OnTheRocks

I counsel teens weekly. please know...that there are people who do not turn a blind eye to the "filthy teen slut" mentality. I think...if you had asked your parents or grandparents back in the 40's if they thought there would ever be a day when there would be "gay pride"...gay recognition....gay parent day....whatever they want to call it in local schools...they would say the same thing to you that you just said to me in your first comment.

I understand your point perfectly clear Campy....my point is...that the culture will become numb to all things immoral...and then there will be hate crime legislation against pedophiles. Having said that....do you think that is something you will never see happen? Legistlation to protect pedophiles?

read the post again...my point is....that these groups start small....and grow. people don't pay any attention to them because they think they are so far "off" there could not possibly be anything to the group. then....(and i know you don't think this could ever happen to you) but what will you do or someone you know tells you that the local school is going to have a "Man-Boy Love Pride Day"?

look at the original post 12 pages back and think again.

the point is...it starts with a small group...and grows. it is that simple. if you think that 25 years ago you would have ever seen ANYTHING like this in the USA...you are crazy.. now almost overnight they have an "ASSOCIATION" ?????????????

you think the Christian Right in this thread is "nuts".... read this and tell me who is CRAZY. http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/...e%20Association

you start another thread. there is no argument. they ARE NOT a minority people group. period. are they in the minority yes. are they a minority people group? NO!

and the arguement against what you are saying is like stating something to this effect: "hey....I am an adulterer....lets start a club and we can eventually become known as a 'minority people group'...then when we say we are being discriminated against...we can get a bunch of lawyers together and fight for our cause." Referring to homosexuals as a "minority group" is a TOTAL CROCK!

I asked a question. i clearly stated it wasn't a Kerry Bash...or a Bush chest puffing post. thanks for still not aswering the question. Do you think this would have happened hads Kerry won. A candidate who clearly has a record of being weak on defense? *edited to remove unkind unecessary words. - OTR

for those of you discouraged by the Bills loss last night.... Let me remind you that it is just a game....and more importantly.... Arafat is still dead.

although i agree it may not have been the wisest decision to put JP in but only because of the issue of the leg. But,....I HAVE GOT TO BELIEVE he had gotten a report he was 10%. In regard to Losman not having his head in the game...i think on another side of the coin it was great to see him go in. That might have been the message Mularky was sending to Losman....get your head out of your butt.....and pay attention! He needs to know that he will always be just 1 snap away from going into a game. I would hate to think we have a BJ Hobert on our hands.

Gavin in 2008!

I don't understand your question either. actually...i was just trying to stimulate some discussion....on a topic i don't know a lot about. it wasn't intended to bash Kerry...and it wasn't a way to stand on a soap box and beat my chest with "Bush is Great...and all nations cower at the news of his election." I don't know that this announcement is non-binding and can't be verified. do you?

ummmm....ok...so he isn't Joe Montana......

i for one am glad i stayed up to watch this... happy to be around to see JP's first snaps.

upfront....I am not too familiar with how far along Iran is at in with this program. do you suppose they were waiting to see how the American election ended before they decided to back off this program?

i missed Tom's post too. i can say that my wife had a non-cancerous tumor before we were married. two in fact. at the base of her skull. we decided to get married before the required surgeries for the same reason. all is well now...but it was a pins and needles period of time. i hope all goes well for the two of you!

you are ridiculous.

i guess the point i am trying to make as i followed the thread was this: when a people group is labeled by a term that is offensive, and or known to be offensive by an entire culture that group changes the term....to make it less offensive. gay people do not want to be known as sodomites because that is an offensive term...and if you read the story of Lot and his family in Sodom and Gomorrah, you would see (and i am not saying you have never read it Genesis 19), what a repulsive lifestyle it truly is. In fact the term "sodomy" is far from archaic as I think it is on the books as a crimminal act. ofiba is indicating (and i agree) that a culture becomes numb to a un-natural act...and after a while it begins to accept it. Are people in incestuous relationships (outside of West Virgina....ok...i am sorry...that was not nice), the next group to come up with a less offensive politically correct term? Some educators and psyhcologists are already coming up with new words to describe pedophiles. why? because they want their behavior to be more acceptable. IMHO of course.

point being?

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book...omite&x=15&y=13

when did the term sodomites get replaced by the term homosexual or gay?

hmmmm....15 years to life = justiced served? for double homicide? i don't think so.

x2