What are your attitudes about Homosexuals?

[GISMYS]

YES!!! SATAN IS A LIAR AND THE FATHER OF LIARS!!!and you?? I THINK I WILL BELIEVE GOD AND GOD'S WORD AND IGNORE YOUR IGNORANCE!! ONLY A TOTAL FOOL WOULD TAKE MAN'S WORD OVER GOD'S WORD!!!and you??

Satan is a creation of god, being the sadist he is, God decided to put evil in the world.

That something aint it? You dont want people to sin but you put temptation and a whole slew of rules they shouldnt break. Then you make it mans nature to sin and further frustrate yourself. Then you get mad at man for sinning and put him where the guy you invented to symbolize sin lives as punishment. Kind of messes with your head doesnt it?

GOD DID NOT CREATE ROBOTS,YOU HAVE CHOICE OF GOOD OR EVIL,TRUTH OR LIES,TO LIVE IN LIGHT OR DARKNESS BUT YOU CANNOT BLAME GOD WHEN YOU CHOOSE POORLY!!!Think!!

 

[Nosmo King]

Fair enough, though we disagree on most points, one in particular would be that of acceptance of it. I can tolerate many things I don't like...that doesn't mean I have to accept them nor should I be compelled by government to pretend I do. After doing tons of research on this topic, I am all but fully convinced my stance on the issue is the right one to have. I really wish this could be handled without all the hyperbole, but that is where we are at as a society. I know for a fact there are stable gays that are good people, it's the radical, force acceptance wing of the movement I despise.

As a libertarian, I see both government & societal coeercion as one of the most evil things in this world. Nothing justifies it. If you look at the racial climate today, we can say we have made some very great strides as a society , but we are also starting to fall back a bit, self-segregation amongst the races is becoming more prevelant. Is that a good thing or bad thing? My opinion? It has both good & bad about it.

most who disagree with homosexuality being normalized in society & held up like it's something grand & beautiful believe it is a combination of enviromental & social causes, the only part that is a choice is when you act upon your urges. That's a bit different than the simplistic charge you're leveling at those who disagree with you.

There are exceptions, Slyhunter is not pro-gay, yet he believes it is caused by genetics. I am positive there is NO gay gene or genes, and I would think that if there is a genetic cause that may make it more likely to be a homosexual, it probably has nothing to do with predisposing someone to homosexuality, but it guarantees you will be a sexual deviant, depending on the enviromental & social situation they've grown up in will determine if they're a homosexual, pedophile, coprophiliac, necrophiliac, etc...

I too am skeptical about a genetic link to sexual orientation. But I do not agree that homosexuality can be conflated with pedophilia or necrophilia or coprophilia. I believe that, while those other conditions cause harm due to the lack of consent, homosexuality is a state of human sexuality that is the result of a natural ingrained attitude, if you will. Homosexuals are, for the most part, as stable, sober and responsible as any heterosexual. They are not inclined, as you and I, to be attracted to the opposite sex, but their sexual preferences do not pose a threat to society and should be tolerated, if not accepted as responsible citizens.

I don't think that there is any move afoot by the state to 'force acceptance'. The state could not force racists to accept African Americans as anything more than citizens with equal standing. As such, the racists were 'forced' to do business with and provide equal justice to African Americans. But no one was ever compelled to accept African Americans as part of the family.

Today the LGBT community desires tolerance, which means equality, under law. Discrimination in public accommodations, equality under law and equal access to the protections and privileges afforded by the marriage contract are in the forefront. Unless there is a compelling case for discrimination, there should be no discrimination.

If you own a photography studio or a catering firm or a bakery that normally does business with couples planning weddings, your services cannot be withheld to homosexual couples simply because you find their lifestyle 'icky'. If your business license says you are open to the public, you should be open to the public.

 

[GISMYS]

FACE TRUTH!! BE WISE!!! little man cannot ever win by trying to argue and fight against ALMIGHTY GOD and GOD'S INSPIRED(GOD BREATHED) WORD. YOU CURSE YOURSELF IF YOU TRY!!!=======GOD'S WORD IS THE LAST WORD,THE LIVING,ETERNAL,INSPIRED (GOD BREATHED) WORD OF GOD!!!!======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, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 CORINTHIANS 6:9-10

 

[I.P.Freely]

I concur, I mean what use is a brain to you.

Hipster the anarcho capitalist communist social democrat green party member trying to tell me to grow a brain? Priceless Hilarity!

Oh yes he does. I already stated my position and qualified it.
And I ignore your tripe about gay genes because it's a verifiable fact that none have been proven to exist, there is only speculation.

These "scientists" always report their findings before they are peer reviewed and or recreated by another group of scientists, and the fact is none of them have been recreated, so take your junk science and shove it up your ass.

After you evolve a brain, which should be millions of years away.

 

[I.P.Freely]

Satan is a creation of god, being the sadist he is, God decided to put evil in the world.

That something aint it? You dont want people to sin but you put temptation and a whole slew of rules they shouldnt break. Then you make it mans nature to sin and further frustrate yourself. Then you get mad at man for sinning and put him where the guy you invented to symbolize sin lives as punishment. Kind of messes with your head doesnt it?

GOD DID NOT CREATE ROBOTS,YOU HAVE CHOICE OF GOOD OR EVIL,TRUTH OR LIES,TO LIVE IN LIGHT OR DARKNESS BUT YOU CANNOT BLAME GOD WHEN YOU CHOOSE POORLY!!!Think!!

you dont half give me the horn when you shout.

 

[Slyhunter]

Gays agree. No church or religious leader will ever be forced to perform a ceremony against the tenants of their faith...by anything other than public opinion.

If churches have that right why can't cake makers have that right too?

Read the 1st Amendment...sound out the words. A cake shop is not a religious institution and a baker not a religious leader.

Where in the 1st Amendment does it say they have to be?

 

[I.P.Freely]

FACE TRUTH!! BE WISE!!! little man cannot ever win by trying to argue and fight against ALMIGHTY GOD and GOD'S INSPIRED(GOD BREATHED) WORD. YOU CURSE YOURSELF IF YOU TRY!!!=======GOD'S WORD IS THE LAST WORD,THE LIVING,ETERNAL,INSPIRED (GOD BREATHED) WORD OF GOD!!!!======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, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 CORINTHIANS 6:9-10

**** that for a holiday destination, it all inclusive for me or nothing.

Ps you never mentioned tipping?

 

[LockeJaw]

I don't think any business should be forced to serve someone they wish not to, in almost every state businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone. I see no reason for government to use force & threats of destroying businesses owner's livlihoods because they don't want to cater to a specific group. Freedom of association, it used to be respected in this country. How far we have fallen.

Fair enough, though we disagree on most points, one in particular would be that of acceptance of it. I can tolerate many things I don't like...that doesn't mean I have to accept them nor should I be compelled by government to pretend I do. After doing tons of research on this topic, I am all but fully convinced my stance on the issue is the right one to have. I really wish this could be handled without all the hyperbole, but that is where we are at as a society. I know for a fact there are stable gays that are good people, it's the radical, force acceptance wing of the movement I despise.

As a libertarian, I see both government & societal coeercion as one of the most evil things in this world. Nothing justifies it. If you look at the racial climate today, we can say we have made some very great strides as a society , but we are also starting to fall back a bit, self-segregation amongst the races is becoming more prevelant. Is that a good thing or bad thing? My opinion? It has both good & bad about it.

I too am skeptical about a genetic link to sexual orientation. But I do not agree that homosexuality can be conflated with pedophilia or necrophilia or coprophilia. I believe that, while those other conditions cause harm due to the lack of consent, homosexuality is a state of human sexuality that is the result of a natural ingrained attitude, if you will. Homosexuals are, for the most part, as stable, sober and responsible as any heterosexual. They are not inclined, as you and I, to be attracted to the opposite sex, but their sexual preferences do not pose a threat to society and should be tolerated, if not accepted as responsible citizens.

I don't think that there is any move afoot by the state to 'force acceptance'. The state could not force racists to accept African Americans as anything more than citizens with equal standing. As such, the racists were 'forced' to do business with and provide equal justice to African Americans. But no one was ever compelled to accept African Americans as part of the family.

Today the LGBT community desires tolerance, which means equality, under law. Discrimination in public accommodations, equality under law and equal access to the protections and privileges afforded by the marriage contract are in the forefront. Unless there is a compelling case for discrimination, there should be no discrimination.

If you own a photography studio or a catering firm or a bakery that normally does business with couples planning weddings, your services cannot be withheld to homosexual couples simply because you find their lifestyle 'icky'. If your business license says you are open to the public, you should be open to the public.

 

[Nosmo King]

I don't think any business should be forced to serve someone they wish not to, in almost every state businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone. I see no reason for government to use force & threats of destroying businesses owner's livlihoods because they don't want to cater to a specific group. Freedom of association, it used to be respected in this country. How far we have fallen.

Fair enough, though we disagree on most points, one in particular would be that of acceptance of it. I can tolerate many things I don't like...that doesn't mean I have to accept them nor should I be compelled by government to pretend I do. After doing tons of research on this topic, I am all but fully convinced my stance on the issue is the right one to have. I really wish this could be handled without all the hyperbole, but that is where we are at as a society. I know for a fact there are stable gays that are good people, it's the radical, force acceptance wing of the movement I despise.

As a libertarian, I see both government & societal coeercion as one of the most evil things in this world. Nothing justifies it. If you look at the racial climate today, we can say we have made some very great strides as a society , but we are also starting to fall back a bit, self-segregation amongst the races is becoming more prevelant. Is that a good thing or bad thing? My opinion? It has both good & bad about it.

I don't think that there is any move afoot by the state to 'force acceptance'. The state could not force racists to accept African Americans as anything more than citizens with equal standing. As such, the racists were 'forced' to do business with and provide equal justice to African Americans. But no one was ever compelled to accept African Americans as part of the family.

Today the LGBT community desires tolerance, which means equality, under law. Discrimination in public accommodations, equality under law and equal access to the protections and privileges afforded by the marriage contract are in the forefront. Unless there is a compelling case for discrimination, there should be no discrimination.

If you own a photography studio or a catering firm or a bakery that normally does business with couples planning weddings, your services cannot be withheld to homosexual couples simply because you find their lifestyle 'icky'. If your business license says you are open to the public, you should be open to the public.

I don't understand. How is turning away business better than having business open to everyone? Why does Woolworth's serve Black customers? Why are Black travelers welcomed on Greyhound busses? How could it be beneficial to the business owner to discriminate when first, that immediate sale is lost and then, by word of mouth, potentially hundreds of sales are lost.

If a business is open to the public, that business should be literally open to the public.

 

[GISMYS]

I don't think any business should be forced to serve someone they wish not to, in almost every state businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone. I see no reason for government to use force & threats of destroying businesses owner's livlihoods because they don't want to cater to a specific group. Freedom of association, it used to be respected in this country. How far we have fallen.

I don't think that there is any move afoot by the state to 'force acceptance'. The state could not force racists to accept African Americans as anything more than citizens with equal standing. As such, the racists were 'forced' to do business with and provide equal justice to African Americans. But no one was ever compelled to accept African Americans as part of the family.

Today the LGBT community desires tolerance, which means equality, under law. Discrimination in public accommodations, equality under law and equal access to the protections and privileges afforded by the marriage contract are in the forefront. Unless there is a compelling case for discrimination, there should be no discrimination.

If you own a photography studio or a catering firm or a bakery that normally does business with couples planning weddings, your services cannot be withheld to homosexual couples simply because you find their lifestyle 'icky'. If your business license says you are open to the public, you should be open to the public.

I don't understand. How is turning away business better than having business open to everyone? Why does Woolworth's serve Black customers? Why are Black travelers welcomed on Greyhound busses? How could it be beneficial to the business owner to discriminate when first, that immediate sale is lost and then, by word of mouth, potentially hundreds of sales are lost.

If a business is open to the public, that business should be literally open to the public.

YOU MAY WANT TO DEAL WITH THEIVES,KILLERS,SEXUAL PERVERTS BUT SOME HAVE A LITTLE HIGHER STANDARDS AND WILL NOT SELL OUT FOR A $==and you??

 

[LockeJaw]

I don't think any business should be forced to serve someone they wish not to, in almost every state businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone. I see no reason for government to use force & threats of destroying businesses owner's livlihoods because they don't want to cater to a specific group. Freedom of association, it used to be respected in this country. How far we have fallen.

I don't think that there is any move afoot by the state to 'force acceptance'. The state could not force racists to accept African Americans as anything more than citizens with equal standing. As such, the racists were 'forced' to do business with and provide equal justice to African Americans. But no one was ever compelled to accept African Americans as part of the family.

Today the LGBT community desires tolerance, which means equality, under law. Discrimination in public accommodations, equality under law and equal access to the protections and privileges afforded by the marriage contract are in the forefront. Unless there is a compelling case for discrimination, there should be no discrimination.

If you own a photography studio or a catering firm or a bakery that normally does business with couples planning weddings, your services cannot be withheld to homosexual couples simply because you find their lifestyle 'icky'. If your business license says you are open to the public, you should be open to the public.

I don't understand. How is turning away business better than having business open to everyone? Why does Woolworth's serve Black customers? Why are Black travelers welcomed on Greyhound busses? How could it be beneficial to the business owner to discriminate when first, that immediate sale is lost and then, by word of mouth, potentially hundreds of sales are lost.

If a business is open to the public, that business should be literally open to the public.

I am not saying it would be a smart business move to turn away business, it's not. You know my stances on homosexuals, I still will do business with a homosexual client. Granted, there aren't many out here to do business with, but since Ive been open in AZ, Ive had 3 contracts with homosexual owned businesses. If they asked me to help them build something to further their agenda, that's something I would refuse, but most of the homosexual owned businesses have been things like Hair & Nail salons & Restaurants & don't outwardly promote anything homosexual.

The point is telling someone to serve someone in a way that goes against your beliefs & principles is DEAD WRONG. You do not have the right to force people to cater to you. That's just a step above slavery and is unacceptable.

Would believe the same thing if the scenario were that a couple of KKK members walked into my business, and Im black, and asked me to help them build a compound for them. I'm going to not only refuse to do the job, Id grab my shotgun From my desk drawer & tell them to get the hell out before I blow their heads off. But according to you, Im Guilty of the evil of discrimination for not serving ALL of the public, being that I am licensed to serve the public.

Just because I am licensed to serve the public does not mean I cannot decide who I will serve. Does that make it a little clearer to you?

By the way, I am enjoying this civil discussion. Props for keeping it civil!

 

[CorvusRexus]

YES!!! SATAN IS A LIAR AND THE FATHER OF LIARS!!!and you?? I THINK I WILL BELIEVE GOD AND GOD'S WORD AND IGNORE YOUR IGNORANCE!! ONLY A TOTAL FOOL WOULD TAKE MAN'S WORD OVER GOD'S WORD!!!and you??

Satan is a creation of god, being the sadist he is, God decided to put evil in the world.

YOUR IGNORANCE IS SHOWING AGAIN!!! WHY DO THAT?? SATAN BEFORE HE CHOSE TO LIVE IN SIN AND REJECT GOD WAS PERFECT, SATAN LIKE YOU CHOSE POORLY!! Beware the cost!!

But God created Satan knowing he would become evil, and also created him with the capacity to do evil. By that act, God thus created evil.

Or you could say that God didn't create evil, that evil is a part of this all-encompassing God and as such is as old as God himself. Interesting thought. By that, God did not create evil or good, and God is both.


Just curious, can anybody show me a Bible verse that says God created Satan?

 

[Silhouette]

I don't think any business should be forced to serve someone they wish not to, in almost every state businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone. I see no reason for government to use force & threats of destroying businesses owner's livlihoods because they don't want to cater to a specific group. Freedom of association, it used to be respected in this country. How far we have fallen.

I don't understand. How is turning away business better than having business open to everyone? Why does Woolworth's serve Black customers? Why are Black travelers welcomed on Greyhound busses? How could it be beneficial to the business owner to discriminate when first, that immediate sale is lost and then, by word of mouth, potentially hundreds of sales are lost.

If a business is open to the public, that business should be literally open to the public.

I am not saying it would be a smart business move to turn away business, it's not. You know my stances on homosexuals, I still will do business with a homosexual client. Granted, there aren't many out here to do business with, but since Ive been open in AZ, Ive had 3 contracts with homosexual owned businesses. If they asked me to help them build something to further their agenda, that's something I would refuse, but most of the homosexual owned businesses have been things like Hair & Nail salons & Restaurants & don't outwardly promote anything homosexual.

The point is telling someone to serve someone in a way that goes against your beliefs & principles is DEAD WRONG. You do not have the right to force people to cater to you. That's just a step above slavery and is unacceptable....

Yes and it's a violation of your 1st Amendment rights on two counts, 1. Right to adhere to your deeply held religious beliefs and 2. Right of free speech. The word "free" in #2 is key to understanding how it applies. If you feel our you in fact are forced to "speak out" in words or actions in support of something that violates your deeply held religious beliefs, someone has violated your constitutional rights as clear as a fresh-washed window on a bright Summer's day...

The act is akin to psychological bondage and is the antithesis of the American freedom principle.

 

[GISMYS]

Satan is a creation of god, being the sadist he is, God decided to put evil in the world.

YOUR IGNORANCE IS SHOWING AGAIN!!! WHY DO THAT?? SATAN BEFORE HE CHOSE TO LIVE IN SIN AND REJECT GOD WAS PERFECT, SATAN LIKE YOU CHOSE POORLY!! Beware the cost!!

But God created Satan knowing he would become evil, and also created him with the capacity to do evil. By that act, God thus created evil.

Or you could say that God didn't create evil, that evil is a part of this all-encompassing God and as such is as old as God himself. Interesting thought. By that, God did not create evil or good, and God is both.


Just curious, can anybody show me a Bible verse that says God created Satan?

SATAN'S CHOICE WAS EVIL. HE chose to live in sin and reject GOD!!! EVIL IS SATAN'S AND MAN'S CREATION, WE sinners create evil many times each day,we all need JESUS as our LORD AND SAVIOR!!

 

[Asclepias]

I don't think any business should be forced to serve someone they wish not to, in almost every state businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone. I see no reason for government to use force & threats of destroying businesses owner's livlihoods because they don't want to cater to a specific group. Freedom of association, it used to be respected in this country. How far we have fallen.

Fair enough, though we disagree on most points, one in particular would be that of acceptance of it. I can tolerate many things I don't like...that doesn't mean I have to accept them nor should I be compelled by government to pretend I do. After doing tons of research on this topic, I am all but fully convinced my stance on the issue is the right one to have. I really wish this could be handled without all the hyperbole, but that is where we are at as a society. I know for a fact there are stable gays that are good people, it's the radical, force acceptance wing of the movement I despise.

As a libertarian, I see both government & societal coeercion as one of the most evil things in this world. Nothing justifies it. If you look at the racial climate today, we can say we have made some very great strides as a society , but we are also starting to fall back a bit, self-segregation amongst the races is becoming more prevelant. Is that a good thing or bad thing? My opinion? It has both good & bad about it.

I don't think that there is any move afoot by the state to 'force acceptance'. The state could not force racists to accept African Americans as anything more than citizens with equal standing. As such, the racists were 'forced' to do business with and provide equal justice to African Americans. But no one was ever compelled to accept African Americans as part of the family.

Today the LGBT community desires tolerance, which means equality, under law. Discrimination in public accommodations, equality under law and equal access to the protections and privileges afforded by the marriage contract are in the forefront. Unless there is a compelling case for discrimination, there should be no discrimination.

If you own a photography studio or a catering firm or a bakery that normally does business with couples planning weddings, your services cannot be withheld to homosexual couples simply because you find their lifestyle 'icky'. If your business license says you are open to the public, you should be open to the public.

I agree but only for one reason. No way would an establishment that does not want my money be rewarded by getting my money. In this day and age you can open a competing business and call out the business that is discriminating to get their customers. However, the laws say if you are open to the public that means all of the public. If you dont want to serve the public then you lose the tax benefits and open a members only club.

 

[Silhouette]

But God created Satan knowing he would become evil, and also created him with the capacity to do evil. By that act, God thus created evil.

Or you could say that God didn't create evil, that evil is a part of this all-encompassing God and as such is as old as God himself. Interesting thought. By that, God did not create evil or good, and God is both.


Just curious, can anybody show me a Bible verse that says God created Satan?

It's possible that "God" isn't quite what people think. Or, perhaps, God can't fully beat back a separate entity such as the satanic vortex. In either case there seems to be quite a push and pull between the two intents as individual spirits are tested.

It could be the clever design of one Omnipotent mind. Or it could be that there is more to this universe than we know and to keep from blowing our minds, it's been rendered into a religion; a tale we can relate to in the most superficial sense. It serves a practical and didactic purpose while at the same time buffering us from that immensity of knowledge that would flatten our puny sanity here in an instant if it were to all be known at once.

In either event, what does this have to do with forcing people to speak out in favor of something that violates their constitutional freedom to adhere to their deeply held religious beliefs oh King Crow?

 

[CorvusRexus]

YOUR IGNORANCE IS SHOWING AGAIN!!! WHY DO THAT?? SATAN BEFORE HE CHOSE TO LIVE IN SIN AND REJECT GOD WAS PERFECT, SATAN LIKE YOU CHOSE POORLY!! Beware the cost!!

But God created Satan knowing he would become evil, and also created him with the capacity to do evil. By that act, God thus created evil.

Or you could say that God didn't create evil, that evil is a part of this all-encompassing God and as such is as old as God himself. Interesting thought. By that, God did not create evil or good, and God is both.


Just curious, can anybody show me a Bible verse that says God created Satan?

SATAN'S CHOICE WAS EVIL. HE chose to live in sin and reject GOD!!! EVIL IS SATAN'S AND MAN'S CREATION, WE sinners create evil many times each day,we all need JESUS as our LORD AND SAVIOR!!

I'm just being hypothetical here, but if God didn't create evil by creating Satan with the ability to do so, then evil existed before then. Which means God is either partially evil, or that evil existed before or with God. Or, if God did not make Satan, then evil is not with God, and is with Satan, but then Satan has to be as old as God. But that would mean some things are not God's creation.

 

[GISMYS]

SATAN(LUCIFER) ==14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire."

This is not an earthly king, as the word "cherub" is only used in references to angels.

15 "Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee."
EZEKIEL 28:12

 

[LockeJaw]

I cannot remember the name of the book or the author's name, but a long time ago my mother had this book that was written by this woman who claimed to have had a "vision" in a dream that detailed how Lucifer & his fallen angels ended up becoming evil & eventually starting the spiritual war in heaven & on earth. Great read, not that I completely buy it, but it does bring up a lot of points to ponder & I couldn't find any way that it contradicted the bible's version of the events, they were just much more detailed.

I'll find out what it was called & let you know because I think you'd enjoy it judging by this post.

Let me know if you're interested.

Satan is a creation of god, being the sadist he is, God decided to put evil in the world.

YOUR IGNORANCE IS SHOWING AGAIN!!! WHY DO THAT?? SATAN BEFORE HE CHOSE TO LIVE IN SIN AND REJECT GOD WAS PERFECT, SATAN LIKE YOU CHOSE POORLY!! Beware the cost!!

But God created Satan knowing he would become evil, and also created him with the capacity to do evil. By that act, God thus created evil.

Or you could say that God didn't create evil, that evil is a part of this all-encompassing God and as such is as old as God himself. Interesting thought. By that, God did not create evil or good, and God is both.


Just curious, can anybody show me a Bible verse that says God created Satan?

 

[Silhouette]

SATAN(LUCIFER) ==14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire."

This is not an earthly king, as the word "cherub" is only used in references to angels.

15 "Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee."
EZEKIEL 28:12

What's the weather like today out in the Castro District of San Francisco GISMYS? [Or maybe it's West Hollywood?] Wasn't it John Muir who said the coldest day in Winter he ever spent was a Summer in San Francisco?...