Re: So Much for Democracy?

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>It's been a long time since Aristide has been a true proponent
>of democracy.

Take a leson, Gordito:

The Bush thugs cut off all aid and all loans to Haiti the day the Bush
administration came into power, insuring the collapse of the country and its
government as well as the loss of thousands of infant lives due to sickness and
malnutrition. It began during the Clinton years when Clinton brought Aristede
back the first time, and *before* Aristede did a damn thing, good or bad, and
the Republican congess withdrew all support to screw Clinton and started the
country on a road to Chaos.

If you're really interested in this, rather than your usual knee jerk Bush
defense (although with a bulbous belly like yours I can't imagine it jerking
very far; how *do* you find your dick in al that blubber?) You'll check out a
new book by Sachs on the subject. (Columbia University) I just spent an hour
listening to the man and he has documented fact after fact about just how
sleazy the Bush boys are.

Professor Midnite.

[Arny Krueger]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message


>> From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>> It's been a long time since Aristide has been a true proponent
>> of democracy.

> Take a leson, Gordito:

> The Bush thugs cut off all aid and all loans to Haiti the day the Bush
> administration came into power, insuring the collapse of the country
> and its government as well as the loss of thousands of infant lives
> due to sickness and malnutrition.

Neatly ignoring the fact that a country should be sellf-sufficient. Under
Aristede's failed regime, Haiti's GNP dropped by about 25% last year. It was
well-known that aid routed through the Haitian government never reached the
people who needed it most but was stolen and grafted along the way.

Whoever "Professor Midnite" is, he obviously thinks that paying graft is a
good idea, and that good money should be thrown after bad.

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Arny Krueger"

>Under
>Aristede's failed regime, Haiti's GNP dropped by about 25% last year. I

As a direct result of Bush-sponsored loan undercutting, as I said. If you're
interested in learning something you don't know abot Haiti, I refer you to the
editorial page of the latest Financial Times. Not available on line,
unfortunately, but check it out at newstand. (Unless, of course, a financial
big whig like yourself already subscribes.) There's no point in discussing this
with you until you have some facts available other than what you find on
Google.

Professor Midnite

[Arny Krueger]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message

>> From: "Arny Krueger"
>
>> Under
>> Aristede's failed regime, Haiti's GNP dropped by about 25% last
>> year. I

Note that the "professor" was so intimidated by my account of the relevant
facts that he's trying to pretend that they never existed.

> As a direct result of Bush-sponsored loan undercutting, as I said.

Yawn. Likely story. Everything bad that happens in the universe is the fault
of George W. Bush, or so the Democratistic partisans would have us believe.

>If
> you're interested in learning something you don't know abot Haiti, I
> refer you to the editorial page of the latest Financial Times. Not
> available on line, unfortunately, but check it out at newstand.
> (Unless, of course, a financial big whig like yourself already
> subscribes.) There's no point in discussing this with you until you
> have some facts available other than what you find on Google.

Yawn. Yet another "Look over there, cake" response. You a friend of Middius,
too?

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Arny Krueger"

>
>Yawn. Likely story. Everything bad that happens in the universe is the fault
>of George W. Bush, or so the Democratistic partisans would have us believe.

Unfortunately, you have no facts. Do compare and contrast the government of
Chad with the government of Haiti in terms of both corruption and our economic
assistance (Why is one supposed to be self-sufficient and not the other?) and
you may get the point. Then again, it's pointless to try to teach a man who's
mind is both made up and closed

Krueger Dismissed

Professor Midnite

[Arny Krueger]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message

>> From: "Arny Krueger"
>
>>
>> Yawn. Likely story. Everything bad that happens in the universe is
>> the fault of George W. Bush, or so the Democratistic partisans would
>> have us believe.

> Unfortunately, you have no facts.

Posture on, dude!

> Do compare and contrast the
> government of Chad with the government of Haiti in terms of both
> corruption and our economic assistance (Why is one supposed to be
> self-sufficient and not the other?) and you may get the point.

Not the topic I addressed.

> Then again, it's pointless to try to teach a man who's mind is both made
> up and closed

Like you?

"Hey look over there, cake!"

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>Aristide rigged the 2000 elections before Bush took office. His government
>is rife with corruption, human rights violations and complicity with drug
>dealers.

Change *Aristede* to *Bush* and the sentence still works.

So you admit that Bush toppled the government of Haiti deliberately, and that
Colin Powell, Bush's 'House ******' as Harry Belafonte called him is full of
it? Seriously. Get the latest issue of Financial Times and tell me what you
think.

Professor Midnite

[Arny Krueger]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message

>> From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
>> Aristide rigged the 2000 elections before Bush took office. His
>> government is rife with corruption, human rights violations and
>> complicity with drug dealers.
>
> Change *Aristede* to *Bush* and the sentence still works.

So, you are now doing me-too posts, eh professor?

[Professor Midnite]

>From: Le Artiste

>I don't see the words "me too" in the post you are responding to.

Me neither. Me too. Me neither . . .

The fact is it's simply a case of 'Great minds think alike', or 'Different
minds, same gutter.' :-)

Professor Midnite

Professor

[Glenn Zelniker]

Yeasty Cock-Slimmer wrote:

> Sadly, Arnii ****ed up that rather simple one-liner. In his version,
> he is apparently *talking to the cake*, telling it to look over there.
>
> Look over there! Cakes!*
>
> --
> td

Thanks for admitting sockpuppet td or Graham or whatever the
usual list of suspects calls you, that you've grown the
mental acumen of a carrott. NoT"! Or is this another example
of your "look over there, cake" bobbing and weaving and
living in the last millenium! Yawn. So now all the Middius'
girls admit they dont understand the meaning of the word
cake. Yet another IKYWABAI. Come back when you're not so
intimidated by my cakes.

[Joseph Oberlander]

Well, I have heard the recordings of the conversations between
Aristide and various peple and either he's the greatest liar
in the history of the world or what he says is true - we kidnapped
him and forced him out of power.

Considering our past history of doing exactly this sort of thing,
I know which side I believe. I loved hearing Rumsfeld saying
a couple hours after it happened "not today" - it's clear they
weren't expecting a response that fast with recordings and statements,
and had no official response worked out yet.

Typical. Oh - not Bush - but our entire government. Democrat
or Republican - we don't belong in the business of overthrowing
other nations.

[Schizoid Man]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
>
> >> From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >> It's been a long time since Aristide has been a true proponent
> >> of democracy.
>
> > Take a leson, Gordito:
>
> > The Bush thugs cut off all aid and all loans to Haiti the day the Bush
> > administration came into power, insuring the collapse of the country
> > and its government as well as the loss of thousands of infant lives
> > due to sickness and malnutrition.
>
> Neatly ignoring the fact that a country should be sellf-sufficient. Under
> Aristede's failed regime, Haiti's GNP dropped by about 25% last year. It
was
> well-known that aid routed through the Haitian government never reached
the
> people who needed it most but was stolen and grafted along the way.

Where do you get your facts from? Fox News?

[Schizoid Man]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message >
> "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
> > >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

> Aristide rigged the 2000 elections before Bush took office. His government
> is rife with corruption, human rights violations and complicity with drug
> dealers.


Sockpuppet,

Now you have gone too far. Your delusional writing is usually laced with
anti-Semitism, racism and bigotry. But this is too much. What pristine news
source have you consulted to spread your malicious lies about Aristide
rigging the 2000 elections? Let me supply you with one:

An exhaustive and convincing report by the International Coalition of
Independent Observers concluded that "fair and peaceful elections were held"
in 2000, and by the standard of the presidential elections held in the US
that same year they were positively exemplary.
Why then were they characterised as "flawed" by the Organisation of American
States (OAS)? It was because, after Aristide's Lavalas party had won 16 out
of 17 senate seats, the OAS contested the methodology used to calculate the
voting percentages. Curiously, neither the US nor the OAS judged this
methodology problematic in the run-up to the elections.

However, in the wake of the Lavalas victories, it was suddenly important
enough to justify driving the country towards economic collapse. Bill
Clinton invoked the OAS accusation to justify the crippling economic embargo
against Haiti that persists to this day, and which effectively blocks the
payment of about $500m in international aid.

I have had enough of your redneck xenophobia and flagrant ignorance. Travel
a bit. Read a book. It might do you some good.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >Aristide rigged the 2000 elections before Bush took office. His
government
> >is rife with corruption, human rights violations and complicity with drug
> >dealers.
>
> Change *Aristede* to *Bush* and the sentence still works.
>
> So you admit that Bush toppled the government of Haiti deliberately, and
that
> Colin Powell, Bush's 'House ******' as Harry Belafonte called him is full
of
> it? Seriously. Get the latest issue of Financial Times and tell me what
you
> think.
>

No Arny I didn't admit anything.
Aristede couldn't survive the rebels. The outcome
was clear We just presented the reality,
he was 'done' and if he wanted to live,
he ought to leave. We told him we would not
protect him unless he left. I guess he construes
that as 'forcing' him to leave. Many reble leaders
are former Aristede supporters who got fed up
with his abuse of power and neglect for the people.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Glenn Zelniker]

Yeasty Cock-Slimmer wrote:

> Thanks for adknitting your lies once again sockpuppet Glanzicker, its
> like I haven't eated cakes in the snow fixing radars in Barveria with
> a bowl of **** on my J-poles, singing a canoe.

Proove it cakepuppet sock or whatever all the Miidius girl's
call the usual list of suspects. "Look cake, over there!"

> Not ;-(! The good news
> is your look cake there over isn't an old debating trade trick I
> spotted of "Look over there, little boys" with cakes in my sweetie
> bag? ;-(

Sockpuppet Cock-Slammer try to beg borrow or, steal a
carrot. Thank you for admitting my uSEnEt output terrifies
you. Oh, I get it. Its like i'ts Ok to tell a cake "look
over, there!" if its one of your friends. ;-)

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Schizoid Man" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message >
> > "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
> > > >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> > Aristide rigged the 2000 elections before Bush took office. His
government
> > is rife with corruption, human rights violations and complicity with
drug
> > dealers.
>
>
> Sockpuppet,
>
> Now you have gone too far. Your delusional writing is usually laced with
> anti-Semitism, racism and bigotry.


First things first, tell me where I laced any writings with racism
or anti-Semitism. People her have falsley argued about my
supposed bigotry, for aligning myself with Kerry's position
as pro civil union and opposed to gay marriage.
Where did you dredge up these two new issues?




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Schizoid Man]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message >
> "Schizoid Man" > wrote in message

> >
> > "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message >
> > > "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
> > > > >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
> >
> > > Aristide rigged the 2000 elections before Bush took office. His
> government
> > > is rife with corruption, human rights violations and complicity with
> drug
> > > dealers.
> >
> >
> > Sockpuppet,
> >
> > Now you have gone too far. Your delusional writing is usually laced with
> > anti-Semitism, racism and bigotry.
>
>
> First things first, tell me where I laced any writings with racism
> or anti-Semitism. People her have falsley argued about my
> supposed bigotry, for aligning myself with Kerry's position
> as pro civil union and opposed to gay marriage.
> Where did you dredge up these two new issues?

Look, I am no Kerry fan. I believe problems. And in problem solving. Why
don't you argue with me on the issues? I retract my statement about your
racial prejudices. Please enlighten me on why the 2000 Haitian elections
were fixed. Or shall I send you the report from the International Coalition
of
Independent Observers?

Debate the point, Sockpuppet. Not the person.

[Schizoid Man]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
...
>
> >
> > I have had enough of your redneck xenophobia and flagrant ignorance.
> Travel
> > a bit. Read a book. It might do you some good.
> >
>
> I already have my tickets for my next two international trips.
>

You do know that traveling out of your county, though it may seem like a
foreign, alien land, does not constitute an international trip. ;)

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Schizoid Man" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message >
> > "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
> > > >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> > Aristide rigged the 2000 elections before Bush took office. His
government
> > is rife with corruption, human rights violations and complicity with
drug
> > dealers.
>
>
> Sockpuppet,
>
> Now you have gone too far. Your delusional writing is usually laced with
> anti-Semitism, racism and bigotry. But this is too much. What pristine
news
> source have you consulted to spread your malicious lies about Aristide
> rigging the 2000 elections? Let me supply you with one:
>
> An exhaustive and convincing report by the International Coalition of
> Independent Observers concluded that "fair and peaceful elections were
held"
> in 2000, and by the standard of the presidential elections held in the US
> that same year they were positively exemplary.
> Why then were they characterised as "flawed" by the Organisation of
American
> States (OAS)? It was because, after Aristide's Lavalas party had won 16
out
> of 17 senate seats, the OAS contested the methodology used to calculate
the
> voting percentages. Curiously, neither the US nor the OAS judged this
> methodology problematic in the run-up to the elections.
>
> However, in the wake of the Lavalas victories, it was suddenly important
> enough to justify driving the country towards economic collapse. Bill
> Clinton invoked the OAS accusation to justify the crippling economic
embargo
> against Haiti that persists to this day, and which effectively blocks the
> payment of about $500m in international aid.
>
> I have had enough of your redneck xenophobia and flagrant ignorance.
Travel
> a bit. Read a book. It might do you some good.
>

I already have my tickets for my next two international trips.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Schizoid Man" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message >
> > "Schizoid Man" > wrote in message
>
> > >
> > > "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message >
> > > > "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
> > > > > >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
> > >
> > > > Aristide rigged the 2000 elections before Bush took office. His
> > government
> > > > is rife with corruption, human rights violations and complicity with
> > drug
> > > > dealers.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sockpuppet,
> > >
> > > Now you have gone too far. Your delusional writing is usually laced
with
> > > anti-Semitism, racism and bigotry.
> >
> >
> > First things first, tell me where I laced any writings with racism
> > or anti-Semitism. People her have falsley argued about my
> > supposed bigotry, for aligning myself with Kerry's position
> > as pro civil union and opposed to gay marriage.
> > Where did you dredge up these two new issues?
>
> Look, I am no Kerry fan. I believe problems. And in problem solving. Why
> don't you argue with me on the issues? I retract my statement about your
> racial prejudices. Please enlighten me on why the 2000 Haitian elections
> were fixed. Or shall I send you the report from the International
Coalition
> of
> Independent Observers?
>
> Debate the point, Sockpuppet. Not the person.
>
>

I have been looking for the OAS and UN reports.
At any rate, it was over for him before any US
troops hit the Haitian soil. We expedited both saving
his life, and saving Haiti from even worse turmoil.
The only other alternative was to stand back and watch
more death, looting and butchery. Certainly, we
couldn't go in there and prop him back up.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Mike McKelvy]

(Professor Midnite) wrote in message >...
> >From: "Arny Krueger"
>
> >
> >Yawn. Likely story. Everything bad that happens in the universe is the fault
> >of George W. Bush, or so the Democratistic partisans would have us believe.
>
> Unfortunately, you have no facts. Do compare and contrast the government of
> Chad with the government of Haiti in terms of both corruption and our economic
> assistance (Why is one supposed to be self-sufficient and not the other?) and
> you may get the point. Then again, it's pointless to try to teach a man who's
> mind is both made up and closed
>
> Krueger Dismissed
>
> Professor Midnite

Why not compare Haiti with it's next door neighbor on teh same ****ing island?
Why is it they don't need to propped up?

[pyjamarama]

(Professor Midnite) wrote in message >...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >Aristide rigged the 2000 elections before Bush took office. His government
> >is rife with corruption, human rights violations and complicity with drug
> >dealers.
>
> Change *Aristede* to *Bush* and the sentence still works.
>
> So you admit that Bush toppled the government of Haiti deliberately, and that
> Colin Powell, Bush's 'House ******' as Harry Belafonte called him is full of
> it? Seriously. Get the latest issue of Financial Times and tell me what you
> think.
>
> Professor Midnite

Oh, goody! Another racist lefty.

Bored with mere anti-semitism already?

[Professor Midnite]

>From: George M. Middius

> Bored with mere anti-semitism already?
>
>Still no cure, I see.

What do you expect from someone who wears feetsy pajamas 16 hours a day?

PM

[Glenn Zelniker]

Yeasty Cock-Slimmer wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 17:51:57 -0500, Glenn Zelniker >
> wrote:
>Yeasty>
> Cock-Slimmer wrote:
>
>>>Thanks
> > for adknitting your
> lies
> once again sockpuppet Glanzicker, its>>>like I haven't ea
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ted cakes in the snow fixing radars in Barveria with
>>>a bowl of **** o
> cake, sockpipit Zeknilger. Been there, done that, sorry yo
ur still
> living in the 80 > you're "Look cakes, jumping canoes!" a old Scopenwh
ore tarctic #4.
> LOL! ;-(
> grown a brain cake, bake an idea with ><*&*^&$
&^@#%!_@^%#$@!_@!
yourself, as if you weren't so
> ingnorant. LOL! ;-(

Your arrogants to use a spell-checker duly noted. I dont
know anyone who uses tarctics cocksnipper. Thanks for
admitting the recording rig in my van has been there and
done that better than youre vinyl-biggot mid-80's speakers
with limited dynamic capabilities. RFTLOAMO!

[Jacob Kramer]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message >...

> Saddam was elected several times. He got 99% of the vote,
> a very popular guy.

Is this a joke?

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Schizoid Man"

>PS - For sweet Jesus's sake, please argue intelligently. I am sure you're
>not nearly as ignorant a redneck as you're sounding on this board.

Have mercy on the boy, would you? Mr. Sackman is a morbidly obese unmarried man
who deals with his homosexual urges by stuffing food down his gullet while
decrying Gay marriage and insisting that he's quite 'normal'. Imagine, for a
moment, how difficult it is to fend off those feelings. A Sysyphian task!
Eventually, his arms must weaken and give way as the spring-loaded closet door
creaks open to reveal a wardrobe filled with crinolines, puce tutus and floor
to ceiling phallic fantasies.
Alas...

Homophobe dismissed

PM

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Jacob Kramer" > wrote in message
om...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>...
>
> > Saddam was elected several times. He got 99% of the vote,
> > a very popular guy.
>
> Is this a joke?

Not if you're the 1%




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Schizoid Man"
>
> >PS - For sweet Jesus's sake, please argue intelligently. I am sure you're
> >not nearly as ignorant a redneck as you're sounding on this board.
>
> Have mercy on the boy, would you? Mr. Sackman is a morbidly obese
unmarried man
> who deals with his homosexual urges by stuffing food down his gullet while
> decrying Gay marriage and insisting that he's quite 'normal'. Imagine, for
a
> moment, how difficult it is to fend off those feelings. A Sysyphian task!
> Eventually, his arms must weaken and give way as the spring-loaded closet
door
> creaks open to reveal a wardrobe filled with crinolines, puce tutus and
floor
> to ceiling phallic fantasies.

I'm not as fat as your wife, and not one tenth as hideously ugly.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
> ...
>>> From: "Schizoid Man"
>>
>>> PS - For sweet Jesus's sake, please argue intelligently. I am sure
>>> you're not nearly as ignorant a redneck as you're sounding on this
>>> board.
>>
>> Have mercy on the boy, would you? Mr. Sackman is a morbidly obese
> unmarried man
>> who deals with his homosexual urges by stuffing food down his gullet
>> while decrying Gay marriage and insisting that he's quite 'normal'.
>> Imagine, for
> a
>> moment, how difficult it is to fend off those feelings. A Sysyphian
>> task! Eventually, his arms must weaken and give way as the
>> spring-loaded closet
> door
>> creaks open to reveal a wardrobe filled with crinolines, puce tutus
>> and
> floor
>> to ceiling phallic fantasies.
>
> I'm not as fat as your wife, and not one tenth as hideously ugly.

Is this one of the standard hustler's lines?

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> > "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>> From: "Schizoid Man"
> >>
> >>> PS - For sweet Jesus's sake, please argue intelligently. I am sure
> >>> you're not nearly as ignorant a redneck as you're sounding on this
> >>> board.
> >>
> >> Have mercy on the boy, would you? Mr. Sackman is a morbidly obese
> > unmarried man
> >> who deals with his homosexual urges by stuffing food down his gullet
> >> while decrying Gay marriage and insisting that he's quite 'normal'.
> >> Imagine, for
> > a
> >> moment, how difficult it is to fend off those feelings. A Sysyphian
> >> task! Eventually, his arms must weaken and give way as the
> >> spring-loaded closet
> > door
> >> creaks open to reveal a wardrobe filled with crinolines, puce tutus
> >> and
> > floor
> >> to ceiling phallic fantasies.
> >
> > I'm not as fat as your wife, and not one tenth as hideously ugly.
>
> Is this one of the standard hustler's lines?
>
>

Try it, see if it works




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>> From: "Schizoid Man"
>>>>
>>>>> PS - For sweet Jesus's sake, please argue intelligently. I am sure
>>>>> you're not nearly as ignorant a redneck as you're sounding on this
>>>>> board.
>>>>
>>>> Have mercy on the boy, would you? Mr. Sackman is a morbidly obese
>>> unmarried man
>>>> who deals with his homosexual urges by stuffing food down his
>>>> gullet while decrying Gay marriage and insisting that he's quite
>>>> 'normal'. Imagine, for
>>> a
>>>> moment, how difficult it is to fend off those feelings. A Sysyphian
>>>> task! Eventually, his arms must weaken and give way as the
>>>> spring-loaded closet
>>> door
>>>> creaks open to reveal a wardrobe filled with crinolines, puce tutus
>>>> and
>>> floor
>>>> to ceiling phallic fantasies.
>>>
>>> I'm not as fat as your wife, and not one tenth as hideously ugly.
>>
>> Is this one of the standard hustler's lines?
>>
>>
>
> Try it, see if it works

Not my job.

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>I'm not as fat as your wife, and not one tenth as hideously ugly.

Now isn't that both precious and ironic all in one pink little package.

I'm GAY, you blathering tub of polyunsaturated ****! And if it weren't for
redneck racist homophobes like you, my boyfriend of ten years (not my wife, you
narrow-minded nitwit) would likely be married and not to have worry as we do
about things like Hospital visitation. (We've already had problems on that
score.) But because of half-wit homophobes like you and Senator Scrotum
Sanctorum from my very own state of Pennsylvania, we can't. (Philadelphia. The
City of Brotherly Love. Ha! Not if Scrotum Sanctorum has his way.)

So what you have here, you glistening apple-stuffed pig, is not an abstraction
but a Gay man who bleeds the same blood you do. Live with it.

Now do get to work finding your pudgy little penis beneath those roles of flab
and consider taking it as a friend. Birds of a feather, as they say . . .

Professor Midnite

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> >>
> >>> "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >>>>> From: "Schizoid Man"
> >>>>
> >>>>> PS - For sweet Jesus's sake, please argue intelligently. I am sure
> >>>>> you're not nearly as ignorant a redneck as you're sounding on this
> >>>>> board.
> >>>>
> >>>> Have mercy on the boy, would you? Mr. Sackman is a morbidly obese
> >>> unmarried man
> >>>> who deals with his homosexual urges by stuffing food down his
> >>>> gullet while decrying Gay marriage and insisting that he's quite
> >>>> 'normal'. Imagine, for
> >>> a
> >>>> moment, how difficult it is to fend off those feelings. A Sysyphian
> >>>> task! Eventually, his arms must weaken and give way as the
> >>>> spring-loaded closet
> >>> door
> >>>> creaks open to reveal a wardrobe filled with crinolines, puce tutus
> >>>> and
> >>> floor
> >>>> to ceiling phallic fantasies.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not as fat as your wife, and not one tenth as hideously ugly.
> >>
> >> Is this one of the standard hustler's lines?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Try it, see if it works
>
> Not my job.
>
Nothing is your job. You don't have a job.






----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >I'm not as fat as your wife, and not one tenth as hideously ugly.
>
> Now isn't that both precious and ironic all in one pink little package.
>
> I'm GAY, you blathering tub of polyunsaturated ****! And if it weren't for
> redneck racist homophobes like you, my boyfriend of ten years (not my
wife, you
> narrow-minded nitwit) would likely be married and not to have worry as we
do
> about things like Hospital visitation. (We've already had problems on that
> score.) But because of half-wit homophobes like you and Senator Scrotum
> Sanctorum from my very own state of Pennsylvania, we can't. (Philadelphia.
The
> City of Brotherly Love. Ha! Not if Scrotum Sanctorum has his way.)
>

LOOK MORON, EVIDENTLY YOU CAN'T READ.
I have, on many occasions, indicated my support for
gay civil unions, and my support for such legal rights as you
complain about not having. Yes, you should have those rights.
My position opposing same sex marraiage, but approving
of gay civil unions is the same position that Senator John Kerry has.


> So what you have here, you glistening apple-stuffed pig, is not an
abstraction
> but a Gay man who bleeds the same blood you do. Live with it.
>
> Now do get to work finding your pudgy little penis beneath those roles of
flab
> and consider taking it as a friend. Birds of a feather, as they say . . .
>

Vive la differance, as they say




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>LOOK MORON, EVIDENTLY YOU CAN'T READ.
>I have, on many occasions, indicated my support for
>gay civil unions, and my support for such legal rights as you
>complain about not having.

Well lawdy lawd! Ain't I grateful! Here's some more news for you, you fat
flatulent homophobic hermaphrodite: I'm your worst nightmare. I'm a Gay
Afro-American tenured college professor at a major university in Pennsylvania
and I *am* opening peoples minds. If you think I'll brook bull**** like the
above from you you're as wrong as your are narrow-minded.

>My position opposing same sex marraiage

Your position? From the looks of you, your primary position is fighting your
way to front of the line at a $5.99 all-you-can-eat all-night-buffet in Las
Vegas. How about this you, arrogant ass? How about we don't allow obese slobs
like you to marry, but to be gracious our *poh-zition* is that civil unions
will do jez fine? And you, you roly-poly pig-face . . . you *could* do
something about your weight if you had a modicum of self-discipline. Gay people
have *no* choice in who they are. All your condescending crap sounds like the
same crap my parents put up with from the first 'Liberals' in Alabama which is
why they came to Philadelphia in the early fifties:

"Why I *do* declare! They are suh-PRIS -isingly refined and articulate for
Negroes. Maybe in the middle of the bus would. . ."


>My position opposing same sex marraiage, but approving
>of gay civil unions is the same position that Senator John Kerry has.

While I loathe George Bush, it seems both you and the rather... shall we say .
.. challenged Mr. McKelvy don't understand that I'm no great fan of Kerry
either. But as Bill Maher said on Larry King yesterday, the lesser of two evils
is indeed less evil - which is why he won't vote for Nader again and I will
vote for Kerry.

>> Now do get to work finding your pudgy little penis beneath those roles of
>flab
>> and consider taking it as a friend. Birds of a feather, as they say . . .
>>
>
>Vive la differance, as they say

A difference between you and your pudgy little pecker? Even if an archaeologust
come find it in a dig (which I doubt) I also doubt that even the
blind-test-loving Mr. Krueger could tell the diffference between you and that
slimy snail-like thing if his eyes were closed.

Now go give the South Beach diet a tryo, would you? It's all the rage and
you're an eyesore!

Professor Midnite

[Schizoid Man]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message

> > Eventually, his arms must weaken and give way as the spring-loaded
closet
> door
> > creaks open to reveal a wardrobe filled with crinolines, puce tutus and
> floor
> > to ceiling phallic fantasies.
>
> I'm not as fat as your wife, and not one tenth as hideously ugly.


Wow. All that flag waving really obfuscated the depth of your eloquence,
articulation and commendable debating skills.

You really have the gift of the proverbial gab, mate. And I am not solely
referring to absolutely stellar come back in the line above, where you
attempt some very subtle character assassination.

You surely do humanity an injustice by keeping such novel ideas and opinions
to yourself. Have you ever considered writing a book? Perhaps an
autobiography. I'm sure O'Reilly would welcome someone of your juristic
abilities onto the "Factor".

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Schizoid Man"

>You really have the gift of the proverbial gab, mate. And I am not solely
>referring to absolutely stellar come back in the line above, where you
>attempt some very subtle character assassination.

Well I thank you, sir.

>You surely do humanity an injustice by keeping such novel ideas and opinions
>to yourself. Have you ever considered writing a book?

How kind. I already have two in print -they were part of the tenure track -
and I've a third in progress. But I do my best work extempore. I've been a
guest on the Tavis Smiley radio show (NPR) where you may have heard me. I've
also been featured on a radio show called GBE (Global Black Experience) but
most of all, I like to open closed minds, if I can.

Thanks again

Professor Midnite

[Schizoid Man]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message

> >From: "Schizoid Man"
>
> >You really have the gift of the proverbial gab, mate. And I am not solely
> >referring to absolutely stellar come back in the line above, where you
> >attempt some very subtle character assassination.
>
> Well I thank you, sir.
>
> >You surely do humanity an injustice by keeping such novel ideas and
opinions
> >to yourself. Have you ever considered writing a book?
>
> How kind. I already have two in print -they were part of the tenure
track -
> and I've a third in progress. But I do my best work extempore. I've been a
> guest on the Tavis Smiley radio show (NPR) where you may have heard me.
I've
> also been featured on a radio show called GBE (Global Black Experience)
but
> most of all, I like to open closed minds, if I can.
>
> Thanks again
>
> Professor Midnite
>

Ummm... I was referring all of the above to Yustabe's comment about your
wife.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >LOOK MORON, EVIDENTLY YOU CAN'T READ.
> >I have, on many occasions, indicated my support for
> >gay civil unions, and my support for such legal rights as you
> >complain about not having.
>
> Well lawdy lawd! Ain't I grateful! Here's some more news for you, you fat
> flatulent homophobic hermaphrodite: I'm your worst nightmare. I'm a Gay
> Afro-American tenured college professor at a major university in
Pennsylvania
> and I *am* opening peoples minds. If you think I'll brook bull**** like
the
> above from you you're as wrong as your are narrow-minded.
>
> >My position opposing same sex marraiage
>
> Your position? From the looks of you, your primary position is fighting
your
> way to front of the line at a $5.99 all-you-can-eat all-night-buffet in
Las
> Vegas. How about this you, arrogant ass? How about we don't allow obese
slobs
> like you to marry, but to be gracious our *poh-zition* is that civil
unions
> will do jez fine? And you, you roly-poly pig-face . . . you *could* do
> something about your weight if you had a modicum of self-discipline. Gay
people
> have *no* choice in who they are. All your condescending crap sounds like
the
> same crap my parents put up with from the first 'Liberals' in Alabama
which is
> why they came to Philadelphia in the early fifties:
>
> "Why I *do* declare! They are suh-PRIS -isingly refined and articulate for
> Negroes. Maybe in the middle of the bus would. . ."
>
>
> >My position opposing same sex marraiage, but approving
> >of gay civil unions is the same position that Senator John Kerry has.
>
> While I loathe George Bush, it seems both you and the rather... shall we
say .
> . challenged Mr. McKelvy don't understand that I'm no great fan of Kerry
> either. But as Bill Maher said on Larry King yesterday, the lesser of two
evils
> is indeed less evil - which is why he won't vote for Nader again and I
will
> vote for Kerry.
>
> >> Now do get to work finding your pudgy little penis beneath those roles
of
> >flab
> >> and consider taking it as a friend. Birds of a feather, as they say . .
..
> >>
> >
> >Vive la differance, as they say
>
> A difference between you and your pudgy little pecker? Even if an
archaeologust
> come find it in a dig (which I doubt) I also doubt that even the
> blind-test-loving Mr. Krueger could tell the diffference between you and
that
> slimy snail-like thing if his eyes were closed.
>
> Now go give the South Beach diet a tryo, would you? It's all the rage and
> you're an eyesore!
>
> Professor Midnite
>

Nice story prof.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Schizoid Man" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> >
> > "Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
>
> > > Eventually, his arms must weaken and give way as the spring-loaded
> closet
> > door
> > > creaks open to reveal a wardrobe filled with crinolines, puce tutus
and
> > floor
> > > to ceiling phallic fantasies.
> >
> > I'm not as fat as your wife, and not one tenth as hideously ugly.
>
>
> Wow. All that flag waving really obfuscated the depth of your eloquence,
> articulation and commendable debating skills.
>
> You really have the gift of the proverbial gab, mate. And I am not solely
> referring to absolutely stellar come back in the line above, where you
> attempt some very subtle character assassination.
>
> You surely do humanity an injustice by keeping such novel ideas and
opinions
> to yourself. Have you ever considered writing a book? Perhaps an
> autobiography. I'm sure O'Reilly would welcome someone of your juristic
> abilities onto the "Factor".
>

You're complaining about character assasination?
Look what I got for taking a moderately liberal
position in line with the prevalent opinions in the is country.
No to same sex marriage and yes to civil unions.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Schizoid Man]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> "Schizoid Man" > wrote in message

>
> You're complaining about character assasination?
> Look what I got for taking a moderately liberal
> position in line with the prevalent opinions in the is country.
> No to same sex marriage and yes to civil unions.
>

Don't kid yourself, Yustabe. You have got flak for taking a Nixonian
position in race, marriage and realpolitik.

Personally, I have no problem with conservatives, ultraconservatives or
rabid right-wingers - okay, maybe a few of last category because most would
probably want to lob my head off since I am not white.

However, more often that not I find conservatives arguing nonsense and
supplementing whatever they cannot argue with patriotism.

Take for example, that bastion of air-headed conservatism, Bill O'Reilly. He
constantly makes a point of how he's a gritty interview compared to
"airballs" that Larry King tosses his guests. What a bunch of crock.

For one, most of his guests's opinions are not worth hearing - they all have
PhD from Online Law School, or were married to the sister of some
ex-Congressman's (usually Republican) assistant secretary.

Secondly, did you hear the questions he threw at Mel Gibson? I bet Mel was
really sweating when O'Reilly asked him whether he thought he would get a
fair shake.

Jesus christ - pardon the pun - what happened to his father's Holocaust
denials and rabid anti-Semitism? I mean the guy has asked for Alan Greenspan
to be hung.

I can't vote, but even if I could, I'm not sure I'd want to.

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Schizoid Man"

>Ummm... I was referring all of the above to Yustabe's comment about your
>wife.

Ummm...Duh! As they say. But as they also say: He who never blows his own horn
probably has a dead battery

Professor Midnite

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>Nice story prof.

Thank you, though I'm sure you don't mean it. Most of my work revolves around
the idea that gay African American males are a very distinct minority that
differs from both Caucasians says and straight African American males because
we don't fit either stereotype.

Deep down in that prejudiced and probably cholesterol-caked heart of yours,
homophobe racists like you think most urban AA males sit on porch stoops
drinking malt liquor bragging about how many 'Jewels in The Crown' they have -
how many children they've fathered out of wedlock with different women. You
think they're lazy, dirty, inarticulate, animalistic and coarse. But your
stereotype for gay Caucasina males is something else entirely. So a gay AA male
sends most racist homophobes heads spinning. We can't be both prissy and dirty.
Neat and slovenly. Effete and animalistic, and of course, we can't be coarse
and sing show tunes.

All of which is to say that you can't deal with us, you fat mother ****er. But
you'll have to from on. Because we're here and we're not going away.

PW
Professor Midnite

[ScottW]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >Nice story prof.
>
> Thank you, though I'm sure you don't mean it. Most of my work revolves
around
> the idea that gay African American males are a very distinct minority
that
> differs from both Caucasians says and straight African American males
because
> we don't fit either stereotype.
>
> Deep down in that prejudiced and probably cholesterol-caked heart of
yours,
> homophobe racists like you think most urban AA males sit on porch stoops
> drinking malt liquor bragging about how many 'Jewels in The Crown' they
have -
> how many children they've fathered out of wedlock with different women.
You
> think they're lazy, dirty, inarticulate, animalistic and coarse. But your
> stereotype for gay Caucasina males is something else entirely. So a gay
AA male
> sends most racist homophobes heads spinning. We can't be both prissy and
dirty.
> Neat and slovenly. Effete and animalistic, and of course, we can't be
coarse
> and sing show tunes.
>
> All of which is to say that you can't deal with us, you fat mother
****er. But
> you'll have to from on. Because we're here and we're not going away.

Running around screeching epithets is a great way to gain understanding of
your
position.
You make a good case for doing away with tenure.

ScottW

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Schizoid Man" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> >
> > "Schizoid Man" > wrote in message
>
> >
> > You're complaining about character assasination?
> > Look what I got for taking a moderately liberal
> > position in line with the prevalent opinions in the is country.
> > No to same sex marriage and yes to civil unions.
> >
>
> Don't kid yourself, Yustabe. You have got flak for taking a Nixonian
> position in race, marriage and realpolitik.
>
> Personally, I have no problem with conservatives, ultraconservatives or
> rabid right-wingers - okay, maybe a few of last category because most
would
> probably want to lob my head off since I am not white.
>
> However, more often that not I find conservatives arguing nonsense and
> supplementing whatever they cannot argue with patriotism.
>
> Take for example, that bastion of air-headed conservatism, Bill O'Reilly.
He
> constantly makes a point of how he's a gritty interview compared to
> "airballs" that Larry King tosses his guests. What a bunch of crock.
>
> For one, most of his guests's opinions are not worth hearing - they all
have
> PhD from Online Law School, or were married to the sister of some
> ex-Congressman's (usually Republican) assistant secretary.
>
> Secondly, did you hear the questions he threw at Mel Gibson? I bet Mel was
> really sweating when O'Reilly asked him whether he thought he would get a
> fair shake.
>
> Jesus christ - pardon the pun - what happened to his father's Holocaust
> denials and rabid anti-Semitism? I mean the guy has asked for Alan
Greenspan
> to be hung.
>
> I can't vote, but even if I could, I'm not sure I'd want to.
>

First of all, I haven't taken any position at all in regards to
race, it has not been a matter of discussion here. And the flak
I've received has been extremely venemous and hateful,
and all for taking a moderate position on the gay
union/marriage issue. I have repeatedly pointed out
that I make no moral judgement about gays and their
lifestyle.

And O'Reilly is certainly not the most intelligent
or intellectually honest guy on TV.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "ScottW"

>
> Running around screeching epithets is a great way to gain understanding of
>your
> position.
> You make a good case for doing away with tenure.
>
>ScottW

Reminds me of a story my daddy once told me:

A female cub reporter heard that on some Army base in Georgia they'd come up
with a way to train mules with love, kindness and compassion, so she set out to
the base to see what sounded so unlikely to be true.
Lucky enough, just as she got there, they were unloading a train car of mules.
A soldier opened the train-car door, set a wood plank down, and when the first
mule wouldn't walk down that plank the sergeant major came up and slammed it
silly upside the head with a 2x4 and then led the dazed animal into the barn.

The reporter button-holed the Sergeant Major and said: "I don't get! I heard
you train mules with love and compassion and here you whacked that poor animal
over the head! . . ."

"Yes, ma'am," the Sergeant Major said. "We do train mules with love, kindness
and compassion. But first you have to get their attention."

Glad I got yours, friend. :-)

Professor Midnite

[ScottW]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "ScottW"
>
> The reporter button-holed the Sergeant Major and said: "I don't get! I
heard
> you train mules with love and compassion and here you whacked that poor
animal
> over the head! . . ."
>
> "Yes, ma'am," the Sergeant Major said. "We do train mules with love,
kindness
> and compassion. But first you have to get their attention."
>
> Glad I got yours, friend. :-)

You got my attention and my disdain.
Was it worth it?

ScottW

[Marc Phillips]

Mr. Middius said:

>Socky said:
>
>> I have, on many occasions, indicated my support for
>> gay civil unions, and my support for such legal rights as you
>> complain about not having. Yes, you should have those rights.
>
>You are remarkably obtuse on this issue.

Let's see if this makes sense to him.

Gay people, all of their lives, have had the morals and standards and values of
the heterosexual majority forced down their throats, much like the rest of the
world has US culture forced down theirs. Gay people have seen movies, read
books and magazines, and have heard from people around them about how a
person's wedding day is one of the best days of their life. It's completely
embedded into our culture, and most other cultures around the world. It's a
day of beauty, love, and happiness.

But gay people still aren't good enough to experience it.

Boon

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
> Mr. Middius said:
>
> >Socky said:
> >
> >> I have, on many occasions, indicated my support for
> >> gay civil unions, and my support for such legal rights as you
> >> complain about not having. Yes, you should have those rights.
> >
> >You are remarkably obtuse on this issue.
>
> Let's see if this makes sense to him.
>
> Gay people, all of their lives, have had the morals and standards and
values of
> the heterosexual majority forced down their throats, much like the rest of
the
> world has US culture forced down theirs. Gay people have seen movies,
read
> books and magazines, and have heard from people around them about how a
> person's wedding day is one of the best days of their life. It's
completely
> embedded into our culture, and most other cultures around the world. It's
a
> day of beauty, love, and happiness.
>
> But gay people still aren't good enough to experience it.
>

They could do that with a civil union. They can get a liberal minded
minister or rabbi to officiate the ceremony. I think that
Reconstructionist rabbis would do that. And they can have a reception.

Now, Marc, when you are talking about the wedding day ceremony
you are getting into the beliefs and practices of various religions.
That is not a question for the law. I understand that most clergy
would not officiate, and I don't think one could find a Catholic
priest, should the couple be Catholic.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Marc Phillips]

Yustabe said:

>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
>> Mr. Middius said:
>>
>> >Socky said:
>> >
>> >> I have, on many occasions, indicated my support for
>> >> gay civil unions, and my support for such legal rights as you
>> >> complain about not having. Yes, you should have those rights.
>> >
>> >You are remarkably obtuse on this issue.
>>
>> Let's see if this makes sense to him.
>>
>> Gay people, all of their lives, have had the morals and standards and
>values of
>> the heterosexual majority forced down their throats, much like the rest of
>the
>> world has US culture forced down theirs. Gay people have seen movies,
>read
>> books and magazines, and have heard from people around them about how a
>> person's wedding day is one of the best days of their life. It's
>completely
>> embedded into our culture, and most other cultures around the world. It's
>a
>> day of beauty, love, and happiness.
>>
>> But gay people still aren't good enough to experience it.
>>
>
>They could do that with a civil union. They can get a liberal minded
>minister or rabbi to officiate the ceremony. I think that
>Reconstructionist rabbis would do that. And they can have a reception.
>
>Now, Marc, when you are talking about the wedding day ceremony
>you are getting into the beliefs and practices of various religions.
>That is not a question for the law. I understand that most clergy
>would not officiate, and I don't think one could find a Catholic
>priest, should the couple be Catholic.
>

Your argument takes out all of the emotional issues, doesn't it.

Boon

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Marc Phillips said:
>
> > >> I have, on many occasions, indicated my support for
> > >> gay civil unions, and my support for such legal rights as you
> > >> complain about not having. Yes, you should have those rights.
> > >
> > >You are remarkably obtuse on this issue.
> >
> > Let's see if this makes sense to him.
> >
> > Gay people, all of their lives, have had the morals and standards and
values of
> > the heterosexual majority forced down their throats, much like the rest
of the
> > world has US culture forced down theirs. Gay people have seen movies,
read
> > books and magazines, and have heard from people around them about how a
> > person's wedding day is one of the best days of their life. It's
completely
> > embedded into our culture, and most other cultures around the world.
It's a
> > day of beauty, love, and happiness.
> >
> > But gay people still aren't good enough to experience it.
>
> That summary is dead-on.
>
> There is also the issue of equality, which we don't have. There may be
> laws that protect employment, but does that stop harassment? Right now
> we are second-class citizens, and the laws lend legitimacy to the
> attitudes and behaviors of hate that reinforce our status.
>
> To borrow one of Socky's favorites stigmas, "at least" black people
> are fully equal *in the eyes of the law*. Many (if not all) of them
> still encounter prejudice and racism in our divided society.
>
> Complacent, hate-filled straights still cling to the notions of
> "inferior" or "immoral" or "abnormal". What rankles us is how a
> fear-driven majority is able to dictate which rights we are entitled
> to simply because they have more votes.
>
> One other point for Socky: If a notion is so simple that duh-Mikey and
> Scottie Terrierdork get it (despite their brain-dead politics),
> shouldn't that be a wake-up call?
>
>
"abnormal" is not equivilant to "inferior" or "immoral".
Abnormal simply means different than the norm.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
> Yustabe said:
>
> >"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Mr. Middius said:
> >>
> >> >Socky said:
> >> >
> >> >> I have, on many occasions, indicated my support for
> >> >> gay civil unions, and my support for such legal rights as you
> >> >> complain about not having. Yes, you should have those rights.
> >> >
> >> >You are remarkably obtuse on this issue.
> >>
> >> Let's see if this makes sense to him.
> >>
> >> Gay people, all of their lives, have had the morals and standards and
> >values of
> >> the heterosexual majority forced down their throats, much like the rest
of
> >the
> >> world has US culture forced down theirs. Gay people have seen movies,
> >read
> >> books and magazines, and have heard from people around them about how a
> >> person's wedding day is one of the best days of their life. It's
> >completely
> >> embedded into our culture, and most other cultures around the world.
It's
> >a
> >> day of beauty, love, and happiness.
> >>
> >> But gay people still aren't good enough to experience it.
> >>
> >
> >They could do that with a civil union. They can get a liberal minded
> >minister or rabbi to officiate the ceremony. I think that
> >Reconstructionist rabbis would do that. And they can have a reception.
> >
> >Now, Marc, when you are talking about the wedding day ceremony
> >you are getting into the beliefs and practices of various religions.
> >That is not a question for the law. I understand that most clergy
> >would not officiate, and I don't think one could find a Catholic
> >priest, should the couple be Catholic.
> >
>
> Your argument takes out all of the emotional issues, doesn't it.
>

They can have as emotional a day as they want. they can have a
union, and they can have a ceremony, and they can have a
reception. There is nothing that deprives them of emotions.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[ScottW]

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
> Mr. Middius said:
>
> >Socky said:
> >
> >> I have, on many occasions, indicated my support for
> >> gay civil unions, and my support for such legal rights as you
> >> complain about not having. Yes, you should have those rights.
> >
> >You are remarkably obtuse on this issue.
>
> Let's see if this makes sense to him.
>
> Gay people, all of their lives, have had the morals and standards and
values of
> the heterosexual majority forced down their throats, much like the rest
of the
> world has US culture forced down theirs.

Who is forcing US culture down the throats of the world?

I used to be amused when I saw scenes of Japanese youth
displaying a vast appetite for "American culture" while I was
growing up in the midwest. I always thought, "that isn't
American culture, that's Hollywood culture".

> Gay people have seen movies, read
> books and magazines, and have heard from people around them about how a
> person's wedding day is one of the best days of their life.
> It's completely
> embedded into our culture, and most other cultures around the world.
It's a
> day of beauty, love, and happiness.

Except that muslim wedding party that celebrated the joyous
occasion by launching a mortar round......straight up.
>
> But gay people still aren't good enough to experience it.

I attended a gay wedding once. They claimed their
commitment was pure because they weren't legally bound,
only emotionally and spiritually.

ScottW

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>"abnormal" is not equivilant to "inferior" or "immoral".
>Abnormal simply means different than the norm.
>

Oh ya think? Then you know less than nothing about either Linguistics or
Osgood's Semantic Differential. The word 'abnormal' has a *very* strong
negative tilt. Most folks don't refer to a musicians compositional talent as
'abnormal' though it certainly does differ from the norm, as you put it.They
call it a gift. So is being gay a gift, too?

This is just one example of your prejudiced self comin' round again. Now look.
All you have to do is come out and say the truth about what you feel and then
maybe you can get beyond it. But it's the same as it is with prejudice against
people of color. In my seminars, I get students to *own* their bias as their
own. And then they have a chance of going beyond it. So compare and contrast:
What do you feel when you see a hot babe in her early twenties making out in
the back of seat of a car with her boyfriend? Does it make you sick? Turn your
stomach? Probably not. You might laugh and say 'Get a room!" and that's that.
Now what do you feel if you see two good looking hunks doing the same thing. Be
honest, Yustaboy. Then maybe we can help. . .

Professor Midnite

[Arny Krueger]

"Glenn Zelniker" > wrote in message

>
> Your arrogants to use a spell-checker duly noted. I dont
> know anyone who uses tarctics cocksnipper. Thanks for
> admitting the recording rig in my van has been there and
> done that better than youre vinyl-biggot mid-80's speakers
> with limited dynamic capabilities. RFTLOAMO!

Is this the same dialect you wrote your PhD thesis in, Glenn? Yup, that's
the Florida educational system for you!

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >"abnormal" is not equivilant to "inferior" or "immoral".
> >Abnormal simply means different than the norm.
> >
>
> Oh ya think? Then you know less than nothing about either Linguistics or
> Osgood's Semantic Differential. The word 'abnormal' has a *very* strong
> negative tilt. Most folks don't refer to a musicians compositional talent
as
> 'abnormal' though it certainly does differ from the norm, as you put
it.They
> call it a gift. So is being gay a gift, too?
>

If you wish to consider it a gift. Then you would be abnormally
gifted. It is in the eye of the individual.

> This is just one example of your prejudiced self comin' round again. Now
look.
> All you have to do is come out and say the truth about what you feel and
then
> maybe you can get beyond it. But it's the same as it is with prejudice
against
> people of color. In my seminars, I get students to *own* their bias as
their
> own. And then they have a chance of going beyond it. So compare and
contrast:
> What do you feel when you see a hot babe in her early twenties making out
in
> the back of seat of a car with her boyfriend? Does it make you sick? Turn
your
> stomach? Probably not. You might laugh and say 'Get a room!" and that's
that.
> Now what do you feel if you see two good looking hunks doing the same
thing. Be
> honest, Yustaboy. Then maybe we can help. . .
>

Yes, I could tell you more about how I would react, and
I could relate some personal experiences. But for right now I won't.
As far as continuing this discussion any further, that ain't gonna happen
till you cease your insults. And quite frankly, I do not
trust you. Nor do I wish to discuss personal aspects of
my life in this open forum.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Jacob Kramer]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message >...

> My position opposing same sex marraiage, but approving
> of gay civil unions is the same position that Senator John Kerry has.

Kerry has not said that gays are abnormal, as you have, however.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Stupey said:
>
> > > The word 'abnormal' has a *very* strong negative tilt.
>
> This point has been made to poor Socky several times before. Sadly, he
> chooses to ignore it, instead hiding behind a preposterous facade of
> phoney clinicality. One can easily discern his true level of delicacy
> by taking stock of his various insults aimed at Krooger over the
> years.
>
>
> > > Most folks don't refer to a musicians compositional talent as
> > > 'abnormal' though it certainly does differ from the norm, as you put
it.They
> > > call it a gift. So is being gay a gift, too?
>
> > If you wish to consider it a gift. Then you would be abnormally
> > gifted. It is in the eye of the individual.
>
> As if we didn't already know about your deep self-loathing....
>
>
> > > Now what do you feel if you see two good looking hunks doing the same
thing. Be
> > > honest, Yustaboy. Then maybe we can help. . .
>
> > Yes, I could tell you more about how I would react, and
> > I could relate some personal experiences. But for right now I won't.
>
> I've already speculated that your zombieness on this subject is a
> result of an incident in the past that you now find shameful.
>
> > As far as continuing this discussion any further, that ain't gonna
happen
> > till you cease your insults. And quite frankly, I do not
> > trust you. Nor do I wish to discuss personal aspects of
> > my life in this open forum.
>
> What we know about you personally is that you are homophobic and in
> total denial. Your entire demeanor on this subject is speaks of
> repression and inner conflict. Your zombie act is totally busted -- we
> know you're hiding something.
>

Talk about hiding something!
If irony killed.

I think now one could see why anyone would be reticient to
talk about anything of a personal nature here. I guess that is why
George won't relate much about his personal life, either.

You're just going to have to get by on your wildly innacurate
projections.






----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Jacob Kramer" > wrote in message
om...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>...
>
> > My position opposing same sex marraiage, but approving
> > of gay civil unions is the same position that Senator John Kerry has.
>
> Kerry has not said that gays are abnormal, as you have, however.

You better go figure out what abnormal means.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Torresists]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>Date: 3/5/2004 8:16 AM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>
>"Jacob Kramer" > wrote in message
om...
>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>...
>>
>> > My position opposing same sex marraiage, but approving
>> > of gay civil unions is the same position that Senator John Kerry has.
>>
>> Kerry has not said that gays are abnormal, as you have, however.
>
>You better go figure out what abnormal means.
>
Here's a good start:

http://tinyurl.com/29eer

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

> If you wish to consider it a gift. Then you would be abnormally
> gifted. It is in the eye of the individual.

That sounds both tortured and solipsistic. But if you have the grits to discuss
this with me, I promise not to be insulting again. (Less one slips out by
accident, of course.)

>Yes, I could tell you more about how I would react, and
>I could relate some personal experiences. But for right now I won't.

Good. The phrase 'for right now' implies the possibility that you might.

>As far as continuing this discussion any further, that ain't gonna happen
>till you cease your insults.

You have a deal.

>Nor do I wish to discuss personal aspects of
>my life in this open forum.

Oh. I see. I'll help you out, then. If you're a statistically 'normal'
homophobe as you might put it, the sight or even the thought of men sharing
physical intimacy of any kind beyond the congratulatory handshake, high-five or
butt-pat on the football field causes you distress. It might even make you
angry. Might make you feel all nauseous and queasy. The one thing it doesn't do
is leave you indifferent. But here's the point. Those feelings exist in *your*
gut and in *your* heart. Not in the world. So how about this? Many folks used
to have those same feelings when they first had to sit at the same lunch
counter with people of color. (Many still do, I'm afraid.) And many other folks
were driven to a lethal rage at the thought of a Black man loving a White
woman, no less at the sight of it. But those feelings don't exist in any
objective world, either. Only in their own minds and their own hearts. So the
solution they choose for that discomfort was to deprive people of their
equality so those awful feelings they were having would go away. And this
without giving a good god damn about the people whose rights they'd trampled
on. Now, to do that, they have to dehumanize those people. You have to make
them so different from you that you don't suffer any guilt:

"******s? ... What's the problem? They're only ******s. . ."

"Gays? Those people are 'abnormal. They're sick perverts. They're subhuman."

There ain't much difference there, I'm afraid.
So you see, Yustabe. I think the problem is yours and you oughta be man enough
to admit it and deal with it rather than bury it under some rhetoric about
'abnormal' and 'our society' and 'tradition'. What do you think? You don't have
to talk personal if you don't want to. We can talk about it in the abstract if
you like. Talk about how 'some folk' feel that way at the sight of gays. What
do you say? Do you have the courage to dialogue with me on the subject? The
only time the Klan boys had that kind of courage was when they was in a lynch
mob hiding under sheets. I do believe that *you* can do better, Yustabe. Least
ways, I certainly hope so . . .

Professor Midnite

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Stupey whined:
>
> > > > > The word 'abnormal' has a *very* strong negative tilt.
> > >
> > > This point has been made to poor Socky several times before. Sadly, he
> > > chooses to ignore it, instead hiding behind a preposterous facade of
> > > phoney clinicality. One can easily discern his true level of delicacy
> > > by taking stock of his various insults aimed at Krooger over the
> > > years.
>
> So you still refuse to acknowledge that "abnormal" is a loaded word?

I have specifically addresesed that issue before, giving a dictionary
definition, and discussing it.

>
>
> > > > If you wish to consider it a gift. Then you would be abnormally
> > > > gifted. It is in the eye of the individual.
> > >
> > > As if we didn't already know about your deep self-loathing....
>
> No response?
>

You are not worthy of one.

>
> > > > I could relate some personal experiences. But for right now I won't.
> > >
> > > I've already speculated that your zombieness on this subject is a
> > > result of an incident in the past that you now find shameful.
>
> No response again?

I don't respond to idle speculation. There was no
such incident.


>
>
> > > What we know about you personally is that you are homophobic and in
> > > total denial. Your entire demeanor on this subject is speaks of
> > > repression and inner conflict. Your zombie act is totally busted -- we
> > > know you're hiding something.
>
> > Talk about hiding something!
> > If irony killed.
>
> I've revealed plenty of myself on this forum.

I don't think so.


>
> > I think now one could see why anyone would be reticient to
> > talk about anything of a personal nature here.
>
> Really? Ya think?
>

As you yourself had said in the past.
I remember you defending me for not
giving Krueger info.

>
> > I guess that is why
> > George won't relate much about his personal life, either.
>
> Bingo.
>
> I think your two apparent goals on RAO are in conflict, BTW. It's one
> thing to want to make friends and sit down with other posters -- that
> was working out pretty well for you. But throwing incendiary opinions
> into a volatile political discussion is just not compatible with that.
>

I think y position is rather moderate. It is the same as the one
held by the Democratic candidate for President. Asfar as the party
platform, we can wait and see whether it embraces same se marriage
or the alternative of civil unions.

>
> > You're just going to have to get by on your wildly innacurate
> > projections.
>
> They're not projections, they're speculations. Maybe you're
> vocabulary-challenged in addition to being a bigot.
>

Ok, they are speculations based upon your own projections.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[S888Wheel]

>
>> Your arrogants to use a spell-checker duly noted. I dont
>> know anyone who uses tarctics cocksnipper. Thanks for
>> admitting the recording rig in my van has been there and
>> done that better than youre vinyl-biggot mid-80's speakers
>> with limited dynamic capabilities. RFTLOAMO!
>
>Is this the same dialect you wrote your PhD thesis in, Glenn? Yup, that's
>the Florida educational system for you!
>

He learned to speak fluent Kroogerish in a short time. Seems pretty smart to
me. What college did you go to Arny?

[Mikermckelvy]

>From: (Professor Midnite)
>Date: 3/4/04 8:53 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>>From: "Schizoid Man"
>
>>PS - For sweet Jesus's sake, please argue intelligently. I am sure you're
>>not nearly as ignorant a redneck as you're sounding on this board.
>
>Have mercy on the boy, would you? Mr. Sackman is a morbidly obese unmarried
>man
>who deals with his homosexual urges by stuffing food down his gullet while
>decrying Gay marriage and insisting that he's quite 'normal'. Imagine, for a
>moment, how difficult it is to fend off those feelings. A Sysyphian task!
>Eventually, his arms must weaken and give way as the spring-loaded closet
>door
>creaks open to reveal a wardrobe filled with crinolines, puce tutus and floor
>to ceiling phallic fantasies.
>Alas...
>
>Homophobe dismissed
>
>PM
>

Arguing the issues and not the man?

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...

>
> Oh. I see. I'll help you out, then. If you're a statistically 'normal'
> homophobe as you might put it, the sight or even the thought of men
sharing
> physical intimacy of any kind beyond the congratulatory handshake,
high-five or
> butt-pat on the football field causes you distress. It might even make you
> angry. Might make you feel all nauseous and queasy. The one thing it
doesn't do
> is leave you indifferent. But here's the point. Those feelings exist in
*your*
> gut and in *your* heart. Not in the world. So how about this? Many folks
used
> to have those same feelings when they first had to sit at the same lunch
> counter with people of color. (Many still do, I'm afraid.) And many other
folks
> were driven to a lethal rage at the thought of a Black man loving a White
> woman, no less at the sight of it. But those feelings don't exist in any
> objective world, either. Only in their own minds and their own hearts. So
the
> solution they choose for that discomfort was to deprive people of their
> equality so those awful feelings they were having would go away. And this
> without giving a good god damn about the people whose rights they'd
trampled
> on. Now, to do that, they have to dehumanize those people. You have to
make
> them so different from you that you don't suffer any guilt:
>
> "******s? ... What's the problem? They're only ******s. . ."
>
> "Gays? Those people are 'abnormal. They're sick perverts. They're
subhuman."
>

Gays are not sick perverts, I never said they were.
I never said anything about being subhuman.
They are abnormal. It's a fact. And there is nothing
wrong with being abnormal. Geniuses are abnormal, as an example.
If you were a genius, and maybe you are, I would call you abnormal.



> There ain't much difference there, I'm afraid.
> So you see, Yustabe. I think the problem is yours and you oughta be man
enough
> to admit it and deal with it rather than bury it under some rhetoric about
> 'abnormal' and 'our society' and 'tradition'. What do you think? You don't
have
> to talk personal if you don't want to. We can talk about it in the
abstract if
> you like. Talk about how 'some folk' feel that way at the sight of gays.
What
> do you say? Do you have the courage to dialogue with me on the subject?
The
> only time the Klan boys had that kind of courage was when they was in a
lynch
> mob hiding under sheets. I do believe that *you* can do better, Yustabe.
Least
> ways, I certainly hope so . . .
>

I have no intention of discussing anything personal
with you on a public forum. Nor would I discuss such with you
or any other stranger, in private.
The one thing I will tell, is that in the past, I had rented out
a room to tenants/housemates, and one of those was gay.
The odd thing is that I think you may know a good friend of his,
who had been over my house visiting my housemate a number of
times. Being that he is from Philadelphia, prominent in the local Art
community, and is open about his sexuality and seeing that you
claim to be a professor in the Philadelphia area, and seem to
be a person interested in music, art, theater and literature, I would
guess you know him, or at least, who he is.

I think that you have a grave misunderstanding of where
I am coming from. But your ignorance is your business..




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Joseph Oberlander]

>>>>The word 'abnormal' has a *very* strong negative tilt.
>>
>>This point has been made to poor Socky several times before. Sadly, he
>>chooses to ignore it, instead hiding behind a preposterous facade of
>>phoney clinicality. One can easily discern his true level of delicacy
>>by taking stock of his various insults aimed at Krooger over the
>>years.


"Well, if I am normal, and you are not normal, you are
not equal to me." - Yustabe

That pretty much sums it up.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
> >>>>The word 'abnormal' has a *very* strong negative tilt.
> >>
> >>This point has been made to poor Socky several times before. Sadly, he
> >>chooses to ignore it, instead hiding behind a preposterous facade of
> >>phoney clinicality. One can easily discern his true level of delicacy
> >>by taking stock of his various insults aimed at Krooger over the
> >>years.
>
>
> "Well, if I am normal, and you are not normal, you are
> not equal to me." - Yustabe
>
> That pretty much sums it up.
>

Sorry if I caused confusion with the term "equal'. I certainly
did not mean it in terms of better, or worse. I meant it in terms of
not the same as. My intended meaning was that there
was a difference, I didn't intend to infer one condition being better or
worse than the other.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>> "Well, if I am normal, and you are not normal, you are
>> not equal to me." - Yustabe

>Sorry if I caused confusion with the term "equal'. I certainly
>did not mean it in terms of better, or worse.

C'mon man! Give it up! That's just more of your prejudice and conditioning
coming out and you know it.

Professor Midnite

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>I have no intention of discussing anything personal
>with you on a public forum.

Like I said. I'm willing to discuss it in the abstract, if you like, and it
doesn't have to be personal or confrontational at all. I'll make it easy, and
I'm not trying to be legalistic and insist on 'yes' and 'no' answers to convict
you of being wrong. I really do want to know how you think about these issues.
At least in the abstract. So ....

1- It seems to me that most folk who object to gay marriage are uneasy around
gays, and even more uneasy when they witness physical affection of any sort
between gays, even hand holding, or a brief kiss on the lips. Whether you do or
don't, why do you think that is? And how does it differ if at all from people
who used to be uneasy about using the same bathroom as 'colored folk' did -
like maybe some kind of 'jig germs' would jump up and bite 'em on the pecker.
:-)

2- Some 'liberal and tolerant' folks like yourself propose that gays should be
happy with civil unions. Let me offer another solution and you can comment:
First off, I think we agree about separation of church and state, right? And I
think we agree about 'equal protection under the law.' So here's a nifty peachy
cotton-candy downright dandy solution that I'm sure you're gonna hate and I'd
like to know why:

Let's reserve the term 'marriage' for 'sacred' ceremonies performed by clergy.
There will be no such thing anymore as civil marriage either for gay *or* for
straight people. All unions performed without clergy will be civil unions with
the same legal rights and obligations of civil marriage today. But they'd be
all 'state', and no 'church.' (mosque, synagogue, druidic tree . . )

However, if anyone wants to put some religious icing on the cake, that's
perfectly fine. *Marriages* can be performed by clergy at their own discretion,
and will include all civil rights and obligations of civil unions as well as
any additional ones decreed by a particular religion.You see, if your religion
says that only a man and a woman can marry, well, that's fine with me as long
as I don't have to buy into that belief system the same way I don't buy into
Ramadan, or Communion, or the father-son-holy ghost gig, or the Jewish laws of
Kashruth that say you're screwed if you eat a cheeseburger.

With the solution above, church and state remain separate, everybody's equal
under the eyes of the law, the traditional idea of 'marriage' is protected, and
it's all just fine.

But I bet it sure does get *your* britches in an uproar because it's real
equality. Am I wrong?

What do you say?

Oh by the way. At last count and by your definition, being a 'midget, dwarf or
small person' is more abnormal than being gay. Hell! Should we let 'em marry or
euthanize the little pests? :-) Never mind...

Professor Midnite

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >> "Well, if I am normal, and you are not normal, you are
> >> not equal to me." - Yustabe
>
> >Sorry if I caused confusion with the term "equal'. I certainly
> >did not mean it in terms of better, or worse.
>
> C'mon man! Give it up! That's just more of your prejudice and conditioning
> coming out and you know it.
>
> Professor Midnite

whatever, dude




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[ScottW]

(Professor Midnite) wrote in message >...

So tell us what you think of Wisconsin and Kansas?

ScottW

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >I have no intention of discussing anything personal
> >with you on a public forum.
>
> Like I said. I'm willing to discuss it in the abstract, if you like, and
it
> doesn't have to be personal or confrontational at all. I'll make it easy,
and
> I'm not trying to be legalistic and insist on 'yes' and 'no' answers to
convict
> you of being wrong. I really do want to know how you think about these
issues.
> At least in the abstract. So ....
>
> 1- It seems to me that most folk who object to gay marriage are uneasy
around
> gays, and even more uneasy when they witness physical affection of any
sort
> between gays, even hand holding, or a brief kiss on the lips. Whether you
do or
> don't, why do you think that is? And how does it differ if at all from
people
> who used to be uneasy about using the same bathroom as 'colored folk'
did -
> like maybe some kind of 'jig germs' would jump up and bite 'em on the
pecker.
> :-)
>
> 2- Some 'liberal and tolerant' folks like yourself propose that gays
should be
> happy with civil unions. Let me offer another solution and you can
comment:
> First off, I think we agree about separation of church and state, right?
And I
> think we agree about 'equal protection under the law.' So here's a nifty
peachy
> cotton-candy downright dandy solution that I'm sure you're gonna hate and
I'd
> like to know why:
>
> Let's reserve the term 'marriage' for 'sacred' ceremonies performed by
clergy.
> There will be no such thing anymore as civil marriage either for gay *or*
for
> straight people. All unions performed without clergy will be civil unions
with
> the same legal rights and obligations of civil marriage today. But they'd
be
> all 'state', and no 'church.' (mosque, synagogue, druidic tree . . )
>
> However, if anyone wants to put some religious icing on the cake, that's
> perfectly fine. *Marriages* can be performed by clergy at their own
discretion,
> and will include all civil rights and obligations of civil unions as well
as
> any additional ones decreed by a particular religion.You see, if your
religion
> says that only a man and a woman can marry, well, that's fine with me as
long
> as I don't have to buy into that belief system the same way I don't buy
into
> Ramadan, or Communion, or the father-son-holy ghost gig, or the Jewish
laws of
> Kashruth that say you're screwed if you eat a cheeseburger.
>
> With the solution above, church and state remain separate, everybody's
equal
> under the eyes of the law, the traditional idea of 'marriage' is
protected, and
> it's all just fine.
>
> But I bet it sure does get *your* britches in an uproar because it's real
> equality. Am I wrong?
>
> What do you say?
>
> Oh by the way. At last count and by your definition, being a 'midget,
dwarf or
> small person' is more abnormal than being gay. Hell! Should we let 'em
marry or
> euthanize the little pests? :-) Never mind...
>
> Professor Midnite

My opinions on the matter are not based upon religion.
Man + woman is different from man + man or woman + woman.
To me, its my opinion of natural order. It's my opinion,
and I am going to keep it. If you feel that the basis of it is my bigotry,
so be it. I don't think gay relationships are inferior, superior,moral,
or immoral. I just think its just not the natural order of things.

I have some understanding of how resentful you might feel that
I consider your gayness unnatural; I can understand that
anyone would want to be perceived and accepted by society as normal.
But that's the way it is, and that's the way I feel, and it is not
based upon any hatred of gays; it's just that I feel that gays are different
form straights and that gay unions are different in that they are
not in the scheme of natural order. Now this is just a difference,
and there are lots factors that present differences between
groups of people. My love of humanity is for all humanity, regardless
of differences in race, religion, sexuality, or ethnic background.

I think this whole thing about gay marriage is being overblown,
and I have lots more important things to worry about, such as
when and where the next Al-Queda attack will be, and
how bad it's gonna be. National security and the economy
are far more important to me. I stated my position, you
can say what you want, call me any kind of nasty names you want,
make up whatever lies and conjectures you want, and insult me to your
hearts content. I made my position clear, and I don't want to keep
revisiting the issue. Take it or leave it.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[ScottW]

George M. Middius > wrote in message >...
> > > What we know about you personally is that you are homophobic and in
> > > total denial. Your entire demeanor on this subject is speaks of
> > > repression and inner conflict. Your zombie act is totally busted -- we
> > > know you're hiding something.
>
> > Talk about hiding something!
> > If irony killed.
>
> I've revealed plenty of myself on this forum.

And it ain't pretty. Should you be penalized for
doing so?

>
> > I think now one could see why anyone would be reticient to
> > talk about anything of a personal nature here.
>
> Really? Ya think?
>
>
> > I guess that is why
> > George won't relate much about his personal life, either.
>
> Bingo.

The hypocrisy. How many irrelevant personal questions do you author?
>
> I think your two apparent goals on RAO are in conflict, BTW. It's one
> thing to want to make friends and sit down with other posters -- that
> was working out pretty well for you. But throwing incendiary opinions
> into a volatile political discussion is just not compatible with that.

So go blame those immature volatile types.

The minute someone can't express an opinion because someone else
finds it offensive or incendiary, we all lose.
In your quest for rights, you choose to deny rights to others.

One step forward, one step back. Some progress.

ScottW

[Arny Krueger]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message


> I've revealed plenty of myself on this forum.

i..e., little of substance, but way too much.

[Schizoid Man]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> My opinions on the matter are not based upon religion.
> Man + woman is different from man + man or woman + woman.

Don't be such a hypocrite.

On the one hand you appreciate the artistry and stimulating effects of
lesbian pornography. On the other hand, you decry these very individuals and
brandish them as abnormal and immoral.

Practice what you preach, son.

[Jacob Kramer]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message >...
> "Jacob Kramer" > wrote in message
> om...
> > "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> >...
> >
> > > My position opposing same sex marraiage, but approving
> > > of gay civil unions is the same position that Senator John Kerry has.
> >
> > Kerry has not said that gays are abnormal, as you have, however.
>
> You better go figure out what abnormal means.

Do you mean by this that Kerry has indicated he believes gays are
abnormal by calling for civil unions instead of gay marriage?

If so you are imputing beliefs to Kerry that he has not expressed, nor
would he. None of the candidates in this election have said they
believe gays are abnormal, nor could they without immediately being
labeled as both extremist and homophobic, and effectively putting
themselves outside the mainstream of American politics.

In fact the last candidate for president who received any national
attention that I can remember who said this was Pat Buchanan. On this
specific issue--the deviance of gays, not gay marriage--you and he
seem to see pretty much eye to eye. Which is to say that you are both
far to the right of what is considered to be acceptable by most
Americans.

[Professor Midnite]

>From: (ScottW)

>So tell us what you think of Wisconsin and Kansas?
>

The direction this country's headed in frightens the hell out of me. Four more
years of Bush and this country's going to be as divided as it was right before
the Civil War. The reason more people loathe the son of a bitch then any other
President in history is this:

Let's say that he legitemately won the last election. Even if we agree to that,
no one can dispute that a majority of voters voted for someone else. But this
adminastration has and continues to act like it has some kind of mandate for an
extreme shift to the right and uses this 'War on Terror' deal to keep people
shaking in their boots. If this goes on for four more years of Bush, you *will*
see a country totteing on the edge of divisive ruin, and rioting of one kind or
another will come sooner or later. Problem is, it's the extreme Right that
wants to keep their assault weapons while we gonna be throwin' stones... :-)

Wait and see what's about to happen with the FCC. If they get their way in the
name of decency, we gonna have 'All white bread. All the time.' I don't much
care for Howard Stern and all his stuff, but wait until you see what's gonna be
up wid dat!

Professor Midnite

Professor Midnite

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>My opinions on the matter are not based upon religion.
>Man + woman is different from man + man or woman + woman.
>To me, its my opinion of natural order.

I see. So it's the natural order because you say it is. As was slavery for
thousands of years . . .

Let me put this bluntly, Mr. Sackman. I hold you in contempt. You are an
intellectual coward and a narrow-minded bigot. There are those here who call
you friend and ally because you fight the fight against this silly cantankerous
windmill named Krueger. But in my opinion, you're a significantly lower and far
more dangerous form of life. This Krueger fellow everybody rags on, if I read
him right, is a self-inspired prick who enjoys getting people's goats without a
nod to the rules of reason. But I'd bet that if I met him in person (The fact
that I'm 6'4" 220 pounds of well-muscled mother-****in' ****** not
withstanding) I'd bet he'd treat me with more respect than you would. Krueger's
nasty **** is confined to newsgroups and he enjoys it. You, on the other hand,
can and would hurt my brothers and sisters in the real world. Every
mother-****ing you breath you breathe is wasted oxygen, and the world would be
a whole lot better off if you stopped.

You're a Jew, aren't you? Who's gonna stand up for you when the next mother
****er starts talking about the 'natural order' and the 'natural superiority'
of the White Christian race?

I offered you the chance to discuss the issue as adults and you declined. Now,
fat boy, we're coming to get you . Sleep well . . .
Professor Midnite

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Jacob Kramer" > wrote in message
om...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>...
> > "Jacob Kramer" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > > "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> > >...
> > >
> > > > My position opposing same sex marraiage, but approving
> > > > of gay civil unions is the same position that Senator John Kerry
has.
> > >
> > > Kerry has not said that gays are abnormal, as you have, however.
> >
> > You better go figure out what abnormal means.
>
> Do you mean by this that Kerry has indicated he believes gays are
> abnormal by calling for civil unions instead of gay marriage?
>
> If so you are imputing beliefs to Kerry that he has not expressed, nor
> would he. None of the candidates in this election have said they
> believe gays are abnormal, nor could they without immediately being
> labeled as both extremist and homophobic, and effectively putting
> themselves outside the mainstream of American politics.
>
> In fact the last candidate for president who received any national
> attention that I can remember who said this was Pat Buchanan. On this
> specific issue--the deviance of gays, not gay marriage--you and he
> seem to see pretty much eye to eye. Which is to say that you are both
> far to the right of what is considered to be acceptable by most
> Americans.

I think we are each operating from a different definition of abnormal..
My views are not anything like those of Buchanon. As far as Kerry,
I stated that we have the same position regarding civil union and gay
marriage. How we got there is probably different.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >My opinions on the matter are not based upon religion.
> >Man + woman is different from man + man or woman + woman.
> >To me, its my opinion of natural order.
>
> I see. So it's the natural order because you say it is. As was slavery for
> thousands of years . . .
>

This is strictly about sexuality. There is no natural order
regarding slavery, race, or any such other thing.
You totally misunderstand my concept of natural order.


> Let me put this bluntly, Mr. Sackman. I hold you in contempt. You are an
> intellectual coward and a narrow-minded bigot. There are those here who
call
> you friend and ally because you fight the fight against this silly
cantankerous
> windmill named Krueger. But in my opinion, you're a significantly lower
and far
> more dangerous form of life. This Krueger fellow everybody rags on, if I
read
> him right, is a self-inspired prick who enjoys getting people's goats
without a
> nod to the rules of reason. But I'd bet that if I met him in person (The
fact
> that I'm 6'4" 220 pounds of well-muscled mother-****in' ****** not
> withstanding) I'd bet he'd treat me with more respect than you would.
Krueger's
> nasty **** is confined to newsgroups and he enjoys it. You, on the other
hand,
> can and would hurt my brothers and sisters in the real world. Every
> mother-****ing you breath you breathe is wasted oxygen, and the world
would be
> a whole lot better off if you stopped.
>
> You're a Jew, aren't you? Who's gonna stand up for you when the next
mother
> ****er starts talking about the 'natural order' and the 'natural
superiority'
> of the White Christian race?
>

This is strictly about sexuality.

> I offered you the chance to discuss the issue as adults and you declined.
Now,
> fat boy, we're coming to get you . Sleep well . . .
> Professor Midnite

Its easy to offer up physical threats and intimidation
when you remain anonymous. Is physical violence
part of your agenda?




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >My opinions on the matter are not based upon religion.
> >Man + woman is different from man + man or woman + woman.
> >To me, its my opinion of natural order.
>
> I see. So it's the natural order because you say it is. As was slavery for
> thousands of years . . .
>
> Let me put this bluntly, Mr. Sackman. I hold you in contempt. You are an
> intellectual coward and a narrow-minded bigot. There are those here who
call
> you friend and ally because you fight the fight against this silly
cantankerous
> windmill named Krueger. But in my opinion, you're a significantly lower
and far
> more dangerous form of life. This Krueger fellow everybody rags on, if I
read
> him right, is a self-inspired prick who enjoys getting people's goats
without a
> nod to the rules of reason. But I'd bet that if I met him in person (The
fact
> that I'm 6'4" 220 pounds of well-muscled mother-****in' ****** not
> withstanding) I'd bet he'd treat me with more respect than you would.
Krueger's
> nasty **** is confined to newsgroups and he enjoys it. You, on the other
hand,
> can and would hurt my brothers and sisters in the real world. Every
> mother-****ing you breath you breathe is wasted oxygen, and the world
would be
> a whole lot better off if you stopped.
>
> You're a Jew, aren't you? Who's gonna stand up for you when the next
mother
> ****er starts talking about the 'natural order' and the 'natural
superiority'
> of the White Christian race?
>
> I offered you the chance to discuss the issue as adults and you declined.
Now,
> fat boy, we're coming to get you . Sleep well . . .
> Professor Midnite

I am 53 years old, never married and childless;
that makes me abnormal. I haven't contributed to
furthering the species, and it is likely I never will.
Recognizing that I do not fit the sexual norms for society
doesn't bother me one bit.

happily abnormal,
Sockpuppet Yustabe




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>This is strictly about sexuality. There is no natural order
>regarding slavery, race, or any such other thing.
>You totally misunderstand my concept of natural order.
>
>

No but I *do* understand, fat boy. You **** me off. Far as your natural order
is concerned, women in menopause shouldn't be allowed to marry either, right?
After all, it ain't part of the natural order less they can procreate and make
babies.

>This is strictly about sexuality.

That's what *you* think, you tub of ****. Soon as you take civil rights away
from any group then your own ass is up for grabs.

>Its easy to offer up physical threats and intimidation
>when you remain anonymous. Is physical violence
>part of your agenda?

Listen up, fat boy. We ain't talkin' violence here. I keep anonymous on usenet
because I can't quite talk like this in front of the Academy, tenured or not.
But here's what it is, tubby: Get your fat white ass into a video store and
rent 'Deliverance.' and pay real good attention to where somebody gets asked to
*squeal*. like a pig. Look over your shoulder, fat-boy. We're comin; to get ya.
We know who you are and we know where you live. Sweet dreams . . .

Professor Midnite

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Le Artiste" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" emitted :
>
> >"abnormal" is not equivilant to "inferior" or "immoral".
> >Abnormal simply means different than the norm.
>
> Disagree strongly. Look up "abnormal" in any thesaurus to get a basic
> drift of the connotations of the word, as commonly used. The reactions
> you are getting should have clued you in in the first case.
>
> It's normal to be gay - how can it not be when there are *millions* on
> the planet? You might say it is more normal to be hetero, or less
> usual to be homo.. but "abnormal" is like calling them perverts!
>

Please, I certainly do not mean that.

> Let's say you walk into a gay bar.. would you feel content being
> described as"abnormal"? Be true! Be honest!
>

It depends how they meant it. If as a factual statement,
fine. I would be abnormal in that environment.


> I really don't see the purpose of this normal/abnormal
> label/distinction anyhow.
>

I could agree with that. I don't make any big thing
of it. You could find some abnormal traits
about anyone.

I think that I am defining the term differently
than the way others do. At some points, I tried to
use the term "different", but I got shot down about
that one, too.





----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Marc Phillips]

Le Artiste said:

>"Marc Phillips" emitted :
>
>>Let's see if this makes sense to him.
>>
>>Gay people, all of their lives, have had the morals and standards and values
>of
>>the heterosexual majority forced down their throats, much like the rest of
>the
>>world has US culture forced down theirs. Gay people have seen movies, read
>>books and magazines, and have heard from people around them about how a
>>person's wedding day is one of the best days of their life. It's completely
>>embedded into our culture, and most other cultures around the world. It's a
>>day of beauty, love, and happiness.
>>
>>But gay people still aren't good enough to experience it.
>
>I was feeling quite upbeat until I read that - very succinct...

Also, and this is for Yustabe, if there's something you can do for someone
else, and it makes them very happy, and it doesn't affect you, then why oppose
it?

Boon

[ScottW]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: (ScottW)
>
> >So tell us what you think of Wisconsin and Kansas?
> >
>
> The direction this country's headed in frightens the hell out of me. Four
more
> years of Bush and this country's going to be as divided as it was right
before
> the Civil War. The reason more people loathe the son of a bitch then any
other
> President in history is this:
>
> Let's say that he legitemately won the last election. Even if we agree to
that,
> no one can dispute that a majority of voters voted for someone else. But
this
> adminastration has and continues to act like it has some kind of mandate
for an
> extreme shift to the right

Bull puck. True right wingers feel that Bush has abandoned them on
virtually
every policy except taxes and the war on terror, and he screwed up that
with his
wrong justification for the right war.
Look at his prescription drug plan
his growth in spending
his immigration plan
his failure to take any action to secure the borders
his amendment proposal that still allows states to honor civil unions.

As a leader of the far right Bush sucks.

>and uses this 'War on Terror' deal to keep people
> shaking in their boots. If this goes on for four more years of Bush, you
*will*
> see a country totteing on the edge of divisive ruin, and rioting of one
kind or
> another will come sooner or later. Problem is, it's the extreme Right
that
> wants to keep their assault weapons while we gonna be throwin' stones...
:-)
>
> Wait and see what's about to happen with the FCC. If they get their way
in the
> name of decency, we gonna have 'All white bread. All the time.' I don't
much
> care for Howard Stern and all his stuff, but wait until you see what's
gonna be
> up wid dat!

This isn't gonna make my top ten. I'm more ****ed that you often have to
pay to
radio sports feeds over the 'net now.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Socky said:
>
> > > "Well, if I am normal, and you are not normal, you are
> > > not equal to me." - Yustabe
> > >
> > > That pretty much sums it up.
>
> > Sorry if I caused confusion with the term "equal'. I certainly
> > did not mean it in terms of better, or worse. I meant it in terms of
> > not the same as.
>
> Then use "not identical" rather than "not equal".
>
> > My intended meaning was that there
> > was a difference, I didn't intend to infer one condition being better
or
> > worse than the other.
>
> Actually, you not only inferred that years ago, you've also been
> trumpeting it all over this forum.

Poor George. If can't find a fight, he'll make one up.

ScottW

[Joseph Oberlander]

Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:

> "Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
> hlink.net...
>
>>>>>>The word 'abnormal' has a *very* strong negative tilt.
>>>>
>>>>This point has been made to poor Socky several times before. Sadly, he
>>>>chooses to ignore it, instead hiding behind a preposterous facade of
>>>>phoney clinicality. One can easily discern his true level of delicacy
>>>>by taking stock of his various insults aimed at Krooger over the
>>>>years.
>>
>>
>>"Well, if I am normal, and you are not normal, you are
>>not equal to me." - Yustabe
>>
>>That pretty much sums it up.
>>
>
>
> Sorry if I caused confusion with the term "equal'. I certainly
> did not mean it in terms of better, or worse.

Based upon your bast overall demeanor towards the others in
this newsgroup, I can honestly say that nobody believes you.
You said it - and it's not like you are 4 and can have a "do over".

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Le Artiste" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" emitted :
>
> >You better go figure out what abnormal means.
>
> Give it up!
>
yeah, I need to find a better term. People don't
quite get that one. To me, it is merely not
coinciding with the norm.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Le Artiste" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" emitted :
>
> >I am 53 years old, never married and childless;
> >that makes me abnormal.
>
> FREAK!!
>
> :-)
>

I Yustabe




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
> Le Artiste said:
>
> >"Marc Phillips" emitted :
> >
> >>Let's see if this makes sense to him.
> >>
> >>Gay people, all of their lives, have had the morals and standards and
values
> >of
> >>the heterosexual majority forced down their throats, much like the rest
of
> >the
> >>world has US culture forced down theirs. Gay people have seen movies,
read
> >>books and magazines, and have heard from people around them about how a
> >>person's wedding day is one of the best days of their life. It's
completely
> >>embedded into our culture, and most other cultures around the world.
It's a
> >>day of beauty, love, and happiness.
> >>
> >>But gay people still aren't good enough to experience it.
> >
> >I was feeling quite upbeat until I read that - very succinct...
>
> Also, and this is for Yustabe, if there's something you can do for someone
> else, and it makes them very happy, and it doesn't affect you, then why
oppose
> it?
>

Really, it's about number 100 on my most important list.
I'm not interested in repeating the argument.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
>
> Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>
> > "Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
> > hlink.net...
> >
> >>>>>>The word 'abnormal' has a *very* strong negative tilt.
> >>>>
> >>>>This point has been made to poor Socky several times before. Sadly, he
> >>>>chooses to ignore it, instead hiding behind a preposterous facade of
> >>>>phoney clinicality. One can easily discern his true level of delicacy
> >>>>by taking stock of his various insults aimed at Krooger over the
> >>>>years.
> >>
> >>
> >>"Well, if I am normal, and you are not normal, you are
> >>not equal to me." - Yustabe
> >>
> >>That pretty much sums it up.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Sorry if I caused confusion with the term "equal'. I certainly
> > did not mean it in terms of better, or worse.
>
> Based upon your bast overall demeanor towards the others in
> this newsgroup, I can honestly say that nobody believes you.
> You said it - and it's not like you are 4 and can have a "do over".
>
Believe it or not, its up to you.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Marc Phillips]

Yustabe said:

>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
>> Le Artiste said:
>>
>> >"Marc Phillips" emitted :
>> >
>> >>Let's see if this makes sense to him.
>> >>
>> >>Gay people, all of their lives, have had the morals and standards and
>values
>> >of
>> >>the heterosexual majority forced down their throats, much like the rest
>of
>> >the
>> >>world has US culture forced down theirs. Gay people have seen movies,
>read
>> >>books and magazines, and have heard from people around them about how a
>> >>person's wedding day is one of the best days of their life. It's
>completely
>> >>embedded into our culture, and most other cultures around the world.
>It's a
>> >>day of beauty, love, and happiness.
>> >>
>> >>But gay people still aren't good enough to experience it.
>> >
>> >I was feeling quite upbeat until I read that - very succinct...
>>
>> Also, and this is for Yustabe, if there's something you can do for someone
>> else, and it makes them very happy, and it doesn't affect you, then why
>oppose
>> it?
>>
>
>Really, it's about number 100 on my most important list.
>I'm not interested in repeating the argument.

Live and let live is my motto. Except when it comes to Arny of course.

Boon

[Professor Midnite]

>From: George M. Middius

>Personally, I don't "expect" any uptight homophobes to drop their
>conditioning overnight. Very few of you are openminded to accept
>without judgment what you've been taught to fear and hate your entire
>lives

That's the point that Fat-Boy Yustabe doesn't get. (Amongst about 236,354,030
others) We don't expect him to feel peachy keen about gays, only to realize
that it's his problem and not ours. And having a problem, deeply conditioned or
not, doesn't give a person the right oppress anyone.

Professor Midnite

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "ScottW"

>Bull puck.

Say whut? :-)

>True right wingers feel that Bush has abandoned them on
>virtually
> every policy except taxes and the war on terror,

And some of my friends and colleagues think Ted Kennedy isn't much different
than Barry Goldwater. But that's not the point, especially when it comes to
people of color. The judges he's been appointing? Ashcroft? If he isn't all the
way to the right as far as the immigration bit and the medicare bit (which,
lord knows, is all about big money and drug companies again) he sure *is* all
the way when it comes to social issues.

Anyway. one way or anotherm if he gets four more years the country will be
further divided than it is now and that might get ugly. It's a good bet because
Bush hasnt shown a single instance of compromise except when he had to.

Professor Midnite

and he screwed up that
>with his
>wrong justification for the right war.
>Look at his prescription drug plan
>his growth in spending
>his immigration plan
>his failure to take any action to secure the borders
>his amendment proposal that still allows states to honor civil unions.
>
>As a leader of the far right Bush sucks.
>
>>and uses this 'War on Terror' deal to keep people
>> shaking in their boots. If this goes on for four more years of Bush, you
>*will*
>> see a country totteing on the edge of divisive ruin, and rioting of one
>kind or
>> another will come sooner or later. Problem is, it's the extreme Right
>that
>> wants to keep their assault weapons while we gonna be throwin' stones...
>:-)
>>
>> Wait and see what's about to happen with the FCC. If they get their way
>in the
>> name of decency, we gonna have 'All white bread. All the time.' I don't
>much
>> care for Howard Stern and all his stuff, but wait until you see what's
>gonna be
>> up wid dat!
>
> This isn't gonna make my top ten. I'm more ****ed that you often have to
>pay to
> radio sports feeds over the 'net now.
>
>ScottW
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>>
>yeah, I need to find a better term. People don't
>quite get that one. To me, it is merely not
>coinciding with the norm.
>

The norm? Part of the constitution is supposed to be about protecting
minorities (those outside the norm, the 'abnormal' as you put it) from the
tyranny of the majority. Those opposed to slavery were 'abnormal'. Those who
wanted women to vote were 'abnormal' Catholics, Jews and Hindus are abnormal.
Don't you get it? And this 'natural order' **** is **** plain and simple.
Natural? Is it natural to go to the dentist? Is it natural to have sex for
reasons other than procreation? Is it natural to have oral sex? Anal sex?
Dress-up dress? Role play sex? How about decrying all that, Mr. Natural? And
btw, it sure ain't 'natural' to be a self-indulgent stuff-food-in-your-mouth
dangerously obese slob either, but . . .


Professor Midnite

[S888Wheel]

>
>> I've revealed plenty of myself on this forum.
>
>i..e., little of substance, but way too much.
>

Tell us what the "i.e." stands for in your post Arny. Then try to rationalize
your hypocrisy over literacy.

[ScottW]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "ScottW"
>
> >Bull puck.
>
> Say whut? :-)
>
> >True right wingers feel that Bush has abandoned them on
> >virtually
> > every policy except taxes and the war on terror,
>
> And some of my friends and colleagues think Ted Kennedy isn't much
different
> than Barry Goldwater. But that's not the point, especially when it comes
to
> people of color.

Why should people of color have such a different point?
I know quite a few conservative people of color.
I don't find your viewpoint the least bit representative of
people of color, either conservative or liberal.
Of course, I've also realized long ago that people in academia
are often out of touch with America.
Life on the college campus is far removed from most of America.
They are a world unto themselves.

>The judges he's been appointing? Ashcroft? If he isn't all the
> way to the right as far as the immigration bit and the medicare bit
(which,
> lord knows, is all about big money and drug companies again) he sure *is*
all
> the way when it comes to social issues.

What specific actions or policies has he implemented that you find so
far
right?
>
> Anyway. one way or anotherm if he gets four more years the country will
be
> further divided than it is now and that might get ugly.

The divisiveness and hatred is coming from the left.
The right is willing to discuss issue, the left just hates.

> It's a good bet because
> Bush hasnt shown a single instance of compromise except when he had to.

Specifics?

ScottW

[ScottW]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
> >>
> >yeah, I need to find a better term. People don't
> >quite get that one. To me, it is merely not
> >coinciding with the norm.
> >
>
> The norm? Part of the constitution is supposed to be about protecting
> minorities (those outside the norm, the 'abnormal' as you put it) from
the
> tyranny of the majority. Those opposed to slavery were 'abnormal'. Those
who
> wanted women to vote were 'abnormal' Catholics, Jews and Hindus are
abnormal.
> Don't you get it? And this 'natural order' **** is **** plain and simple.
> Natural? Is it natural to go to the dentist? Is it natural to have sex
for
> reasons other than procreation? Is it natural to have oral sex? Anal sex?
> Dress-up dress? Role play sex? How about decrying all that, Mr. Natural?
And
> btw, it sure ain't 'natural' to be a self-indulgent
stuff-food-in-your-mouth
> dangerously obese slob either, but . . .

Are really incapable of refraining from resorting to insults at all?
Pity the young people whose "minds you open".
They're likely to be shattered in the process.

ScottW

[Bruce J. Richman]

YCS wrote:


>On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:52:26 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
> wrote:
>
>>> Also, and this is for Yustabe, if there's something you can do for someone
>>> else, and it makes them very happy, and it doesn't affect you, then why
>>> oppose it?
>
>>Really, it's about number 100 on my most important list.
>
>But if you were a gay person prevented from marrying someone you love,
>maybe it would have more importance to you, no?
>
>>I'm not interested in repeating the argument.
>
>I think your politics are horrible, but I have close friends with whom
>I disagree sharply on important political issues and our differences
>don't affect our friendship. But your position on this is deeply
>sickening to me.
>
>--
>td
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I'm sort of in the same situation that you are, Graham. With some of my
closest friends, I don't bother to discuss politics or religion any more,
because of our sharp differences. We just amicably "agree to disagree". :)

As far as my position on gay marriages is concerned, I think that 2 consenting
adults should be able to do what they want to do, both publically and
privately.

It is nobody else's business.

As for the use of the word, "abnormal", speaking professionallly, it has
many negative connotations. Attempts to justify its usage by trying to equate
it with simply a statistical argument are somewhat disingenuous.






Bruce J. Richman

[ScottW]

"Yeasty Cock-Slimmer" > wrote in message
news:08bk405u7b0vp66dk1jg93rl4ifdea6pj9@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:52:26 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
> > wrote:
>
> >> Also, and this is for Yustabe, if there's something you can do for
someone
> >> else, and it makes them very happy, and it doesn't affect you, then
why
> >> oppose it?
>
> >Really, it's about number 100 on my most important list.
>
> But if you were a gay person prevented from marrying someone you love,
> maybe it would have more importance to you, no?
>
> >I'm not interested in repeating the argument.
>
> I think your politics are horrible, but I have close friends with whom
> I disagree sharply on important political issues and our differences
> don't affect our friendship. But your position on this is deeply
> sickening to me.

Making your ears ring it is.

BTW, I had a nasty cold with sinus/ear infection
and swallowed 1000 mg horsepills of augmentin
for 10 days. Both ears still feel like they have water
in 'em. Doc says there is inflammation but no sign
of infection so no more antibiotics. Also they've
begun to discourage the use of antibiotics for minor
infections because of the outbreak of resistant bugs.
Anyway, my 2 weeks waiting period with no change
(other than my right ear is catching up with my left which
is good cuz I don't feel like Im leaning as much)
will be up Monday
and I'm back to the doc. Luckily, no ringing.
Hope you get well soon.

I don't care about gays marrying. I have reservations
about adopting or raising kids. Hurl on that one.

ScottW

[Joseph Oberlander]

Yeasty Cock-Slimmer wrote:

> On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:52:26 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>>Also, and this is for Yustabe, if there's something you can do for someone
>>>else, and it makes them very happy, and it doesn't affect you, then why
>>>oppose it?
>
>
>>Really, it's about number 100 on my most important list.
>
> But if you were a gay person prevented from marrying someone you love,
> maybe it would have more importance to you, no?

I love his logic. It's "about number 100" yet he feels perfectly
justified in believing that it should be illegal for those who
feel it is their #1 issue in life.

From a man who never married himself.

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "ScottW"

>Why should people of color have such a different point?

Because we have bigger dicks and can jump higher? :-)

Live in a black skin for one day, bitch, and you might understand.

>I don't find your viewpoint the least bit representative of
> people of color, either conservative or liberal.

Whose is? That Uncle Tom Oreo from California?

>Of course, I've also realized long ago that people in academia
> are often out of touch with America.

**** off. You wanna provoke me? Hell with ya.

> What specific actions or policies has he implemented that you find so
>far
> right?

How about all his anti-civil rights judges for a start?


<Specifics?

Oh please. Give it a break. You wanna defend the indefensible? Have fun by
yourself.

Professor Midnite

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "ScottW"

> Are really incapable of refraining from resorting to insults at all?

Probably about as incapable as you are of creating complete sentences that are
expressive rather than passive-provocative like the one above. If you'd like to
tell me to **** off, at least have the balls to do it up front.

So far, you're getting a D.

Professor Midnite

[Professor Midnite]

>From: Le Artiste

>You glossed over George's grossly offensive (fighting talk, basically)
>labelling of *me* as a homophobe in the preceeding paragraph. Consider
>your final sentence above.
>
>Comments?

I have my own definition of homophobia. A man who's got the guts to admit that
gays freak him about is *not* a homophobe unless, like Yustabe Human, he
rationalizes his uneasiness and wraps it in absolutistic normative judgemental
thinking.

Siimilarly, I don't ever expect a day's gonna come when a white person sees me
face-to-face and doesn't notice that I'm black. Now if he's willing to put his
prejudice and preconceptions aside and notice how we might be more similar than
different, I tip my hat. Same with people who know I'm gay.

Professor Midnite

[ScottW]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "ScottW"
>
> >Why should people of color have such a different point?
>
> Because we have bigger dicks and can jump higher? :-)
>
> Live in a black skin for one day, bitch, and you might understand.

I live in a multiracial family. It's the best I can do.
>
> >I don't find your viewpoint the least bit representative of
> > people of color, either conservative or liberal.
>
> Whose is? That Uncle Tom Oreo from California?

Truly pathetic. More offensive insults from the left
just because they hold different opinions.
Your a biggot.
>
> >Of course, I've also realized long ago that people in academia
> > are often out of touch with America.
>
> **** off. You wanna provoke me? Hell with ya.

And they have thin skins.
>
> > What specific actions or policies has he implemented that you find so
> >far
> > right?
>
> How about all his anti-civil rights judges for a start?

Specifics please.
>
>
> <Specifics?
>
> Oh please. Give it a break. You wanna defend the indefensible? Have fun
by
> yourself.

So much for engaging the educated elite
in meaningful discourse.

I suspect you're one of those profs I occasionally hear kids call
Savage and complain about the ridiculous attempts at brainwashing
they must endure.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "ScottW"
>
> > Are really incapable of refraining from resorting to insults at all?
>
> Probably about as incapable as you are of creating complete sentences
that are
> expressive rather than passive-provocative like the one above.

You're the one who expressed a desire to refrain from insults so a
dialogue
could be undertaken. That lasted.... how long?

> If you'd like to
> tell me to **** off, at least have the balls to do it up front.

If that's your measure of balls, I see why women have no
interest in you.

>
> So far, you're getting a D.

I thought I was dismissed?

ScottW

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "ScottW"

>Your a biggot.

Sorry, baby. You've gone from a *D* to a *D minus*

That's *YOU'RE*

And that's *bigot*.

I suppose the bit about black folks having big dicks got you all hot and
jittery. Heh heh. Ask your mamma for a 'Speak N' Spell' next Christmas.

Professor Midnite

[ScottW]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "ScottW"
>
> >Your a biggot.
>
> Sorry, baby. You've gone from a *D* to a *D minus*
>
> That's *YOU'RE*
>
> And that's *bigot*.
>
> I suppose the bit about black folks having big dicks got you all hot and
> jittery. Heh heh. Ask your mamma for a 'Speak N' Spell' next Christmas.

What happenned to all that intellectual substance?
Melted down to a spell checker in record time.

ScottW

[Professor Midnite]

>

>If that's your measure of balls, I see why women have no
>interest in you.

You don't know **** about ****, do you? Over the past 40 years, I've had more
women try to 'help' me become heterosexual than you've ever seen since the
first of them little curly pubies came in while you were playing with your
ding-dong and drooling over Maidenform bra ads.

Right now I got exams to prepare, but I'll be back in just awhile with a tube
of *Anal-Ease* and a big Valentine gift just for you. Now don't that make you
shiver and shake with anticipation. . .

Professor Midnite

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
>
> Yeasty Cock-Slimmer wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:52:26 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
> > > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>Also, and this is for Yustabe, if there's something you can do for
someone
> >>>else, and it makes them very happy, and it doesn't affect you, then why
> >>>oppose it?
> >
> >
> >>Really, it's about number 100 on my most important list.
> >
> > But if you were a gay person prevented from marrying someone you love,
> > maybe it would have more importance to you, no?
>
> I love his logic. It's "about number 100" yet he feels perfectly
> justified in believing that it should be illegal for those who
> feel it is their #1 issue in life.
>
> From a man who never married himself.
>

Civil union is just my opinion of what it should be. If
gay marriage comes to be legal, no big deal for me.






----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"ScottW" > wrote in message
news:tQr2c.16010$id3.9396@fed1read01...
>
> "Yeasty Cock-Slimmer" > wrote in message
> news:08bk405u7b0vp66dk1jg93rl4ifdea6pj9@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...
> > On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:52:26 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
> > > wrote:
> >
> > >> Also, and this is for Yustabe, if there's something you can do for
> someone
> > >> else, and it makes them very happy, and it doesn't affect you, then
> why
> > >> oppose it?
> >
> > >Really, it's about number 100 on my most important list.
> >
> > But if you were a gay person prevented from marrying someone you love,
> > maybe it would have more importance to you, no?
> >
> > >I'm not interested in repeating the argument.
> >
> > I think your politics are horrible, but I have close friends with whom
> > I disagree sharply on important political issues and our differences
> > don't affect our friendship. But your position on this is deeply
> > sickening to me.
>
> Making your ears ring it is.
>
> BTW, I had a nasty cold with sinus/ear infection
> and swallowed 1000 mg horsepills of augmentin
> for 10 days. Both ears still feel like they have water
> in 'em. Doc says there is inflammation but no sign
> of infection so no more antibiotics. Also they've
> begun to discourage the use of antibiotics for minor
> infections because of the outbreak of resistant bugs.
> Anyway, my 2 weeks waiting period with no change
> (other than my right ear is catching up with my left which
> is good cuz I don't feel like Im leaning as much)
> will be up Monday
> and I'm back to the doc. Luckily, no ringing.
> Hope you get well soon.
>
> I don't care about gays marrying. I have reservations
> about adopting or raising kids. Hurl on that one.
>
> ScottW
>
>

How would a gay couple raise a kid without adopting one????
Not unless one of them were previously in a heterosexual relationship.
Then it is biologically that person's child and he/she should be able to
raise the child.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> YCS wrote:
>
>
> >On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:52:26 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
> > wrote:
> >
> >>> Also, and this is for Yustabe, if there's something you can do for
someone
> >>> else, and it makes them very happy, and it doesn't affect you, then
why
> >>> oppose it?
> >
> >>Really, it's about number 100 on my most important list.
> >
> >But if you were a gay person prevented from marrying someone you love,
> >maybe it would have more importance to you, no?
> >
> >>I'm not interested in repeating the argument.
> >
> >I think your politics are horrible, but I have close friends with whom
> >I disagree sharply on important political issues and our differences
> >don't affect our friendship. But your position on this is deeply
> >sickening to me.
> >
> >--
> >td
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> I'm sort of in the same situation that you are, Graham. With some of my
> closest friends, I don't bother to discuss politics or religion any more,
> because of our sharp differences. We just amicably "agree to disagree".
:)
>
> As far as my position on gay marriages is concerned, I think that 2
consenting
> adults should be able to do what they want to do, both publically and
> privately.
>
> It is nobody else's business.
>
> As for the use of the word, "abnormal", speaking professionallly, it
has
> many negative connotations. Attempts to justify its usage by trying to
equate
> it with simply a statistical argument are somewhat disingenuous.
>

I really wasn't trying to be disingenious. First I used 'different' and
was roundly ciriticized for that. I really wanted to find the right word
that accurately described my opinion. I certainly did not desire
the tremendous level of misunderstanding over 'abnormal'. I
had no intent to convey any idea of pathology. I thought that my
explanations of clarification handled that, but few believed me.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Bruce J. Richman]

Art Sackman wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> YCS wrote:
>>
>>
>> >On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:52:26 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>> Also, and this is for Yustabe, if there's something you can do for
>someone
>> >>> else, and it makes them very happy, and it doesn't affect you, then
>why
>> >>> oppose it?
>> >
>> >>Really, it's about number 100 on my most important list.
>> >
>> >But if you were a gay person prevented from marrying someone you love,
>> >maybe it would have more importance to you, no?
>> >
>> >>I'm not interested in repeating the argument.
>> >
>> >I think your politics are horrible, but I have close friends with whom
>> >I disagree sharply on important political issues and our differences
>> >don't affect our friendship. But your position on this is deeply
>> >sickening to me.
>> >
>> >--
>> >td
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I'm sort of in the same situation that you are, Graham. With some of my
>> closest friends, I don't bother to discuss politics or religion any more,
>> because of our sharp differences. We just amicably "agree to disagree".
>:)
>>
>> As far as my position on gay marriages is concerned, I think that 2
>consenting
>> adults should be able to do what they want to do, both publically and
>> privately.
>>
>> It is nobody else's business.
>>
>> As for the use of the word, "abnormal", speaking professionallly, it
>has
>> many negative connotations. Attempts to justify its usage by trying to
>equate
>> it with simply a statistical argument are somewhat disingenuous.
>>
>
>I really wasn't trying to be disingenious. First I used 'different' and
>was roundly ciriticized for that. I really wanted to find the right word
>that accurately described my opinion. I certainly did not desire
>the tremendous level of misunderstanding over 'abnormal'. I
>had no intent to convey any idea of pathology. I thought that my
>explanations of clarification handled that, but few believed me.
>
>
>
>
>----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
>News==----
>http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000
>Newsgroups
>---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption
>=---
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I think if you had used the word "different" rather than "abnormal" initially
to express your views, the reception would have been a lot less negative. And
even then, it's very easy to overgeneralize about differences in the absence of
empirical evidence to support many of them.



Bruce J. Richman

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> >
>
> I think if you had used the word "different" rather than "abnormal"
initially
> to express your views, the reception would have been a lot less negative.
And
> even then, it's very easy to overgeneralize about differences in the
absence of
> empirical evidence to support many of them.
>

If there weren't differences, we wouldn't have cause
to celebrate diversity.
But the ones I'm thinking of relate to my perceptions
of natural order, and how sexuality relates to it. It is
conceptual, you can accept it, or reject it. I assert my
Philosophy follows from the basic facts of life
and how humans procreate.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Joseph Oberlander]

Professor Midnite wrote:

>>From: Le Artiste
>
>
>>You glossed over George's grossly offensive (fighting talk, basically)
>>labelling of *me* as a homophobe in the preceeding paragraph. Consider
>>your final sentence above.
>>
>>Comments?
>
>
> I have my own definition of homophobia. A man who's got the guts to admit that
> gays freak him about is *not* a homophobe unless, like Yustabe Human, he
> rationalizes his uneasiness and wraps it in absolutistic normative judgemental
> thinking.
>
> Siimilarly, I don't ever expect a day's gonna come when a white person sees me
> face-to-face and doesn't notice that I'm black.

You haven't met me yet, then :)

I guess it's the years living in Los Angeles. Everyone after a few
generations begins to look the same homogenous tan here, so unless you
push it in my face, I've been known to talk to people for 3-4 hours
in real life before noticing the color of their skin. It's such a
minor thing, really - just like what color my cat or dog is.

I laugh at myself often about this - that it never even occurred
to me to think about their color or ethnicity or sometimes even
gender. I'm glad that I've become completely desensitized to
such physical attributes. But I appear to be the exception.
Maybe it's all the time I spend online - who knows. Here - we
all are the same.

So it's not hard to transfer that to real life. People are people.
Nothing more, nothing less.

Conversely, biggots are biggots. Sorry Yustabe, but you need
sensitivity classes or something.

[Joseph Oberlander]

Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:

> But the ones I'm thinking of relate to my perceptions
> of natural order, and how sexuality relates to it. It is
> conceptual, you can accept it, or reject it. I assert my
> Philosophy follows from the basic facts of life
> and how humans procreate.

"Natural Order" is an antequated concept since we started
messing around with our bodies and how we procreate.

See - your argument has way too many holes in it.

[Professor Midnite]

>From: Joseph Oberlander

>> Siimilarly, I don't ever expect a day's gonna come when a white person sees
>me
>> face-to-face and doesn't notice that I'm black.
>
>You haven't met me yet, then :)

>From: Yeasty Cock-Slimmer

>I can honestly say that I don't even think about it. It never enters
my head.

Congratulations, then. That's rarely the case in cities in the East.

Professor Midnite

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"


>But the ones I'm thinking of relate to my perceptions
>of natural order, and how sexuality relates to it. It is
>conceptual, you can accept it, or reject it. I assert my
>Philosophy follows from the basic facts of life

Okay, then. So how come you didn't answer a few simple questions? I'm still
willing to discuss it with you rationally before going on about how you look
like the Michelin Man again.

According to your reasoning, sex for non-procreative purposes is not natural.
Not part of the 'natural order'. Masturbation, then, would not be natural.
(Unless you wanna say it's 'practice'; bet you had a lot of *that* lately.
Oops! Sorry.Just sort of slipped out.) Similarly, oral sex is not natural. Anal
sex is not, etc. And sex in any position beside the one most likely to lead to
pregnancy is unnatural. We' re getting kind of fundamentalist biblical here,
aren't we? And btw, there *is* gay sex in the animal kingdom, though it's
often an expression of dominance behavior or group bonding rather than
procreative. Additionally, several higher species have sex for pleasure alone.
Therefore, if gay sex is an expression of love, or dominance, or pleasure
rather than procreation, it too is part of the 'natural order' by your
definition.

Listen, Art. It doesn't work to say 'I think it because I think it.' You call
it your 'philosophy', but my research on race has shown that prejudiced folk
invent and search for 'logic' and 'reasons' to defend their prejudices rather
base their prejudices on some sound logic or reason. Get it? That's what
you're doing, Art. All you have to do is accept that you have a deeply
conditioned irrational prejudice instead of defending it as 'right' or 'true'
or 'logical' and I just might lay off your ass. Hell, honky-boy, I might even
let you marry my sister . :-)

Professor Midnite

[Professor Midnite]

>From: George M. Middius

>Do you cross the street if you see a pack of skinheads walking towards
>you?

No. Not in broad daylight and not when I'm armed. :-)

But my point is that I don't expect white folk to become color blind. Nice if
they can like some here say they are, but all I want is for people like Ustabe
to recognize their prejudice for what it is, racial or sexual. See it as their
own and deal with it. That'd be just fine for a start. Furthermore, our
research shows that prejudice, sexual or racial, is self-perpetuating. The more
prejudiced a person is, the less likely they are to have much contact with the
objects of prejudice, and the less contact they have, the less likely they are
to lose their prejudice.

Professor Midnite

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
> Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>
> > But the ones I'm thinking of relate to my perceptions
> > of natural order, and how sexuality relates to it. It is
> > conceptual, you can accept it, or reject it. I assert my
> > Philosophy follows from the basic facts of life
> > and how humans procreate.
>
> "Natural Order" is an antequated concept since we started
> messing around with our bodies and how we procreate.
>
> See - your argument has way too many holes in it.
>

I am against cloning, I think is a really bad idea.
A new life should derive from half the genes from
a man, and half the genes from a woman.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[S888Wheel]

>
>I am against cloning, I think is a really bad idea.
>A new life should derive from half the genes from
>a man, and half the genes from a woman.
>

There are other uses for cloning than human procreation.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Yeasty Cock-Slimmer" > wrote in message
news:lo5m40d0flifo2dq24qhm77spkbmlhi4v9@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...
> On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 21:10:25 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
> > wrote:
>
> >I really wasn't trying to be disingenious. First I used 'different' and
> >was roundly ciriticized for that. I really wanted to find the right word
> >that accurately described my opinion. I certainly did not desire
> >the tremendous level of misunderstanding over 'abnormal'. I
> >had no intent to convey any idea of pathology. I thought that my
> >explanations of clarification handled that, but few believed me.
>
> I believe you, Art. I still believe you are prejudiced, however. There
> is no sane reason for denying gay couples the same kind of marriage
> you and I are permitted in law, just as there was no sane reason for
> suggesting gay people feel love differently to straight people. That
> remark was one of the most offensive things I've ever read. YMMV.
>
> --

On that topic, I never implied that they didn't feel love, or
didn't feel love as strongly or deeply. it's just that I think
a little something would be missed, causing sadness, because they
couldn't naturally have children together.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sander deWaal]

Joseph Oberlander > said:

> From a man who never married himself.

I strongly object to marrying oneself. It's not normal.

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

[dave weil]

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 10:28:07 -0500, George M. Middius
> wrote:

>
>
>Stupey said:
>
>> I am against cloning, I think is a really bad idea.
>> A new life should derive from half the genes from
>> a man, and half the genes from a woman.
>
>Clumsier and clumsier.

And isn't that exactly where a clone really comes from?

[ScottW]

"Le Artiste" > wrote in message
...
> "George M. Middius" emitted :
>
> >> >>Personally, I don't "expect" any uptight homophobes to drop their
> >> >>conditioning overnight. Very few of you are openminded to accept
> >> >>without judgment what you've been taught to fear and hate your
entire
> >> >>lives
> >
> >Oops, my bad. I meant "very few of you straights". Sorry.
>
> Is that a genuine apology? The substitution doesn't quite work.
>
> I think you should choose your targets more carefully.

The obvious hypocrisy of his hetero prejudice
is invisible to George.

ScottW

[Joseph Oberlander]

Professor Midnite wrote:

>>I can honestly say that I don't even think about it. It never enters
>
> my head.
>
> Congratulations, then. That's rarely the case in cities in the East.
>
> Professor Midnite

Hence why I like it out here. It seems as if the second you get
past The Rockies, it goes back in time to 1950 or something.

I guess it was in college - I went through half a dozen girlfriends
with who knows WHAT ethnicity. One was part russian, part spanish,
and part native american - no kidding. You just give up after
a while. Plus, last I checked, it all works the same under the
covers.

Just like cats - color of your fur or skin is merely something
nice to look at. They all can breed with each other just fine.

[Joseph Oberlander]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
> Yeasty Cock-Slimmer said:
>
>
>>I am not aware of any kids being, um, indoctrinated to 'be gay'.
>
>
> Oh, so that's it. We go around "recruiting" people with our evil mind
> tricks. That naturally follows from the "sexuality is a choice" line
> of, er, thinking.

Of course. This is their Holy Grail last-ditch refuge. If they
are forced to admit that it is physical, then it can't be a matter
of therapy and religion "saving" them. They then have no options.

[Sander deWaal]

George M. Middius >wrote in message
>
>
>
>
>
. net>
>>>>
>>
>
>Sander deWaal said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > From a man who
never
>>>>>>>>>>>> married himself.
>> >>>
>> I
>>>>>>>strongly
object to marrying oneself. It's
>>>>not normal.
>>>>>>
>>Proove it Mr. Sander'>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>s or maybe you should call
>>>>>>yoruslef a tube bigot bigot bigot bigot bigot bigot bigot bigot bigot bigot bigot bigot bigot bigot
>Mr. Sander.
>
>
>
Thank you mr. Miduis for admitting you don't know squat about maraigge
or life it, is on "Usenet" NoT in general, thank you very much mr.
Oedipus!

Mr. Missiot its like, living well is just like Phillips sockpuppet
wheel and Wiel get to have the right revenge, as if fixxing radar's in
the snow isn't just what Atkonsoin's biggotted liberal comments are
after, "look, there over, cake!"

Hardly, mr. Imidus.

As if jetfighters can go "BOOM" all by themselves, mr. Dimmius.
Not likely in this millennimumumum, LOT;S ;-(

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

[Joseph Oberlander]

Professor Midnite wrote:

>>From: George M. Middius
>
>
>>Do you cross the street if you see a pack of skinheads walking towards
>>you?
>
>
> No. Not in broad daylight and not when I'm armed. :-)
>
> But my point is that I don't expect white folk to become color blind. Nice if
> they can like some here say they are, but all I want is for people like Ustabe
> to recognize their prejudice for what it is, racial or sexual. See it as their
> own and deal with it. That'd be just fine for a start. Furthermore, our
> research shows that prejudice, sexual or racial, is self-perpetuating. The more
> prejudiced a person is, the less likely they are to have much contact with the
> objects of prejudice, and the less contact they have, the less likely they are
> to lose their prejudice.

I guess it's something that big cities helps to combat - try going out
looking for dates in a major city. Sure - that tan colored person
in front of you might be part Chinese, part Indian(country), part
African, part Brazilian, part.. GOD WHO CARES - I JUST WANT A DATE AND
MAYBE SOME SEX. Okay - no sex - that never happens the first date
anyways(I know my limitations - lol) - but I can try, can't I?

Most men and women have other things on their mind when they are
looking for somone to go out with. Heh. :)

Throw a bunch of kids together in a real melting-pot of 50+
cultures and half a dozen religions and watch none of them
really care about such minor things when their hormones
get going. Last I checked, a brown colored 34D works
the same as a white colored 34D >:)

[Joseph Oberlander]

Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:

> "Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
> hlink.net...
>
>>Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>>
>>
>>>But the ones I'm thinking of relate to my perceptions
>>>of natural order, and how sexuality relates to it. It is
>>>conceptual, you can accept it, or reject it. I assert my
>>>Philosophy follows from the basic facts of life
>>>and how humans procreate.
>>
>>"Natural Order" is an antequated concept since we started
>>messing around with our bodies and how we procreate.
>>
>>See - your argument has way too many holes in it.
>>
>
>
> I am against cloning, I think is a really bad idea.
> A new life should derive from half the genes from
> a man, and half the genes from a woman.

Too bad the first cloned babys have been born already,
or shortly will be. Can't stuff the worms back in
the can...

[Joseph Oberlander]

Sander deWaal wrote:

> Joseph Oberlander > said:
>
>
>>From a man who never married himself.
>
>
> I strongly object to marrying oneself. It's not normal.

LMAO.

Unfortunately, that's about all Yustabe has left.

I get this image of a frustrated, overweight, single
man with half a head of hair, sitting in front of his
computer. A stack of porn and magazines on the coffee
table and only his right hand to keep himself company at night.

[Sander deWaal]

Joseph Oberlander > said:

>I get this image of a frustrated, overweight, single
>man with half a head of hair, sitting in front of his
>computer. A stack of porn and magazines on the coffee
>table and only his right hand to keep himself company at night.

That would be more like a certain person from Michigan we all know and
love.

Umm.......forget that last word.

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

[Bruce J. Richman]

Sander de Waal wrote:


>Joseph Oberlander > said:
>
>>I get this image of a frustrated, overweight, single
>>man with half a head of hair, sitting in front of his
>>computer. A stack of porn and magazines on the coffee
>>table and only his right hand to keep himself company at night.
>
>That would be more like a certain person from Michigan we all know and
>love.
>
>Umm.......forget that last word.
>
>--
>Sander deWaal
>Vacuum Audio Consultancy
>
>
>
>
>
>

Thanks for admitting you didn't know he's ambidextrous. As if his flexibility
in all matters, including audio, was not a matter of Google record!

ROFLMAO !!!



Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

George M. Middius wrote::


>Joseph Oberlander said:
>
>> I get this image of a frustrated, overweight, single
>> man with half a head of hair, sitting in front of his
>> computer. A stack of porn and magazines on the coffee
>> table and only his right hand to keep himself company at night.
>
>Irrational prejudice against lefties noted.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

And also the ambidextrous.

(and presumambly other switch-hitters).



Bruce J. Richman

[ScottW]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> PD sides with The Idiot.
>
> > > The obvious hypocrisy of his hetero prejudice
> > > is invisible to George.
> >
> > Agreed.
>
> Oh, sure. Why don't the two of you get together and tell us all how
> you've oppressed by Gay people. Did you spend the first 15 or 20 years
> of your life pretending to be Gay? Were you chased and beaten by a mob
> of angry fags? Were you forced to lisp and swish in order to blend in?
>
> Not that there's anything wrong with that....

Most heteroes have never been involved in any such thing.

Your attempt to rationalize your problems is admission
they are real.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Scottie tries some mock Krooglish.
>
> > Your attempt to rationalize your problems is admission
> > they are real.
>
> Funny, all the humor goes out of it when you do it.......

Failure to face the truth, noted.

ScottW

[Torresists]

>From: Le Artiste
>Date: 3/7/2004 5:34 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>"George M. Middius" emitted :
>
>>> > The obvious hypocrisy of his hetero prejudice
>>> > is invisible to George.
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>>
>>Oh, sure. Why don't the two of you get together and tell us all how
>>you've oppressed by Gay people. Did you spend the first 15 or 20 years
>>of your life pretending to be Gay? Were you chased and beaten by a mob
>>of angry fags? Were you forced to lisp and swish in order to blend in?
>>
>>Not that there's anything wrong with that....
>
>Fascinating how you switch to "humor" mode...
>
>
>--
>S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t
>
>
>
>
>
>

..

[Torresists]

>From: Le Artiste
>Date: 3/7/2004 9:32 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>"Torresists" emitted :
>
>>>From: Le Artiste
>>>Date: 3/7/2004 5:34 PM Central Standard Time
>>>Message-id: >
>>>
>>>"George M. Middius" emitted :
>>>
>>>>> > The obvious hypocrisy of his hetero prejudice
>>>>> > is invisible to George.
>>>>>
>>>>> Agreed.
>>>>
>>>>Oh, sure. Why don't the two of you get together and tell us all how
>>>>you've oppressed by Gay people. Did you spend the first 15 or 20 years
>>>>of your life pretending to be Gay? Were you chased and beaten by a mob
>>>>of angry fags? Were you forced to lisp and swish in order to blend in?
>>>>
>>>>Not that there's anything wrong with that....
>>>
>>>Fascinating how you switch to "humor" mode...
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>Ta.
>
>
>--
>S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t
>
>
>
>
>
>














































































..

[Joseph Oberlander]

Sander deWaal wrote:

> Joseph Oberlander > said:
>
>
>>I get this image of a frustrated, overweight, single
>>man with half a head of hair, sitting in front of his
>>computer. A stack of porn and magazines on the coffee
>>table and only his right hand to keep himself company at night.
>
>
> That would be more like a certain person from Michigan we all know and
> love.

The simmilarity wasn't lost on me either. :)

[Joseph Oberlander]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
> Joseph Oberlander said:
>
>
>>I get this image of a frustrated, overweight, single
>>man with half a head of hair, sitting in front of his
>>computer. A stack of porn and magazines on the coffee
>>table and only his right hand to keep himself company at night.
>
>
> Irrational prejudice against lefties noted.

Well, last I heard, Yustabe was right-handed. No prejudice
against lefties intended. :)

[Joseph Oberlander]

Bruce J. Richman wrote:


>
> Thanks for admitting you didn't know he's ambidextrous. As if his flexibility
> in all matters, including audio, was not a matter of Google record!
>
> ROFLMAO !!!

He still needs one hand to hold the magazine or remote control...

:)

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Professor Midnite" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
>
> >But the ones I'm thinking of relate to my perceptions
> >of natural order, and how sexuality relates to it. It is
> >conceptual, you can accept it, or reject it. I assert my
> >Philosophy follows from the basic facts of life
>
> Okay, then. So how come you didn't answer a few simple questions? I'm
still
> willing to discuss it with you rationally before going on about how you
look
> like the Michelin Man again.
>
> According to your reasoning, sex for non-procreative purposes is not
natural.
> Not part of the 'natural order'. Masturbation, then, would not be natural.
> (Unless you wanna say it's 'practice'; bet you had a lot of *that* lately.
> Oops! Sorry.Just sort of slipped out.) Similarly, oral sex is not natural.
Anal
> sex is not, etc. And sex in any position beside the one most likely to
lead to
> pregnancy is unnatural. We' re getting kind of fundamentalist biblical
here,
> aren't we? And btw, there *is* gay sex in the animal kingdom, though
it's
> often an expression of dominance behavior or group bonding rather than
> procreative. Additionally, several higher species have sex for pleasure
alone.
> Therefore, if gay sex is an expression of love, or dominance, or pleasure
> rather than procreation, it too is part of the 'natural order' by your
> definition.
>
> Listen, Art. It doesn't work to say 'I think it because I think it.' You
call
> it your 'philosophy', but my research on race has shown that prejudiced
folk
> invent and search for 'logic' and 'reasons' to defend their prejudices
rather
> base their prejudices on some sound logic or reason. Get it? That's what
> you're doing, Art. All you have to do is accept that you have a deeply
> conditioned irrational prejudice instead of defending it as 'right' or
'true'
> or 'logical' and I just might lay off your ass. Hell, honky-boy, I might
even
> let you marry my sister . :-)
>
> Professor Midnite
>

I wouldn't mind that, if she had a more pleasant disposition than you. :-)




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
>
>
> Sander deWaal wrote:
>
> > Joseph Oberlander > said:
> >
> >
> >>From a man who never married himself.
> >
> >
> > I strongly object to marrying oneself. It's not normal.
>
> LMAO.
>
> Unfortunately, that's about all Yustabe has left.
>
> I get this image of a frustrated, overweight, single
> man with half a head of hair, sitting in front of his
> computer. A stack of porn and magazines on the coffee
> table and only his right hand to keep himself company at night.
>

Wrong!
I got 3/4 head of hair left, I don't need porn mags when
I can download videos, and my left hand has fewer calluses
than my right hand. And "at least' I am trying to work on my weight.
Sheesh!




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
>
>
> Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>
> > "Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
> > hlink.net...
> >
> >>Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>But the ones I'm thinking of relate to my perceptions
> >>>of natural order, and how sexuality relates to it. It is
> >>>conceptual, you can accept it, or reject it. I assert my
> >>>Philosophy follows from the basic facts of life
> >>>and how humans procreate.
> >>
> >>"Natural Order" is an antequated concept since we started
> >>messing around with our bodies and how we procreate.
> >>
> >>See - your argument has way too many holes in it.
> >>
> >
> >
> > I am against cloning, I think is a really bad idea.
> > A new life should derive from half the genes from
> > a man, and half the genes from a woman.
>
> Too bad the first cloned babys have been born already,
> or shortly will be. Can't stuff the worms back in
> the can...
>

so much for natural selection....:-(




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >I am against cloning, I think is a really bad idea.
> >A new life should derive from half the genes from
> >a man, and half the genes from a woman.
> >
>
> There are other uses for cloning than human procreation.

I understand that, and I worry about it, too, despite
the more immediate benefits that could be derived.
It's not nice to fool Mother Nature.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Professor Midnite]

>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"

>I wouldn't mind that, if she had a more pleasant disposition than you. :-)

My sister would eat your ass for breakfast and spit you out before noon except
she don't do no fat ass premature ejaculators.

There. I feel so much better. Now please respond to what I wrote or give it up.

Professor Midnite

[S888Wheel]

>
>"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
...
>> >
>> >I am against cloning, I think is a really bad idea.
>> >A new life should derive from half the genes from
>> >a man, and half the genes from a woman.
>> >
>>
>> There are other uses for cloning than human procreation.
>
>I understand that, and I worry about it, too, despite
>the more immediate benefits that could be derived.
>It's not nice to fool Mother Nature.
>
>

Are you aware of just how much research relies on cloning these days? One can
argue that medicine in general isn't "natural." I am quite happy that
researchers are not worried about that.

[Lionel]

Joseph Oberlander wrote:
>
>
> Sander deWaal wrote:
>
>> Joseph Oberlander > said:
>>
>>
>>> From a man who never married himself.
>>
>>
>>
>> I strongly object to marrying oneself. It's not normal.
>
>
> LMAO.
>
> Unfortunately, that's about all Yustabe has left.
>
> I get this image of a frustrated, overweight, single
> man with half a head of hair, sitting in front of his
> computer. A stack of porn and magazines on the coffee
> table and only his right hand to keep himself company at night.

This is the sad story of Sockpuppet "Ol' Chicken" Yustabe's life.
Years ago he was beloging to the left hoping that an old nymphomaniac
hippy, still adept of the "free sex" will accept to initiate him and
take care of his virginity. Alas...

[Joseph Oberlander]

Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
\
>>I get this image of a frustrated, overweight, single
>>man with half a head of hair, sitting in front of his
>>computer. A stack of porn and magazines on the coffee
>>table and only his right hand to keep himself company at night.
>>
>
>
> Wrong!
> I got 3/4 head of hair left, I don't need porn mags when
> I can download videos, and my left hand has fewer calluses
> than my right hand. And "at least' I am trying to work on my weight.
> Sheesh!

So your right hand has more callouses.

I rest my case.

[Joseph Oberlander]

Lionel wrote:

>
> This is the sad story of Sockpuppet "Ol' Chicken" Yustabe's life.
> Years ago he was beloging to the left hoping that an old nymphomaniac
> hippy, still adept of the "free sex" will accept to initiate him and
> take care of his virginity. Alas...

Alas... All he has left is the sex he pays for...

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> >
> >> >I am against cloning, I think is a really bad idea.
> >> >A new life should derive from half the genes from
> >> >a man, and half the genes from a woman.
> >> >
> >>
> >> There are other uses for cloning than human procreation.
> >
> >I understand that, and I worry about it, too, despite
> >the more immediate benefits that could be derived.
> >It's not nice to fool Mother Nature.
> >
> >
>
> Are you aware of just how much research relies on cloning these days? One
can
> argue that medicine in general isn't "natural." I am quite happy that
> researchers are not worried about that.

My concern is pretty much limited to
messing with natural selection. In the long term,
I think it is dangerous. Even if researchers do it,
they still certainly should be worried about it. If they
are doing it blind to such considerations, that is troubling.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
>
> Lionel wrote:
>
> >
> > This is the sad story of Sockpuppet "Ol' Chicken" Yustabe's life.
> > Years ago he was beloging to the left hoping that an old nymphomaniac
> > hippy, still adept of the "free sex" will accept to initiate him and
> > take care of his virginity. Alas...
>
> Alas... All he has left is the sex he pays for...
>

One way or another, there is always a price to pay!




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
>
> Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
> \
> >>I get this image of a frustrated, overweight, single
> >>man with half a head of hair, sitting in front of his
> >>computer. A stack of porn and magazines on the coffee
> >>table and only his right hand to keep himself company at night.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Wrong!
> > I got 3/4 head of hair left, I don't need porn mags when
> > I can download videos, and my left hand has fewer calluses
> > than my right hand. And "at least' I am trying to work on my weight.
> > Sheesh!
>
> So your right hand has more callouses.
>
> I rest my case.
>

If you like it rough, that's your business.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[S888Wheel]

>
>My concern is pretty much limited to
>messing with natural selection. In the long term,
>I think it is dangerous. Even if researchers do it,
>they still certainly should be worried about it. If they
>are doing it blind to such considerations, that is troubling.
>

Natural selection for humans went out the door long before we knew what DNA
was.There wouldn't be 6 billion humans on earth if natural selection were in
play. I see no difference between curing people through the use of medicine,
surgery, or genetics. What do you think is going to happen? Besides extending
and improving our lives.

[S888Wheel]

>
>>I see no difference between curing people through the use of medicine,
>>surgery, or genetics. What do you think is going to happen? Besides
>extending
>>and improving our lives.
>
>Genetic modification is experimental. Nobody really knows what can
>happen.
>

That is simply an overly broad claim.


>
>Who needs to live longer anyway? People already live too long, and now
>we have developed societies full of unproductive elderly people who
>require financial and physical support, and artificial life support.
>This is an example of deviating from the "natural order of things".

I'll assume you are joking.

[Joseph Oberlander]

Le Artiste wrote:

> "S888Wheel" emitted :
>
>
>>I see no difference between curing people through the use of medicine,
>>surgery, or genetics. What do you think is going to happen? Besides extending
>>and improving our lives.
>
>
> Genetic modification is experimental. Nobody really knows what can
> happen.
>
> Who needs to live longer anyway? People already live too long, and now
> we have developed societies full of unproductive elderly people who
> require financial and physical support, and artificial life support.
> This is an example of deviating from the "natural order of things".

You don't get it do you.

The goal is not to extend a person's life, but to enable them to
be in good health like the are at age 40-60 all the way until
they die at 90 or so like they would have.

No problems, no diseases, no burden - and they can be productive
the whole time. Getting old isn't bad. Falling apart is.

[S888Wheel]

>
>>>>I see no difference between curing people through the use of medicine,
>>>>surgery, or genetics. What do you think is going to happen? Besides
>>>extending
>>>>and improving our lives.
>>>
>>>Genetic modification is experimental. Nobody really knows what can
>>>happen.
>>>
>>That is simply an overly broad claim.
>
>Appropriately broad - the consequences are unknown.

Hardly. When one starts to get specific the consequences become known to the
degree that they have been studied.An extrem example: I am confident that we
have not caused a global catastrophe with the invention of the Navel Orange.
Your claim is simply *too* broad to have any real meaning.


>
>>>Who needs to live longer anyway? People already live too long, and now
>>>we have developed societies full of unproductive elderly people who
>>>require financial and physical support, and artificial life support.
>>>This is an example of deviating from the "natural order of things".
>>
>>I'll assume you are joking.
>
>Nope.

If you really believe this you are always free to refuse any moderrn medical
care. You will likely die before getting very old and unproductive that way. I
am not a fan of the "natural order of things." Mother nature can be a bitch.

[MINe 109]

In article >,
(S888Wheel) wrote:

> >
> >>>>I see no difference between curing people through the use of medicine,
> >>>>surgery, or genetics. What do you think is going to happen? Besides
> >>>extending
> >>>>and improving our lives.
> >>>
> >>>Genetic modification is experimental. Nobody really knows what can
> >>>happen.
> >>>
> >>That is simply an overly broad claim.
> >
> >Appropriately broad - the consequences are unknown.
>
> Hardly. When one starts to get specific the consequences become known to the
> degree that they have been studied.An extrem example: I am confident that we
> have not caused a global catastrophe with the invention of the Navel Orange.
> Your claim is simply *too* broad to have any real meaning.
>
>
> >
> >>>Who needs to live longer anyway? People already live too long, and now
> >>>we have developed societies full of unproductive elderly people who
> >>>require financial and physical support, and artificial life support.
> >>>This is an example of deviating from the "natural order of things".
> >>
> >>I'll assume you are joking.
> >
> >Nope.
>
> If you really believe this you are always free to refuse any moderrn medical
> care. You will likely die before getting very old and unproductive that way. I
> am not a fan of the "natural order of things." Mother nature can be a bitch.

No ice floes in San Diego. I guess he could sit in the penguin house at
the zoo...

Stephen

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >My concern is pretty much limited to
> >messing with natural selection. In the long term,
> >I think it is dangerous. Even if researchers do it,
> >they still certainly should be worried about it. If they
> >are doing it blind to such considerations, that is troubling.
> >
>
> Natural selection for humans went out the door long before we knew what
DNA
> was.There wouldn't be 6 billion humans on earth if natural selection were
in
> play. I see no difference between curing people through the use of
medicine,
> surgery, or genetics. What do you think is going to happen? Besides
extending
> and improving our lives.

People will be buying kids like they're Brittany Spears cd's.
Matter of fact, Brittany would be a real popular clone. She
could market herslef and make billions by selling her own DNA.
Beats endorsing a line of clothes. I bet she could sell five million
copies of herself in just the first year. Every 18 year old girl will
want to have a Brittany copy baby for herself.

Of course, in the world of radical Muslims, they'll
obviously want an Osama clone I could see that at
least 10 million radical Muslim parents would want a
baby Osama . Well when that happens, "at least" we ought
to be able to find one of them!




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[S888Wheel]

>
>> >My concern is pretty much limited to
>> >messing with natural selection. In the long term,
>> >I think it is dangerous. Even if researchers do it,
>> >they still certainly should be worried about it. If they
>> >are doing it blind to such considerations, that is troubling.
>> >
>>
>> Natural selection for humans went out the door long before we knew what
>DNA
>> was.There wouldn't be 6 billion humans on earth if natural selection were
>in
>> play. I see no difference between curing people through the use of
>medicine,
>> surgery, or genetics. What do you think is going to happen? Besides
>extending
>> and improving our lives.
>

>
>People will be buying kids like they're Brittany Spears cd's.

You are focusing on a very narrow use of cloning, that being procreation. I
doubt the gene pool would be profoundly affected by cloning. People are not
going to stop procreating the old fashioned way.

>Matter of fact, Brittany would be a real popular clone. She
>could market herslef and make billions by selling her own DNA.

People are already doing that. You are aware of sperm banks yes?

>Beats endorsing a line of clothes. I bet she could sell five million
>copies of herself in just the first year.

Highly unlikely.

> Every 18 year old girl will
>want to have a Brittany copy baby for herself.
>

Why on earth would you assume that procreation via cloning would include
slavery of the said clone?

>
>Of course, in the world of radical Muslims, they'll
>obviously want an Osama clone I could see that at
>least 10 million radical Muslim parents would want a
>baby Osama .

I suspect the vast majority of them will also stick with the old fashioned
methods of procreation. I'm begining to think you may have taken a movie like
"The Boys from Brazil" too seriously.

> Well when that happens, "at least" we ought
>to be able to find one of them!
>

I don't know. His ability to hide may be genetic.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
...
> >


>
> People are already doing that. You are aware of sperm banks yes?
>

It's not at all the same as cloning.





----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[S888Wheel]

>
>>
>> People are already doing that. You are aware of sperm banks yes?
>>
>
>It's not at all the same as cloning.
>

It is the sale of DNA for the use of procreation. You were claiming that
cloning would create a huge market for that sort of thing. I was pointing out
that such a market already exists and it isn't nearly as big as you speculate
it would be should we start cloning people as a means of procreation. It seems
that celebraties are not interested in marketing their DNA for procreation.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >>
> >> People are already doing that. You are aware of sperm banks yes?
> >>
> >
> >It's not at all the same as cloning.
> >
>
> It is the sale of DNA for the use of procreation. You were claiming that
> cloning would create a huge market for that sort of thing. I was pointing
out
> that such a market already exists and it isn't nearly as big as you
speculate
> it would be should we start cloning people as a means of procreation. It
seems
> that celebraties are not interested in marketing their DNA for
procreation.

No, cloning is an exact copy.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[S888Wheel]

>
>>>>>Genetic modification is experimental. Nobody really knows what can
>>>>>happen.
>>>>>
>>>>That is simply an overly broad claim.
>>>
>>>Appropriately broad - the consequences are unknown.
>>
>>Hardly. When one starts to get specific the consequences become known to the
>>degree that they have been studied.An extrem example: I am confident that we
>>have not caused a global catastrophe with the invention of the Navel Orange.
>>Your claim is simply *too* broad to have any real meaning.
>
>The Navel Orange is *not* genetically modified by humans it is a
>natural mutation.

Wrong.


>Cross pollination and mutations that occur in the
>wild are *not* the same thing as genetic modification regardless of
>what the agricultural industry might tell the public.
>

Actually they both very much are the same thing only less precise.

>
>If you want to compare foodstuffs consider GM crops designed to
>produce their own insecticide (already being grown for consumer
>consumption in the US and Europe).
>

Yes. A more precise means of making a better product. The Navel Orange is
exactly the same sort of thing only instead of splicing genes it was created by
grafting branches of one fruit tree onto another. The effect is the same. We
have been using GMFs for quite some time now. It is a technology that can do so
much to help feed the starving people throughout the world. Too bad an
irrational fear of genetic engineering prevents us from helping those who are
starving.


>
>Some potential complications to consider :
>
>* Some insecticide producing strains have *already* been shown to
>result in super-duper insecticide and pesticide resistant bugs
>
>* The pollen on these strains affect species besides the intended
>target "pests", potentially affecting ecosystems in particular birds
>
>* GM crops may breed with wild plants and spread with unpredictable
>effect
>
>* The GM product may produce allergens or other harmful substances to
>humans
>
>* Gene stacking could result in super-weeds
>
>These are just a few possibilities. Ones that have been thought of.


None of which are unique to genetic engineering. Life is dynamic. **** happens.
At least we can do things with a certain intent.


>
>You are right when you say "the consequences become known to the
>degree that they have been studied". More studies are required IMO!
>

I don't think things should be done without care and caution. I don't think
they are being done without care and caution. I am all for extreme care in the
R&D and implimentation of genetic engineering.




>
>>>>>Who needs to live longer anyway? People already live too long, and now
>>>>>we have developed societies full of unproductive elderly people who
>>>>>require financial and physical support, and artificial life support.
>>>>>This is an example of deviating from the "natural order of things".
>>>>
>>>>I'll assume you are joking.
>>>
>>>Nope.
>>
>>If you really believe this you are always free to refuse any moderrn medical
>>care. You will likely die before getting very old and unproductive that way.
>
>I was actually talking on the macro level, so this recommendation is
>dismissed.

I see. Your philosophy applies to the masses but not to you. Your position is
dismissed.

>FYI, I avoid medication and treatment except where
>*absolutely* necessary, and by doing so my natural resistance is most
>likely stronger.

Maybe it is maybe it isn't. I suspect if you come down with a life threatening
disease you are not going to want "mother nature" or "natural selection" to
dictate the outcome.

>
>>I am not a fan of the "natural order of things." Mother nature can be a
>bitch.
>
>I have a gfreat respect for nature.
>

Until your ass is on the line. Then you will want the best that medical
research can offer you.

[S888Wheel]

>
>> >>
>> >> People are already doing that. You are aware of sperm banks yes?
>> >>
>> >
>> >It's not at all the same as cloning.
>> >
>>
>> It is the sale of DNA for the use of procreation. You were claiming that
>> cloning would create a huge market for that sort of thing. I was pointing
>out
>> that such a market already exists and it isn't nearly as big as you
>speculate
>> it would be should we start cloning people as a means of procreation. It
>seems
>> that celebraties are not interested in marketing their DNA for
>procreation.
>
>No, cloning is an exact copy.

So? You think this will be the difference between popstars choosing to sell or
not sell their genes? It ain't gonna happen.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >> >>
> >> >> People are already doing that. You are aware of sperm banks yes?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >It's not at all the same as cloning.
> >> >
> >>
> >> It is the sale of DNA for the use of procreation. You were claiming
that
> >> cloning would create a huge market for that sort of thing. I was
pointing
> >out
> >> that such a market already exists and it isn't nearly as big as you
> >speculate
> >> it would be should we start cloning people as a means of procreation.
It
> >seems
> >> that celebraties are not interested in marketing their DNA for
> >procreation.
> >
> >No, cloning is an exact copy.
>
> So? You think this will be the difference between popstars choosing to
sell or
> not sell their genes? It ain't gonna happen.
>

Instead of pirating the music of rockstars, the next wave of pirates
will be pirating their DNA.

Who would you want to be your kid?
Dylan? Neil Young? Me, I want a little Howard Stern running around
my house.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[S888Wheel]

>
>>>The Navel Orange is *not* genetically modified by humans it is a
>>>natural mutation.
>>
>>Wrong.
>
>"The navel orange is a bud-sport of the sweet orange. The mutation
>happened in a garden at a monastery in Bahia, Brazil around 1820"
>http://www.killerplants.com/weird-plants/20030213.asp
>

Well what do you know? Point conceded. All this time I thought it was done on
purpose. However many other designer fruits were genetically engineered the old
fashioned way using grafs.

>>>Cross pollination and mutations that occur in the
>>>wild are *not* the same thing as genetic modification regardless of
>>>what the agricultural industry might tell the public.
>>>
>>Actually they both very much are the same thing only less precise.
>>>
>>>If you want to compare foodstuffs consider GM crops designed to
>>>produce their own insecticide (already being grown for consumer
>>>consumption in the US and Europe).
>>>
>>Yes. A more precise means of making a better product.
>
>So you say.
>

So a lot of people say.

>
>Maybe you'll feel differently when you sprout a second or third head?

When that happens I will. It ain't gonna happen.

>
>>The Navel Orange is
>>exactly the same sort of thing only instead of splicing genes it was created
>by
>>grafting branches of one fruit tree onto another. The effect is the same. We
>>have been using GMFs for quite some time now. It is a technology that can do
>so
>>much to help feed the starving people throughout the world. Too bad an
>>irrational fear of genetic engineering prevents us from helping those who
>are
>>starving.
>
>Spare me the tears - GM is about commerce.

In many cases it is. I think tht is the real reason why most peoplea re against
them. The fact still remains that with GMFs people who would otherwise starve
can feed themselves.

>
>>>Some potential complications to consider :
>>>
>>>* Some insecticide producing strains have *already* been shown to
>>>result in super-duper insecticide and pesticide resistant bugs
>>>
>>>* The pollen on these strains affect species besides the intended
>>>target "pests", potentially affecting ecosystems in particular birds
>>>
>>>* GM crops may breed with wild plants and spread with unpredictable
>>>effect
>>>
>>>* The GM product may produce allergens or other harmful substances to
>>>humans
>>>
>>>* Gene stacking could result in super-weeds
>>>
>>>These are just a few possibilities. Ones that have been thought of.
>>
>>
>>None of which are unique to genetic engineering.
>
>Genetic engineering takes us into unexplored territories. Fact.

As has just about every other technological breakthrough. that is the nature of
exploration.

>
>>>You are right when you say "the consequences become known to the
>>>degree that they have been studied". More studies are required IMO!
>>
>>I don't think things should be done without care and caution. I don't think
>>they are being done without care and caution.
>
>Hahaha!!! That's a good one :-)

Posturing doesn't make for a good argument.

>
>>I see. Your philosophy applies to the masses but not to you.
>
>Look - I never said "I want to die" - I said people live long enough
>as it is..
>

You are entitled to your opinion. I disagree. If modern medicine is good enough
and people already live long enough then maybe all medical research should
stop. I think that is a bad idea.

>
>>>FYI, I avoid medication and treatment except where
>>>*absolutely* necessary, and by doing so my natural resistance is most
>>>likely stronger.
>>
>>Maybe it is maybe it isn't. I suspect if you come down with a life
>threatening
>>disease you are not going to want "mother nature" or "natural selection" to
>>dictate the outcome.
>
>Sure -antibiotics saved me when I got chicken pox at 23. Did I say
>anything about doing away with medicine altogether...?

You said something about letting nature take it's course. So now you are
picking and choosing your modern medicine. clearly your objections to genetic
engineering have nothing to do with people living tooo long. You were happy to
live longet thanks to modern medecine.

>
>>>>I am not a fan of the "natural order of things." Mother nature can be a
>>>bitch.
>>>
>>>I have a gfreat respect for nature.
>>
>>Until your ass is on the line. Then you will want the best that medical
>>research can offer you.
>
>Not that old chestnut!

Sounds like you've already been down that road. Good thing for you mother
nature wasn't allowed to run her course.

[S888Wheel]

>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> People are already doing that. You are aware of sperm banks yes?
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >It's not at all the same as cloning.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> It is the sale of DNA for the use of procreation. You were claiming
>that
>> >> cloning would create a huge market for that sort of thing. I was
>pointing
>> >out
>> >> that such a market already exists and it isn't nearly as big as you
>> >speculate
>> >> it would be should we start cloning people as a means of procreation.
>It
>> >seems
>> >> that celebraties are not interested in marketing their DNA for
>> >procreation.
>> >
>> >No, cloning is an exact copy.
>>
>> So? You think this will be the difference between popstars choosing to
>sell or
>> not sell their genes? It ain't gonna happen.
>>
>
>Instead of pirating the music of rockstars, the next wave of pirates
>will be pirating their DNA.
>
>Who would you want to be your kid?
>Dylan? Neil Young? Me, I want a little Howard Stern running around
>my house.
>
>
I am happy with what I have thank you.

[Mikermckelvy]

>From: "Schizoid Man"
>Date: 3/4/04 2:26 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: >

>Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>
>> "Schizoid Man" > wrote in message
>
>>
>> You're complaining about character assasination?
>> Look what I got for taking a moderately liberal
>> position in line with the prevalent opinions in the is country.
>> No to same sex marriage and yes to civil unions.
>>
>
>Don't kid yourself, Yustabe. You have got flak for taking a Nixonian
>position in race, marriage and realpolitik.
>
>Personally, I have no problem with conservatives, ultraconservatives or
>rabid right-wingers - okay, maybe a few of last category because most would
>probably want to lob my head off since I am not white.
>
>However, more often that not I find conservatives arguing nonsense and
>supplementing whatever they cannot argue with patriotism.
>
>Take for example, that bastion of air-headed conservatism, Bill O'Reilly.

O'Reilly is not a Conservative, he's an independent.

He
>constantly makes a point of how he's a gritty interview compared to
>"airballs" that Larry King tosses his guests. What a bunch of crock.
>
>For one, most of his guests's opinions are not worth hearing - they all have
>PhD from Online Law School, or were married to the sister of some
>ex-Congressman's (usually Republican) assistant secretary.
>
You know you're lying, right?

>Secondly, did you hear the questions he threw at Mel Gibson? I bet Mel was
>really sweating when O'Reilly asked him whether he thought he would get a
>fair shake.
>
>Jesus christ - pardon the pun - what happened to his father's Holocaust
>denials and rabid anti-Semitism? I mean the guy has asked for Alan Greenspan
>to be hung.
>
Mel Gibson and his father are 2 different people. Dad's an idiot. Mel is a
differnt man and shouldn't be held accountable for his father's words any more
than Schwarzenegger should be accountable for his father bein a Nazi.

>I can't vote, but even if I could, I'm not sure I'd want to.
>
Covicted Felon?

[Mikermckelvy]

>From: (Professor Midnite)

>>From: "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
>
>>LOOK MORON, EVIDENTLY YOU CAN'T READ.
>>I have, on many occasions, indicated my support for
>>gay civil unions, and my support for such legal rights as you
>>complain about not having.
>
>Well lawdy lawd! Ain't I grateful! Here's some more news for you, you fat
>flatulent homophobic hermaphrodite: I'm your worst nightmare. I'm a Gay
>Afro-American tenured college professor at a major university in Pennsylvania
>and I *am* opening peoples minds.

But only to throw garbage in.

If you think I'll brook bull**** like the
>above from you you're as wrong as your are narrow-minded.
>
>>My position opposing same sex marraiage
>
>Your position? From the looks of you, your primary position is fighting your
>way to front of the line at a $5.99 all-you-can-eat all-night-buffet in Las
>Vegas. How about this you, arrogant ass? How about we don't allow obese slobs
>like you to marry, but to be gracious our *poh-zition* is that civil unions
>will do jez fine? And you, you roly-poly pig-face . . . you *could* do
>something about your weight if you had a modicum of self-discipline.

That's how you can tell a Liberal, they always resort to name calling.

Gay
>people
>have *no* choice in who they are. All your condescending crap sounds like the
>same crap my parents put up with from the first 'Liberals' in Alabama which
>is
>why they came to Philadelphia in the early fifties:
>
You sure it wasn't tehm cheesesteaks?

>"Why I *do* declare! They are suh-PRIS -isingly refined and articulate for
>Negroes. Maybe in the middle of the bus would. . ."
>
>
>>My position opposing same sex marraiage, but approving
>>of gay civil unions is the same position that Senator John Kerry has.
>
>While I loathe George Bush, it seems both you and the rather... shall we say
>.
>. challenged Mr. McKelvy don't understand that I'm no great fan of Kerry
>either. But as Bill Maher said on Larry King yesterday, the lesser of two
>evils
>is indeed less evil - which is why he won't vote for Nader again and I will
>vote for Kerry.

Kerry is not he lesser of two evils, he's more evil and if he should ever get a
Congress that is on his side would do more damage to minorities than Bush.

Higher taxes means lower employment.

[Mikermckelvy]

>Running around screeching epithets is a great way to gain understanding of
>your
> position.
> You make a good case for doing away with tenure.

There is no case for tenure.