Lt. Dan's Revenge

You're right on about that. He disrupted a few plays in the first half, but I remember asking myself about midway through the 4th quarter if he had gotten hurt or something because I don't think I heard his name once in the second half.

What's comical is that you're failing to understand that you made your first two statements in response to what people said about Maybin's first step and your baseless feeling that other people can't form their own opinions about the subject, and that they just follow the talking heads. Whether you like Maybin or not is irrelevant to me, it's the manner in which you replied to a couple of posters that were touting him that bothered me. That's the only reason Aaron Maybin came into the conversation.

You responded to people who said that they like Aaron Maybin with those posts. That would seem to make it quite obvious that you don't agree with their assesment, would it not? If you are incinuating right now that your opinion on him is no different from theirs, then why would you feel the need to say that all their doing is regurgitating garbage and are unable to form their own opinions? That wouldn't make much sense, would it? Unless you're just doing it for the sake of being contradictory, which wouldn't surprise me. You say I have a habit of arguing in circles, I say that you have a habit of taking unnecessary shots at posters who have different views on players. Or those who you don't seem to think have as many years under their belt of NFL scouting as you do. Maybe both.

You know what I really can't take? When a fan decides that every time other fans disagree with his/her opinion on a player - Maybin in this case - they feel the need to respond like a condescending prick rather than simply stating their differing opinion in a respectful manner. The best part is, you trash others opinions on guys like this, without even explaining how your opinion differs from theirs. And by the way, I'm not even much of an Aaron Maybin fan. Great job.

Okay, so when you ask someone a question you would prefer that they answer you with a bunch of bullsh*t rather than honestly?

Him and MAYBE Adrian Wilson. That's about it.

C'mon, Dean. Obviously to provide a sufficient answer to that question you have to think about your personal feelings about gay marriage. "Do you think every state should follow suit. Why or why not?" In order to answer that, you're going to be forced to share your feelings about it, one way or another. There's not much of a way to get around it.

I've never had the opportunity to vote on a ballot initiative of that sort, but if one did happen in our area in the future, I'm sure I would vote on it. Voting and lobbying others to vote as you do are two completely different things, so I'm not real sure where you're trying to go with that.

Good point. And just to clarify in case anyone feels that way, I have not been trying to lobby for anyone to believe however I may believe. I was simply trying to provide reasons for another perspective existing to a couple of posters who - and this was clear - could not begin to imagine why anyone would be against the idea of gay marriage. Bottom line: Whether or not you think homosexuals in this country should be married is completely your own opinion, and no one should be cut down for stating that they believe either way. This is why I started the topic in the first place. It was absolutely absurd for that question to be asked in a national forum like that pageant, and it is even more ridiculous that scores of people, most of whom have never even met or spoken with that young girl, to be publicly ridiculing her based solely upon an honest answer to a controversial question. What makes it worse is that Perez Hilton, the person who asked her that question, just so happens to be a homosexual. Sorry Perez, not everyone is going to tell you what you want to hear when you pose such a dynamic topic.

Disagree. Homosexuality is MUCH more literally denounced.

Nowhere in those passages does it explicitly say that only white men and women can have a relationship, or enter in marriage for that matter. Gender in marriage is clearly stated in the Bible (man and woman), race is not, therefore people against interracial relationships use their own interpretation of passages like those to satisfy their own agenda.

The key here is that those passages are used to condemn interracial relationships. Nowhere is it clear that in fact they are meant to condemn them.

In what realm of the religious sector does it say marriage is to be between white and white?

If we trade for Edwards does he come with a years supply of stick-um?

Since I don't have it memorized, nor do I have the resources to provide a link to it at the moment, do some homework yourself if you are so passionate about this topic and want to see the other side. It won't take long at all, and might actually prove to be educational. Also, if you don't think our country was "founded on" many biblical principles, you're either ignorant (there's that word again) or uninformed.

Again, this isn't what this thread was intended to turn into, although I can never really complain about good debate. Although in retrospect this was bound to happen, it still clouds the issue at hand which is pretty important IMO.

It is clearly stated in the Bible that marriage is a holy sacrament between a man and a woman. This is the basis of why so many people believe it is wrong. Simple enough?

The difference is your example can only be viewed as CLEARY wrong. Even if they were taught that, the bible says absolutely nothing against interracial relationships. The difference is the gay marriage issue can be seen from multiple different angles. Segregation, in reality and at the end of the day, can only be seen as being wrong.

Excellent comparisons.

You always you the word "bigot" so judiciously.

The point is that is part of the sentiment of many, more than likely the majority of, the people in this country.

I was thinking the same thing about 10 minutes ago. My bad....

Many people in this country don't believe that Bob and Glenn should have the ability to marry and therefore receive the same benefits of marriage (mostly financial) as Bob and Amy. Just sayin'.

Exactly. Maybe Omon will wear #44 for the Panthers or some other team that picks him up after the first round of cuts.

Of course there is no problem with people questioning what they have been taught religiously and looking at all situations from multiple angles, but I still don't see people who believe in what they are taught and form an opinion based on that as ignorant either.