Ok folks, feel free to hijack this with your own current events stuff that you feel you need to let others know about...

Ok, so I am an animal lover. Now I am not PETA extreme, but I am all for conservation and do my best to help the animals--domestic and wild. Anyway, I just came across an article about a jerkwad who hates wolves and is up on charges for trying to kill them (they are currently protected until January). The article will follow in a moment. Anyway, a couple points...this jerk is gonna get maybe 6 months with a 5 year probation term-- a slap on the wrist pretty much, not any sort of real punishment... 3 states will be implementing wolf hunting season... I am really pissed about this.

I don't mind hunters like Ted Nugent, who uses as much of his "kill" as possible. Use the meat, the skin, etc...don't just stuff the animal and mount it...but how do you hunt wolf...I mean do you eat it after, or just rejoice in the kill and leave it at that??? Wolves have been on the endangered list for some time now, and now the Fed Gov't will be taking themoff the list and letting the states implement hunting season...WTF

Anyway, here is the article...lemme hear your thoughts...and as I said, if you have your own soapboxing need feel free to use this thread...but please...let's try to be considerate of others. If there are any hunters here, I'd like to hear from you...I want to understand about wolf hunting, and why.

Wolf Hater

I know, and add to it that many of my friends are gay, AND I have a broken down Ford in my garage...I am pretty sure I am destined to burn in Hell.

I got marshmallows Jenn ;oP

Well at least it won't be a weenie roast. =D
Good news tho---the courts found in favor of Kamehameha schools, and they can keep it Hawaiian only. More to come on that...possibly a future soapbox entry...it may still be appealed.

WARNING SARCASTIC COMMENT INCOMING

Oooo... god forbid the Gap should use an all inclusive term for this time of year and dis the christian faith because the word "Christmas" was not used. What, would this organisation wish to say, that other religious holidays practiced at this time of year (Umm Hanukkah for example) be ignored? I say KUDOS to the Gap.

Ok... back to your regularily schedueled program. :o)

Yup...or Kwanzaa...but then the Gap really should only appeal to Christians, cuz if you ain'y Christian, apparently, you ain't...fill in your own expletive.

BACK TO THE WOLF TOPIC>>>
I got this as an email, it is pretty interesting::

Dear Jennifer,

It could be a whole lot harder to see a baby wolf in Wyoming if the state has its way.

In Wyoming, more than 200 wolves, including mothers and pups, could die if the state wins a lawsuit it recently filed. Fortunately, you can help stop the slaughter before it starts… and get a great gift for the wildlife lover on your holiday shopping list.

Adopt a wolf or wolf family for a loved one or yourself and help support Defenders of Wildlife's emergency action to save Wyoming wolves:
http://go.care2.com/e/R2WQ/b6lc/VF_I

Wyoming's lawsuit aims to force the federal government to accept an ill-conceived wolf management plan that calls for the removal of as many as two-thirds of the wolves in Wyoming, allowing for indiscriminate killing throughout 90% of the wolf's Wyoming range outside of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks.

Defenders of Wildlife has already joined emergency legal action to stop Wyoming and mobilized more than 44,000 wildlife activists to send messages urging the state to withdraw its lawsuit. When you adopt a wolf for the holidays, you or a loved one will receive a cute plush wolf, but you also get to know that you're helping Defenders protect Wyoming's wolves and their babies.

Defenders is working on the ground and in the courts to prevent a wolf slaughter in Wyoming. But this is a tough fight, and they need your help to win it.

Adopting a wolf or wolf family is giving more than just an adorable plush toy (shipped first-class for free in time for the holidays). Your gift recipient will feel all warm and fuzzy knowing their gift represents hope for wolves across the United States.

Adopt a wolf or wolf family (to make an especially big difference), and help support crucial efforts to protect Wyoming wolves and other wildlife.

Your wolf gift adoption will also help Defenders work with farmers and ranchers to prevent livestock loss and needless wolf deaths, lobby federal officials for responsible wolf management practices and mobilize grassroots activists to speak out for still-recovering wolves!

This Holiday Season, you can do something meaningful for our wolves... and all the animal lovers on your Holiday list. Please adopt a wolf today and help support our work to save America's magnificent wolves.

Thank you for making a difference,

Hilary Stamper
Care2 and ThePetitionSite.com

P.S. To ensure your Wildlife Gift Adoption is delivered in time for the holidays, please be sure to adopt by 11 PM next Tuesday (December 12th).

GAY RIGHTS>>>

Hell yeah!!! I wish the US would follow suit.
Canada Rocks!!

Most excellent news Jenn... and I agree, why can't the US follow suit?

Well Jenn... it looks like the Gap isn't the first store to have been targets by the AFA for not using "Christmas" in their advertising...

"Tim Wildmon, the American Family Association’s president, said Wal-Mart had been responsive to conservative pressure on a different issue, approving use of the word “Christmas” in advertising and employee greetings this season after shifting to a “happy holidays” phrasing last year."

...as found in this article, about Wal-Mart coming under fire for promoting gay & Lesbian rights in the workplace... Wal-Mart boycott over gays called off

I know, I know... people are probably getting tired of hearing about these issues. But, none the less, these are issues that are still affecting people. Not only here in the States, but also around the world.

One thing, though, I find rather interesting is to see how corporate america has been quicker to look at, and implent, positive changes for equal rights for gays and lesbians in the workplace than the government. Is it because of the "all mighty buck"? Quite possibly. It has been estimated (I forget where I saw it) that the GLBT community accounts for approximately 680 billion dollars of revenue each year.

Perhaps, now that corporate america is signing on together to get some work done in congress, perhaps now we can start seeing some more far reaching change.

Major Companies Back Gay-Rights Legislation

A quote from the article on something that really does need to change...

"The letter supports House Bill 2661, which would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. "It remains legal in 38 states to fire someone because of their sexual orientation," the letter, dated Jan. 10, states. "This is not only bad for business, it is bad for America.""

Why does anyone listen to these groups anyway? Who do they claim to represent? We have a "family association" over here too and they sometimes get on the news, but I see no evidence that they are supported by anyone or anything to suggest that they are standing up for "families" basically they are just a bunch of bigote who get together to promote their own agenda and then throw the word "family" around to get attention. I mean I could go out and form my own group to promote anything I want, but if I put the word "family" in it does that mean I suddenly warrant media attention? The real shame is that alot of people probably beleive that they really are a legitimate group, like a PTA or a political party or something...

Well, how about if I put it this way... You're in a store with a couple of your kids... Which one gets the most attention? The quiet, nearly submissive one, or the one that will throw a tantrum at the drop of a hat when they don't get there way?

*ponders the squeaky wheel philosophy*

*forms the Family United Cookie Club*

Gonna have some problems, methinks when it comes to the printed literature and pamphlets. Correct spelling will be essential. :oP

Back to Christmas -vs- Happy Holidays
Just got this email from the AFA::

December 12, 2006

Please help us get this information into the hands of as many people as possible by forwarding it to your entire email list of family and friends.

Would You Be Willing To Boycott Stores Which Refuse To Allow The Word 'Christmas' To Be Displayed? Take Our Poll.

Dear Jennifer,

Gap, Inc., which owns Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic, Forth & Towne and Piperlime has adamantly refused to allow the word Christmas to be displayed in their stores?

Retailers like Gap want your shopping money, but they refuse to recognize the Reason for the CHRISTmas season.

Christians celebrate Christmas as the birthday of Christ. Yet there are those companies which feel that a public recognition of the birthday of Christ is not appropriate. Why? Because a few people may be offended!

Would you be willing to boycott retailers which refuse to allow the word Christmas to be displayed in their stores? Give us your answer. We will forward the results to those retailers which refuse to allow Christmas to be displayed in their stores or promotions.


Can I just flashback to the 80's and say "Oh gag me with a spoon!"

... and finally, one more ... ~ bump ~ ... and I am done for the night. :o)

have u heard about the xmas trees at the sea-tac airport? haha, a jewish guy complained and all the decorations go bye-bye...why? b/c he has a lawyer and ppl dont like trouble. Also, he said he wanted jewish decorations up, if the tree is to stay, or something like that.

See, to me, THAT is as much BS as this is. Everyone should be allowed to celebrate their holiday, be it Christmas, Hannukah, Kwanzaa, whatever...it is just the EXTREME-ness of it that bugs me. AFA says ban the Gap because they dont say Merry Christmas, this guy Noah mentions get's trees down cuz they aren't doing Hannukah...the extreme thinking is what bugs me, just say Happy Frikken Holidays and cover all the darn bases equally with one statement

...but you may have to say that year round...hindu's have holidays when we dont you know. ;-) Lol, so then it's kindof like, "Happy Holidays 365 days/year...today's holidy: Holi! ...now every1 hit each other with water balloons"

...Holi is a word u have to look up.

Merry Holidays & Happy days off!

Just trying to combine some stuff...

*walks off*

Boy I wonder what the results of that poll might be... seeing as it would be sent specifically to their members. How pointless.

i'd fall under the 'undecided category'...u can send in my vote. =P

What ever happened to DIVERSITY and ACCEPTANCE???

Ok, so another one for my OMFG books...will it never end? At least if someone is playing Halo, they're killing aliens...so if you kill an alien in Halo, but don't pray over it like in this video game, will you go to Hell?

I love that second last paragraph... so telling... so violence and murder are fine with these so-called family groups as long as it promotes their religious beliefs...

Are we talking about Ji-had here? just wondering... i might be way off or offensive.. but... i'm really confused

umm... uhh... O,o

*shakes head*

Why of course Sam... that is the sum of it all. You must fear the One World Government, so that our One World Religious view (government?) does not fall. Just keep in mind... after you "off" somebody for not converting, pray for redemption, and it shall be given. As long as you believe in the one true God, you do not need to be held accountable for your actions.

Isn't that what the game is attempting to teach?

*goes back and sits in the corner to stew in his own sarcastic juices*

Gotta love Charlie Sheen!!!!!
Another email from the AFA wanting to boycott the TV show Two and a Half Men...and here's why (my email)



December 13, 2006

Please help us get this information into the hands of as many people as possible by forwarding it to your entire email list of family and friends.

CBS, Charlie Sheen bash Christ, Christmas and Christians

Charlie Sheen makes Joy to the World into a cheap sex song

Dear Jennifer,

CBS and actor Charlie Sheen have used the Christmas season to ridicule and mock Christ, Christmas and Christians. CBS approved actor Charlie Sheen’s vulgar adaptation of a favorite Christian Christmas carol. On the December 11 program, the network included in their Two and a Half Men an episode featuring Sheen singing about his sexual activity to the tune of the traditional Christmas hymn "Joy to the World."

CBS and Sheen knew that the lyrics would greatly offend Christians, but did not hesitate to air them. Click here to see the episode on CBS.

The episode opens with series star Charlie (Sheen) singing:

“Joy to the world, I’m getting laid; I’m getting laid tonight. We’ll light the yule log, deck the halls, and then we’ll play some jingle balls. It’s been a real long wait – this is our second date! It’s Christmas Eve and I’m getting laid.”

His housekeeper/cook comes in and asks:

“Hey, I’m mixing up the egg nog. You want this broad lit up or just slightly glowing?” “Well,” Charlie says, “let’s see, we’re celebrating peace on earth and good will towards all mankind, so let’s get ‘er plowed!” “Hallelujah!” says the cook.

Charlie returns to singing, “Glo-oh-oh-oh-oh-ria, tonight I’m boinking Gloria!” CBS punctuates every single line with a laugh track.

Take Action

Such actions send a signal from CBS and Hollywood: “It’s ok to bash Christians, their religion and their God.” If you are tired of this bigotry from CBS and Hollywood, please take action and then forward this to your friends and family.

* Click here to send an email to CBS.
* Forward this to your friends and family.

Actually it's good to read things like that because you know that it can only isolate them from sane people/people with a sense of humour.

*waves hands in the air* I have an idea! Let's take all the people who are intolerant of other people's religions/views, and have no ability to take some lighthearted joking, round em all up and put them on the new moonbase. If they have to be stored somewhere while it's getting built, it won't bother me. I'll be fine with it. Really.

*looks up from his corner of sarcasm*

So, they are basically saying it's OK to bash, ridacule and attempt to bully others who are different from them or have a different view point, but it's not ok to do it to them?

Sounds like a fair trade... O,o
Um... boo hoo

*goes back to stewing*

*nods* that's usually about the way it works in their worlds.

Oh give me a BRAKE!!

Now I know Astrology, working with a Bay Area psychic, I was called upon often to chart people...I have done astrology charts for a good 15 years, and if Fresno wasn't so backwards, I'd consider doing it here...but this ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ article makes me LAUGH!!!
**Oh and for the record, I am a Libra, and have NEVER been in an accident caused by me driving (although I have been a passenger in a couple)**

Don'tpeople have something better to do??
Horror Film gets panties in a twist

I like that headline, "Christmas horror movie offends religious groups". Must be useful for cut and paste jobs... just change it slightly and viola: "Computer game offends religious groups"... "New book offends religious groups"... "Baby duck crossing road offends religious groups"...

Horror film loving, computer game playing, educated book reading, pro-choicers of the homosexual persuasion offends religious groups.

I think that covers it all. Right?

Everything offends groups and people. <-- That's basically what it ends up being.

True... but it's what you do with that offence?... Do you attack it? Attempt to strike it out of the common collective? Or... do you accept that there will alwas be differences, and build on what do you have in common despite those differencces? Where groups like the AFA are concerned, it would appear that their position is the one and only position that can be concidered. they do not appear to want to meet others, just half way.

That baby duck... going round offending everyone...

Uh... I kinda lost the plot around 20 posts ago, but here is what I say:

1. Wolf hunting is wrong.

2. Why won't they let gays/lesbians get married? That is extremely unfair. If they love each other, what is wrong?

3. Yes, older drivers need to be checked. Funny story, actually.

I was waiting for my lift to pick me up from school, when an old man in a red car pulled out of his parking space (we were in a parking lot) and drove straight into a car that was parked opposite him. I saw his face, he hadn't even seemed to have noticed. He pulled backwards... straight into another car, and then drove out of the parking lot.

I just remembered, I heard an appalling advertisement for premature ejaculation on the radio set to the tune of "Jingle Bells". Talk about offensive!!! Not only because it was tateless, but just painful and embarrassing in so many ways...

So, I guess SOMEONES bells were jingling...and from the sounds of it, a bit sooner than should be!!!

...

I got one..i saw a bumper sticker that said: "NO VETERANS...NO AMERICA"

There is only 1 war in the world that i can think of that was a threat to america: WWII.

...just wanted to point that out. :-S

??????????
That was a bit random.

Ok, now I have mixed feelings on this subject...one one hand I think if you are proven without a doubt to be guilty of a capital punishment crime, then you forfeit all rights, and in my book should die a nasty death (often the way the victims did)...that being said...for the one or two that may actually be innocent, the death penalty would plain suck.
So anyway, there are claims that lethal injections may be painful to the inmate, and have since had a temporary ban placed...now to that I say...Boo Frikken Hoo...if you're guilty, if you raped and murdered someone...gee I'm so sorry (NOT!!!) if the lethal injection is a bit painful...it is probably much kinder than what I would do if anyone harmed my kids or family/friends...
So lemme hear your opinions.

Oh BooHoo...Whatever!

A brief revive here...

<Rant on>
You know, I find it rather irksome when your local newspaper has articles like THIS and manages to completely ignore the deaths that may have been hate crimes against the LGBT community.

2 unresolved cases of finding male college students in the lake, wearing only chaps, in town here. Others also just south of us.

A friend of mine, John K., an outspoken activist for GLBT rights and HIV/AIDS awareness. A founding father for our local GLBT Community Center, as well as a member on several HIV state based HIV planning commities, of which I served with him on our regional Ryan White Consortium. Where was he found? In the river by a fisherman, just outside of town.

I'm sorry, but for c**** sake, we are also the sons and daughters of somebody elses family. These cases still need the communities attention, and can't just be swept under the rug, only to be forgotten. Since when has it become "OK" to so disregard potential hate crimes like this? What does this actually say about our communities, and as a people of the US?
</Rant off>

Curt, it is SO true. I remember a few years ago in the Castro, there was a beating...4 guys jumped out of a car, whipped ass on some guy (who it turned out was straight, but visiting his gay brother) got beaten within an inch of his life...now the guys who did it, it was said were trolling the Castro LOOKING for someone to beat down...last I heard it was still unsolved. At first there was some irritation, mostly by the gay community, then once it was discovered the guy was not gay, everyone got pissed...I mean WTF??? Oh, just another fag getting beat, who cares...wait, it's a straight guy, OMG that's horrific...lets get up in arms that the case isn't solved...I mean what is up with that mentality??? It doesn't matter WHAT the guys sexual persuasion was...a car of 4 guys went trolling for trouble, found a random person and beat them down...THAT is all that should matter...not whether he liked boys or girls...and the dude who had got beat was madder than hell, not just because he got beat, but because, as he said, it coulfd have easily been his brother...which was pretty much the target...a gay man...I mean why else do you cruise the Castro looking for trouble...and if it had been some uber rich Nob Hiller, I can guarantee that cops would have been out in full force!!

Oh give me a f**king break!!! This is ridiculous!!!

A Cali lawmaker is proposing a no spanking law...
Now I admit, some parents take spankings too far, but young kids do learn by them. If a kid is reaching for something, a quick smack on the hand and a stern NO, gets their attention, and they do learn...but if this bill passes, even doing a smack on the hand could cost you a fine and possibly a year in jail. The government wants to tell gays to not marry, and women that they have no rights to choice, and now they want to tell parents that they cannot punish their kids...beating a child, and smacking the hand or tush are two completely DIFFERENT things!! When will the government stop?? After ALL of our civil liberties have been removed??? After we are no longer the "Land of the Free"...I mean...WTF???

You said exactly what I was going to say Jenn. A beating is one thing, God no ! But a well timed swat on the rear end can be a help, not a hinderence. What would they suggest we do ... let our 2 & 3 year olds touch that fire ?

"The bill, backed by Democrat Sally Lieber of San Francisco, a member of the state legislature, would outlaw spanking children three years old or younger and carry a possible penalty of jail time or a 1,000-dollar fine.

I think it's pretty hard to argue you need to beat a child three years old or younger,"

Jen, I understand your concern, but I'm wondering, did you miss the age that was mentioned here? Also,unless you have additional info, I didnt see any reference to smacking a hand.

Sorry, I didn't have a link to it, but she was interviewed on the news tonight and said that any hitting, striking, swatting, patting or any other terms parents used for abusing their kids would be included in the wording of the bill. Now abuse is one thing, but if the law were to list those terms specifically, then ANY parent, grandparent, babysitter, you name it, could be fined and possibly jailed. A swat on the hand is NOT abuse, yet if that term were put into law, it would suddenly jump to that level.

**EDIT**
In paragraph 4, she says about the same thing as she did in the news interview on tv:
<Quote>
The bill, which was still being drafted, would make the crime a misdemeanor and be written to ban "any striking of a child, any corporal punishment, smacking, hitting, punching, any of that," Lieber said.
<End Quote>

One little LINKIE...
Two little LINKIE
Three little LINKIE
FOUR!!!

But Lieber is optimistic that lawmakers will find her proposal hard to resist. For the record, she does not have children and says she was not slapped as a child. But she does have a cat named Snoop, which her veterinarian told her never to hit.

``And if you never hit a cat,'' Lieber said, ``you should never hit a kid.''

Nope, I dont hit my cat, I squirt the little sh*t with water/vinegar mix...I think the cat would prefer being hit.

I am a mom. My kids are 6. I was raised on spankings--NOT beatings, NOT abuse. My kids frequently have had hands smacked for something naughty. I have never beat my kids, I have never punched, kicked, or done anything along those lines of abuse to my kids, but they have been spanked. Do they call me a "B*tch" at a store because they don't get their way? No. But I have seen other kids do just that...one of them is a child developement instructor's kid. How ironic. When my kids were babies and doing something potentially dangerous, they were removed from the situation then had their hand smacked and heard a very stern NO. They learned that doing that dangerous action is something not to be done...1- they were told they'd get hurt badly, and 2- they know if they do it, they will get a spanking if they survive.

I am all for protecting kids, but this bill, in my mind steps across those lines that are making this country a load of crap. First they try and tell me what to do with my uterus, no with my kids...

If anyone sees me beating the holy hellout of my kids, please, step in. But if they are getting a smack on the hand or butt for doing something either naughty, dangerous, or both...stay the hell out of my business...especially if all you have is a cat, but no kids.

Another aspect to this is, when will the bar be raised, going from children 3 and under to 6 and under? Or, when will it be concidered unlawful to give children "time outs" as they feel it causes the child "emotional or psychological abuse"? Either way, this is a very slippery slope.

It's bad enough now, when a child can get pissed at their parents and scream "Abuse" and have em carted off.

I turned a dead fish into a crab using mind control

Copyright stuff: This sentence and anything that is to become of it is here-by copyrighted for life by the one and only "Davo". Any use of this sentence or re-gurgitating a piece of paper with these words which are worth their weight in gold is also counted as a violation under sub-contradictory statement 82 part 2 section... 6.
Any failure to comply with these terms and conditions can and will result in punishment, whether it be a dirty nappy thrown at you or a fine+jail bonus combo deal (only $9.95 [includes G.S.T] available until 12.9.[insert some year here]).
If un-happy with the bonus toy, please send it to your local pharmacy for fun :P

*pulls soapbox out from under speedy's feet*

*uses it to store soap*

Ah, I didn't even read very far on this thread before I realised that if I ever dared to give my opinion on things like our current president and gay rights you'd all roast me alive T_T and really, I don't want to get into the argument myself. If you want you hear my views I'll respond, but I've heard these things argued backwards and forwards so many times by people who have already made up their minds and will never relent to the other viewpoint that it seems pretty pointless by now. I just wish these discussions didn't always end up so one-sided and actually had equal opinions from people from all viewpoints. Hearing one side's arguments will never give you a clear picture.

OK Davo... into the corner... it's a time out for you.
*points at corner*

Aliryn,
There is no harm in giving your point of view on a subject. Discussion, and yes, sometime head butting comes from it, is all good. It's when people don't give opinions, things then become one sided, because the other side is never heard.

I'm going to make points as I read this thread, because I suppose no one else is going to defend the other viewpoint, and if I say nothing I'm a hypocrite for not speaking about what I believe.

Hunting
I don't believe in overhunting for sport, although hunting for food I think is alright. My mother grew up in pretty remote areas of Oregon where many people had to hunt because it was cheaper than buying meat. However, while I agree that animals shouldn't be killed uselessly or abused, I don't think they are on the level of humans, in a sense: if you're going to save the whales, save the humans too. Don't neglect humankind in favour of helping animals. People seem to overlook that, especially where abortion comes in, but I don't think I ought to get into that...

Gay Marriage
I've got a lot of direct responses from here on.
1. Who does it hurt?
According to the beliefs I hold, which are listed below, I think it hurts the people themselves, because it is wrong. Please read further before you yell.

2. Supporting equal rights
Yes, if you're going to say 'tolerate everything'--which is, by the way, if you take it seriously and really think about it, a horrifying idea--you should allow gay marriage. But there's more on that point below...

3. Vehemency stems from insecurity
Yes, this is very possible and quite certainly true in some people's cases. However, just because someone doesn't agree with the gay lifestyle doesn't mean they're sexually insecure. It just means they don't agree with it.

4. The Bible hasn't evolved with us
This is definitely something you're incorrect about. No, the Bible hasn't changed. But the Bible, according to Christian belief, was inspired by God, who has always known everything about the world's history and sociology from its beginning to its end. He intended the Bible to be our guideline for all of time. Furthermore, morals and principles, by definition, cannot change over time. Otherwise, who's to say a day won't come when people consider murder okay because human sociology has "evolved"? If it was wrong then, it is wrong now. If we're going to suddenly start discounting bits of the Bible it is no longer a reliable source of knowledge or principals in any area whatsoever. (And don't say that means that's the case, because I've managed to get a pretty good amount of evidence (not proof, but evidence) that the Bible is correct.)

5. Seperation of church and state
Christianity should not be nor can be forced on anyone. However, this country WAS founded on Christian principles, like it or not, and the founding fathers did not intend for us to chuck religion totally out the window--only that we should not persecute those of varying religions, or favour those of particular religions. In the end maybe that will result in a "separation of church and state", but that doesn't mean that no Christian principles have any worth whatsoever. (What's more, there actually isn't any "seperation of church and state" listed in the actual Constitution or Amendments or Bill of Rights or anything. The phrase was first used, I believe, the Communist Manifesto. I suppose that fact has little to do with this discussion, though.)

6. The heart of the matter
What about people just BEING gay or straight? I don't really believe that it's something that you just "are". I've read few things that actually have an unbiased view on the matter, so it's hard to tell what's true about studies that have been done. That's not to say I think it's necessarily a conscious decision--I think it's something that people honestly believe, but they weren't intended to be that way. Yes, a great deal of the reason I believe this is because of my faith, but religion without faith is nothing. If I gave on the subject of homosexuality I'd have to give on everything, which is not going to happen. And don't say I'm just going against it for that reason, because it's not "so my religion isn't undermined". It's because I really believe what my faith teaches. And no, I don't just spit out the opinions of other Christians. I've studied many things, and I have legitimate reasons for my beliefs.

7. Would kids brought up in homosexual households be "screwed up"?
Not necessarily, but it would definitely cause problems with how they'd be viewed by society, which even if you could legalize adoption for them that wouldn't help how they're viewed. Certainly other children probably wouldn't know how to react to or deal with them, stunting their social growth. More importantly, humans are made to need both maternal and paternal nurturing. This is why kids who grow up with a dead or absent parent have problems. My dad died when I was eleven, and still sorely miss the fatherly affection, guidance, and support I ought to have gotten even though I'm twenty-one by now. Not to mention the kid might struggle with their homosexual guardians' situation, because I don't think it's natural. It's something we know from a young age, not because we're told by the people around us as I'm sure most people would counter, but because it's something we feel deep down. Humans are born with an innate understanding of what is wrong and right, and as we get older, we are allowed understanding into these things. However, these are subjective senses, so people don't consider them reliable or think that they prove anything. But we were made with hearts and souls as well as minds and bodies, and when we look for the truth we must do so with both our feelings and our minds. If we don't, our picture will be incomplete.

8. You won't burn in hell for owning a Ford.


Old drivers
Don't have much experience with 'em. But in Colorado, at least all along the Front Range, people drive terribly. They run red lights, cut you off, don't signal, and about another million things. There's an intersection near my home where I need to cross when I get back to the bus stop from being out, and it kills people all the time--both pedestrians and people in cars. And they're going to build a Super Wal-Mart near there. Another irritating lack of necessity. There's already two Super Wal-Marts in the area, and now they're going to increase traffic and kill even more people? It's really a terrible thing. Wal-Mart is an evil place to begin with. It's so boring that whenever we so much as pass it on the road I want to scream. (If that's not evil, I don't know what is.)

Christmas
1. We're not forcing you to celebrate anything. But we have just as much a right to celebrate Christmas as others do to celebrate Kwanzaa or whatever. No one would yell if there was an ad that said "Happy Hanukkah" (or however you spell it. I apologise if I got it wrong). The problem with this country is that everyone has pushed "freedom of religion" until traditional Christians are the ones who are being discriminated against. If you voice a Christian opinion or even mention that you are a Christian, you get way worse than just the third degree. You get at least a dozen people yelling reiterated opinions at you, many of whom I suspect are only repeating the popular opinion or are just saying something that sounds good to them or they think sounds smart. I'm sure some people honestly thought through these things, but so many people will just say what they think others want to hear. Why am I being persecuted? I'm not telling you to celebrate Christmas and I'm not keeping you from celebrating anything else. Holidays really aren't anything to be pushy about, if you ask me. I don't think there's anything wrong with saying "Merry Christmas", and I don't see what could possibly be very offensive with an ad mentioning Christmas. Please explain how that is offensive, other than the fact that you might feel left out. Which I don't think is enough reason to get so irritated.

2. I agree with Samatar in a lot of ways on this topic. I think Christians find a lot of meaning in Christmas, and so do non-Christians. I don't see anything wrong with that, in and of itself.

3. Yes, actually, I think at least one holiday was a pagan one taken over by Christians. I don't necessarily agree with that or not; I haven't thought about that sort of thing much. I tend to think about more innately philosophical thihngs -_-; I suppose I could think about it, but I think there are more important issues out there.

4. In the end, though, Christmas is celebrating a Christian event. But saying "Merry Christmas" isn't the same as "become a Christian, sinner!" (which I'm not saying either. I'm not out to convert anyone, just to voice the thoughts of the other side of society. No one defends us--at least, the few who do speak out seem to be extremists who WOULD say that. After that happens, no one will listen to any of us. Isn't that discrimination, too? We're not all completely void of reason, you know.)

5. Don't boycott over something that stupid. Please. There's enough idiocy in our country.

Halo?
1. Not sure I understood it, particularly since while I play video games I haven't played Halo yet, but according to Christian doctrine not praying over someone you kill in and of itself definitely isn't going to condemn you to hell.
2. "As long as you believe in the one true God, you do not need to be held accountable for your actions." I think Curt was being sarcastic, but that's not true either. I doubt anyone wants to hear the dissertation, but if you ask I'll give.

That tv thing
Just so you know, we're not all that narrowminded and utterly ridiculous. I wouldn't like a "cheap sex song" no matter what song it was made off of, but that doesn't mean I'm going to say "I can bash you and you can't bash me!" Yes, many people are like that. But please don't dump us all into the same pot. It's the same as treating a member of a minority as a second-class citizen. No one will listen to the viewpoint of a Christian, which sounds like delegating us to second-class citizens to me. Or getting there at least. But no, I do not agree with only one-sided bashing. It truly is hypocritical.


War As Threat
I think a lot of wars weren't directly threatening to America, but the results if the wars had gone in different directions would have ended up being so. Countries have to think in the long run.
Also, while we may not be necessarily dependent on veterans to exist, they deserve our respect. Anyone who can come back from combat alive and sane is definitely something far above ordinary.

Capital Punishment
I don't know what to think of capital punishment from a religious standpoint--there's a bit of doctrinal confusion from what I can see--at the moment, at least. I need to go talk to my old teachers and stuff. But I think from a practical standpoint someone who has raped and murdered should be executed, if for no other reason than to make sure they can't do anything like that again. Such crimes are so horrible for the victims that those who don't die usually wish they had. I don't think those people should live to potentially strike again. Even if they've got a life sentence they can escape, and many dangerous criminals are let out to roam free because there isn't enough room in the prisons to begin with. This isn't right.

Hate Crimes
I don't agree with that either. Again, just because someone doesn't agree with homosexuality or some other issue does not mean they are going to commit a hate crime. The only thing I don't feel bad about hurting is spiders, and that's over a phobia. (And if you tell me animal rights includes spiders, I'll really scream. In disbelief. It's a SPIDER and it's got no business in my room.)

Child punishment
1. Really, there's a pretty broad area between spanking a child as punishment and abusing them. I think that's overboard. There's a possibility that people are afraid it'd be hard to tell the difference in a specific case, but I think you could figure it out. There's usually psychological issues involved that shows up abuse. I got spanked often enough as a kid and I got no lasting emotional scars for it even though I cried like hell over it when it happened. (But I was always a strangely emotional child. Then I grow up and find out I'm bipolar >_< no wonder. My mother says she always wondered if something was wrong with me... I find it more funny than anything else.) Ah, despite my digression, words alone don't always work on kids. I as a child would argue and scream until my parents took some sort of action. Some kids can't be handled otherwise.
2. (I think there's a difference between hitting an animal and a kid, because the animal is less likely to understand and it would be easier to do serious damage to an animal to a kid, but really... just get a squirtbottle.)
3. I certainly never had emotional or psychological problems from getting a time-out, either. I just played a game in my head. (Which isn't to say I didn't get bored. I did feel it was a punishment.) I really hope it doesn't go that far; that's ridiculous.



ONE THING I MUST MAKE CLEAR.

Never will everyone agree on something. Never will everything be a happy little global community. Because, no matter how much headway you make, someone else will always disagree, and someone else will always try to mess up the peace. It would be nice if these things could come true, but they can't. You cannot get around this fact.

There will always be differences, and I agree that we must be tolerant of them. However, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE between tolerating something and agreeing with it. I am not commiting hate crimes; neither do I agree with the things some people do. If possible, I want to help people understand my beliefs, but I have no intentions of stuffing them down their throats, and I will not keep preaching loudly when they don't want to listen. I don't intend to believe something without reason and I think when I do find enough evidence through logic, facts, and internal faith, that is sufficient to believe something and I will bring these things up to defend my beliefs. I do not think it necessary to get out of temper, offensive, rude, or closedminded. These are the sorts of views that Christians are really supposed to have, but sadly most Christians are poorly educated about their own religion. They have a vague idea of the doctrines but don't have much actual knowledge. They don't always think about their attitudes, and admittedly many of them do not care about their attitudes. This is a very unfortunate state of affairs, and it really saddens me. I really prefer it when people seriously listen to each other and give their honest opinions.

Sometimes, even when there is something wrong with society, you can't do anything about it. I think eventually homosexual marriage will be lawful, merely because when you start talking about equal rights and such there aren't many obvious defenses except tradition, which very few people take seriously any longer. And tradition, in and of itself, doesn't mean anything. Traditions are sometimes wrong, and traditions are sometimes right. I don't think there's anything to be done about that. I will vote for my beliefs, but railing against the majority of society doesn't accomplish anything.

And this is really what tolerance is. If you force everyone to agree that what you believe is right, it isn't tolerance, it's agreement. The definition of "tolerance" is peacefully getting along with those you -disagree- with. Otherwise there's nothing to tolerate.

In the end, the way humans are, I think in many areas we're going to have to say "I think this way. You think that way. There's nothing to be done about it, so let's just go on with life." You can do this even while you disagree. And that is the essence of tolerance.

Ah, you posted while I was writing. But thanks for the support of me saying what I believe, Curt.

Okay, I have to put my 2 cents in here *turns on the serious mic* because I was a child who was abused. I mostly was taken out of my situation early, but there were still things that I remember quite well, and all these things are from the age of five and under.

Being pulled down the street by my hair if I didn't want to go somewhere, being smacked so hard that I fell out of my chair, accidentally stepping on my real mother's toe, and having her turn around and smack me soooooo hard I still remember that hit, I think it almost took my head off. Having my upper arm in a pincher grip... not the bone part you understand, just the flesh.

THOSE things qualify as abuse. Mildly spanking or swatting the hand of a child not old enough to verbalize or understand verbal instruction does not. I am with Jenn 100% on this one. Behavoiral training has to be accomplished, and a mild thwat on the butt, or a tap on the hand accompanied by a tone of voice (not yelling) is a very effective non harmful method.

*must read up now* people posted while I was typing… lol

that always happens to me because I have a tendency to talk forever... diggin' my own grave

Oooo... you weren't kidding... long post... You wouldn't happeded to be related to Les, would ya? hehe

Thank you for your opinions Aliryn, very well thought out. As well as not as "hard line" as I'm use to seeing, which is also refreshing.

Hopefully, we can continue to see your presence here on the boards. Both in the serious and not-so-serious threads. :o)

wHEN YOU SAID YOU WERE GOING TO GIVE THE OTHER SIDE, i BRACED MYSELF...ESPECIALLY SINCE MANY THINK i AM QUITE LIBERAL, AND i TEND TO GET A LASHING FROM THOSE WHO ARE NOT SO.

OOPS!!!
Cap Locks was on, and I don't feel like re-typing, so I apologize, I wasn't yelling at anyone, I am just lazy today...

Anyway, thank you for making your point clear, while not banging us over the heads. Definately refreshing. Hope you'll join in on this thread from time to time...while I will admit to having very strong opinions, if someone can give me something to make me consider otherwise, I do at least consider them...may or may not change them, but I do consider them. That is the point of a good debate. To get people thinking.

I don't mind so much if people disagree with me as long as they don't try to undermine my rights as a person...

Just a not on the subject of children with gay parents... I saw a documentary a few years ago about a male German couple (made in Germany) who had adopted many children who were either rejected by their natural heterosexaul parents or forcibly removed from them due to abuse, neglect etc... many of these children were physically or mentally disabled, basically thrown away by society. I wish I could remember what it was called because if you saw it I think you would have to change your view on whether a child can grow up healthy and with a balanced view of the world if you saw it. They were some of the most selfless people and it was very easy to see that these children were infinitely better off under their guidance than living with their straight parents, whether they were together or not, and probably better off than many children with "normal" family units come to that.... but I can't so you're just going to have to take my word for it I guess...

Don't worry, I don't think you're making it up -_-;
In any case, I didn't really mean that "it's impossible for children to grow up well with homosexual parents". It sounds like in this case they were definitely better off; I'm not debating that at all. But I think children ideally should have both a mother and a father. It's just the way humans are.

Ah, thanks, everyone, for not immediately bashing me T_T it's nice. I've posted conservative viewpoints on threads before and got eaten ALIVE. I don't think there's any reason to get all over each other because we don't agree. Just keep in mind that while I don't get all freaky like that, I do really believe these things and don't plan on compromising those beliefs. I just don't think that yelling and utterly refusing to listen to each other are conducive to anything at all, except perhaps idiocy. But I also will listen to others' opinions seriously and really think about them. My faith is partially based on reason after all. God gave us intelligence; we should use it. Sadly most Christians don't think about that, and just keep yelling the same things over and over with no idea why they think that way. Not that that sort of thing doesn't happen among people with liberal viewpoints either.

Ah... if only the world would grow up...

"Ah... if only the world would grow up... "

Amen. :o)

Hahaha, actually I probably shouldn't say that sort of thing. Even if I actually use my brain, I'm still pretty immature in a lot of ways. Some of it is even partially on purpose. I never did want to grow up T_T not once in my entire life did I wish I was older than I was T_T in the end, I decided I wanted to be seventeen forever, but sadly that didn't happen T_T I turned eighteen, then I turned nineteen, and then twenty, and then twenty-one... really, it's so sad I could cry forever T_T

As for why... ah, that's a looooooong story....

Well as long as you accept my very liberal views, and don't try to convert me to your conservative ones, I'll listen openly. I will always have my ideas...much of them based on what I consider my family--my friends. They are made up of interracial couples, gay couples, straight couples...I'mpretty much equal opportunity. So when I see things that are freely available to me, but not to my friends for one reason or another, it gets my panties in a twist.

Now onto the "child spanking". I was a divorced child. One stepfather was a perv, the other stepfather was alcoholic. I grew up with an assortment of spankings...and beatings. Even though my stepfathers alcoholic rages would definately constitute abuse, I did not grow up to abuse my kids. In fact, I am always checking myself to make sure that I do not EVER cross the line, as I know what it feels like to get the crap beat out of you...so I think its BS to say that spanked kids will become abusive. I am in no way saying we shouldn't find some way to regulate true abuse...but for those parents who are responsible and loving, but do believe in spankings...they shouldn't be punished. My butt would be in jail for life if that were the case. Just today I smacked Rachel's hand for hitting her brother.

I think that there are a lot of well meaning people out there, but unless they are parents, they need to just shut the hell up.

Oh, and just to touch on what you said about animal protection...in my opinion, ecology as a whole depends on animal protection. Just because we are at the top of the food chain doesn't give us the right to build into areas that are traditionally nature, and then boohoo, when a displaced animal comes into our neighborhoods. Hunting for food is one thing, it is hunting for sport that I am against. We do neither with humans...and if there came a time when we did, then perhaps I'd start being vocal about "Save the Humans". Animals don't have a way to say "please mister, don't kill me, I have 5 pups in a den just down the way that will die if you do".

That having been said...my next rant...PETA
Old news made fresh again...case is pending in court...

2 PETA members are up on some 60+ charges...they took animals from shelters and a vet's office and euthanized them...including a mom cat and her kittens, then dumped them in the garbage bin behind a store. Ummm...ethical treatment of animals...what??? PeTA gets so much funding from Hollywood stars, they could easily set up no-kill shelters, or place animals in foster care, etc...but to take an animal who may have had a chance at adoption and euthanize it, saying that it was better for the animal...says who. Who died and made them God?? I volunteer at the local shelter, and no, shelters aren't fun for the animals. But we have a pretty good turn-around here, and we make a point of exercising our animals at least once a day, they are closely monitored by the in-house vet...it's not so bad to spend a week in the shelter and be adopted, when the other option is death...but PeTA just up and decided death was better. Now I cannot speak for other shelters, so I may be a bit biased...

OK...so I found the article...

In the early hours of June 15, 2005, two employees of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) were arrested in Ahoskie, North Carolina, and charged with 31 felony counts of cruelty to animals. A Grand Jury later indicted each defendant on 22 counts of Animal Cruelty and 3 counts of Obtaining Property By False Pretenses. PETA employees Andrew Cook and Adria Hinkle are expected to face a trial in Hertford County (NC) Superior Court on November 13, 2006. A few days after the arrests, local authorities told Greenville, North Carolina's WNCT-TV News that they had found more than 70 additional dead animals that may be connected to PETA.

When Ahoskie police arrested Cook and Hinkle, they discovered 18 dead animals in a shopping-center dumpster (including a bag containing dead puppies), and 13 more dead animals (including two kittens) in the PETA-owned van the two were driving. Police observed them throwing several dark-colored bags into the dumpster before the arrests were made. The animal-cruelty investigator for the Northampton County (North Carolina) sheriff's department shared her outrage with the Virginian-Pilot a few days after the arrests: "Some animals have to be euthanized," she told the paper, "but the way this crowd did it is sick."

Witnesses from the Bertie County (NC) Animal Shelter and the Ahoskie Animal Hospital later confirmed that the defendants had collected animals earlier that day on the promise that PETA would find them adoptive homes. And a Bertie County deputy sheriff told reporters that Cook and Hinkle assured the shelter "they were picking up the dogs to take them back to Norfolk where they would find them good homes," later adding that persons identifying themselves as PETA representatives have picked up live dogs from that shelter during the last two months.

Ahoskie veterinarian Dr. Patrick Proctor told reporters that his staff gave a perfectly healthy cat and her two newborn kittens to Hinkle and Cook. "This cat and two kittens I gave them last week," he said, "were in good health and were very adoptable, especially the kittens." Dr. Proctor later added in the Virginian-Pilot: "These were just kittens we were trying to find homes for. PETA said they would do that, but these cats never made it out of the county."

One Norfolk television station aired a heartbreaking interview with the manager of the supermarket whose dumpster became an impromptu pet cemetery. "They just slung the doors [open] and started throwing dogs ... beautiful cats. I saw a [dead] beagle last week that was pregnant ... last week it was 23 or 24 dogs ... it's happened to us nine times ... they drove straight from there, straight here, and disposed of the dogs in 30 seconds."

Another TV news report in PETA's home town revealed in June 2005 that Hinkle and Cook were not licensed to euthanize animals. "We have no records of training PETA employees," a Virginia Department of Agriculture spokesperson told Norfolk, Virginia's WAVY-TV10 News, "because we were informed that euthanasia was being done by a local veterinarian." Neither defendant has a veterinary degree.

Ah, yeah, I don't think it's reasonable to punish a parent for spanking. It really is different from abuse. I was never abused in the least, but my mother grew up with a series of stepparents who all abused her in pretty much every way possible. I'm sorry, but spanking's nothing next to that. Furthermore, because she was abused, I think my mom was more careful about that sort of thing with my brother and me. (Well, more with me. My brother didn't need to be disciplined much... -_-;) Spanking is not going to scar a child for life.

Yes, ecology depends on animal protection. I have nothing whatsoever against protecting animals. I just don't want people to start putting more importance on animals than humans. Again, this is partly because of my faith; according to God's original plan, he gave us dominion over the earth and the animals--not to misuse, but to nurture and use correctly. I remember being taught at some point, though I can't find anything in the Bible about it, that animals don't have souls; but I have problems with that idea. My cat, who was my best friend since before either of us were old enough to remember, died last summer. If someone were to tell me she was completely "gone", and that animals can't show up in heaven, I think I'd really go crazy. Screaming and crying and all that. Because she was the only reason I survived most of my life. I would have killed myself dozens of times over in my life if it weren't for her, and I've been slowly breaking down since she's been gone. (Plus my brother's cat died last month. She's not as close to my heart, but I still miss her terribly. My brother's probably more upset about it than he shows, too, so I worry about him. He never cried much after our dad died... ugh... I hope he'll be okay. Our mom says our dad always seemed pretty reasonable 'til a couple years before he died, then he went bonkers, and then he finally killed himself. I really, really hope my brother's okay... ah, I always thought I inherited his share of the mental illness that pervades the gene pools of both our parents, but I worry...)

I'm not entirely sure what I'm trying to say, except that animals are indeed important and worth protecting, but we should make sure fellow humans are okay first. In a practical sense, I guess it just means do what you can for who you can. I really have a hard time applying morals to things like politics, though. Sometimes things will end up screwed up no matter how hard you try. People in power have it rough. So things like laws about being humane to animals and people can be really tricky. Sometimes I think it would be better with smaller communities instead of all these huge countries. When you have to deal with so many people, too many things will go wrong.

Ah... there's nothing we can do about it, I guess... even if someone tried to reduce civilisation to that sort of thing, it would only cause more trouble. And in the end it might be worse after all. I have dumb ideas sometimes.

I've never known much about animal shelters. I really don't like the idea of euthanising animals, and I certainly don't like the idea of euthanasia as far as humans are concerned, but then again, I don't know much about the practicality of keeping on animals 'til they're adopted. I had the idea from somewhere that many shelters get filled up too quickly and can't keep them all, but... you still feel bad about it. But... I guess if there's nothing you can do, there's nothing you can do... I think these places need to do their best to avoid euthanising animals, but again, I don't know what the limits of practicality are in the situation. I really don't know much about PETA either.

When it comes down to it, there's a lot of things I don't know much about. I spent too much of my life reading fiction, and then in high school I spent so much time studying philosophy and theology and stuff... I don't know anything about current events or anything... they depress me, so I never watch the news or anything... My mom and brother are in a perpetual state of disbelief (or more like utter shock) at my lack of specific knowledge in a lot of areas. Anyway I find most journalism and works of nonfiction completley and utterly BORING.

But then, I get bored really, really easily...

Ah... I got way offtopic! X | Sorry...

Ah, you posted an article while I typed. Oh, man, if I tried to read all those specific things in my current state of nonconcentration, I'd go crazy... I'll just trust you about what it says, 'kay?

OMFG it's not phallic

It's a guitar people, not something bad

In the 80's and 90's Prince sang Cream and Darling Nikki, and gyrated on stage, and wore buttless chaps...but during the Superbowl show, all Prince did was kick butt...Have we as a society become so puritanical that everything is now under a microscope and guitar's suddenly transform into male genitalia???? And I guess my playing drums is me secretly saying I want to do something sexual...oh and what's that...2 drumsticks, so I must secretly want a menage a trois...who knows what will be said of tuba players, or clarinet, sax, and other reed instruments...perhaps that is all some secret Freudian shout out for oral sex...

Yes, I'm mad. Prince played a guitar, Janet flashed us her boob...2 totally different things.

That's some of the weirdest looking genitalia I've ever seen...

Maybe its true what they said in "American Pie" ...
When will all the censorship stop??? I saw nothing wrong with his performance. My 6 year old twins saw nothing wrong...in fact they said he "totally rocked"...so what uptight biddie sat in front of the set and decided that Prince was not playing his guitar, but rather his penis???
Maybe its just me, but if one is so obsessed with sex, that someone will claim a guitar is a phallus, perhaps one has denied ones self too long and really needs to make a booty call.

Actually hun... nothing is safe from attack anymore... nothing.

Damned if you do.. damned if you don't... it's pretty much become a no win situation.

As for your censorship comment, you have a valid point... Let's see... we have rating systems for games, movies, music, television, internet access... when will books be next? Which reminds me, have you read Farenheit 451? Excellent book, and movie by the way.

*shaking head as I LMAO... boy some people have a good imagination... makes you wonder why they thought of that in the first place? sounds like a lot of people have a lot of psychological problems over there, psychatrists must have a field day doing evaluations with the black blob cards... lol.. lucky they dont see the tv advertisements and billboards over here, there would be no advertising... lol...

Naw... I'd just say, that as a society we are just a bunch of uptight prudes. :oP

Ok, here comes the contrarian ... I think that is exactly what Prince was trying to achieve and convey. Portraying a simulated sexual act.

Ask yourselves this question ... why bring up the curtain and create the shadow image then in the first place? Artistic imagery ... whatever? Don't think so.

But more to the point, as I see it ... tame (compared to what is available for viewing and I am not talking prime time either) ... and lame. That's it from me.

And by the way ... I know I am right, so next please. :oP

p.s. I was not offended for the record, save only for this last stab from a fading performer for the limelight. C'mon ... I expected more from Prince. The guy was ... was ahead of his time ... for a while, that is.

In the absence of Jenn, I present the following... TRIPE.

Sure, a week later, Hardaway appologized for his comments:
"As an African-American, I know all too well the negative thoughts and feelings hatred and bigotry cause," Hardaway said Thursday in a statement issued by his agent. "I regret and apologize for the statements that I made that have certainly caused the same kinds of feelings and reactions.

"I especially apologize to my fans, friends and family in Miami and Chicago. I am committed to examining my feelings and will recognize, appreciate and respect the differences among people in our society," he said. "I regret any embarrassment I have caused the league on the eve of one of their greatest annual events."

I'm sorry dude... you already cast the die on that one... Why the hell would you have said it if you didn't believe it in the first place? There is absolutly no need for you to back track now... oh wait... there is... your precious carreer.

The NBA banished Tim Hardaway from All-Star weekend in Las Vegas because of his anti-gay remarks.

That's the only reason he appologized, in my opinion. The all mighty $$. Do you think this hater would have renounced his comments if the NBA didn't take action and begin to censure him?

Let's not even get into the potential impact his statements may have had on his impressionable fans who look up to him... "Hey, my hero hates gays, so I guess it's ok if I do too".

Hate... where would we be without it?

aww...c'mon, let's gay-bash...it's obviously the "in" thing to do, all the celebs are doing it...i mean really curt...you and i are so behind on the current trends...it's obviously a fun time to be had by all...hell even that grey's anatomy dude jumped on the bandwagon to further his career...it's no wonder we are losers...think of where we'd be if we just gay-bashed like all the famous peeps...bet we'd even get the vip seating at the best clubs, and can you imagine the ease of making dinner reservations...why be out and proud when you can hang with the "in" crowd...hey, that's pretty good there....

point is, these people are rich and famous and dont answer to anyone, so they can get away with this bs.

That's ok Jen... I'm quite happy being "square". :oP

huey lewis said it best when he sang hip to be square...so I guess we can be in the sqaure crowd together...

I'm with the square crowd all the way.

hopefully curt will fill you in on the new campaign to not include hate crimes into laws...my hand is cramping, so if curt doesn't, i'll be back later...what is the afa afraid of?

In a nut shell...
H.R. 254: David Ray Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 (also called David's Law) is coming up before Congress.

Religious organizations are moving to oppose the above law, as they feel as their rights to Freedom of Speech will be denied them.

Ironic isn't it? A country based on christian values with religious organizations that feel it is "OK" to espouse hate against it's own citizens. Wasn't it not that long ago, when blacks were forced to sit at the back of the bus?

And better yet... Someone like Anna Nichole Smith dies, and we Americans are glued to the TV over the next tidbit of taudry gossip that is released. But yet, someone like Corretta Scott King, a major activist for equal rights passes away, and there is barely a peep.

Personally, and I hate to say it, I see this law having a hard time passing into law as Bush has already stood against similar legislation in Texas, back when he was Govenor.
The real sad part about this, is that it has been felt that ones sexual orientation needs to be spelled out in law, where we already have laws against hate crimes. We wouldn't need to have said wording, if only the spirit of the law could be upheld. Hate crimes are still hate crimes, regardless if they are perpetuated against blacks, women, gay or straight.

why is it that all these anti-organizations have cred and are w00ted up, while organizations that promote diversity and tolerance and equality are boo'd or called liberal freaks???
i am proud to be boo'd, guess i sided with the right organization...boo all you want, but i will always throw my hat into the ring fighting for tolerance, any day over those fighting for hate and homogonization.

*snickers*

Jenn said HOMOgonization. :oP

In all seriousnes though, that's a very good question Jenn. Can anyone answer that?

The saddest thing about that basketball report is to read the comments left by people and see comments like "This is America, he's entitled to free speech" and "Why can't we be proud of being straight" etc... so basically we should allow people to openly express hatred and disdain of any race, religion etc they wish and if anyone objects to that they are trying to limit the individuals right to free speech?? And if he has a right to free speech, don't others have just as much right to say what they think of him and his views? Just imagine the uproar if he had been talking about Christians or similar!!!

Man… I'd have a whole bunch to say if I hadn't just completely ranted in Curt's ear this morning.

Long story short… I'm all for tolerance in every respect as long as it does not discriminate against another. You may not be the same skin color as me or you can choose not to live my lifestyle, but don't disparage me for it. I'll respect your right to live the way you want to if you respect mine to live the way I want to.

That's probably why my answer to the Lubavitcher trying convert me into an Orthodox Jew and convince me how important it is to keep kosher was: "That's nice, I respect your wish to live that way. Me… I really like my cheeseburgers". Her face almost fell off @ that point. Sorry?

its interesting to me that people will be my best friend until i say that i am an active supporter in n.a.r.a.l or that i march in the pride parade...why women cannot have the RIGHT to choose (different from pro-life/abortion, but folks don't get that), or same sex couples cannot get the same rights and benefits that straight couples get...i just dont get it...maybe i wont ever get it...but i just dont see what is so bad...if curt and i were a couple nobody would care, but if cat and i were a couple suddenly its evil...how so???

and yeah...i've had a few try to convert me and not respect me saying no...i dont piss in their drinking water, what makes people think its ok to pee in mine??? cat, you have an awesome point.

Definitely. And I'm sorry if my answers aren't as generally great as everyone elses... hey, I'm 14.

I go to a school, which in my opinion, has great facilities, ok staff, and it would generally be a great school if it were not for the students. Most of the students that go to our school are racist, intolerant of homosexuality and anyone who is different in even the slightest way. However, it is comforting to know that these people are hardly what would be known as intelligent.

One instance was in one of our PSHE lessons (Personal Social and Health Education) lessons, where our teacher started up a debate about issues going on today in our country and the world. The subject of terrorism came up, and one particularly racist boy was saying things like "Chuck all the p*kis out of the country, they're all trying to blow us up". I won't say the word, because I find it extremely offensive. He seemed to think that anyone in our country with that colour skn was trying to blow us up, whereas it is such a minute percentage (and I mean really minute) of them that commited the London bombings on the bus and such.

What also gets to me is how people around my age (I am sorry to say) constantly use homosexuality as an insult. I get annoyed if people accuse other people of it because I don't think it is anything that should be considered taboo, and I feel annoyed when they insult me wih it because I just don't like being called what I am not. I have nothing against it myself and don't see why people say that they're not homophobic when they go round thinking it's an insult and a bad thing.

Hypocrites.

i had a friend from england...we went to college together...he was out of smokes and bummed a "fag"...to him it means cigarettes...he caught crap for it all semester...people called him that. his answer was "if people want to call me gay, its their issue". i agree. i used to go club hopping in the castro, i found it flattering to be hit on by women, and yes, if asked to dance i would. i can look at a woman and go "damn she's hot"...but for me, i am just this side of being "straight"...my husband got to me first...had i met an amazing woman instead, my life may been different...i wouldn't say i am straight, gay, or bi...i am just me...i like what/who i like. i am happy with rob and the kids, and that's the path my life took...but it pisses me off that because my life went in the "straight" direction, i have numerous rights...while my friends who went in the so called "gay" direction, have few if any rights. to me, there is no straight or gay no labels...only people who are in love and happy with their partner, that's all that matters to me...and i dont see what the big deal is in society.

Here you go Jenn ... noooowww ... remember ... play nice. :o)

i went to the linkie...briefly...as it is very hard for me to play nice...but i tried...i put a lot of effort into playing nice...but in the end, had to keep it short and let y'all fill in the blanks.

Ok, I was in student support today, and I was depressed and bored so I came on here.

I tried to come on this thread, but sometimes I find that certain parts of Caedes get blocked on the school computers, as they have some pages that you can't go on if it says a certain word, etc.

They blocked the end of this thread, right where we started talking about homosexuality. Yet another organisation that blocks anything 'wrong'. Not the sort of people we want monitoring what sites we should or shouldn't be on in our schools, in my opinion.

a more detailed spanking bill
well lieber dropped her first stupid bill, but is trying to push a more detailed one. i think she means well, but could end up doing more harm than good.
thoughts?

I'd like to take a moment and refer back to the Anti-Hate Crime Bill above for just a moment. I promise I won't take alot of your time here... just want to leave behind a few thoughts.

I'm sure people feel that "gay issues" seem to get thrust down your throats quite a bit here on the threads. But, I just would like to put a bit more of a human face to it... I was recently told that "it's OK to kill homosexuals" by a co-worker. A comment, which quite frankly. came out of the blue, and has left me wondering about the safety of not only myself, but as well as for two women I work with.

Now I ask you... Do we, or don't we need this type of legislation?

hell yes we do!!!
i could care less what goes on in the bedroom, but apparently, others find it very important. and that is a very sad thing. and it is very sad that we NEED laws like this. everyone hides behind the bible saying that gays are bad...but the bible also says...THOU SHALL NOT KILL...guess alot of folks forget that little part of the bible.
as for that co-worker, i will keep you and your safety in my thoughts.