quite honestly, unless it involves myself and someone who I love and loves me in return, the physical act whether it be hetero or homo, isn't something that trips my trigger either way. We take this word, and make it the entire definition of a human being, which in turn reduces that person to only that perception. Dehumanizing them to just a sex act on legs. There's much more to a human than how they express their affection for the love of their life, and honestly it isn't anyone else's fvckin business. What a sick and twisted example of tunnel vision we seem to have at times.
There Goes America
- Thread starter Tecumsehsbones
- Start date
Strange isn't it how many people characterize a person by one trait. (Axe murdering I could see)
No it doesn't. Free will means you choose what you do, from within a more-or-less limited range of options. It has nothing to do with "reaping what you sow" (note spelling).
Good, it was bugging me!
WALTER
Since you obviously take issue with this post, it would interesting to know how you think Homosexuals should be dealt with or treated. I'm at a loss what fault anyone would find with tolerance/equal treatment.
next time you decide on a little doggie style JLM take a look in the mirror and you might consider applying that word to yourself as well. lmaoGood, it was bugging me!
WALTER
Since you obviously take issue with this post, it would interesting to know how you think Homosexuals should be dealt with or treated. I'm at a loss what fault anyone would find with tolerance/equal treatment.
LOL at that visual.lol
As i've stated before, criticizing spelling and grammar on a forum is very poor netiquette.. but i've come to take your impoverished ethical upbringing and natural rudeness with a grain of salt, bones. You have no idea what Free Will means. It involves free and informed moral choices of extraordinary range and with the most profound consequences.. in this life and beyond.
Also homosexuality is not a victimless crime. Like adultery, rampant promiscuity, sado-masochism or other forms of unbridled sexual incontinence (between consenting adults) it has severe personal, familial and societal implications.
We've already removed all of those from all criminal sanction.. and now it seems we are asked not to even comment on it... if it conflicts with the modern media portrayal of it as a harmless, natural, healthy, genetically predisposed form of relationship that must be celebrated. It is none of those things.
I have in many threads stated that i oppose re-criminalizing homosexuality. But i absolutely reject that all negative characterizations of it should be shelved, in surrender to the modern zeitgeist of its affirmation and celebration which is completely pervasive in our culture.
Last edited:
Yeah, well, taking any correction as criticism says a lot about you.
As I have come to take your bigoted mopery.
No it doesn't. It is "reaping what you sew." At least that's what our resident expert says.
That's true. It's not a crime, victimless or otherwise, anywhere except in your head and Muslim countries.
Which is why you call them crimes, no doubt.
Asked by whom? And even if it is "asked," that doesn't obligate you to comply.
That's the thing about you, coldstream. You see any correction as an attack on you, you see any request as an attack on you, you see pretty much everything as an attack on you.
Got news for you, buck. Ain't more'n a handful of people on the planet give a damn about you one way or t'other.
Now, a normal person would understand the irony of opposing re-criminalizing what he himself calls a crime. You, on the other hand, would just see such an observation as an attack on you.
You're under attack, coldstream! Better pray for salvation.
This is the definition of 'crime' bones
My definition referred to #2 or #4 - a grave offense against morality - or something reprehensible, foolish or disgraceful. Which fully applies of homosexuality, except in societies in death spirals... there nobody gives a damn about what anybody else does.
For someone who is so scrupulous in criticizing others offenses against the English language, bones, you should refer to a Dictionary now and again.
'Sow' the wind, bones, and see what you reap.
My definition referred to #2 or #4 - a grave offense against morality - or something reprehensible, foolish or disgraceful. Which fully applies of homosexuality, except in societies in death spirals... there nobody gives a damn about what anybody else does.
For someone who is so scrupulous in criticizing others offenses against the English language, bones, you should refer to a Dictionary now and again.
'Sow' the wind, bones, and see what you reap.
Last edited:
Good points, Bones. I think you are "flogging a dead horse" from the dark ages. "Promiscuity" is a misnomer, or maybe not - possibly means doing what you like with your own body while doing no harm to anyone else. Can't be any worse than someone who is not promiscuous that spreads S.T.D.s
Good thing we have you to stick your nose into what ain't your business.
Speaking of dictionaries, you might could wanna look up what "circumspect" means. Or just continue making a fool of yourself using words you don't understand. It's good for a snicker.
That's right, sweetie. Lash out with all your terror and loneliness. It's called "catharsis." Look that sh*t up too, while you're at it.
Well, we certainly don't have to worry about coldstream being promiscuous. There ain't many'd f*ck that streak of misery for all the oil in Alberta.Good points, Bones. I think you are "flogging a dead horse" from the dark ages. "Promiscuity" is a misnomer, or maybe not - possibly means doing what you like with your own body while doing no harm to anyone else. Can't be any worse than someone who is not promiscuous that spreads S.T.D.s
I'll change circumspect to scrupulous... providing you admit that you have no idea what the definition of crime is, bones. In fact you don't know anything about me... you just put everyone into categories of your own invention and (lack of) imagination.
I know you're about as pleasant as a poisonous porcupine rolled in dogsh*t and set on fire.
And really, what more is there to know?
I've looked at a lot of posts, recently having also been on the receiving end of one of your derisive tirades and I see that this sort of insult is your typical M.O.. Is there anyone on this forum that you don't address as some sort of an imbecile? You might just have a screw or two loose.