Oh my how things have changed!!!

We all know people back then never had premarital sex, masturbated, kissed, or enjoy sex as recreational activity. Hell, even Lucy and Ricky slept in seperate beds for crying out loud!

That was one of my favorite shows growing up and still is one of my favorite shows, and I certainly never got that part. So, what did Little Ricky say about his dad's anatomy?

I seem to recall that on several occasions in both chat and forum you have identified yourself as a homophobe.

I think what riverrat said to me is very telling of what his answer to your question would be.

quote:

---

In my religious view, I have decided to let God deal with it, and I will not judge, but just love everyone, as I always have.

---

He's probably afraid of god's wrath on this nation.

It's not that we are picking on RR for not liking homosexuality. In fact, I would agree with him, and you, in that I don't have any desire to see two men doing it. What bothers us, or at least me, is that RR still refuses to recognize that it isn't any of his bussiness, or mine, to say what's what about it or to pass judgement.As I understand it, and from the old posts I've been able to dig up, RR started out trying to demonize homosexuals and homosexuality with his bible thumping rants. He then later admitted that people could do what they wanted but he would still try to block any legal recognition of gay relationships. In a great debate that took place not too long ago, he even tried to make the argument against giving legal recognition for gay relationship on the account that they don't reproduce (should my wife and I be tarred and feathered for not having any children yet?). Very recently, he has admitted that he could no longer pass such judgement on the issue but would still teach his children that it's wrong. He even went as far as saying that he would not tolerate it if one of his kids is gay.Starting from the beginning to the recent admittance of some gay rights, it is very clear to me that his disgust of gay relationships originates beyond the bible. His logical side is trying to tell him that it's not any of his goddamn bussiness to interfere (and I commend him for it), but his irrational side still wants to hang onto him very tightly.I will go ahead and admit this much. I am picking on him because even after all of this time and 6 freakin' thousand years of civilization someone like riverrat still manages to hang onto some of the darkest primal hate out there. What's worse, he's not the worst of them.And like I said, I have no desire or have never found another man attractive in that way, but is it any of my bussiness to try to legislate what goes in in someone else's bedroom? And I have been around gay people enough to be convinced that it's more complicated than simply a choice that you have to make: either be straight or gay. God forbids, what if one of his children turns out to be gay? It frightens me to think about it because I have known someone thrown out of the house at age 16 to fend for himself.I don't know. Perhaps I am reading too much into his posts.My apology for the harsh language.Added by edit.And unless someone can effectively find a way to turn me gay, I will stand by the fact that you can't cure homosexuality anymore than you can cure heterosexuality.Edited by gasby, : No reason given.

All points aside, I don't think anyone would argue with you that you have the right to bring up your children the way you want to, just like the parents of Lamb and Lynx Gaede. The real question is are these two girls given a chance at all to love all people (as your christ preached)?You can view the following youtube video to get a better perspective of these two young stars if you haven't already known about them.

I guess I should have worded it more carefully.I have no problem with people passing judgement. That is the right that we all have and noone can ever take that away from us (unless you can control other people's minds).But RR's view is beyond just simply passing judgement. He's been opposing gay relationships to be legally recognized, and that's beyond simply passing judgement. It's requiring that his opinion be made into law.Now that he's passed that point, he is still going to pass on his homophobia (call it whatever you want, i still see it as a phobia) to his children. And like I said, god forbids if one of his kids turn out to be gay. That's beyond simply passing judgement. That's outright manipulating your children to hate. I see no difference between that sort of attitude and the attitude of the parents of the two racist singing girls.

Go ahead and call me a homophobe-phobe. I really don't mind. And I do admit that this is an area that really pushes my buttons. It's a problem when people like RR and others like him try to legislate laws that impose their own personal moral values on the rest of us without considering what effects they would have on the nation.For example, I pointed out in another thread that I have tried the southeast asian fruit called Durian and thought it was absolutely nasty. I can't imagine myself ever want to smell that thing again, let alone eat it. Yet, I also realize that that's just my personal opinion and, unlike some people, I don't require that my opinion be made into the law. However, if we find out that Durian causes people to go crazy and go on shooting sprees, then I will consider the possibility of banning such a fruit.People like RR, apparently, just don't understand that the law has nothing to do with your personal opinion. When you want to legislate something, you need to consider how it will affect the nation as a whole and not just your own personal bias. Driving too fast puts other people's lives in danger. You know that. Now, whether how fast the speed limit should be I will leave that to the experts and keep my mouth shut.However, if we start talking about wearing seatbelts, then I will argue for people's rights to not wear seatbelts. After all, it's their own lives and they have a right to decide. But that's just it, I have never seen an argument against gay marriage that isn't involve some kind of religious or personal bias against gay people. The arguments for banning gay marriage have significant resemblance to the past arguments for banning interracial marriage. I beg to differ. I have not met a racist (and I have talked to quite a few) that have admitted to hating people of color, or mud people as they'd like to call them. They all say the same thing. It's all somewhere along the line of "we don't hate, we just blah blah blah..." Read that article and watch that movie again. The greatest emphasis those girls and their parents tried to make was that they don't "hate".What you present to children at a very early age may leave a life long impression on them. Call it intolerance, hate, not accepting, or whatever. Every generation, we always have people like RR that insists on carrying on the message of having negative attitude or intolerating people who are different than them.Just because they have changed their names from slave traders to slave owners to nationalists to racists to fascists to christian fundies to "people-who-don't-hate-gays-but-by-golly-their-kids-will-never-accept-them-gays-as-real-people" doesn't mean those messages of hate are gone.Again, you can call it whatever you want, but it's still hate taking on a more politically acceptable face.Added by edit.I keep seeing the theme of "moral objection" coming up over and over.RR and everyone else has the right to morally object to whatever they want. I am one of those that really has no problem with neo-nazis spouting their messages of hate simply because it's their right to free speech. What I do have a problem with, and this is still my personal opinion, or rather what ticks me off is people having moral objections to things that can't be changed. It's like having a moral objection against sun flowers being yellow. It's like having a moral objection to me liking boobies. It's like having a moral objection to the sky being blue during the day.Like I said, I've been around gay people long enough to be convinced that they can't be changed the same way that I can't be made to start liking other men. I can't think of any possible way that someone could do to make me start liking other men in a sexual way. As if having a moral objection to people being white or black or whatever is going to change their skin color. Just doesn't make any sense to me.And by the way, I do have a moral objection with RR infecting his children with the hate germ.Edited by gasby, : No reason given.

Hasn't it occured to you that the reason we skip the formal debate part when it comes to this issue is because people like myself have heard their same old argument a thousand times before?But to name a few...-Procreation
-Slipery slope: people can marry their dogs afterwards
-God's wrath on this nation
-Gay people are bad
-The bible condemns homosexuality
-etc...Quite frankly, people like us are tired of hearing the same arguments from the other side, none of which make any sense in a democratic institution like our legal system. By the way, these same arguments were also used against interracial marriage back in the good old days. Ok, let's hear it. Why shouldn't two men who have committed 15 years or more of their lives together not be able to go into a hospital and be treated the same as two married hetero individuals? In other words, why shouldn't person A (a gay male), who have lived 15 years or so with person B (another gay male), be able to have next of kin rights if anything happens to person B? It's not a tactic. There are many faces of racism, and I suppose telling people outright that you hate black people is one of its faces. But telling people that you don't hate black people but prefers to call every non-white person "mud" is also another face of racism. The least extreme face of racism is simply not wanting anything to do with the another race, you know segregation, but it's still racism.Just because you don't use the word "hate" when describing how you feel doesn't mean you're not a racist. Same thing with homophobia. So, in other words all you're saying is you prefer not to see gay people expressing their love or holding hands with another gay person in public? Would you feel better if we ban holding hands and stuff in public all together? No argument here. Sorry, dude, but I tried all that sh*t in college. Never been to jail. Never been forced to have sex or raped... I think. Fine by me.

I am still waiting for fire and brimstone to rain down on Earth after gay marriage was legalized in certain parts of the States. Heck, I'm still waiting for the earth to open up where Satan will come up to rule the Earth after interracial marriage became widely accepted by society.Yup, still waiting...Edited by gasby, : grammar fixation...

Unlike you, I actually exercise my right to not watch such crap. I've reduced myself to watching the Simpsons, Nova, the news (fox, cnn, abc, etc.), superheros movies like x-men and spiderman, zombie movies, and a few action movies that actually have a good theme to them. I didn't even like Pearl Harbor, which had the potential to be a good movie if most of the film wasn't about a freakin' love triangle complex.I heard about jackass a while back and saw 10 minutes of it before I decided not to waste anymore time with such crap.You see, even though I really hate all the violent and BS crap on the media these days, I also realize that there are people who actually like to watch this crap. I honestly don't understand why people nowadays like to watch those reality bullshit, especially when the show is basically about people being mean to each other. But the brutal truth is there are honest to god people who watch this crap and buy into these unrealistic body images. As much as I hate it, just like how your intolerance is bothering the hell out of me, I also have to see that these people have every right to fry their brains with all this bullshit on tv.I don't even know why I have sattelite even though I don't watch most of the stuff on there. I think I'll cancel it soon.But beside the tv, you also have another option, which I have been using for the last 6 years or so. The radio seems to work fine for me. In fact, I listen to npr about half my day everyday. I have it on right now.What's the moral of the story, riverrat? If you don't like the movie jackass, don't watch it. If you don't like all the bullcrap on tv, watch something else or don't watch at all. If you don't like what's on the radio, turn it off. If you don't like to see boys kissing, don't look. If you don't want to recognize gay marriage, then don't. Heck, if you think masturbation is work of the devil, then don't masturbate. But for the sake of your creator, don't impose your opinion on other people.The New York times, or whatever that was, was wrong. It says right in the Declaration of Independence that all persons are entitled to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Life means not be persecuted by your kind. Liberty means not be blocked of certain rights because people like you don't like to see two boys kissing. Pursuit of happiness means be able to live a life style that makes one happy as long as it doesn't hurt you or get in your face.It's simple, riverrat. If you don't like it then you don't have to watch it or recognize it. You do realize that the states with the most divorces are republican states, right? As a matter of fact, the top 7 or so states that have the highest divorce rates are also the states in the union that have banned gay marriage. How come nobody protested or demanded a law to ban straight marriage after Brit Spears got married for fun for 55 hours? How come nobody is demanding that Rush Limbaugh be tarred and feathered? Between him and his wife, they have 6 marriages and divorces, and last I heard they are going through a divorce... but that could be old news.It's not the hypocrisy I'm trying to point out. I think I've made it clear that pointing out hypocrisy isn't my way. I pointed out the republican states having the highest divorce rates and the most famous anti-gay marriage speakers have many marriages and divorces to show that things aren't black and white like you seem to think. Having christian "morals and values" doesn't necessarily mean you're going to have less divorce rates. This is a response to

quote:

---

We should allow gay marriage because it's none of your business if gay people want to make a secular legal contract with each other.

---

Riverrat, I think you responded there in a little bit of anger. After having read some of your previous posts, which still tell me that you are a homophobe that is afraid of being a called a homophobe and also someone that have concluded unwillingly that what you said there in reference to what was quoted doesn't make any sense. Therefore, I'm going to let this slide for now. Actually, my dog and I have been discussing this quite a bit. She thinks that with much practice she will be able to sign her name on a contract 6 months from now. My wife has also expressed that she has no problem with me having another "woman" in my life. Therefore, I am thinking of marrying my dog 6 months from now. Would you like to attend the reception?Edited by gasby, : No reason given.

Didn't know you had one.

I just had a flashback.When I was a good little jesus freak, I was told about the story of how Moses lead the Israelites out of Egypt and to the promise land. I didn't know it back then, but the story always skipped from the part about the 10 commandments to the establishment of the Kingdom of Israel.When I became older, I was attending a bible school and we watched a movie about the moses story. I remember being so surprised when the movie went on to tell the story of how the Israelites conquered the region and what happened to the people of cities like Jerico.Don't you just love it when parents selectively leave out the parts in the bible that condones rape, genocide, murder, incest, etc.?If you're going to raise your kids as literalists, at least raise them as literalists.