Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > FOX News attacks Disney for insufficient homophobia!

FOX News attacks Disney for insufficient homophobia! (Page 4)
Thread Tools
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Off the Tobakoff
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:05 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
I could say the SAME thing about Christianity. Heck ,you get chastised more now for being a Christian in here than for having sex with men. That says a lot. And I agree, as time goes on, more people will be homosexual. I wont deny that. Society isn't getting "better" Nor will it.
Yup, acceptance is a bitch. It's hard to be completely accepted, though, when you don't accept the behavior of others, especially when their behavior does not directly harm you.
Originally posted by Zimphire:
Because that is what our morals as a country tells us. Not having sex with a 12 year old is a moral ideal. For example, in the US having sex with someone under the age of 18 is bad because morally we deemed it so. In England it's 16. Is England full of sexual deviants? Of course not.
Yes, I agree with you.
Originally posted by Zimphire:
I never said it was. I was just showing how just because a society accepts those things, it doesn't suddenly make it ok.
...see below.

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Huh? I am not trying to get homosexual sex banned. People have free will. They do what they want. They always will. Heck, I am even for giving homosexuals the same rights married people have. I am a BIG FAN of free will.

I am speaking about those trying to justify it as being on the same level as heterosexuality. Trying to "normalize" it.

People can do what they want. But please, lets not try to dumb down society so you can feel justified or ok in your actions.
You're using cannibalism and 12-year-old sex (ambiguity in puberty) as ideas of things that are morally wrong. Both of these things interfere, however, with the rights of the people being eaten and usually with the rights of the 12-year-old having sex. So how does homosexuality fall into these other examples?
"You rise," he said, "like Aurora."
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:07 PM
 
Originally posted by strictlyplaid:
There are reasons we don't let people have sex with 12 year olds. There is a massive amount of evidence to suggest that molested children suffer serious psychological problems as adults.

But it wasn't always so. At one time as soon as a girl reached puberty, she was fair game. A lot of women got married at 12/13. They suffered no damage from this when they got older.

Further, 12 year olds are not mature enough to be able to consent to a sex act. The 16-18 year old range is murkier in both these regards.

Depends on the 12 year old I would guess. I have seen some 12 year olds that are more mentally and physically mature than some 16 year olds. But as a society, we have to draw the line somewhere. Our morals tells us this.

Adult gays, on the other hand, are of consenting age and many say that they wouldn't be happy in a heterosexual relationship. I'm really failing to see the big reason why homosexuality shouldn't be considered a "normal" behavior. What is it they do that hurts themselves or hurts others, specifically?
I am sure you don't see how it hurts anyone. But you are also looking at it in a secular view point. Me sitting here badmouthing people under my breath really hurts no one. Well, no one but myself. Again, I am not trying to stop homosexuality. Just because something isn't hurting anyone in a secular point of view, doesn't suddenly make it normal or justify it as being equal.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:10 PM
 
Originally posted by Stradlater:
You're using cannibalism and 12-year-old sex (ambiguity in puberty) as ideas of things that are morally wrong. Both of these things interfere, however, with the rights of the people being eaten and usually with the rights of the 12-year-old having sex. So how does homosexuality fall into these other examples?
I wasn't comparing them saying they fall into the same categories. AGAIN I was showing just because society accepts these things, doesn't automatically make it ok. That is the 3rd time now I have said this.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Off the Tobakoff
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:10 PM
 
Originally posted by angaq0k:
ethnocentrism
"You rise," he said, "like Aurora."
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Off the Tobakoff
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:12 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
I wasn't comparing them saying they fall into the same categories. AGAIN I was showing just because society accepts these things, doesn't automatically make it ok. That is the 3rd time now I have said this.
Fine, I'll move on:

Our society generally accepts that homosexual marriage is bad, so are you willing to accept that our society is wrong here?
"You rise," he said, "like Aurora."
     
Senior User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:13 PM
 
Just two quick comments:

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Depends on the 12 year old I would guess. I have seen some 12 year olds that are more mentally and physically mature than some 16 year olds. But as a society, we have to draw the line somewhere. Our morals tells us this.
Yeah, there are some 21 year olds out there who I'm not sure are ready. We just have to say it's "ok" when 99% of people are ready, which I guess is more or less true somewhere between 16 and 18.

I am sure you don't see how it hurts anyone. But you are also looking at it in a secular view point. Me sitting here badmouthing people under my breath really hurts no one. Well, no one but myself. Again, I am not trying to stop homosexuality. Just because something isn't hurting anyone in a secular point of view, doesn't suddenly make it normal.
Right, my viewpoint is secular and that does make a difference. You and I seem to agree that state policy has to protect religious freedom, but make policy based on secular consequences (more or less.) So yeah, at the end of the day, I think we're pretty much at the point where we agree enough such that we can "get along" on this issue, so to speak.

Great talking to you, but I still think you should stop taunting the fanboys.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:13 PM
 
The comment I am making is, I am told homosexual sex is ok and justified. It's just as normal as heterosexual sex.

My conscience tells me differently. And because of that, I am being told I am a bigot and a homophobe.

In other words, if I don't "Go along" with such ideals, I am going to be called names.

It's no better than a backwoods hick calling a homosexual a faggot. It's just as demeaning and just as ignorant.

Not everyone is going to accept homosexuality as an equal. As a matter of fact, the majority does. And it's their right to. Just like it's a person's right to accept it, and partake in it.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:17 PM
 
Originally posted by Stradlater:
Our society generally accepts that homosexual marriage is bad, so are you willing to accept that our society is wrong here?
There is a difference of letting people do what they wish, and accepting their actions. The first we should do as a country. The second is a personal matter that should never be forced. Free will.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:17 PM
 
Originally posted by strictlyplaid:
Great talking to you, but I still think you should stop taunting the fanboys.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Off the Tobakoff
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:19 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
There is a difference of letting people do what they wish, and accepting their actions. The first we should do as a country. The second is a personal matter that should never be forced. Free will.
I think we've explored this topic as much as we can and possibly more than we should have. We agree: free will is good as long as no one is exploiting the freedom of others. We disagree: homosexuality is innately wrong.
"You rise," he said, "like Aurora."
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Over there...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:23 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:

But it wasn't always so. At one time as soon as a girl reached puberty, she was fair game. A lot of women got married at 12/13. They suffered no damage from this when they got older.


There was barely any love then: it was all about trading for political or economical favors between human communities (tribes, families, etc.)

Depends on the 12 year old I would guess. I have seen some 12 year olds that are more mentally and physically mature than some 16 year olds. But as a society, we have to draw the line somewhere. Our morals tells us this.
Adolescence is a modern phenomena (circa the end of the 1800s). Before then, you became a man as soon as you were able to prove your abilities. It is still common amongst the Inuit to let their young have the same rite of passage that has been used for millenia. A man was ready to marry once he was able to kill his firts big game (whale, or polar bear) then make is first qajaq and sleigh by himself. Then the community would recognize his as a man, and he would then kidnap the woman of his choice to flee away for several weeks in an igloo until the woman would get used the so-called husband. So habits are still current around the world.

The custom of choosing a partner for your own child is still practiced in many cultures and those marriages have for sole purpose the trading of goods and maintaining good rapports.

Whatever conscience or morals you use, it is culturally and historically relative.

I am sure you don't see how it hurts anyone. But you are also looking at it in a secular view point. Me sitting here badmouthing people under my breath really hurts no one. Well, no one but myself. Again, I am not trying to stop homosexuality. Just because something isn't hurting anyone in a secular point of view, doesn't suddenly make it normal or justify it as being equal.
So you say, and it is clear that not everyone agrees with you, though you are entitled to your own opinion in your own right.
"******* politics is for the ******* moment. ******** equations are for ******** Eternity." ******** Albert Einstein
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 06:28 PM
 
Originally posted by Stradlater:
I think we've explored this topic as much as we can and possibly more than we should have. We agree: free will is good as long as no one is exploiting the freedom of others. We disagree: homosexuality is innately wrong.
And I have no problem with you disagreeing with me on that. Nor would I ever call you names because of it.


The way dcolton was treated in that other thread was despicable. What those people did was no better than the inbreds that go around calling homosexuals "faggots"

And really, that is the only reason I joined in on this thread.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:06 PM
 
Yeah. But do you think it was worth getting banned and/or reported for? (the anti-dcoltons)
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:07 PM
 
Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Yeah. But do you think it was worth getting banned and/or reported for? (the anti-dcoltons)
I don't know, ask them.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:08 PM
 
Even if they were reported, they wouldn't do anything. When's the last time a lib was banned?
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:14 PM
 
Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Even if they were reported, they wouldn't do anything. When's the last time a lib was banned?
Who knows.. not many people in here admit to being banned (Some have even denied it *snort*) And Demonhood usually doesn't say soo...
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:30 PM
 
gg guys
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:33 PM
 
Did you make that yourself? If so bravo.
(from scene in Family Guy where Stewie's in the doctors and sits next to a granny with a small baby. )
     
Senior User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:33 PM
 
Originally posted by MindFad:
gg guys
Hey, that's fine by me. I'm not one of those "+1" guys.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:34 PM
 
[Mindfad holds high court in fanboyness. He has been apart of my fanclub for years.

Making such posts just furthers his fanboyness.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:41 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
Homosexuality isn't the usual or ordinary course of nature. Heterosexuality is. Homosexuality occurs at MOST in 4% of the population.(Like many mental disorders) Therefore it's not the usual or ordinary course of nature.
Less than 4% of people have more than 140 IQ points. That "logic" of yours doesn't work.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:43 PM
 
Originally posted by voodoo:
Less than 4% of people have more than 140 IQ points. That "logic" of yours doesn't work.
140point IQ scores isn't the normal course of nature either.

I never said just because it wasn't the normal course, that is automatically means it's bad. You should really read the rest of my posts.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:44 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
[Mindfad holds high court in fanboyness. He has been apart of my fanclub for years.

Making such posts just furthers his fanboyness.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:47 PM
 
You mistaken me making fun of you with crybabying.

Stop being such a fanboy. Notice, before this turns ugly, Everything was going just fine before the fanboy came in.

It was his purpose.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:48 PM
 
I took a test in school and got a 142, but isnce it's summer, it's more like 120.
MinFad, did you make that picture?

What's a Fanboy in this case? Like a Nintendo Fanboy, like me?
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:49 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
140point IQ scores isn't the normal course of nature either.
Of course it is. A certain amount of people born into this world will always have 140+ IQ. Perfectly natural.

Of the entire world less than 4% have blonde hair and blue eyes. Your flawed "logic" makes no sense. People with blonde hair and blue eyes are a very natural and it is indeed desired by many people seeing how people bleech their hair.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:50 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
You mistaken me making fun of you with crybabying.

Stop being such a fanboy. Notice, before this turns ugly, Everything was going just fine before the fanboy came in.

It was his purpose.
I could be mistaken, but I believe Zimphire is a fanboy of fanboys.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:51 PM
 
Originally posted by voodoo:
Of course it is. A certain amount of people born into this world will always have 140+ IQ. Perfectly natural.

Of the entire world less than 4% have blonde hair and blue eyes. Your flawed "logic" makes no sense. People with blonde hair and blue eyes are a very natural and it is indeed desired by many people seeing how people bleech their hair.
You are again are proving you haven't read my posts, and don't get what my "point" was.

Please go back. Thanks.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:51 PM
 
Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
I could be mistaken, but I believe Zimphire is a fanboy of fanboys.
Nope. Not at all. I dislike fanboys. They have no real purpose other than to be fanboys.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Over there...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:53 PM
 
Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
I took a test in school and got a 142, but isnce it's summer, it's more like 120.
MinFad, did you make that picture?

What's a Fanboy in this case? Like a Nintendo Fanboy, like me?
"******* politics is for the ******* moment. ******** equations are for ******** Eternity." ******** Albert Einstein
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:55 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
You are again are proving you haven't read my posts, and don't get what my "point" was.

Please go back. Thanks.
No thanks, I usually don't read your posts nor have I interest or inclination to do so now. The post I quoted I understand completely and your logic is flawed... incredibly ... that is obvious to everyone here now.

I wasn't posting to correct you Sinewave but rather to allow others to see how flawed and supeficial your logic here is. I couldn't care less whether you figure it out or not how wrong you are.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:55 PM
 
Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
What's a Fanboy in this case? Like a Nintendo Fanboy, like me?
No, a fanboy is someone that follows another person around in threads personally attacking them and adding really nothing but silliness to threads in purpose of derailing them. Mindfad's latest example was a good one.

They usually don't like when people are getting a long. They are obsessive and usually live in their parents basements.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:55 PM
 
Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
MinFad, did you make that picture?


I didn't take the original photo, no, or make the dialogue bubble.

What's a Fanboy in this case? Like a Nintendo Fanboy, like me?
Part of a fictional body of people who Zim thinks are obsessed with him, except that he is just obsessed with having people notice him. Say something to disagree with, poke fun at, or otherwise include his name, and you are a fanboy. Perhaps it gives him some Internet comfort in his lonely life? Seems like a way to perpetuate the victim mentality. I don't know. I do plan on doing a search for "fanboy" one day, though, just to see how many I got out of him.

You'll notice that he does the same thing in other threads, yet whines about it when it gets done to him. This is what makes it funny.

I could be mistaken, but I believe Zimphire is a fanboy of fanboys.


This would be correct, but do expect a FUD and/or projecting graphic in no time.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:57 PM
 
Originally posted by voodoo:
I don't read your posts nor have I interest or inclination to do so. The post I quoted I understand completely and your logic is flawed... incredibly ... that is obvious to everyone here now.

I wasn't posting to correct you Sinewave but rather to allow others to see how flawed and supeficial your logic here is. I couldn't care less whether you figure it out or not how wrong you are.
But that is just the point voodoo, you took a quote out of context, and proved it wrong. Something I wasn't even saying.

So yes, you proved something I wasn't saying wrong.

WAY TO GO!

Here, have a pennant.



You have deserved it well.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:57 PM
 
Originally posted by angaq0k:
Didn't quit answer the question.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 07:59 PM
 
Originally posted by MindFad:
Part of a fictional body of people who Zim thinks are obsessed with him, except that he is just obsessed with having people notice him.

Yes, you are right, I am making it up totally! You don't go into threads making personal jabs at me out of the blue all the time. NEVER!

Say something to disagree with, poke fun at, or otherwise include his name, and you are a fanboy.

No, in that case, everyone in this thread I would have called a fanboy. That isn't the case. Only the people that have an obsession with me like you do are fanboys.

Perhaps it gives him some Internet comfort in his lonely life? Seems like a way to perpetuate the victim mentality. I don't know. I do plan on doing a search for "fanboy" one day, though, just to see how many I got out of him.
Proof you are just another fanboy.

Please, go post over at the BBQ on how much you dislike me so we all don't have to weed through your silliness.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Over there...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 08:01 PM
 
Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Didn't quit answer the question.
It's a fanboy. What else do you want?
"******* politics is for the ******* moment. ******** equations are for ******** Eternity." ******** Albert Einstein
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 08:05 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
But that is just the point voodoo, you took a quote out of context, and proved it wrong. Something I wasn't even saying.

So yes, you proved something I wasn't saying wrong.

WAY TO GO!

Here, have a pennant.



You have deserved it well.
MindFad you are right on the money.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 08:07 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:

Yes, you are right, I am making it up totally! You don't go into threads making personal jabs at me out of the blue all the time. NEVER!
[/b]

Posting pics is taking jabs? You do the same thing all the time. You can't take it?

No, in that case, everyone in this thread I would have called a fanboy. That isn't the case. Only the people that have an obsession with me like you do are fanboys.


You think people are obsessed with you. This is funny.

Proof you are just another fanboy.


What is?

Please, go post over at the BBQ on how much you dislike me so we all don't have to weed through your silliness.
Talk about obsessed. I never didn't understand you crying about the BBQ. You obviously didn't spend much time there or know anything of the people. And it's been gone for months. But you sure do like to talk about it, as if it means something.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 08:10 PM
 
Originally posted by MindFad:

Posting pics is taking jabs? You do the same thing all the time. You can't take it?

I usually post pics that are relevant to the discussion. USUALLY. Now I have on occassion done what you have done. But not nearly like you do. Nor do I usually single out one person like a fanboy does.
You think people are obsessed with you. This is funny.

It's obvious that you are. I've read the BBQ posts before. Heck, that forum at one time was nothing but a "We hate Zimphire" forum. I used to laugh whenever someone from there would send me links of you or someone else would obsess over me.

Talk about obsessed. I never didn't understand you crying about the BBQ.

I never cried about BBQ. I made fun of it. It was a fanboy forum. Most of my "fanboys" here also posted there.

You obviously didn't spend much time there or know anything of the people. And it's been gone for months. But you sure do like to talk about it, as if it means something.
Oh it's gone now? No wonder the fanboys are at full force now.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Off the Tobakoff
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 10:49 PM
 
I'm not sure I should even bother with this, but hopefully Zimphire (prize him) will be able to more coherently state his case.

Zimphire, do you say that you personally think that homosexuality is wrong, and that this is something people with morals feel innately?

Natural argument: it isn't natural to be homosexual. Are you mentioning that because homosexuality is "unnatural," it is also wrong? Again: 140 pts on the IQ test and having blonde hair and blue eyes are not "natural," either, but you say people miss the point when bringing these things up. What is your point here? You don't believe that homosexuality is on the same "level" as heterosexuality because it's unnatural? Is there more to this, or is this essentially one of your arguments for why it's wrong?--That is, because it's unnatural/not as common?

Social argument: just because a society accepts a practice doesn't make it right. So what makes it right? Do you believe in a relatively absolute right and wrong determined by a Christian God? I understand your cannibalistic and pedophiliac examples, but even you admitted that homosexuality was not in the same group as those things.

Please tie everything together; you're scatter-brained.
"You rise," he said, "like Aurora."
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 10:53 PM
 
What I am saying is, Homosexuality is not the normal course for nature. That has nothing to do with why I think it's wrong.

I personally feel it is wrong because of my spiritual beliefs.

But I wouldn't stop homosexuals from getting equal rights if that is what they want.

Free will and all.

That is about as blunt as it gets.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Off the Tobakoff
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 10:56 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
What I am saying is, Homosexuality is not the normal course for nature. That has nothing to do with why I think it's wrong.
Ok...I guess no real reason to have mentioned this then.
Originally posted by Zimphire:
I personally feel it is wrong because of my spiritual beliefs.

But I wouldn't stop homosexuals from getting equal rights if that is what they want.

Free will and all.

That is about as blunt as it gets.
Fair enough. Thread closed (gavel bangs).
"You rise," he said, "like Aurora."
     
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 11:04 PM
 
Originally posted by Stradlater:
Ok...I guess no real reason to have mentioned this then.
Er sure there was.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Off the Tobakoff
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2004, 11:26 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
Er sure there was.
k.
"You rise," he said, "like Aurora."
     
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2004, 12:01 AM
 
Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
oic ... you've been banned.
I am sure if dcolton wasn't banned by the NAZI ADMIN DEMONHOOD, he would reply in kind. nonetheless...since morality is not appreciated or condoned on this board...dcolton can't explain the evils of anal sex, aids, and biased administrators on this forum. BUT...I believe that the best response to your question is to remove demonhood as an administrator so anyone can express their opinion without fear of his heavy handed abuse of power.
     
Senior User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2004, 12:05 AM
 
Originally posted by Mosheh:
I am sure if dcolton wasn't banned by the NAZI ADMIN DEMONHOOD, he would reply in kind. nonetheless...since morality is not appreciated or condoned on this board...dcolton can't explain the evils of anal sex, aids, and biased administrators on this forum. BUT...I believe that the best response to your question is to remove demonhood as an administrator so anyone can express their opinion without fear of his heavy handed abuse of power.
If you don't like the admins, why populate the board? There are tons of forums out there, moderated and otherwise.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2004, 12:06 AM
 
So the question then would be if it's right for disney to support "Gay Day" for the possible negative influence on the children, correct? I don't believe the children would be in any harm. (Maybe the parents?) Should disney promote one minority but not another? Probably not. It's a public theme park, so i don't think discrimination is right either.

Varney's effort to link the "Gay Days" event to Disney's release of a computer designed for children, however, is a new twist on the attacks.
Would that be considered "projecting" on Varney's part?

(I reposted this because it was ignored)
     
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2004, 12:10 AM
 
Originally posted by strictlyplaid:
If you don't like the admins, why populate the board? There are tons of forums out there, moderated and otherwise.
Freedom of speech. If gays are so discriminated against...why would a gay guy discriminate against someone with opposing views?
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2004, 12:12 AM
 
Gay Day is all fun and games.
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:51 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2