Your Political Affiliation

[Evil_Geoff]

Geoff - Maybe you engaged in SO much debauchery that you finally "blacked-out" as a result (you know, all the blood rushing south, lack of oxygen to your brain, whatever), and so you just don't remember those 50 girls you slept with that week at the convention in Reno.
Fell better now?
(Coulda happened that way.)

*LOL* I _wish_!

But I've never been to Reno. I flew over Nevada once on the way to a TDY at Vandenberg AFB in California but that was about the closest I've been to there.

 

[BeachGurl2]

You really, honestly have "never understood" this? Well, if that's true, then one can only assume that you have your head so far...in the sand, as to be woefully ignorant of even the most basic things - like the fact that throughout the entirety of human history (well, till now anyway ) there has been an overwhelming consensus that all of the above are sexual perversions.
I have to ask again - You really have never had any awareness of that simple fact of human social history? Well, here's a dollar - buy a clue.

Do you even listen to yourself? What I've never understood is the amazing level of stupidity required to make that assumption. I try very hard to believe that humans have intelligence, I mean that's what those in the know say separates us from the other animals on the planet. But then some well intentioned idiot opens his mouth . . . well, maybe I'm being generous with the well intentioned remark.

BS - hey, how appropriate is that - I've allowed myself to get dragged into this, so I have to accept responsibility for that at least. You are incapable of open discourse with others. I'm done here.

 

[Netzach]

But I didn't call all homosexuals pedophiles. I merely answered your question about why people might associate homosexuality with pedophilia. Also, I think your analogy is flawed. As I pointed out, the ONLY group advocating sex with children as "a good idea" is a homosexual group, but white supremacists are not the ONLY group of racists in the world.

Doesn't account for the fact that whatever these people say most abuses against kids are carried out by heterosexual men, often happily married. Often within their own families. Men with no sexual history of contact with adult males. Another reason the hets are clearly out of control. I also remember, as disastrous as the Waco events were, that Koresh seemed to really have a club going which involved sex with girls in this culture considered underage. Freedom of religion at its best.

Although the Paula Poundstone phenom seems to be on the rise, weird as it is too. I guess if there isn't a poster and a pamphlet you don't have a problem with it.

Of course you think the analogy is flawed. It's pointing out the flaws in your analogies and assertions. How pesky.

 

[midwestyankee]

You really, honestly have "never understood" this? Well, if that's true, then one can only assume that you have your head so far...in the sand, as to be woefully ignorant of even the most basic things - like the fact that throughout the entirety of human history (well, till now anyway ) there has been an overwhelming consensus that all of the above are sexual perversions.
I have to ask again - You really have never had any awareness of that simple fact of human social history? Well, here's a dollar - buy a clue.

Excuse me, but how does the fact that people lump things together mean that the things are, in fact, related? If the only evidence you have that homosexuality and pedophilia are related is that you and people like you claim that they are related, then I think it's time to look for more substantial proof.

Of course, well-respected people once thought that humours in the air caused disease and that spontaneous generation was possible.

 

[Marquis]

I'm glad I peeked into this thread, some fine entertainment in here.

I guess I would say my political idealogy is more in line with the ACLU than the Democratic party.

 

[BogartSlap]

Just a thought

I think we've pretty well beaten the topic of homosexual marriage into the ground. Is there perhaps some other political issue someone would care to discuss?
Of course, we can always just keep screaming at each other over the current topic...

 

[Marquis]

Homosexuals are bad, mmmmkay.

 

[midwestyankee]

I think we've pretty well beaten the topic of homosexual marriage into the ground. Is there perhaps some other political issue someone would care to discuss?
Of course, we can always just keep screaming at each other over the current topic...

Let's see....I asked you a reasonable question on this topic in a polite manner, which you ignored only to post this two hours later. How does that constitute screaming at each other?

 

[BogartSlap]

play catch up

Let's see....I asked you a reasonable question on this topic in a polite manner, which you ignored only to post this two hours later. How does that constitute screaming at each other?

You're late to the party. Trust me, there's been plenty of screaming.
And your question struck me as more rhetorical than reasonable.

 

[Evil_Geoff]

AT EACH OTHER!!!
the current topic

 

[BogartSlap]

heads up

AT EACH OTHER!!!
the current topic

Geoff - Someone told me you're not really all that evil. I just thought you might want to know people were spreading nasty rumours like that behind your back.

 

[midwestyankee]

You're late to the party. Trust me, there's been plenty of screaming.
And your question struck me as more rhetorical than reasonable.

Trust me, I read the thread and am fully aware of the screaming. But the question was aimed directly at you and was in no way meant to be rhetorical. It was expressed in a reasonable (i.e., not in a screaming tone) manner as well. Do you care to respond?

 

[BogartSlap]

if you insist

Trust me, I read the thread and am fully aware of the screaming. But the question was aimed directly at you and was in no way meant to be rhetorical. It was expressed in a reasonable (i.e., not in a screaming tone) manner as well. Do you care to respond?

(sigh) If you insist. They are all related by that very fact that people have generally always mentally associated them as all falling under the category of "sexual perversions". You are, of course, free to argue that homosexuality doesn't belong in that category, but that doesn't change the fact that it has traditionally been considered - like pedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia, etc. - as falling in that category.
And therefore I think it's a bit disingenuous for people to say, "Gee - I don't get it". Because, even if someone doesn't think homosexuality ought to be thought of that way, it's more than a bit difficult to believe that they aren't well aware of the fact that it generally always HAS BEEN thought of that way by the overwhelming majority of humankind since the beginning of recorded history. It's a bit like saying that you've never understood why Christmas trees are associated with Christmas just because you don't think they ought to be.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Gee you're a bigger twit then I thought!

Catalina

 

[SpectreT]

(sigh) If you insist. They are all related by that very fact that people have generally always mentally associated them as all falling under the category of "sexual perversions". You are, of course, free to argue that homosexuality doesn't belong in that category, but that doesn't change the fact that it has traditionally been considered - like pedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia, etc. - as falling in that category.
And therefore I think it's a bit disingenuous for people to say, "Gee - I don't get it". Because, even if someone doesn't think homosexuality ought to be thought of that way, it's more than a bit difficult to believe that they aren't well aware of the fact that it generally always HAS BEEN thought of that way by the overwhelming majority of humankind since the beginning of recorded history. It's a bit like saying that you've never understood why Christmas trees are associated with Christmas just because you don't think they ought to be.

Actually, "Christmas" trees are a holdover from pagan celebrations around the winter solstice. It wasn't until the 1400's or thereabouts that The Church (as if it were the only one) moved the celebration of Christ's birth to coincide with that holiday. They did a lot of that, which had the additional effect of making the historicity of religious events much harder for the layman to study. I'm pretty sure they did the same thing with Easter. Got to compete with those pagans, after all...

Directly to the "Gee, I don't get it." comments:

Simply because one thing has been lumped in with other things in the past, does not make a connection between them logical or even reasonable. I also fail to understand the connection being made in some people's minds, especially since we now have far more, and far better, data that no longer support such connections. Tradition is no excuse for closed-minded ignorace, IMO.

I also made a direct statement to you regarding homosexual marriage that went without rebuttal, and was not ranting, screaming or frothing. Slightly elevated blood pressure, sure. I get that way when dealing with a completely closed mind - which, based on the content of your posts - yours appears to be.

 

[SpectreT]

And here's the comment, in case you missed it among those who were successfully diverted by your pushing of other "Hot Buttons". Are you sure you're not Bill O'Reilly?

BS, I'll address this directly to you: Homosexual marriage does not equal endorsing unsafe sex orgies and other forms of irresponsible promiscuity, but the exact opposite. The whole point, aside from bringing justice to the law (I've always felt strongly that the law should be a slave to justice, but often in reality the only purpose of laws are to create and spread injustice), is to create a situation whereby that type of irresponible behavior has a legitimate, legally recognised alternative and can be shown up for the self-destructive idiocy it is, in that relatively small segment of the population that behaves in such a manner. I thought I'd said my last words on this, but I guess I needed to repeat them, since you keep missing the point.

 

[midwestyankee]

BS, it seems that you completely ignored the central tenet of my point and merely repeated yourself. The fact that people "have generally always mentally associated them as all falling under the category of 'sexual perversions'" does not, in and of itself, make it true that any one of the items on your list actually belongs there in the eyes of modern society. Lumping all these behaviors into a single list implies an equality that simply does not apply.

We don't believe in the four humours any longer, or in using leeches for medical purposes. Isn't it possible in your view that our society has progressed and become capable of making more accurate distinctions between human behaviors than was once the case? I would hate to think that you still ascribe to the theories of cosmology that were disproven by Galileo, but your reasoning here suggests otherwise.

 

[BogartSlap]

I stutter a lot when I'm typing

"

BS, it seems that you completely ignored the central tenet of my point and merely repeated yourself. The fact that people "have generally always mentally associated them as all falling under the category of 'sexual perversions'" does not, in and of itself, make it true that any one of the items on your list actually belongs there in the eyes of modern society."

That's true - and I believe I acknowledged as much. Let me try this again: I wasn't arguing the point of whether homosexuality actually belongs on the list; I was merely making the point that, historically and across cultures, it always has been on the list.

"Lumping all these behaviors into a single list implies an equality that simply does not apply."

You're entitled to that opinion. It differs from the consensus opinion of mankind throughout history.

"Isn't it possible in your view that our society has progressed..."

Doubtful at best.

"I would hate to think that you still ascribe to the theories of cosmology that were disproven by Galileo, but your reasoning here suggests otherwise."

Gosh darn - I'd hate to think that, too. By the way, the word you're looking for there is "subscribe", not "ascribe".

 

[midwestyankee]

My responses in boldface below.

"

BS, it seems that you completely ignored the central tenet of my point and merely repeated yourself. The fact that people "have generally always mentally associated them as all falling under the category of 'sexual perversions'" does not, in and of itself, make it true that any one of the items on your list actually belongs there in the eyes of modern society."

That's true - and I believe I acknowledged as much. Let me try this again: I wasn't arguing the point of whether homosexuality actually belongs on the list; I was merely making the point that, historically and across cultures, it always has been on the list.
While it's true that you trotted out this list only in the context of saying that over time people have associated the behaviors together, it's also clear from the rest of your contribution to this thread that you do not disagree with the lumping together and the potential perception that all are equally perversions.

"Lumping all these behaviors into a single list implies an equality that simply does not apply."

You're entitled to that opinion. It differs from the consensus opinion of mankind throughout history.
I'm quite content to differ with the consensus opinion of mankind throughout history. Not when that opinion is no more right than the belief in a flat earth.

"Isn't it possible in your view that our society has progressed..."

Doubtful at best.

My, aren't we clever?

"I would hate to think that you still ascribe to the theories of cosmology that were disproven by Galileo, but your reasoning here suggests otherwise."

Gosh darn - I'd hate to think that, too. By the way, the word you're looking for there is "subscribe", not "ascribe".
Well, counselor, sue me for an editing error. Surely this wordo invalidates everything else I've said.

 

[Shankara20]

(sigh)......

And therefore I think it's a bit disingenuous for people to say, "Gee - I don't get it".

I have been outed as being "disingenuous"!

As a matter of fact you are correct. When I stated "I have never understood the need for some to connect homosexuality with bestiality - some even connect it to incest and pedophilia." it was insincere - I have a strongly held opinion that they are lumped together as deviant behavior – deviant as is deviating from a morn not deviant as in morally reprehensible - and then used as if related by reprehensible nature and not by location on a bell-curve. I know, I know, I know, some do see them all as reprehensible.

oh well......

 

[BogartSlap]

And with pre-hensile tails, too!

I have been outed as being "disingenuous"!

As a matter of fact you are correct. When I stated "I have never understood the need for some to connect homosexuality with bestiality - some even connect it to incest and pedophilia." it was insincere - I have a strongly held opinion that they are lumped together as deviant behavior – deviant as is deviating from a morn not deviant as in morally reprehensible - and then used as if related by reprehensible nature and not by location on a bell-curve. I know, I know, I know, some do see them all as reprehensible.

oh well......

Not only reprehensible, but also (see subject line above)!

 

[m wisdom]

I've been too busy to reply for a few days but this thread have really gone downhill so I'm going to stay out of it.

BogartSlap: I don't agree with 99% off what you say but I enjoyed talking with you. Have a nice day.

 

[BogartSlap]

ping and pong

"While it's true that you trotted out this list only in the context of saying that over time people have associated the behaviors together, it's also clear from the rest of your contribution to this thread that you do not disagree with the lumping together and the potential perception that all are equally perversions."

That's right - I don't disagree with the notion that all are perversions...although I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with "equally".

"Isn't it possible in your view that our society has progressed..."

Doubtful at best.

"My, aren't we clever?"

Some days, yeah. Especially when you give me a great set-up line like, "Isn't it possible...society has progressed?".

"Well, counselor, sue me for an editing error. Surely this wordo invalidates everything else I've said."

Well...not EVERYthing.

 

[Shankara20]

Not only reprehensible, but also (see subject line above)!

And with pre-hensile tails, too!

well I'll be a monkeys uncle.....

 

[BogartSlap]

no problem

I've been too busy to reply for a few days but this thread have really gone downhill so I'm going to stay out of it.

BogartSlap: I don't agree with 99% off what you say but I enjoyed talking with you. Have a nice day.

M Wis - That's allright. There's plenty of stuff I say that I don't agree with either.
Any event, take care - hop back into the melee' anytime.
Jack