ... and the smoke of their
torment ascendeth up for ever and
ever." Rev.14:10-11
241."The great winepress of the wrath of God ... was trodden ... and
the blood cam out of the
winepress, even unto the horses bridles." Rev.14:19
242. The seven vials of wrath: 1) sores, 2) sea turned to blood, 3)
rivers turned to blood, 4) people
scorched with fire, 5) people gnaw their tongues in pain, 6)
Euphrates dries up, 7) thunder,
lightening, earthquake, and hail. Rev.16:1-21
243.The great harlot is described as being "full of abominations and
filthiness of her fornication." She
has a rather large and prominent sign on her forehead, will be
made "desolate and naked," and her
flesh will be eaten and burned with fire. Rev.17:1-16
244. Jesus, whose clothes are dipped in blood, has a sharp sword
sticking out of his mouth. Thus
attired, he treads the winepress of the wrath of God.
Rev.19:13-15
245. An angel calls all the fowls to feast upon dead human bodies, or
as the angel calls it "the supper of
the great God." Rev.19:17-18
246.The beast and the false prophet are cast alive into a lake of
fire. The rest were killed with the sword
of Jesus. "An all the fowls were filled with their flesh."
Rev.19:20-21
247.God will send fire from heaven to devour people. Rev.20:9-10
248.Whoever isn't found listed in the book of life will be cast into
the lake of fire. Rev.20:15
249.Those who are fearful or unbelieving will be cast into "the lake
which burneth with fire and
brimstone." Rev.21:8

> > 2.God tells Abraham to kill his second son for a burnt offering
> > Gen.22:2, 10
>
> But stops him from doing so.
>
> > 3.God threatens to kill the Pharaoh's firstborn son Ex.4:23
> > 4.God murders the Egyptian firstborn humans and animals Ex.12:30
>
> In retribution for the Pharaoh attempting to kill all the first-born
> Hebrews.
>
> > 5.God drowns Pharaoh's army Ex.14:27-28
>
> While they were chasing the Hebrews to kill them.

Good replies Michelle. Its amazing how many people take the Bible out of
context.

JZ wrote:
>>> 2.God tells Abraham to kill his second son for a burnt offering
>>> Gen.22:2, 10
>> But stops him from doing so.
>>
>>> 3.God threatens to kill the Pharaoh's firstborn son Ex.4:23
>>> 4.God murders the Egyptian firstborn humans and animals Ex.12:30
>> In retribution for the Pharaoh attempting to kill all the first-born
>> Hebrews.
>>
>>> 5.God drowns Pharaoh's army Ex.14:27-28
>> While they were chasing the Hebrews to kill them.
>
> Good replies Michelle. Its amazing how many people take the Bible out of
> context.

Including christians it seems. Didn't the pharaoh tell the jews to get
out of his country several times but "god hardened the heart of pharaoh
....".

I seem to remember something about gos having a hissy-fit and killing
every man, woman, child, animal on the whole planet (save for a boat-load)

"Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
...
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>> Yeah, because gays are so upstanding and moral. Like throwing
>> condoms in church and swearing in front of the kids and whatnot.
>> It's the ANTI-gays that are terrible, not the diseased perverts...
>
> Most of the people I see swearing in front of kids are straight not ***.
> Nobody's ever thrown a condom in any church I've ever been in, for any
> reason, including people who are ***. I've never seen a homosexual
> person physically attack another person because they differed in sexual
> orientation.
>
> But I have seen self-appointed "defenders of the faith" standing in the
> way of openly *** Catholics to prevent them from receiving the
> Eucharist. I've seen "upstanding" Christians screaming in fury at
> quiet, peaceful gays and *******s, damning them and praying that they go
> to hell. I've seen anti-*** demonstrators disrupting the funerals of
> the honored war dead (who were not ***) in order to make some kind of
> insane point about homosexuality. I've seen "conservatives" demand from
> a state legislative committee the power to strip Constitutional rights
> from homosexuals. Homosexuals have been murdered- many times- simply
> for being homosexual.
>
> Many of the kindest and most ethical people I know are homosexual.

LOL You need to get out more.

"Michelle Steiner" > wrote in message
...
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>> > But you're trying to tell me who I can and can't marry. What
>> > ****ing business is it of yours who I marry?
>>
>> I guess you haven't been paying attention. Your militant *** agenda
>> has turned normal people against you.
>
> On the contrary, normal people have no problem with us. Only evil
> people like you are against us.

So the vast amount of people that voted down homo weddings are evil? Ok.

"Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
...
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>> "Michelle Steiner" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article > ,
>> > "tar~bal" > wrote:
>> >
>> >> No one's telling you where you can and can't stick it. Go
>> >> butt**** each other and have fun.
>> >
>> > But you're trying to tell me who I can and can't marry. What
>> > ****ing business is it of yours who I marry?
>>
>> I guess you haven't been paying attention. Your militant *** agenda
>> has turned normal people against you.
>
> Wrong-o again, dude. In fact, the militant agenda is on the parts of
> the homophobes like you.

I'm not afraid of homos, they disgust me. There's a difference.

>
> And you know what they say about homophobes.

That you hope to turn them *** some day? Yeah, I know, you people surround
yourselves with so many deviants that you don't know where reality ends and
the gays' perception of it begins...

"Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
...
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>> "Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article > ,
>> > "tar~bal" > wrote:
>> >
>> >> I guess this is what passes for a constructive and healthy dialog
>> >> on the issues in the *** community. While not all gays did this,
>> >> I would suspect that a number of them are in solidarity with the
>> >> act. This is the kind of thing that gives gays low standing in the
>> >> community. And exactly why I voted against *** marriage. This
>> >> kind of thing will continue until the rest of us make it clear
>> >> that there will be NO acceptance of the homosexual community so
>> >> long as they resort to militant activist methods.
>> >
>> > This is the same type of insane troll logic that was used to defend
>> > Jim Crow. It was bullshit then and it was bullshit now.
>> >
>> > The article that "tar~bal" cut-and-pasted draws a connection
>> > between the envelopes and the Mormon Church's support of the ban on
>> > *** marriage, yet no connection in known. It prejudicial
>> > supposition and nothing more. Whatever nutbar sent those envelopes
>> > could have had a different agenda entirely.
>> >
>> > It makes no difference whatsoever to my life if homosexuals can
>> > marry. The "defense of marriage" bullshit is purely that: bullshit.
>> > It's bigotry and prejudice wrapped in a cloak of sanctity to try
>> > to make it look better. My wife and I have been married 14 years
>> > and there is no effect that *** marriage can have on the sanctity
>> > of our marriage. Since *** marriage can have no deleterious effect
>> > on the marriages and families of straight Americans, why should
>> > gays and *******s be denied the right to marry?
>> >
>> > The Right Wing's belief that they should have the power to
>> > interfere in and control the private lives of others is a stunning
>> > example of their hypocrisy. Limited government, fiscal
>> > responsibility and personal freedom my ass. The Right Wing is
>> > about theocracy, pure and simple. Why do they hate the
>> > Constitution?
>>
>> No one's telling you where you can and can't stick it. Go butt****
>> each other and have fun.
>
> You are just another bigoted homophobe- so much so that you can't even
> conceive of a straight man supporting the rights of gays/*******s to
> marry. No wonder you hide behind a sock puppet.

Thanks for the fine example of tolerance...

On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:02:45 -0700, Michelle Steiner wrote:

Not that I'm happy about defendning Christians, but:


> But using your logic, Christians blow up and/or burn health-care
> facilities

How many?

>, murder doctors

How many?

>, murder gays,


How many?

> murder Jews,

How many? When?

> burn
> African-American churches,

How many? When?

> and murder each other for not being the right
> flavor of Christianity.

How many? When?



Compare those numbers to the numbers killed/blown up in the name of Islam
over the past decade or two.

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:41:28 -0500, tar~bal wrote:

> "Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article > , "tar~bal"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, because gays are so upstanding and moral. Like throwing condoms
>>> in church and swearing in front of the kids and whatnot. It's the
>>> ANTI-gays that are terrible, not the diseased perverts...
>>
>> Most of the people I see swearing in front of kids are straight not
>> ***. Nobody's ever thrown a condom in any church I've ever been in, for
>> any reason, including people who are ***. I've never seen a homosexual
>> person physically attack another person because they differed in sexual
>> orientation.
>>
>> But I have seen self-appointed "defenders of the faith" standing in the
>> way of openly *** Catholics to prevent them from receiving the
>> Eucharist. I've seen "upstanding" Christians screaming in fury at
>> quiet, peaceful gays and *******s, damning them and praying that they
>> go to hell. I've seen anti-*** demonstrators disrupting the funerals
>> of the honored war dead (who were not ***) in order to make some kind
>> of insane point about homosexuality. I've seen "conservatives" demand
>> from a state legislative committee the power to strip Constitutional
>> rights from homosexuals. Homosexuals have been murdered- many times-
>> simply for being homosexual.
>>
>> Many of the kindest and most ethical people I know are homosexual.
>
> LOL You need to get out more.

Maybe it's you who needs to, LR. The *** people I know have been in (on
average) longer monogamous relationships than the married couples I
know. They're responsible, reasonable, generally gentle people.

Of course I work in and live near NYC, and attitudes like yours about ***
people are rare and dwindling around here. Maybe that's why they're not
like the ones you describe that you see near where you live.

"KK" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:41:28 -0500, tar~bal wrote:
>
>> "Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In article > , "tar~bal"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, because gays are so upstanding and moral. Like throwing condoms
>>>> in church and swearing in front of the kids and whatnot. It's the
>>>> ANTI-gays that are terrible, not the diseased perverts...
>>>
>>> Most of the people I see swearing in front of kids are straight not
>>> ***. Nobody's ever thrown a condom in any church I've ever been in, for
>>> any reason, including people who are ***. I've never seen a homosexual
>>> person physically attack another person because they differed in sexual
>>> orientation.
>>>
>>> But I have seen self-appointed "defenders of the faith" standing in the
>>> way of openly *** Catholics to prevent them from receiving the
>>> Eucharist. I've seen "upstanding" Christians screaming in fury at
>>> quiet, peaceful gays and *******s, damning them and praying that they
>>> go to hell. I've seen anti-*** demonstrators disrupting the funerals
>>> of the honored war dead (who were not ***) in order to make some kind
>>> of insane point about homosexuality. I've seen "conservatives" demand
>>> from a state legislative committee the power to strip Constitutional
>>> rights from homosexuals. Homosexuals have been murdered- many times-
>>> simply for being homosexual.
>>>
>>> Many of the kindest and most ethical people I know are homosexual.
>>
>> LOL You need to get out more.
>
> Maybe it's you who needs to, LR. The *** people I know have been in (on
> average) longer monogamous relationships than the married couples I
> know. They're responsible, reasonable, generally gentle people.

Well maybe you know horrible married couples or rare *** couples.

>
> Of course I work in and live near NYC, and attitudes like yours about ***
> people are rare and dwindling around here. Maybe that's why they're not
> like the ones you describe that you see near where you live.

Of course NYC is the bastion of the liberal world, so you should keep in
mind that there is a whole world out there that is NOTHING like the big
apple. Maybe the ones down here are treated like the ones in California and
Michigan or wherever that cause them to act out in such irresponsible ways
like sucking dick in the middle of a public street or interrupting church
svcs or throwing toilet paper at the mayor.

I would suggest that I am exposed to more of the ugly underbelly of gays in
S. Florida than you are in NY. I don't know about up there, but it was
reported that Ft. Lauderdale was being advertised as a hot spot for ***
anonymous hookup sex in international web pages. For years we have had some
of the most dangerous and notorious *** clubs where people we o.d.ing and
spreading AIDS with impunity.

The fact that gays would protest the mayor for being against gays having
public sex in bathrooms say a lot about the mentality of the freaks down
here. Maybe if they acted more like they do up there, it wouldn't be so
bad. A lot of residents used to complain about the Spring Break atmosphere
down here, but it was only to be replaced with *** spring break, people from
all over the country coming here and thinking that anything goes.

These people need to be pushed out of the city or locked up.

"Michelle Steiner" > wrote in message
...
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>> >> No one's telling you where you can and can't stick it. Go
>> >> butt**** each other and have fun.
>> >
>> > You are just another bigoted homophobe- so much so that you can't
>> > even conceive of a straight man supporting the rights of
>> > gays/*******s to marry. No wonder you hide behind a sock puppet.
>>
>> Thanks for the fine example of tolerance...
>
> You don't know what tolerance is. It's really simple; if you fight
> someone, expect them to fight back. If you don't like that, then don't
> start a fight.

Exactly. Reread the article and get back to me. Unless you think this
behavior is acceptable.

"Michelle Steiner" > wrote in message
...
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>> > Wrong-o again, dude. In fact, the militant agenda is on the parts
>> > of the homophobes like you.
>>
>> I'm not afraid of homos, they disgust me. There's a difference.
>
> And you bigots disgust me.
>
>> > And you know what they say about homophobes.
>>
>> That you hope to turn them *** some day? Yeah, I know, you people
>> surround yourselves with so many deviants that you don't know where
>> reality ends and the gays' perception of it begins...
>
> You are one of the last people who should talk about reality; it is
> foreign to you.

Yeah right. Tell me how people that don't like gays are ***, how gays are
more moral than heterosexuals, how same sex marriage is the same as normal
marriage.

Yeah, I'm living in a real bizzaro world and YOU are the normal one. LOL

"Michelle Steiner" > wrote in message
...
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>> >> I guess you haven't been paying attention. Your militant ***
>> >> agenda has turned normal people against you.
>> >
>> > On the contrary, normal people have no problem with us. Only evil
>> > people like you are against us.
>>
>> So the vast amount of people that voted down homo weddings are evil?
>> Ok.
>
> There is a difference between being against us, as you are, and being
> ignorant, as most of those voters were.


Do you think for a moment that maybe, JUST MAYBE, those voters may have
known EXACTLY what they were doing? Or is being all knowing innate like
being *** supposedly is (but isn't).


> You are a malignancy, destroying the fabric of civilization.

LOLOL!!! Yeah, you belong to the contingent that want to force the concepts
of sodomy in a ten year old's classroom, but I'm destroying the fabric of
civilization!

Sorry, pal. I'm the normal one and you're the sicko.

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:54:27 -0500, tar~bal wrote:

> "KK" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:41:28 -0500, tar~bal wrote:
>>
>>> "Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> In article > ,
>>>> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, because gays are so upstanding and moral. Like throwing
>>>>> condoms in church and swearing in front of the kids and whatnot.
>>>>> It's the ANTI-gays that are terrible, not the diseased perverts...
>>>>
>>>> Most of the people I see swearing in front of kids are straight not
>>>> ***. Nobody's ever thrown a condom in any church I've ever been in,
>>>> for any reason, including people who are ***. I've never seen a
>>>> homosexual person physically attack another person because they
>>>> differed in sexual orientation.
>>>>
>>>> But I have seen self-appointed "defenders of the faith" standing in
>>>> the way of openly *** Catholics to prevent them from receiving the
>>>> Eucharist. I've seen "upstanding" Christians screaming in fury at
>>>> quiet, peaceful gays and *******s, damning them and praying that they
>>>> go to hell. I've seen anti-*** demonstrators disrupting the funerals
>>>> of the honored war dead (who were not ***) in order to make some kind
>>>> of insane point about homosexuality. I've seen "conservatives"
>>>> demand from a state legislative committee the power to strip
>>>> Constitutional rights from homosexuals. Homosexuals have been
>>>> murdered- many times- simply for being homosexual.
>>>>
>>>> Many of the kindest and most ethical people I know are homosexual.
>>>
>>> LOL You need to get out more.
>>
>> Maybe it's you who needs to, LR. The *** people I know have been in
>> (on average) longer monogamous relationships than the married couples I
>> know. They're responsible, reasonable, generally gentle people.
>
> Well maybe you know horrible married couples or rare *** couples.


Sounds like I know more *** people than you do. And if you have some
statistics to be able to call them "rare" I'd love to see it.


>> Of course I work in and live near NYC, and attitudes like yours about
>> *** people are rare and dwindling around here. Maybe that's why
>> they're not like the ones you describe that you see near where you
>> live.
>
> Of course NYC is the bastion of the liberal world, so you should keep in
> mind that there is a whole world out there that is NOTHING like the big
> apple. Maybe the ones down here are treated like the ones in California
> and Michigan or wherever that cause them to act out in such
> irresponsible ways like sucking dick in the middle of a public street or
> interrupting church svcs or throwing toilet paper at the mayor.
> I would suggest that I am exposed to more of the ugly underbelly of gays
> in S. Florida than you are in NY.


Maybe it's the intolerance that makes the activists you see so in-your-
face.

> I don't know about up there, but it
> was reported that Ft. Lauderdale was being advertised as a hot spot for
> *** anonymous hookup sex in international web pages. For years we have
> had some of the most dangerous and notorious *** clubs where people we
> o.d.ing and spreading AIDS with impunity.

NY has Fire Island, Greenwich Village (and, let's be honest, neighboring
Chelsea and Soho). They're world-famous for gayness but there's no
outside public *** sex. "*** anonymous hookup sex" occurs when ***
people have to go underground - which also comes with intolerance.



> The fact that gays would protest the mayor for being against gays having
> public sex in bathrooms say a lot about the mentality of the freaks down
> here. Maybe if they acted more like they do up there, it wouldn't be so
> bad. A lot of residents used to complain about the Spring Break
> atmosphere down here, but it was only to be replaced with *** spring
> break, people from all over the country coming here and thinking that
> anything goes.
>
> These people need to be pushed out of the city or locked up.

I don't disagree about people causing public nuisances. But again you're
associating the boring, monogamous, *** professional couple with the
outdoor-buttsex guy. And that doesn't make sense.

"KK" > wrote in message
...

>> Well maybe you know horrible married couples or rare *** couples.
>
>
> Sounds like I know more *** people than you do. And if you have some
> statistics to be able to call them "rare" I'd love to see it.



I doubt that seriously.



>
>
>>> Of course I work in and live near NYC, and attitudes like yours about
>>> *** people are rare and dwindling around here. Maybe that's why
>>> they're not like the ones you describe that you see near where you
>>> live.
>>
>> Of course NYC is the bastion of the liberal world, so you should keep in
>> mind that there is a whole world out there that is NOTHING like the big
>> apple. Maybe the ones down here are treated like the ones in California
>> and Michigan or wherever that cause them to act out in such
>> irresponsible ways like sucking dick in the middle of a public street or
>> interrupting church svcs or throwing toilet paper at the mayor.
>> I would suggest that I am exposed to more of the ugly underbelly of gays
>> in S. Florida than you are in NY.
>
>
> Maybe it's the intolerance that makes the activists you see so in-your-
> face.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc?

"Michelle Steiner" > wrote in message
...
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>> > There is a difference between being against us, as you are, and
>> > being ignorant, as most of those voters were.
>>
>> Do you think for a moment that maybe, JUST MAYBE, those voters may
>> have known EXACTLY what they were doing?
>
> Yes, I did, and I rejected the notion.

Delusional. Congratulations.

>
>> > You are a malignancy, destroying the fabric of civilization.
>>
>> LOLOL!!! Yeah, you belong to the contingent that want to force the
>> concepts of sodomy in a ten year old's classroom,
>
> Wrong; no one wants to do that, you lying mother ****er.

Well, I posted a link to the contrary, so I guess that makes you wrong, dick
sucker.

>
>> but I'm destroying the fabric of civilization!
>
> That's right, because you're a lying mother ****er, intent on
> oppression, repression, and subjugation.

Where did I lie? And it appears to me that you are bigoted and judgmental.
That really shows a lot of tolerance and acceptance on your behalf. You
should work on that if you expect others to be tolerant and accepting...

>
>> Sorry, pal. I'm the normal one and you're the sicko.
>
> I'm not your pal; I don't allow evil people like you to be my pals.
> You're about as normal as the average Klansman or White Supremacist.

Real nice, pervert. Now you're just being ridiculous. WWJD?

"Michelle Steiner" > wrote in message
...
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>> > You are one of the last people who should talk about reality; it is
>> > foreign to you.
>>
>> Yeah right. Tell me how people that don't like gays are ***, how
>> gays are more moral than heterosexuals, how same sex marriage is the
>> same as normal marriage.
>
> Gays are as moral as heterosexuals; sexual orientation has nothing to do
> with morality. And same-sex marriage is the same as heterosexual
> marriage, except that thus far the divorce rate is much lower than the
> straight's 50% divorce rate.

You forgot to address the one that mindless gays always parrot: How if you
don't like gays, you must be *** yourself. Talk about a mental problem.
LOL

And same sex marriage is nothing like normal marriage. It may seem to be
if you are ***, but if you aren't, you know that it's all about playing
house and complaining about something you can't do for the simple reason of
attracting attention to yourself.

As for the divorce rate, the reason that it's 50% is because the same sick
****s keep getting divorced. It doesn't mean that of every citizen that
holds a marriage certificate, 50% of them will end in divorce. It means
that there are some serial marriers out there skewing the statistic. Oh,
and I find those people to be reprehensible if they have children. Divorce
is such a selfish act to subject a child to...

"KK" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:02:24 +0000, BaJoRi wrote:
>
>
>>> Dude- or dudette as the case may be- fascism in the United States is
>>> from the Right Wing, which believes that it has the right to be the
>>> moral police
>>
>> Are you not the same, pushing your agenda, to force through *** marriage
>> (which to a great many people is a moral argument)
>
> Forbidding it is a moral judgment, the imposition of one's morals upon
> another.

The law books are completely full of crimes based on moral judgment.
Prostitution, gambling, child exploitation, "animal cruelty", I could cite
a million of them. They are not unique in any way.

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:36:18 -0500, tar~bal wrote:

> "KK" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>> Well maybe you know horrible married couples or rare *** couples.
>>
>>
>> Sounds like I know more *** people than you do. And if you have some
>> statistics to be able to call them "rare" I'd love to see it.
>
>
>
> I doubt that seriously.

That I know more *** people than you do? I went to a liberal school with
*** all over the place. While I was there, and for a while after, I
worked in fine dining - 'nuff said. I can't count how many *** guys I
worked with during that time, and I'm still in friendly contact with
more than a few of them.

In each of the four jobs I've had since entering the grown-up world, I've
had at least two *** guys in the departments I've worked in. Some were
out in the open, some were more private about it.

That's not even counting family and friends / friends of friends.

When you hear '***' you hear 'street activist / bathroom sex / *** sex ed
in school'. That's not what leaps to mind if you're familiar with
regular *** people.




>
>
>
>
>>
>>>> Of course I work in and live near NYC, and attitudes like yours about
>>>> *** people are rare and dwindling around here. Maybe that's why
>>>> they're not like the ones you describe that you see near where you
>>>> live.
>>>
>>> Of course NYC is the bastion of the liberal world, so you should keep
>>> in mind that there is a whole world out there that is NOTHING like the
>>> big apple. Maybe the ones down here are treated like the ones in
>>> California and Michigan or wherever that cause them to act out in such
>>> irresponsible ways like sucking dick in the middle of a public street
>>> or interrupting church svcs or throwing toilet paper at the mayor. I
>>> would suggest that I am exposed to more of the ugly underbelly of gays
>>> in S. Florida than you are in NY.
>>
>>
>> Maybe it's the intolerance that makes the activists you see so in-your-
>> face.
>
> Post hoc ergo propter hoc?


How? In-your-face *** activism has lessened in places where it's become
accepted. Do you have some theory that acceptance followed the decrease
in activism, instead of the other way around? If so, what caused the
decrease?

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:46:56 -0500, tar~bal wrote:

> "KK" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:02:24 +0000, BaJoRi wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Dude- or dudette as the case may be- fascism in the United States is
>>>> from the Right Wing, which believes that it has the right to be the
>>>> moral police
>>>
>>> Are you not the same, pushing your agenda, to force through ***
>>> marriage (which to a great many people is a moral argument)
>>
>> Forbidding it is a moral judgment, the imposition of one's morals upon
>> another.
>
> The law books are completely full of crimes based on moral judgment.
> Prostitution, gambling, child exploitation, "animal cruelty", I could
> cite a million of them. They are not unique in any way.

I didn't say no laws were based on whatever passed for morality at the
time. You accused Bajori of being the same as the "moral police" and of
forcing an agenda on people.

That's silly. Without non-sequitur complaining about what *you* are
worried about (but which has nothing to do with *** marriage other than
some of the people who support one also support the other) you can't tell
us what it is that would be "forced" on people.

Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>>> Gays are as moral as heterosexuals; sexual orientation has nothing
>>> to do with morality. And same-sex marriage is the same as
>>> heterosexual marriage, except that thus far the divorce rate is
>>> much lower than the straight's 50% divorce rate.
>> You forgot to address the one that mindless gays always parrot: How
>> if you don't like gays, you must be *** yourself.
>
> Actually, we don't say that; we say that some of the more virulent
> homophobes may be self-hating closet homosexuals.

People like Ted Haggard and Larry Craig?

"KK" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:36:18 -0500, tar~bal wrote:
>
>> "KK" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>> Well maybe you know horrible married couples or rare *** couples.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds like I know more *** people than you do. And if you have some
>>> statistics to be able to call them "rare" I'd love to see it.
>>
>>
>>
>> I doubt that seriously.
>
> That I know more *** people than you do? I went to a liberal school with
> *** all over the place. While I was there, and for a while after, I
> worked in fine dining - 'nuff said. I can't count how many *** guys I
> worked with during that time, and I'm still in friendly contact with
> more than a few of them.
>
> In each of the four jobs I've had since entering the grown-up world, I've
> had at least two *** guys in the departments I've worked in. Some were
> out in the open, some were more private about it.
>
> That's not even counting family and friends / friends of friends.
>
> When you hear '***' you hear 'street activist / bathroom sex / *** sex ed
> in school'. That's not what leaps to mind if you're familiar with
> regular *** people.


Well maybe you hang around more *** places than I do, but there were a lot
in my college, too, but that was back when I was liberal so I didn't see
anything they did as anything I cared about. But I DO have three *** family
members that are still alive, one that killed himself and one that died of
AIDS (those two on my wife's side of the family). Not that I really care
about going for the *** cred that much, but two of my office employees have
*** kids and I work with two of them directly on one of my current projects.

>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>> Of course I work in and live near NYC, and attitudes like yours about
>>>>> *** people are rare and dwindling around here. Maybe that's why
>>>>> they're not like the ones you describe that you see near where you
>>>>> live.
>>>>
>>>> Of course NYC is the bastion of the liberal world, so you should keep
>>>> in mind that there is a whole world out there that is NOTHING like the
>>>> big apple. Maybe the ones down here are treated like the ones in
>>>> California and Michigan or wherever that cause them to act out in such
>>>> irresponsible ways like sucking dick in the middle of a public street
>>>> or interrupting church svcs or throwing toilet paper at the mayor. I
>>>> would suggest that I am exposed to more of the ugly underbelly of gays
>>>> in S. Florida than you are in NY.
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe it's the intolerance that makes the activists you see so in-your-
>>> face.
>>
>> Post hoc ergo propter hoc?
>
>
> How? In-your-face *** activism has lessened in places where it's become
> accepted. Do you have some theory that acceptance followed the decrease
> in activism, instead of the other way around? If so, what caused the
> decrease?

You are telling me something that I don't know to be fact. I mean,
California is supposedly the most accepting place in the world of gays, or
at least until the last election, and they seem to have more protests than
anywhere else in the country right now, so I would say that your claim is
false.

"Michelle Steiner" > wrote in message
...
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>> >> LOLOL!!! Yeah, you belong to the contingent that want to force
>> >> the concepts of sodomy in a ten year old's classroom,
>> >
>> > Wrong; no one wants to do that, you lying mother ****er.
>>
>> Well, I posted a link to the contrary, so I guess that makes you
>> wrong,
>
> No you didn't. You said that's what the link means, but it doesn't.

Because you're too addled to figure out what it means doesn't mean that it
doesn't.

>
>> dick sucker.
>
> Watch those insults, asshole. I'm a *******, not one of your
> cock-sucking bimbos.


Whatever. You clearly are one of those self loathing gays that will do
anything to try to make their cause something that others will take notice
of, even at the detriment of children.


>
>> > That's right, because you're a lying mother ****er, intent on
>> > oppression, repression, and subjugation.
>>
>> Where did I lie?
>
> Just about everything you have said about gays.

So no cite, just a prejudged generalization. Hmm...

>
>> And it appears to me that you are bigoted and judgmental.
>
> That's because you can't accept what you really are.

Sure I can. I'm happy with the way I am. Are you happy with the way YOU
are? I'd love to meet a ******* that didn't have a ****ing chip on their
shoulder about everything in life. For some reason I have a feeling today
won't be my lucky day, either.

>
>> That really shows a lot of tolerance and acceptance on your behalf.
>
> I tolerate thugs like you the same way that blacks tolerate the Klan.

Don't be ridiculous, I wouldn't light a cross in front of your house or
string you up or anything like the Klan would do to blacks. I just have an
issue with your terrorist tactics and think they're wrong. And I think that
bringing graphic words describing your sex acts into classrooms full of ten
year olds is reprehensible. Other than that I'm sure you're a nice person
with only a few mental defects...

>
>> >> Sorry, pal. I'm the normal one and you're the sicko.
>> >
>> > I'm not your pal; I don't allow evil people like you to be my pals.
>> > You're about as normal as the average Klansman or White
>> > Supremacist.
>>
>> Real nice, pervert. Now you're just being ridiculous.
>
> The truth about you hurts, doesn't it?

What would you know about truth? You aren't even tuned in to NORMAL. LOL

>
>> WWJD?
>
> Nothing that you would do, that's for sure. Christianity is a wonderful
> religion; too bad that most Christians today don't practice it.

Maybe we could shuffle together the gays and the xtians and at the end of
the day, all that would be left is their good traits. Yeah, right.

"Michelle Steiner" > wrote in message
...
> In article > ,
> "tar~bal" > wrote:
>
>> > Gays are as moral as heterosexuals; sexual orientation has nothing
>> > to do with morality. And same-sex marriage is the same as
>> > heterosexual marriage, except that thus far the divorce rate is
>> > much lower than the straight's 50% divorce rate.
>>
>> You forgot to address the one that mindless gays always parrot: How
>> if you don't like gays, you must be *** yourself.
>
> Actually, we don't say that; we say that some of the more virulent
> homophobes may be self-hating closet homosexuals. Note the qualifiers,
> you lying mother ****er.
>
>> And same sex marriage is nothing like normal marriage.
>
> Yeah, same-sex marriage is not shotgun marriages caused by pregnancy,
> like Bristol Palin's. Same-sex marriage does not have a 50% divorce
> rate, like heterosexual marriage. Other than that, though, they're
> essentially the same: two people who love each other, and who want to
> spend the rest of their lives together. (Yes, even those het marriages
> that end in divorce usually start out wanting to spend the rest of their
> lives together.)
>
>> As for the divorce rate, the reason that it's 50% is because the same
>> sick ****s keep getting divorced.
>
> Their numbers are so small that they don't affect the overall percentage
> all that much.

Funny how you responded to my comments in the above manner and still have
the nerve to call me a liar.

I have to say that I have really enjoyed this exchange. Are you always
this passionate, or does it only occur about a week out of the month.

"KK" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:46:56 -0500, tar~bal wrote:
>
>> "KK" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:02:24 +0000, BaJoRi wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Dude- or dudette as the case may be- fascism in the United States is
>>>>> from the Right Wing, which believes that it has the right to be the
>>>>> moral police
>>>>
>>>> Are you not the same, pushing your agenda, to force through ***
>>>> marriage (which to a great many people is a moral argument)
>>>
>>> Forbidding it is a moral judgment, the imposition of one's morals upon
>>> another.
>>
>> The law books are completely full of crimes based on moral judgment.
>> Prostitution, gambling, child exploitation, "animal cruelty", I could
>> cite a million of them. They are not unique in any way.
>
> I didn't say no laws were based on whatever passed for morality at the
> time. You accused Bajori of being the same as the "moral police" and of
> forcing an agenda on people.
>
> That's silly. Without non-sequitur complaining about what *you* are
> worried about (but which has nothing to do with *** marriage other than
> some of the people who support one also support the other) you can't tell
> us what it is that would be "forced" on people.

Huh?

"Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "BaJoRi" > wrote:
>
>> "Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article
>> > >,
>> > evadnikufesin > wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article >,
>> >> "Andrew McGee" > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > So, let's get this straight (so to speak).
>> >> >
>> >> > If these militant gays would cease their activities, you would
>> >> > start to support single-sex marriage.
>> >> >
>> >> > Just confirm that that's right, would you?
>> >>
>> >> Quit mixing issues. We're talking about hatecrimes here from
>> >> fascist groups.
>> >>
>> >> Totally unamerican.
>> >
>> > Dude- or dudette as the case may be- fascism in the United States
>> > is from the Right Wing, which believes that it has the right to be
>> > the moral police
>>
>> Are you not the same, pushing your agenda, to force through ***
>> marriage (which to a great many people is a moral argument) and the
>> *** lifestyle?
>
> Nope. First, I'm straight and married for 14 years so far. Second, I
> believe in the freedom of people to make their own choices in this
> matter. There is no "forcing" of *** marriage or the "*** lifestyle" on
> anyone who doesn't want it (BTW it's not a lifestyle, sexual orientation
> is wired before birth). Supporting the guarantee of equal civil rights
> for all is anti-fascism.
>
>> > and to set up a theocracy. People like James Dobson are
>> > the American proto-Taliban. Groups supporting *** marriage are not
>> > fascist, because they are not trying to force people to marry
>> > homosexuals; it's that anti-*** marriage groups that are fascist in
>> > their tendencies (hiding, as fascists always do, behind facile
>> > slogans like "Country First").
>>
>> YOU have done NOTHING to differentiate yourself from those people.
>
> Eh, dude, I'd say I'm plenty differentiated from Dobson and his ilk. I
> support personal freedom, whereas Dobson & Co. think they should make
> your choices for you because you can't be trusted to make the "right"
> choices (that is, the choices they think you should make).

Sorry, you have still done nothing to show that you are different. If
someone believes in the hear that homosexuality is wrong, and to have any of
it in society is wrong, your goal is to force your beliefs and what you
think is "right" on those people. In other words, no matter what the issue,
one side or the other will not be happy with the results.

BaJoRi > wrote:

> "Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
> ...

> > Eh, dude, I'd say I'm plenty differentiated from Dobson and his ilk. I
> > support personal freedom, whereas Dobson & Co. think they should make
> > your choices for you because you can't be trusted to make the "right"
> > choices (that is, the choices they think you should make).
>
> Sorry, you have still done nothing to show that you are different. If
> someone believes in the hear that homosexuality is wrong, and to have any of
> it in society is wrong, your goal is to force your beliefs and what you
> think is "right" on those people. In other words, no matter what the issue,
> one side or the other will not be happy with the results.

Apparently you can't tell the difference between person X wanting to
have the right to exist and person Y wanting to have the right to tell
person X he can't exist. That's a sad commentary on you. I see a world
of difference. It is pretty easy for me to see which one is forcing
things on the other.

Oh, and I'm straight, 35-years married, and the thought of homosexual
sex makes me physically ill. (For that matter, so does the though of sex
with some women like the morbidly obese neighbor friend, but I digress).
But I can also figure out that it is none of my business and that
homosexuals shouldn't need to come get my permission to get married. I
sure as hell didn't have figured it was anyone else's business who I
choose to marry. I don't even recall asking her father for permission;
I'm fairly traditionalist, but not that much so; we instead just told
him about our decision to get married.

--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain

In article > ,
"tar~bal" > wrote:

> D.F. Manno > wrote:
> > "tar~bal" > wrote:
> >> D.F. Manno > wrote:
> >> > "tar~bal" > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I guess this is what passes for a constructive and healthy
> >> >> dialog on the issues in the *** community. While not all
> >> >> gays did this, I would suspect that a number of them are in
> >> >> solidarity with the act.
> >> >
> >> > Ya know, the Mormons have enemies, including those polygamous
> >> > Mormon sects. Their enemies or someone else could have done
> >> > this, knowing that people like you would pin it on the gays.
> >> >
> >> > How about waiting until they find out who did it before you
> >> > treat us to another anti-*** rant?
> >>
> >> Let's just say it's in line with the other stories that I posted, 'kay?
> >
> > Let's not, not without, you know, _evidence_?
>
> Is it your opinion that not one *** person out there could have actually
> done this?

That's not what I said. You really need to work on that comprehension
problem.

The point is that at the moment the only person who knows who did it is
the person who did it. Your attempt to link it to *** activists is
nothing more than uninformed speculation.

--
D.F. Manno |

This time _we_ won. This time _you_ get over it.

In article >,
Batman > wrote:

> By gayness I mean that in English Lit you may
> study a few stories about hetero couples, then a story or 2 about ***
> couples. And students that have an awkwardness towards the opposite sex
> (and who doesn't at that age?) will find it easier finding a mate with
> the same sex. Easier psychologically that is.

This is more a display of your latent homosexual tendencies than it is a
statement of fact. Reading stories about *** people won't make people
*** any more than reading stories about boats makes people sailors.

--
D.F. Manno |

This time _we_ won. This time _you_ get over it.

D.F. Manno wrote:
> In article >,
> Batman > wrote:
>
>> By gayness I mean that in English Lit you may
>> study a few stories about hetero couples, then a story or 2 about ***
>> couples. And students that have an awkwardness towards the opposite sex
>> (and who doesn't at that age?) will find it easier finding a mate with
>> the same sex. Easier psychologically that is.
>
> This is more a display of your latent homosexual tendencies than it is a
> statement of fact. Reading stories about *** people won't make people
> *** any more than reading stories about boats makes people sailors.

Yeah -- this "Batman" has done more to improve Frederic Wertham's
posthumous reputation than Bush has to improve Warren G. Harding's.
--
John W. Kennedy
"Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the
throne of the kingdom of idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts"
-- J. Michael Straczynski. "Babylon 5", "Ceremonies of Light and Dark"

In article > ,
"tar~bal" > wrote:

> I'd love to meet a ******* that didn't have a ****ing chip on their
> shoulder about everything in life.

Not about everything in life, just you.

--
D.F. Manno |

This time _we_ won. This time _you_ get over it.

"Richard Maine" > wrote in message
.. .
> BaJoRi > wrote:
>
>> "Tim McNamara" > wrote in message
>> ...
>
>> > Eh, dude, I'd say I'm plenty differentiated from Dobson and his ilk. I
>> > support personal freedom, whereas Dobson & Co. think they should make
>> > your choices for you because you can't be trusted to make the "right"
>> > choices (that is, the choices they think you should make).
>>
>> Sorry, you have still done nothing to show that you are different. If
>> someone believes in the hear that homosexuality is wrong, and to have any
>> of
>> it in society is wrong, your goal is to force your beliefs and what you
>> think is "right" on those people. In other words, no matter what the
>> issue,
>> one side or the other will not be happy with the results.
>
> Apparently you can't tell the difference between person X wanting to
> have the right to exist and person Y wanting to have the right to tell
> person X he can't exist.

I agree that someone teling someone else to burn in hell and die is a little
much. However, for every idiot bible-thumper who spouts that type of
nonsense, so we can find a militant *** activist who finds it very
justifiable to do the same thing, while condemning others for the same act.


>That's a sad commentary on you. I see a world
> of difference. It is pretty easy for me to see which one is forcing
> things on the other.

Whether you like it or not, people have every right to approve or disapprove
of homosexuality. While you claim it is wrong for people to force you to
adhere to their views, through things like Prop 8, etc. So it is also wrong
for people to try and force their own views of homosexuality on others, by
whetever means necessary, notably trying to get tolerance for such to be
placed into the curriculum of public schools. And don't tell me that isn't
happening, as I just went to a school board meeting in my area where that
was on the agenda, to be put in the classroom of my second grade child.


>
> Oh, and I'm straight, 35-years married, and the thought of homosexual
> sex makes me physically ill. (For that matter, so does the though of sex
> with some women like the morbidly obese neighbor friend, but I digress).

It doesn't matter straight or ***. It really doesn't (and by the way, the
thought of Hillary Clinton in spandex would put most men off sex forever). I
am all for *** marriage, and equal rights, etc. But I am absolutely appalled
at the hypocrisy of people who claim that it is important for their views to
be heard, but would deny that right to others, when they disagree with them.
And I am absolutely ****ed off at the tactics being used to force people to
adhere to their viewpoints; mainly the teaching of homosexual lifestyles in
grade schools, or any public-funded schools, for that matter.

> But I can also figure out that it is none of my business and that
> homosexuals shouldn't need to come get my permission to get married.

My personal feeling is that the government doesn't have the Constitutional
authority to permit marriage to ANYONE, let alone *** or straight. Marriage
is a religious observance, and therefore should be covered under the
separation of Church and State. My feeling is, since marriage is a religious
ceremony (and of the government insists on being involved with such), if the
government recognizes the tax-exempt status of a specific church or religion
and that church or religion performs a religious ceremony, to straight or
*** it makes no dofference, then the government should recognize it.

"Michelle Steiner" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "BaJoRi" > wrote:
>
>> > Eh, dude, I'd say I'm plenty differentiated from Dobson and his
>> > ilk. I support personal freedom, whereas Dobson & Co. think they
>> > should make your choices for you because you can't be trusted to
>> > make the "right" choices (that is, the choices they think you
>> > should make).
>>
>> Sorry, you have still done nothing to show that you are different. If
>> someone believes in the hear that homosexuality is wrong, and to have
>> any of it in society is wrong, your goal is to force your beliefs and
>> what you think is "right" on those people. In other words, no matter
>> what the issue, one side or the other will not be happy with the
>> results.
>
> You're looking at it all wrong, which is not surprising. One side
> (yours) is trying to oppress the other side, and deprive it of human
> rights. The other side (mine) is working for liberty and justice for
> all.

As long as it is done your way and there are no dissenting opionions.

>
> I don't give a shit what you believe; it's what you try to do to me that
> matters to me.
>
> BTW, 104 retired generals and admirals have signed a statement that they
> believe that "Don't ask, don't tell" should be done away with:

I agree. I would put all the gays on the front line against the Taliban,
tell them that there is a Penney's on the other side of the hill, and that
there is a TREMENDOUS sale on new drapes.

Gauranteed that there would be no American casualties and thousands of
Taliban would be trampled mercilessly.



> <http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/17/dont.ask.dont.tell/index.html>
>
> You may have won the recent battle, but you're going to lose the war.
> And don't forget that you started the war.

And the stupidity in your stance is that you alienate people that actually
are on your side, but disagree with you tactics. Schools are no place for
you to make your point.


>
> --
> It's now time for healing, and for fixing the damage the GOP did to
> America.

BaJoRi wrote:
> Marriage is a religious observance,

Not all religions believe that. In fact, Protestantism doesn't.
Protestant churches just do weddings because Roman Catholic churches do,
and when countries switched from Roman Catholicism to Protestantism,
someone had to take up the slack.
--
John W. Kennedy
Read the remains of Shakespeare's lost play, now annotated!
http://pws.prserv.net/jwkennedy/Doub...ood/index.html

> Whether you like it or not, people have every right to approve or disapprove
> of homosexuality. While you claim it is wrong for people to force you to
> adhere to their views, through things like Prop 8, etc. So it is also wrong
> for people to try and force their own views of homosexuality on others, by
> whetever means necessary, notably trying to get tolerance for such to be
> placed into the curriculum of public schools. And don't tell me that isn't
> happening, as I just went to a school board meeting in my area where that
> was on the agenda, to be put in the classroom of my second grade child.

See? From an actual parent that's seen it happening. Imagine what it
will be like in 10 years. Will *** educators demand equal time? IOW 1
hetero story for every *** story read in English?

> > Oh, and I'm straight, 35-years married, and the thought of homosexual
> > sex makes me physically ill. (For that matter, so does the though of sex
> > with some women like the morbidly obese neighbor friend, but I digress).
>
> It doesn't matter straight or ***. It really doesn't (and by the way, the
> thought of Hillary Clinton in spandex would put most men off sex forever). I
> am all for *** marriage, and equal rights, etc. But I am absolutely appalled
> at the hypocrisy of people who claim that it is important for their views to
> be heard, but would deny that right to others, when they disagree with them.
> And I am absolutely ****ed off at the tactics being used to force people to
> adhere to their viewpoints; mainly the teaching of homosexual lifestyles in
> grade schools, or any public-funded schools, for that matter.

You see this all boils down to "Do you feel homosexuality is an OK way
to live or not?" You can ignore it but when it broaches your children's
education, you're going to get a very different reaction from straight
parents than the typical "I don't care what you do behind closed doors".
Because what happens behind closed doors always seems to waft into
society sooner or later.

> > But I can also figure out that it is none of my business and that
> > homosexuals shouldn't need to come get my permission to get married.
>
> My personal feeling is that the government doesn't have the Constitutional
> authority to permit marriage to ANYONE, let alone *** or straight. Marriage
> is a religious observance, and therefore should be covered under the
> separation of Church and State. My feeling is, since marriage is a religious
> ceremony (and of the government insists on being involved with such), if the
> government recognizes the tax-exempt status of a specific church or religion
> and that church or religion performs a religious ceremony, to straight or
> *** it makes no dofference, then the government should recognize it.

Its really not about monetary issues - not the big picture. Its about
the legitimizing of it. And that only comes from education. From the
next generation. You want to change society? Control public education.
That is what this is really about - what we will realize in a few
decades when liberals let this pass today.

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 at 12:46:56, tar~bal > wrote in
uk.legal :
>
>"KK" > wrote in message
>>
>> Forbidding it is a moral judgment, the imposition of one's morals upon
>> another.
>
>The law books are completely full of crimes based on moral judgment.
>Prostitution, gambling, child exploitation, "animal cruelty", I could cite
>a million of them. They are not unique in any way.
>
Though some are far more sensible than others - ones about not eating
certain kinds of food seem particularly bizarre to me.
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:27:17 +0000, BaJoRi wrote:

> While you claim it is wrong for people to force you to adhere to their
> views, through things like Prop 8, etc. So it is also wrong for people
> to try and force their own views of homosexuality on others, by whetever
> means necessary, notably trying to get tolerance for such to be placed
> into the curriculum of public schools. And don't tell me that isn't
> happening,

I haven't seen anyone here demand *** sex-ed curriculum, and it wasn't
part of Prop 8, or any other *** marriage bill, referendum, or court
decision about *** marriage.

On Nov 18, 10:55*am, "tar~bal" > wrote:

> Exactly. *Reread the article and get back to me. *Unless you think this
> behavior is acceptable.

This seems like a hoax, the type perpetrated to attempt to get the
gullible
many to blame the *** community. There is no evidence or claim to
any
connection. And there is this particularly off sentence:

>Protests in recent days have targeted the Mormon church, which encouraged
>its members to fight the recently passed amendment banning *** marriage in
>California.

So if I read this right, gays may have targetted a church which
opposed the
amendment to ban *** marriage in California.

Permit me to say "huh"?