NY activist judges allow same sex marriage

[MissileMan]

Whew! No disrespect intended, MM, but that study works a little hard for the rhyme, doesn't it? That is truly a painful read (I invite you to check out my spoof post - #287). But, even if we accept, in whole or part, it's premise, we are then looking at the assertion that the wild disparity in homosexual child molestations - relative to the homosexual population - can be explained this way: The homosexual child molester is many times more prolific than his heterosexual counterpart. He is, if you will, a super-predator.

Doesn't that STILL suggest something profoundly disturbing about homosexuality?

I think what Freund was trying to say was that there is a higher number of true homosexual pedophiles as opposed to true heterosexual pedophiles, a true pedophile being someone who is exclusively sexual with children. I think the study is alleging that whatever mechanism causes an adult to want to have sex with a child, it more often creates men who want boys.

 

[musicman]

I think what Freund was trying to say was that there is a higher number of true homosexual pedophiles as opposed to true heterosexual pedophiles, a true pedophile being someone who is exclusively sexual with children. I think the study is alleging that whatever mechanism causes an adult to want to have sex with a child, it more often creates men who want boys.

I can't help it , MM. It just seems to me that if some of these studies bend any further backwards trying to absolve homosexuality, something's going to snap.

 

[musicman]

I think the study is alleging that whatever mechanism causes an adult to want to have sex with a child, it more often creates men who want boys.

Or - to put it more bluntly - homosexual pedophiles.

 

[MissileMan]

Or - to put it more bluntly - homosexual pedophiles.

Yes, homosexual pedophiles. I'm just not convinced that you can use that fact as an indictment against the majority of homosexuals who have no interest in having sex with children.

 

[Yurt]

Ok, here is where people may disagree, this is good, dialogue is strength, to a point...

What is the percentage of gay men who sleep with young boys compared to the total gay population?

Compare that to the total "hetrosexual" population.

Then compare that with the homosexual population as compared to the hetrosexual population...

Then, ween out the "bisexual" population, from the hetrosexual group (in a pure test, this would be a cross over, thus not pure hetrosexual)...

Then compare that with the percentage of men who rape/molest little boys who are deemed "hetrosexual" under the alleged standard understanding of the rule. Then apply, my rule, that "bisexual" is really a homosexual who enjoys intercourse with women. It is interesting that "bisexual" has come to mean, he who "sometimes" lays with a man as with a woman, is really a hetrosexual, who plays "the low down."

Religion aside, as some people here are not "jewish" or any biblical "religion." Putting your member in an orafice that excretes waste is unclean. Not only that, but the tissue around that orafice highly sensative. The tissue is easily broken, hence, the EASY wide spead diseases that come from this kind of penetration.

So, regardless of religion, this is unclean. OCA, are you there?.......

 

[musicman]

Yes, homosexual pedophiles. I'm just not convinced that you can use that fact as an indictment against the majority of homosexuals who have no interest in having sex with children.

Nor do I seek to. Rather, I think that this fact presents a glaring indictment of homosexuality itself. This behavior - consistently, unfailingly, and demonstrably - produces a threat to society that society dares not ignore. You and I can sit at our keyboards and break the statistics into a million pieces - then reassemble them painstakingly - in an effort to understand the whys and wherefores. Society doesn't have that luxury. It has neither the time nor the duty to slice definitions that thin. It's first priority is to defend itself. And society is being pressured to legitimize homosexuality - that's the plain truth of it. Should it?

 

[Yurt]

Musicman,

Love the avi, everytime I see it, laugh even more. Priceless.

Nor do I seek to. Rather, I think that this fact presents a glaring indictment of homosexuality itself. This behavior - consistently, unfailingly, and demonstrably - produces a threat to society that society dares not ignore. You and I can sit at our keyboards and break the statistics into a million pieces - then reassemble them painstakingly - in an effort to understand the whys and wherefores. Society doesn't have that luxury. It has neither the time nor the duty to slice definitions that thin. It's first priority is to defend itself. And society is being pressured to legitimize homosexuality - that's the plain truth of it. Should it?

Hmmm,

I first thought this was rubbish. Look again. What is he really saying? At first I wanted to break this down into some "logical" discourse. Was up,
Wat it is, as my brother says, however, I this post has deep points, and serious issues that America should recognize.

Thanks.

 

[MissileMan]

Nor do I seek to. Rather, I think that this fact presents a glaring indictment of homosexuality itself. This behavior - consistently, unfailingly, and demonstrably - produces a threat to society that society dares not ignore. You and I can sit at our keyboards and break the statistics into a million pieces - then reassemble them painstakingly - in an effort to understand the whys and wherefores. Society doesn't have that luxury. It has neither the time nor the duty to slice definitions that thin. It's first priority is to defend itself. And society is being pressured to legitimize homosexuality - that's the plain truth of it. Should it?

IMHO, yes. What can be gained by maintaining the status quo?

 

[sitarro]

IMHO, yes. What can be gained by maintaining the status quo?

What is to be gained by legitamizing it? The stigma of a teenager getting pregnant was taken away so we could all feel so much more progressive , what was the result . As it is "experimenting " for teenage girls has now become a faddish thing . I'm sure that it is doing wonders for the psyche of young girls everywhere .
Go ahead open up pandora's box even further . . . Does the story of Sodom and Gomorrah ring a bell?

 

[musicman]

IMHO, yes. What can be gained by maintaining the status quo?

Well, there'll be no maintaining the status quo, whatever happens. The status of the legitimacy of homosexuality has been in flux for decades, beginning with dramatic changes in some of America's fundamental institutions - academia, the medical community, art, entertainment, the political arena, et. al. . In a historical context, homosexuality was routinely perceived as a perversion - a manifestation of mental illness - a mere heartbeat ago. Does the fact that we can now observe irrefutable statistics showing that homsexuality is dangerous to society - yet shrug our shoulders and say, "Oh well, that's the way the cookie crumbles" - signify progress?

 

[MissileMan]

Well, there'll be no maintaining the status quo, whatever happens. The status of the legitimacy of homosexuality has been in flux for decades, beginning with dramatic changes in some of America's fundamental institutions - academia, the medical community, art, entertainment, the political arena, et. al. . In a historical context, homosexuality was routinely perceived as a perversion - a manifestation of mental illness - a mere heartbeat ago. Does the fact that we can now observe irrefutable statistics showing that homsexuality is dangerous to society - yet shrug our shoulders and say, "Oh well, that's the way the cookie crumbles" - signify progress?

The fact remains that approximately 5% of the population will continue to be homosexual. What alternatives can you offer? Make homosexuality illegal and hunt down, prosecute, and execute the offenders? Or perhaps round them all up and ship them off to a remote internment camp? I'd like to hear some reasonable solutions to "problem".

 

[musicman]

The fact remains that approximately 5% of the population will continue to be homosexual. What alternatives can you offer? Make homosexuality illegal and hunt down, prosecute, and execute the offenders? Or perhaps round them all up and ship them off to a remote internment camp? I'd like to hear some reasonable solutions to "problem".

We could start by facing the truth. Every one of the left's attempts to re-engineer society in the image of it's utopian pipe-dream has been an unmitigated disaster.

Perhaps the biggest lie they ever sold us was the sexual revolution. All the restraints that were so mercilessly ridiculed by the left as "archaic' and "unenlightened have been proven - by time and bitter experience - to be good, decent, and SANE things. Simply put, our "enlightened betters" have demonstrated time and time again that they're full of it.

And now, the left wants us to legitimize homosexuality - to say that it is merely a lifestyle like any other. It's not. The left is wrong, AGAIN. I magine that! I'm not mad at homosexuals, Missle Man. I don't want to round anybody up, or put them in camps. I AM mad at agenda-driven liars, and twisters of words, and profaners of science. I just want the madness to stop. I want America to finally draw a line in the sand and say to the left, "Enough! Shut up already. Stop lying to us. You've given us the breakdown of the family, epidemic out-of-wedlock births, rampant child molestation, thirty million dead babies, herpes, AIDS, SUPER-AIDS, misery, destruction, and death. Shut up now. Go away. Let us try to rebuild our lives in peace."

I want America to consign the left - and it's idiotic designs - to the ash-heap of history. Beyond that, I don't have any answers, MM. The genie is already out of the bottle. Maybe there ARE no answers.

 

[OCA]

Since there are people on this board who have absolutely no ability to comprehend what they read from me I will just post facts on here and watch the libs go crazy.

http://www.leaderu.com/marco/special/spc11b.html

HOMOSEXUALITY HOMOSEXUALITY
The Staggering Truth: Monogamy Not Even a Consideration
�� The Advocate, a leading periodical in the gay community, released the results of a survey taken in August 1994, showing that 57% of
gay men have had sex with more than thirty partners. This survey also revealed that 48% of homosexuals had participated
in a “three-way” during the previous 5-year period. (Source: “The Advocate Sex Poll,” The Advocate, August 1994.)
�� The June 2003 issue of the American Journal of Public Health shared a survey of sexually active homosexual men. The results
revealed that the study’s participants averaged seven sex partners in just the previous six months, while 25% of respondents
claimed to have had sex with 18 or more partners during the previous six months. (Source: “Sexual Suicide: The
Rebellion of Homosexuality Causes Untold Suffering,” Agape Press, September 29, 2003.)
�� One study, released at the 2003 National HIV Prevention Conference in July, found that 39% of “gay” and bisexual men
admitted that they had met partners over the Internet and engaged in unprotected sex, according to USA Today.
(Source:“Sexual Suicide: The Rebellion of Homosexuality Causes Untold Suffering,” Agape Press, September 29, 2003.)
�� A survey conducted by Genre, a periodical popular in homosexual circles, found that 24% of respondents claimed to have had
more than 100 sexual partners during their lifetimes. (Source: “Survey Finds 40 Percent of Gay Men Have Had More Than Forty
Sexual Partners,” Lambda Report, January 1998.)
In January 2005, twenty-two homosexual
organizations met in Washington, D.C., to
determine a plan of attack for their future. They
agreed upon an eight-point proclamation:
�� “We must fight for equal employment
opportunity, benefits and protection;
�� “We must fight against anti-LGBT violence
and for the inclusion of sexual orientation
and gender identity in federal hate crimes
laws;
�� “We must fight — in both the private and public
sectors — for better access to health care and
insurance, including age-appropriate, LGBTinclusive
comprehensive sexuality education;
�� “We must insist on safe schools, free from
bullying, harassment, and discrimination;
�� “We must fight for family laws that give our
children strong legal ties to their parents;
�� “We must work to overturn the military’s
discriminatory anti-LGBT ban;
�� “We must continue to expose the radical
right’s efforts to advance a culture of prejudice
and intolerance, and we must fight
their attempts to enshrine anti-gay bigotry in
our state and federal laws and constitutions;
�� “And we must continue our vigorous fight for
the freedom to marry and the equal protections,
rights and responsibilities that safeguard
our families, strengthen our commitments, and
continue to transform understanding of our lives.”
In 1972, the National Coalition of Gay
Organizations met in Chicago to develop
an initial gay-rights platform, which
included:
�� “Federal encouragement and support
for sex education courses, prepared
and taught by qualified gay women and
men … presenting homosexuality as a
viable alternative to heterosexuality;
�� “Repeal of all state laws prohibiting
private sexual acts involving
consenting adults;
�� “Repeal of all state laws prohibiting
solicitation for private sexual liaisons;
and laws prohibiting prostitution, both
male and female;
�� “Enactment of legislation so that
child custody… shall not be denied
because of sexual orientation;
�� “Repeal of all laws prohibiting transvestitism
and cross-dressing;
�� “Repeal of all laws governing the
age of sexual consent (legalize
pedophilia);
�� “Repeal of all legislative provisions
that restrict the sex or number of persons
entering into a marriage unit, and
the extension of legal benefit… regardless
of sex or numbers.”
An Agenda Revealed:
Homosexuality, Mental Illness,
and the American Psychiatric
Association
In 1973, the APA removed homosexuality from
its diagnostic category of mental illnesses. This
action came not as a result of new research and
findings, but was ultimately brought about by a
militant protest staged by activists at the APA’s
annual convention. In other words, intimidation
was a key motivation. In fact, only 16% of
the entire APA membership actually voted in
favor of the radical change.
— Dr. James Mallory, Head of Psychiatric unit – Rapha
Center, Atlanta, Ga., Homosexuality; Ronald Bayer,
Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of
Diagnosis (NY: Basic Books, 1981), 101-54; William
Dannemeyer, Shadow in the Land (San Francisco:
Ignatius Press, 1989), pp. 24-39.
Employing Deception
In the early stages of any campaign to reach
straight America, the masses should not be
shocked and repelled by premature exposure to
homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of
sex should be downplayed and gay rights should
be reduced to an abstract social question as much
as possible. First let the camel get his nose inside
the tent—only later his unsightly derriere!
– Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill, “The Overhauling of
Straight America,” Guide Magazine, 1987.
F a s t F a c t s
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not
be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor
homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards,
nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And
such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you
were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.”
– 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, NKJV
FASTFACTS is published by the CENTER FOR RECLAIMING AMERICA - an outreach of Coral Ridge Ministries -- to inform citizens and offer vital resources so you can
reclaim your community for Christ. Founder: Dr. D. James Kennedy, Executive Director: Dr. Gary Cass; (877) SALT USA (725-8872); [email protected];
www.reclaimamerica.org. The ministry is supported by the contributions of concerned citizens like you. If you would like to support the CENTER, you can send your gift to:
CENTER FOR RECLAIMING AMERICA, P.O. Box 632, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33302 1/05 LOMR
Homosexuality Is Not a Civil Right!
The assertion that homosexuals are a minority group under current
civil rights law is false. Minority status has been determined by the
U.S. Supreme Court based on three criteria:
1. Economic Deprivation— No! Those engaged in the homosexual
lifestyle are among the most advantaged people in the U.S. On
average, they have a higher per capita income than heterosexuals
and higher household incomes.
— Wall Street Journal, February 10, 1989,
and New York Times, August 22, 1990.
2. Political Powerlessness— No! Homosexuals demonstrate
great influential political power far beyond their actual numbers.
The Human Rights Campaign Fund has annually donated millions
of dollars to candidates, more than most other noncorporate
PACs (The Economist, April 24, 1993). Media news and entertainment
coverage is overwhelmingly favorable.
3. Immutable Characteristics— No! Minority groups share
unchangeable, benign, non-behavioral traits such as race, ethnicity,
disability, or national origin. Homosexuals are the only group to
claim minority status based on behavior!
The Target: Your Children
The homosexual agenda is infiltrating schools — once thought to be
places free of such perversity. The Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education
Network (GLSEN) hosts numerous conferences for school teachers
and students around the nation each year and has launched thousands
of Gay/Straight Alliances in schools across America. The
organization uses workshops to advance its radical agenda, some of
which have been entitled:
�� “Ask the Transsexuals”
�� “Early Childhood Educators: How to Decide Whether to Come
Out or Not”
�� “Lesbian Avengers: How to Promote Queer Friendly Activism in
Your Schools and in Your Lives”
�� “Diesel Dykes and Lipstick Lesbians: Defining and Identifying
Butch/Femme Identity”
�� “The Religious Wrong: Dealing Effectively with Opposition in
Your Community”
�� “Starting a Gay/Straight Alliance in Your School”
– Source: “Public Employees Teach Kids ‘Gay’ Sex,”
World Net Daily, May 9, 2000.
Other recent examples of the homosexual agenda in schools include:
The Ashland-Boyd County School District in Kentucky has made
anti-harassment workshops mandatory for all students and teachers
as part of an agreement struck with the ACLU, which also allowed
Gay/Straight Alliance student groups to meet in school buildings.
A transgender advocacy group called Transgender Day of
Remembrance has made inroads into America’s public school system
to “educate” children about violence against transgender people.
– Source: CENTER FOR RECLAIMING AMERICA
A Deadly Lifestyle Choice
The number of new AIDS and HIV infections has risen among
homosexual and bisexual men in the United States. In a report
issued in concert with World AIDS Day, the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) announced that new HIV and
AIDS diagnoses in 32 states rose 11 percent between 2000
and 2003 among homosexual and bisexual males.
At the same time, rates of new infection remained the same among
other population cohorts. Overall, the infection rate rose to 19.7
cases per 100,000 people, up from 19.5 in 2000.
Public health experts in the U.S. have been warning of a potential
resurgence in the AIDS epidemic, which was eased by the development
of drugs in the early 1990s. According to the CDC report,
the disease is showing signs of a comeback, especially
among homosexual males.
– Source: “HIV, AIDS Cases Rise Among U.S. Gay, Bisexual Men,”
Reuters News, December 1, 2004.
According to the Journal of Clinical Pathology, homosexuals are 3.7
times more likely to be infected with gonorrhea than are heterosexuals.
According to their findings, 15.2% of homosexuals suffer
from pharyngeal (throat) gonorrhea.
– Source: “Value of Screening for Oropharyngeal Chlamydia Trachomatis
Infection,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, 1995, p. 658.
According to Dr. Andrew Grulich at the National Institutes of Health,
90 percent of HIV positive gay men are infected with the Human
Papillomavirus (HPV or genital warts), and 65% of HIV negative gay
men are infected with HPV, an incurable sexually transmitted disease.
– Source: “Rising Rates of Anal Cancer for Gay Men,”
Cancer News, August 17, 2000.
There is Hope for Change
How do we know? Research increasingly says so!
“My literature review contradicts the policies of major mental
health organizations because it suggests that sexual orientation,
once thought to be an unchanging sexual trait, is actually quite
flexible for many people, changing as a result of therapy for some,
ministry for others and spontaneously for still others.”
– Source: Dr. Warren Throckmorton, “Initial Empirical and Clinical Findings
Concerning the Change Process for Ex-Gays,” Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, June 2002.
“. . . all the existing evidence suggests strongly that homosexuality
is quite changeable.”
— Source: Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, former Fellow of Psychiatry & Child
Psychiatry at Yale University, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth, 1996.

www.reclaimamerica.org/PAGES/fastfacts/homosexuality.pdf

 

[OCA]

No, actually I do not know what you are thinking. But, it does sound like a threat. Is this how you treat members on this board? What the hell did I do to you that deserved this veiled ambiguous threat?

What I was thinking was that you can go bugger yourself, no threat of bodily harm just bugger yourself. Your jump to conclusion was worth of Carl Lewis though.

And what is the "elevated" stuff you are talking about? So on this board, he/she who has more posts is better than someone like me? I give respect where respect is due, but your comment clearly infers that my small post number accompanied by my rebuke of your hatred, not you personally, but your hatred, somehow "elevated" me, because posters like me can't say anything to a poster of your magnitude? Tell me I read into that wrong.

Again a jump to conclusion, I was implying that hey you were made a mod and I misssed the announcement. Nothing about post counts or anything although I ascribe to the pay your dues theory around here.






From a post not so long ago:



You expressly proclaim to being the best. Hence I gave you honors. Also, how can you say that this is a "myth," when you yourself feed it and admit to it? I don't understand.

So, according to your rules, I can flame you because you have flamed me first. Yeah, you said I was boorish. I only asked you to please turn down your hate talk, that is not flaming. If it is, let me see the rule book.

Oh boorish, that is a flame to you? Here is an example of a flame from me and please don't take this personally it is only an example:

Yurt you are not worthy to lick the ballsweat from my jockstrap, why don't you climb back into the barcolounger you have down there in the cesspool you call home and suck up all that pc nonsense you love from the boobtube.(This isn't even my best work as many here will readily tell you, I perform best on the fly). My point is you and I can go at it flaming or in intellectual debate, the choice is yours. My wording and my thoughts on the HLCP menace will not change regardless, I will not chill out, I paid my dues here.



Where did I say this? I asked you a question in direct regards to this which you did not answer, rather, you assumed my stance. How utterly unexciting.......




I only hope that someday you have a more open outlook.

Never, this is the most important social issue of our time, I will not back down.




One question before I reply to this. Are you Christian? Ie, do you believe in the Holy Bible?

Yes I am Christian, I was baptized. Am I currently practicing or hardcore as you would put it, absolutely not. Doesn't mean I don't know what is wrong and what is right, wrong and right really aren't even solely religious themes. An atheist can know the difference between wrong and right, its based more on common sense.



I did not make myself clear, I meant, that because of sin, we now have genetic defects which over time have only increased. Whether sin is in and of itself a "genetic defect" I don't know. I merely meant, that ALL of us have sinned.

Yes all of us have sinned, but a genetic defect? That is absolute hooey.

 

[OCA]

Hell people I screwed that up, read in between yurt's quotes to find my comments in the previous post.

 

[mattskramer]

Hell people I screwed that up, read in between yurt's quotes to find my comments in the previous post.

WOW! You admit to making a mistake. anyway -

I'll begin with this introduction that will come into play later: Things that receive popular vote are not always the best things for America. Bill Clinton clearly won the presidential election twice - even if you were to only consider the popular votes. If we had presidential elections determined only by pure popular vote (no electoral college, etc) Al Gore would have won the 2000 election. Such being the case, I doubt that conservatives always support popular vote.

Anyway, I reexamined my socio-political philosophy. I understand that there are some things so dangerous and/or repulsive to individuals (myself included) that there should be laws to prohibit some activities (even if the activities don't directly affect anyone but those involved).

Issues are relative.

Take the 2nd Amendment as an example: "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms..." Should citizens be allowed to own simple rifles? - Yes. Okay - how about "6-shooters"? - Perhaps. Semi-automatic rifles? - hmmm - unregistered? Let's allow anyone to own and conceal fully-automatic pistols with 90-clip magazines (assuming such things exist). Consider grenades, bazookas, live land-mines. Where do we draw the line?

Take drugs - If adults can smoke cigarettes - Yuck - why not marijuana, peyote, or cocaine? Let them sniff glue and paint thinner.

As OCA asked me, who are you to set limits for others? I thinks that he thinks that popular vote should decide such issues (via referendum). Yet, I think that there are some popular opinions/decisions to which he disagrees. Public opinion is not always right. While I doubt that any political system is perfect, I prefer a Republic. I simply wish that the public were a little bit...just a little bit...more of a libertarian mind-set.

 

[mattskramer]

While quickly scanning through the comments I found 2 message to which I'll respond.

"so we give them special rights that i cant get living with my fiance'?"

What "special right" do they want that you can't get living with your fiance - sodomy, marriage, - I don't know your fiance. Please be specific.

"You're talking about conferring a right where no right now exists."

A few years ago, no rights existed allowing women to vote. At one time Blacks didn't have rights. Did you know that a few years ago, in some places in America people of one religion didn't have the right to get married to people of different religions. Understanding grows and "rights" are granted or adjusted as a result.

 

[OCA]

A few years ago, no rights existed allowing women to vote. At one time Blacks didn't have rights.

By birth Matts, by birth, these two groups cannot change. HLCP has a choice. Your comparing apples to porterhouse steaks.

 

[sitarro]

A few years ago, no rights existed allowing women to vote. At one time Blacks didn't have rights. Did you know that a few years ago, in some places in America people of one religion didn't have the right to get married to people of different religions. Understanding grows and "rights" are granted or adjusted as a result.

Gee matts ,
Thanks for the history lesson , I hadn't heard that bit about women and black people not being allowed to vote . . . this morning ! That is such a tired argument , it's a weak as saying that monkeys look like they are performing homo acts so it must be right for humans to do the same . Well monkeys also shit in their hands and eat insects , so what .
As for the vote , I would like to see more restrictions on it . If a white male can't tell me who the current President and Vice President is , that idiot has no right to vote . If a person can't read the ballot , it would be logical to assume that this person has not read any of the views of the representative that they are voting for , they are too ignorant or apathetic to vote . If a person doesn't have a job , isn't paying taxes or doesn't own property in this country . . . why allow them to vote ? The vote should be more valuable than to give it to anyone breathing , or in the Democrat's case . . . not-breathing .It is a mockery to the memories of all of the brave that fought to secure a right to vote to give it to someone that hasn't bothered to register to do so (again , the constituancy of the Democrats). I also don't believe that a vote should be so cheap that it can be bought with a carton of cigarettes or a fried chicken dinner(more of the work of the Democrats).
Your arguments will be dusted off and used again when the clowns from NAMBLA decide it is time for them to have the right to marry the little kids that they are screwing , will you be arguing in favor of them? Sometimes society has to draw the line for the good of all .
As OCA has pointed out , most of the crap that the sixties brought us has not been good for society . We now have more unwed mothers , over 50% divorce rate , rampant use of serious drugs , kids being raised in day care , a huge increase and severity of STDs , and of course we have AIDS . And on top of that , we have to listen to asswipes like snoop dog and p diddy and pretend that they have talent . I say it is well past the time to DRAW THE LINE !

 

[OCA]

Holy hell Sitarro! Get er done buddy! You must be like me and have cabin fever dreaming of hitting the links. Hey Sitarro, I want to be Mickelson's cabin boy, 1.9 million made in the span of 7 days, not bad.

For those who don't know Sitarro and I like golf....alot.