[Athens]

Originally Posted by Eynstyn

No!!!! That is crazy! Son like girls get excited with pretty girls. Why? God. He don't get excited with men. Why? God.

Gays see man and get excited. Why? God. Gays see woman and don't get excited. Why? God.

Nobody choose how they are. No straight will try homo sex if they don't have one or many people to say it is ok and it is good. They say try it and you will like it.

I will tell him gay is problem. Why you want new problems of gays?? Why ANYBODY want to CHOSE gay?

Straight world don't like gays. Try to hurt gays. Shoot, beat, don't give job, give bad service discharge in military, get HIV, have to hide in closet, can not marriage in everyplace. Why anybody chose that???

When he has older I will tell him do not hate the gays but know it is more to curiosity sex and he MUST think if this is good for his life.

Everybody want coochie. If straight coochie is good, stay straight. If gay coochie is good, stay straight. If you want more than that you are greedy pig.

Gays are pretty accepted here where I live. At least you know they are born that way, and that you will teach your kid not to hate them but here is a shocker, I didnt come out until I was 22, up until then I was pure woman and to this day I have a lot of friends that think im 100% straight hehe so you never know.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Eynstyn

You are short temper, yes?

I can vouch for that

[BC_SIG]

Heh, I can also vouch for Eynstyn not having the slightest grasp on the proper use of the english language. Your post are in fact just a large puddle of hipocracy. Oh no!! A big word, Hope your translator can figure that one out.

As for me being "short temper", nope, not the slightest, Short tempered tho, Depends, I have little to no tolerance for stupidity.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by BC_SIG

Heh, I can also vouch for Eynstyn not having the slightest grasp on the proper use of the english language. Your post are in fact just a large puddle of hipocracy. Oh no!! A big word, Hope your translator can figure that one out.

As for me being "short temper", nope, not the slightest, Short tempered tho, Depends, I have little to no tolerance for stupidity.

And people asking you to cyber LOL how many times have you blocked me now for that

[Eynstyn]

Originally Posted by Athens

Gays are pretty accepted here where I live. At least you know they are born that way, and that you will teach your kid not to hate them but here is a shocker, I didnt come out until I was 22, up until then I was pure woman and to this day I have a lot of friends that think im 100% straight hehe so you never know.

I'm ready for man now.

Sandman!

Haaaaaaa!

I made mistake in post here: "Everybody want coochie. If straight coochie is good, stay straight. If gay coochie is good, stay straight. If you want more than that you are greedy pig."

Correct way is: "Everybody want coochie. If straight coochie is good, stay straight. If gay coochie is good, stay gay. If you want more than that you are greedy pig."

So are you gay man or gay woman?

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Eynstyn

I'm ready for man now.

Sandman!

Haaaaaaa!

I made mistake in post here: "Everybody want coochie. If straight coochie is good, stay straight. If gay coochie is good, stay straight. If you want more than that you are greedy pig."

Correct way is: "Everybody want coochie. If straight coochie is good, stay straight. If gay coochie is good, stay gay. If you want more than that you are greedy pig."

So are you gay man or gay woman?

im not gay, im bi

[Eynstyn]

Originally Posted by BC_SIG

Heh, I can also vouch for Eynstyn not having the slightest grasp on the proper use of the english language. Your post are in fact just a large puddle of hipocracy. Oh no!! A big word, Hope your translator can figure that one out.

As for me being "short temper", nope, not the slightest, Short tempered tho, Depends, I have little to no tolerance for stupidity.

No, we are both ignorant. If you can not understand that then maybe someone else is the stupid one, yes? I'm trying to be nice with you. But you must know, just like I don't accpet rude from straight you have no protection because you are gay. There are gay jerks. You may be one. If you are I will deal with you as we might see.

Do you understand that enogh?

[Eynstyn]

Originally Posted by Athens

im not gay, im bi

Ahhhh! You are man.

[RIRedinPA]

Originally Posted by Millennium

I still want to know how they verified that this is the person.

But as for the hypocrisy issue, there are several problems with your arguments:

• Becoming a hypocrite to expose other hypocrites does not absolve you of your own hypocrisy.
• I still challenge anyone supporting this to show me how this guy's identity was established and verified to be that of West.
• Hypocrisy is about belief as much as about action. Let us hear what West has to say, if it is true. Any truly moral person knows his own failings and strives to improve upon them; it is entirely possible that his outspoken conservatism is his own attempt to do this.

I don't see the hypocrisy. I don't want the government in my bedroom, I also keep what goes on in my bedroom private. If West didn't want his lifestyle exposed he should not engage in a communication forum which is not completely private - even if he thought he was communicating in confidence with someone. Had the Seattle paper set someone up outside his house to try to record what was going on inside I would cry foul and agree his privacy had been violated. Since West was trolling for young gay men on the World Wide Web, whether he was aware or not of the potential public viewing of his conversations, its not a violation of his privacy. Ignorance is not a defense in a court of law.

Did you read the article? He confirmed the screen names were his, he confirmed he went to gay.com, he confirmed he meet and dated young men through online conversations. He also hasn't denied offering a job, sports memorabillia, etc. to one of the kids. There are also allegations that he did have sex with under age men, that he had sex in city hall, and he has had a career surrounded by rumors of sexual improprities. Sounds like there is enough circumstancial and actual evidence to say Jim West the mayor is the same person as Jim West who tries to seduce young men on line for sex.

>>Any truly moral person knows his own failings and strives to improve upon them; it is entirely possible that his outspoken conservatism is his own attempt to do this.<<

I think the straw your grasping at here is just a tad out of your reach. I agree with the first half of your statement though I don't know if I would use the phrase "truly moral" with it. I'm not sure morality has anything to do with trying to improve on your failings but I'll leave that for the philosophers on the forum to debate. Call me a cynic but to me West's outspoken conservatism is just an attempt to cover up the fact that he has a sexual addiction, power and identity problem. I'm no psychiatrist but it seems to me this dude is using sex for a lot more than just pleasure or procreation, he's carrying a lot of baggage around.

And clarify this for me - are you making this equation in your statement:

Morals = conservatism
Lack of morals = liberalism

[RIRedinPA]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

So the logic here is that being a hypocrite is an excuse then for a person�s political opponents to become even more hypocritical and pry into a person�s private sex live, and publish the details?

He may be a total hypocrite on gay issues, fine, but the fact is, his political opponents have proven themselves to be even worse hypocrites on the issue of staying out of other people�s bedrooms and private sex lives.

It seems the left is all for staying out of people�s private sex lives- UNLESS they want to go on a political vendetta, then all of their hot air about privacy rights goes straight out the window.

I mean, if you�re going to be self-righteous and pretend your stance is that it�s none of anyone�s business how people live their private sexual lives, shouldn't you at least stay the F out of invading someone�s private sexual life yourself? Pot. Kettle. Black.

Sigh, no the logic here is not to become a hypocrite to expose someone has being hypocritical. I've already typed this reply once today but it's good exercise. I don't want the government prying into my private affairs, including my sex life. I also keep my sex life private. Jim West posted his sex life all over the World Wide Web, a less than private communication forum. Whether he was aware of that fact or not is no excuse.

As an example, here is AOL's terms of service for online chat:

Although you or the owner of the Content retain ownership of all right, title and interest in Content that you post to any AIM Product, AOL owns all right, title and interest in any compilation, collective work or other derivative work created by AOL using or incorporating this Content. In addition, by posting Content on an AIM Product, you grant AOL, its parent, affiliates, subsidiaries, assigns, agents and licensees the irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide right to reproduce, display, perform, distribute, adapt and promote this Content in any medium. You waive any right to privacy. You waive any right to inspect or approve uses of the Content or to be compensated for any such uses.

I'm not sure if the transcripts of an online conversations are owned by both parties or only the part that you post are owned by you but regardless, since it is a fuzzy privacy issue you should show prudence and be careful of what you post and to whom. No one went digging through his trash can or peering in his window to get his sexual conduct, he put it out there and apparently several times.

And where are you getting that the "left" is doing this to poor ole Jim, other than the fact that the story appeared in a newspaper? From what I read his opponent in the last election knew of some sexual misconduct allegations against West but refrained from using them in the election.

Are people on the left going to take this and use it against him. You betcha. Jim West's positions on gay rights, even if they occurred 20 years ago, categorized a lot of people as second class citizens, made their lives harder than they should have been, perhaps even made their lives more dangerous than they should have been and now, it turns out, he was just posing as an arch conservative to make political points, some memories run long and deep. Did you hear the recent admitting by Hastert that some of the attacks on Clinton by the Republicans were revenge for what happened to Nixon by Democrats?

Finally, I am not being self righteous, I'm too flawed a person to be so. I do stand by my conviction that what happens inside someone's bedroom is private, as long as it's legal, but you can't make it public and then cry and say your privacy is being violated. I guess that would make West a hypocrite on the gay issue and a hypocrite on the privacy issues as well.

[ThinkInsane]

I'm glad to see yet another thread dragged off topic and closed because a couple of people need to turn it into there own personal two page bitchfest. You guys do know that we provide a private message feature so you can debate this privately, or that you can start a new topic so those of us that found the original topic interesting don't have to read a rambling diatribe that reads like a duel of ESL students. I just point this out because I care, and because dammit, I love you guys!