Jump to content

Off Topic....Rosie O-Donnell


maxg

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 150
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

----------------

On 3/2/2004 8:44:21 AM stan krajewski wrote:

CNN headline - "Catholics ordered to offer birth control." Holy crap.

It never ends with the left.

----------------

Yeah, that chaps my hide, too. They should only provide birth control to those that are having sex with the priests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

----------------

On 3/2/2004 10:59:28 AM fini wrote:

I see you're dressing.

----------------

Possible responses:

1. And if he does that in anger he will be cross-dressing.

2. Well its not polite to watch someone dressing - look the other way.

3. Christ your eyesight is good.

4. That's what happens when you leave your flies open.

5. Who the hell is your dressing?

6. said the priest stiring his tea with the other hand.

You choose....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woodog, thanks for reminding me about that GREAT Onion satire! I had forgotten about that one although it was bookmarked for a long while.

That is just too great... Beauty. Sadly, it's a bit TOO SCARY when you consider it was literally written on January 18, 2001. I re-read it with disbelief... Amazing.

head_nation_nightmare_3701.gif

The Onion - Bush to Rescue

kh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep ...... this country is heading in the right direction:

Rosie getting illegally married in reaction to President Bush's statement - just as much thinking put into that one as her anti-gun proclamations and magazine venture. What a beautiful human being and outstanding citizen - we should all strive to be more like her and her ad agency.

Those who most loudly proclaim tolerance are usually the ones who are the least tolerant of opinions other than their own.

An onslaught of "offended" citizens who think that any religious reference should be removed from anything that ever had public funds remotely invested. So what if a historical item has been there for hundreds of years - let's misinterpret the meaning of "separation of church & state" and knock those semi-religious references down. Especially if they're Christian. Boo-hoo, I'm so offended by the "In God We Trust" phrase on U.S. currency that I must sue someone soon. Anyone have Johnny Cochran's number?

One particular political party caterwauling about a certain year elections vote counting process while failing to mention how hard that same party tried to screw military folks out of the absentee votes. Get over it, Chad.

Illegal aliens are insulted by being called illegal aliens and even more put off by suggestions that they adhere to the same immigrations standards that naturalized citizens followed. Go figure.

Caligula would be right at home in today's social atmosphere: perhaps doing programming for MTV? Speaking of which, a review of ancient Roman history wouldn't hurt the myopic as it's starting to look less like history and more like a portent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whooo weeeee.... I skipped over 90% of this topic. If my hunch serves me right, I shoud be able to roast marshmellows and hotdogs my just overing a stick over the title of this thread.9.gif

I think i will stay out of this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The Constitution of the United States provides for "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness"

For ALL Americans, even Queers."

Actually the right to the pursuit of happiness referred to the right of free men to own property, and had nothing to do with pursuing happiness or being happy. Not to mention it was in the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution. While you can be queer and be here, nothing says you are actually guaranteed happiness or the pursuit of it. The constitution even with its equal protection provision also in effect prevents Gay marriage. As in your state cant pass a law and make my state abide by it. Obviously this can change if a majority of states pass laws to acknowledge/accept it, but as for now those opposing it have a stronger legal foot to stand on given the US Supreme Ct tends to lean right. Although the Constitution does not give the SC the power to rule over it, Thomas Jefferson is responsible for accepting judicial review not our beloved framing document. Oh well it will be an interesting battle especially when you consider a gay man or woman still can marry one of the opposite sex thus retaining the equal rights they claim to be denied. The law is applied equally to all. The fact that straights cant marry gays either would suggest the laws are being applied without prejudice. Oh well just a thought. Now why is this question in this forum anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really should just let this go. That would be the wise thing. Ah shoot, one more lap...

Max, I accept your definition of "prejudiced", but I fail to see how it applies to me;

"preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an instance of such judgment or opinion c : an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics.)"

I think my opinion on this is neither "preconceived", "without grounds or sufficient knowledge", or "hostile". If you would care to elucidate on why you feel otherwise, I'm all ears (eyes?).

And Max, does a position against allowing homosexuals to marry really merit a comparison to the holocaust? Don't ya think that is just a bit of a leap of illogic? I mean after all, I'm not promoting any kind of "gay bashing" here. In fact, some of those of the opposing view seem to be much more virulent in tone.

And since you mentioned it, OF COURSE I feel religions other than mine are "wrong", to one degree or another. Doesn't everyone? Otherwise, I think one should be looking for a belief they really do ~believe~ in!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James,

One thing we both agree on is that we should both let this go - obviously however, neither of us can - despite the futility of such an argument, so as you say - one more round:

"preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an instance of such judgment or opinion c : an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics.)"

I think my opinion on this is neither "preconceived", "without grounds or sufficient knowledge", or "hostile". If you would care to elucidate on why you feel otherwise, I'm all ears (eyes?)."

The use of the word wrong implies there is some kind of choice here - that people are able to choose to be homosexual or otherwise. Scientifically speaking this does not seem to be the case. People are able to choose to undertake homosexual acts almost regardless of their sexual orientation, but not, ultimately, to decide what it is that really lights their fire. In other words the sexual fanatisies they dream are not an issue of choice - they are a result of the programming of their make up so to speak.

Therefore, to state that homosexuality is wrong implies various misconceptions and prejudices, IMHO. To state it is not something you would choose for either yourself or your children is eminently more acceptable, I wouldnt want my daughter to be a Lesbian when she grows up, but I would still love her is she was and acccept her orientation as a fact of life. Given that position anyone declaring her to be wrong would certainly make me nervous.

"And Max, does a position against allowing homosexuals to marry really merit a comparison to the holocaust? Don't ya think that is just a bit of a leap of illogic? I mean after all, I'm not promoting any kind of "gay bashing" here. In fact, some of those of the opposing view seem to be much more virulent in tone."

I dont know - substitute Jews in the above sentence and see how it reads. Just marriage? How about holding office? Being a Doctor? A priest? School Teacher? How much do you want to limit their involvement in society - really - beyond the sanctity of marriage issue?

"Not promoting any kind of gay bashing" - but how about taking an active step to prevent it. Most Germans were not promoting killing 6 million Jews in concentration camps - but they stood by whilst it happened.

"really merit a comparison to the holocaust?" Take a look at the events of 1933 to 1935 in Germany. In and of themselves they, too, bore no comparison to what was to follow, but they were the cornerstone on which the Holocaust was built.

And since you mentioned it, OF COURSE I feel religions other than mine are "wrong", to one degree or another. Doesn't everyone? Otherwise, I think one should be looking for a belief they really do ~believe~ in!

So it merely comes down to what you want to do about it - or are prepared to stand by and watch done about it. At least with Homosexuality we know that there is no more likelihood of their children being gay than the children of anyone else. This is not the case with Jews - they are far more likely to produce more Jews. Maybe they should not be allowed to marry eiher - they are not of the faith (yours I mean). At the very least we should license them to breed - dont you think?

"In fact, some of those of the opposing view seem to be much more virulent in tone"

That virulence comes from those that read their histories. Comparitively mild transgressions against the Human rights of others have, more often that not, lead to whole scale holocausts not limited to the events of 1939-45.

Take a look at what the Turks did to the Kurds in 1917 (a million dead is memory serves). More recent? - How about the events in the small African State of Rwanda a few years ago?

Of course your arguement that I am going off the deep end on this is valid. Take lesser examples of countries utilizing second class citizen status - A history of Rome and slavery - more apt - Britain and slavery. The Spanish inquisition. American treatment of Native American Indians closer to your own home. Further afield - Australian treatment of the native Aboriginis, South African Apartied system...its a long list...all of one group of people believing someone else was either wrong or inferior.

Mentioned earlier in this thread was a comparison of Gay marriages with inter-racial marriages. Both, in their times, believed simply wrong.

Why can neither of us leave this one alone I wonder?....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Max,

Maybe I'm one of those people that just has to have the last word, but to paraphrase the Gipper, "here I go again". Besides, though horribly wrong 2.gif, you at least are civil, intelligent and respectful, although you were getting close to the edge with that "prejudiced" label. 8.gif

I think the core of our disagreement can be traced to the fact you seem to believe homosexuals are born that way, and therefore can't help themselves. You could make the same argument on behalf of most serial killers, I suppose. Although, I do believe we are born with certain tendencies, and a predisposition to certain behaviors, I definitely do not believe that this excuses "bad" behavior. To put it in a religious context, I believe most of us have weaknesses or "thorns in the flesh", and that these weaknesses are part of what makes us human. But we are not supposed to excuse, much less embrace these weaknesses, which is what it seems to me the "vocal" homosexual community is doing. They are trying to take something wrong and call it right. Just like the Bible says would happen in the last days, (again, to paraphrase); Men will call darkness light and light darkness.

But I fully expect this trend, this moral downward spiral to continue, accelerate and deepen. This too, is Bible prophecy.

One more thing - Although you seem to keep trying to link my attidude or belief to the countless incidents in history of one people abusing, murdering or enslaving another, remember that those terrible things have been done because of hate, greed, avarice, etc. - iow, SIN! And God does not hate sinners, he hates sin itself. Likewise with homosexuals, God does not hate homosexuals, he hates homosexuality. And the Christian's attitude should be the same. If you doubt that God hates homosexuality, I would suggest you do some bible research on the subject. Or check out the archeological record of the cities of Pompei and Herculaneum. Pretty convincing, in my book.

Regards,

JD "The Champion of Decency" McCall 12.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James,

We will have to agree to differ - obviously. I will leave it to the Geneticists to prove the case one way or another. I am 100% certain there is a biological reason Homosexuals exist, and, I would go further and say a biological advantage to their existence.

You wont agree - but I guess 5 years will be enough time for us to find out.

Till then one of us will have to live with our delusions / prejudices or whatever you want to call them.

I dont get the Pompei Herculaneum reference at all - biblical I can cope with - although to my knowledge there is nothing in the New Testement about homosexuality - its all in the Old Testement - and Jesus went to great pains to move on from there in many areas if not this specific one (dietry rules out - Jews only out etc. etc.). I beleive he was starting a process - not defining one by one what was and was not acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the crux of the argument is whether one sees the Bible as an historical record written by humans, or a divine directive. Who's right? How the heck should we know? My guess is that the truth, as it so often does, lies somehwhere between those two absolutes. My intuition is that the universal truths are a bit more complex than our human minds can decipher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*sigh*

Every discussion I've ever had about homosexuality has always ended up being a religious argument. I've been the token 'homo' on a few discussion panels, and 20 years ago the discussion were whether or not it should be LEGAL, now it's about marriage. And when it comes to religion, science and reason fly out the window on this one.

I don't believe in an Invisible Cloud Being now. I used to. I was converted to Christianity at 16 with the 'sinner's prayer' at a church camp. I was told that prayer and faith accomplished anything, and I believed it. My #1 prayer was to be straight. Please GOD, as your child I can't be gay because you say that gays are going to be in heaven (yes, Maxg, the New Testament also sends the likes of me to the fires of HELL). It was nightly internal self-torture, and SO unnecessary. That didn't work, so during a very suicidal freshman year at the University of South Carolina I went to psychiatric therapy, and that resulted in half-hearted (actually much less than half-hearted) dates with girls. I'm probably still counted as one of Ken Carrols' success stories because I finally told him I was straight. That LIE was encouraged by my new "spirit filled" "charismatic" church where I had been baptized with the Holy Spirit at 20. Speaking in tongues, healings, dancing in the aisles, etc. We didn't do snakes, but if I had thought it would have made me straight, I would have done that too. The LIE that I was "straight" came about because I had had the DEMONS of homsexuality cast out of me at a healing service, and at that point, I was told, it was a spiritual battle began with the Devil and I had to speak the truth into being. I was still as queer as I had ever been, no, wait, I was really straight, but the DEVIL himself was at my side and every time I saw a butt that made my wee-wee stir up it was the DEVIL himself who was winning the battle for my soul. Such needless self torture encouraged by people who said they LOVED me.

I tried returning to more 'mainstream' churches because of my musical abilities (I'm an excellent pianist, organist, choral director, arranger, and singer) and have been kicked out of 3 churches to date because being gay is a hot gossip topic (doncha know). I stopped believing in an ICB (invisible cloud being) about 10 years ago, after representatives from the local Emmaus community came to me and "outted" me at a local United Methodist church where I was the director of music. They outted me because I had agreed to direct the music at an upcoming Chrysalis Walk and they were concerned that I would be working around teenage boys. they told me I was a stumbling block to their "walk". *******s. I was forced to resign from a 'christian' church for the last time, and a good friend of mine asked me why I was so determined to try and exist where I would never be truly accepted. *Bingo*, the light came on and I began to divorce myself from this GOD NONSENSE. It was the best decision I've ever made with regards to my own mental health.

I don't care what YOUR religion may say about my orientation, but if you try write your religious INSANITY into civil matters there will be a fight and I will gladly call you a fool in the process and point out all the hypocrisy in your approach. Unlike you, I won't burn because of my hyprocrisy. In other countries this post would cause me to lose my life. It's easy to say it won't happen here, but nothing so drastic ever occurs all at once. It's always in itty bitty steps, and history proves this.

I remember as a child in my home state of South Carolina going to a laundromat for "white customers only". Now when I visit there I see black kids and white kids riding in cars together and even (GASP) dating one another openly. Can we regulate behavior through legislation? Yes, we can.

I believe that some of the BT's (Bible Thumpers, and I was one once) say they don't hate gays, but their religion is explicit.. belief in that religion requires them to kill gays (old testament only, and quite a few others need to be stoned as well, not in the Bob Dylan way), and those gays will burn in hell for eternity. I refuse to be a part of such insanity. The evangelists don't come around to MY house anymore.

Folks who believe you are doomed to HELL for eternity will treat you differently. I know this from personal experience. The minute some folks find out I'm gay the relationship is colored. You lose your job, your apartment, the right to visit your son.

(btw, I have had custody of my son since he was 4, but that took 3 year court battle with a bi-polar pill popping alcoholic mother who successfully kept me from seeing my son for 3 years because I had a bath with him when he was 1 year old, she claimed that I was going to molest him and the religio-crazy lawyers from her church gave her FREE representation while I went into monstrous debt. Bitter? You bet, but my son is safe living with me although several of his friends aren't allowed to visit him at our home because of... religious insanity and outright ignorance)

Marriage is a civil arrangement. It just so happens that marriage is also a religous rite for some (but far from all) Marriage was originally about property rights. Women used to be property. Marriage to the church had as much to do with expectations of tithing as being married to Christ. (he is cute in some of those pictures) I wish I could write as well as this Conason fellow, but he puts an interesting spin on the whole thing and gets some good jabs at the supidity of the religious right in the process.

http://www.observer.com/pages/conason.asp

and lastly, some thoughts that seem silly, but are perfectly biblical:

As Governor Romney and Attorney General Reilly work diligently to prevent marriage between two people of the same sex, others of us have been busy drafting a Constitutional Amendment codifying all marriages entirely on biblical principles. After all, G-d wouldn't want us to pick and choose which of the Scriptures we elevate to civil law and which we choose to ignore:

Draft of a Constitutional Amendment to Defend Biblical Marriage:

* Marriage in Massachusetts shall consist of a union between one man and one or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5.)

* Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take concubines in addition to his wife or wives.

(II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)

* A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21) (This is where Governor Romney's resurrection of the Death Penalty will come in handy.)

* Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden.

(Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)

* Since marriage is for life, neither the Constitution nor any state law of the Commonwealth of

Massachusetts shall permit divorce.

(Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9-12)

* If a married man dies without children, his brother must marry the widow. If the brother refuses to marry the widow, or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law.

(Gen. 38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10)

And finally, Mr. McCall, Champion of Decency, ha ha, since I have been asked these questions from deluded fools for most of my life, I'll ask them (in a slighty different way) to you:

1. What do you think caused your heterosexuality?

2. When did you decide you were heterosexual?

3. Is it possible that your heterosexuality is just a phase that you may grow out of?

4. Is it possible that your heterosexuality stems from a neurotic fear of others of the same sex?

5. If you have never slept with a person of the same sex, is it possible that all you need is a good lesbian/gay lover?

6. Do your parents know that you are straight? Do your friends and/or roommates know?

7. Why do you insist on flaunting your heterosexuality? Can't you just be who you are and keep it quiet?

8. Why do heterosexuals place so much emphasis on sex?

9. Why do heterosexuals feel so compelled to introduce others into their lifestyle?

10.A disproportionate majority of child molesters are heterosexual men. Do you consider it safe to expose children to heterosexual male teachers, social workers, foster parents, etc.?

11. Just what do men and women do in bed together? How can they truly know how to please each other, being so anatomically different?

12. Even with all the societal support marriage receives, the divorce rate increases each year. Why are there so few stable relationships between heterosexuals?

13. Statistics show that lesbians have the lowest incidence of sexually transmitted disease. Is it really safe for a woman to maintain a heterosexual lifestyle and run the risk of disease and unwanted pregnancy?

14. How can you expect to become a whole person if you limit yourself to compulsive, exclusive heterosexuality?

15. Considering the menace of overpopulation, how could humanity survive if everyone were heterosexual?

16. Could you trust a heterosexual therapist to be objective? Don't you feel that s/he might be inclined to influence you in the direction of his/her own leanings?

17. There seem to be very few happy heterosexuals. Techniques have been developed that might enable you to change if you really want to. Have you considered trying aversion and other therapies?

18. Would you want your child to be heterosexual knowing the problems s/he would face?

And lastly (do I hear a collective sigh of relief?) If you don't want gay marriage, don't marry a homosexual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forest,

LMAO!! at your list of suggestions.

While I feel bad for you because of your torment in your youth. Mere equality will not stop those that follow you from the same torment. Perhaps the religion you followed during that time did help you through more than your concious mind is willing to accept.

I think it goes back to my earlier statements that the governments should get out of the "marraige" business altogether and convey the legal benefits of union to two humans. The religious groups can then conduct ceremonies to unite a couple under God,Allah, etc.

The constitution supposedly guarantees equality under the law, it does not and can not convey the blessing or damnation of the Almighty.

Rick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...