General Wants Gay Ban Lifted [Archive] - Page 3 - Debate Policy

OCA

01-30-2007, 03:35 PM

And evidence suggests that sexual preference is only one of many personality traits for which there is, at a minimum, a genetic predispostion.

My point was that exposure leads to knowledge. Knowledge leads to tolerance. Tolerance leads to judging people on their own merits.

Wouldn't know the color of your skin, hon. It's a non-issue. I like or dislike people on their own merits. :thumb:

Care to show this evidence which you are so quick to claim but slow to link to? Hint.....its hard to find because it doesn't exist.

OCA

01-30-2007, 03:40 PM

You don't get to determine other people's "morality".

Sure we do. We pass laws that say you can't murder, can't steal, can't pump up fake stocks then sell them. Our whole legal system is based upon moral judgements.

BTW the quote was kind of jacked up, Jillian said the thing about morality.

darin

01-30-2007, 03:43 PM

BTW the quote was kind of jacked up, Jillian said the thing about morality.

Fixed it for ya. :)

:D

The "Morality" argument is a strawman. She knows it.

Missileman

01-30-2007, 04:55 PM

A man isn't gay if he's not having sex with other men.

So a man isn't heterosexual if he's not having sex with women? This must be the rationale behind celibacy equalling a "cured" homosexual.

darin

01-30-2007, 04:59 PM

So a man isn't heterosexual if he's not having sex with women? This must be the rationale behind celibacy equalling a "cured" homosexual.

Yes. Homosexuality and Heterosexuality are defined by the participants. Correct.

Missileman

01-30-2007, 05:11 PM

Yes. Homosexuality and Heterosexuality are defined by the participants. Correct.

You don't still consider yourself a heterosexual even if not actively engaged in sex?

darin

01-30-2007, 05:14 PM

You don't still consider yourself a heterosexual even if not actively engaged in sex?

Right - sorta. I think people are ALL heterosexual (normal) until they start having sex with ppl of the same gender. It's not 'one or the other' - it's Normal (heterosexual) UNTIL somebody starts having sex w/ a member of their gender...then, they are homosexuals. If they stop, get help, and get normal again, they become 'heterosexual'.

That's pretty close to truth - right thar. :)

Missileman

01-30-2007, 05:25 PM

Right - sorta. I think people are ALL heterosexual (normal) until they start having sex with ppl of the same gender. It's not 'one or the other' - it's Normal (heterosexual) UNTIL somebody starts having sex w/ a member of their gender...then, they are homosexuals. If they stop, get help, and get normal again, they become 'heterosexual'.

That's pretty close to truth - right thar. :)

I don't know any "normal" heterosexuals that could choose to engage in homosexuality, myself included. There has to be something different (abnormal) about them that enables them to make this choice.

darin

01-30-2007, 05:46 PM

I don't know any "normal" heterosexuals that could choose to engage in homosexuality, myself included. There has to be something different (abnormal) about them that enables them to make this choice.

i'm not questioning their motivation - I'm questioning their decision-making ability. They obviously have SOME compulsion to have sex with others of their gender. I'm saying, people can learn to avoid that desire, and live healthier, normal-er, more better lives. :)

Missileman

01-30-2007, 05:51 PM

i'm not questioning their motivation - I'm questioning their decision-making ability. They obviously have SOME compulsion to have sex with others of their gender. I'm saying, people can learn to avoid that desire, and live healthier, normal-er, more better lives. :)

I'm saying that "SOME" compulsion to engage in same gender sex differentiates them from normal heterosexuals. That's why I'm disagreeing with your statement that everyone is a normal heterosexual until they engage in homosexual sex. I'm saying that it's not the act, but the compulsion that defines sexual orientation.

darin

01-30-2007, 06:14 PM

I'm saying that "SOME" compulsion to engage in same gender sex differentiates them from normal heterosexuals. That's why I'm disagreeing with your statement that everyone is a normal heterosexual until they engage in homosexual sex. I'm saying that it's not the act, but the compulsion that defines sexual orientation.

Interesting.

OCA

01-30-2007, 06:32 PM

Nienna

01-30-2007, 06:55 PM

Dang... I was going to get in on this thread, but 35 pages? (13 for dmp) I can't catch up!

Missileman

01-30-2007, 06:57 PM

Do you think the compulsion they have that enables them to make that choice makes them abnormal? I do.

Absolutely. I've never argued that heterosexual isn't the norm.

Gunny

01-30-2007, 09:48 PM

"What law have I supported or "made: about who does what to whom sexually?"

duh.... the continued ban on gays in the military

Yep. I support that rule, but it isn't about who does what to whom sexually ... it is about who does what to whome sexually OUTSIDE the privacy of their own home ... in public, if you will.

There are homosexuals in the military now. Probably always has been. But I don't know what they're doing, nor do I want to, anymore than I want to know what heterosexuals are doing in the privacy of their own homes.

Sexual orientation does not belong in the professional environment, and what you proponents of this crap refuse to address is THAT is what this all about.

This is about those that want to get in AND flaunt their aberrant sexual behavior. Otherwise, this is a moot issue.

Yurt

01-30-2007, 09:49 PM

CDC only looks at this country. And lifesite.net doesn't count. ;)

Good try, though.

Now try looking at the numbers on an international basis (real numbers, not skewed numbers editorialized by a religious anti-gay site that talks about "fetal rights").

And then, if you're so inclined, you can look at the numbers of AIDS deaths versus deaths from other causes. I think you'll find that the hysteria with regard to AIDS is overstated, though the disease still needs to be addressed and, hopefully, cured.

Yes or no:

1. ass sex has a greater chance of spreading disease because of the very sensative tissue in the rectum getting torn from anal sex

2. sticking one's penis in a depository feces comes out of is clean

Besides, you fail to acknowledge it was the gays themselves who admitted this? Are you calling them liars?

jillian

01-30-2007, 09:54 PM

Yes or no:

1. ass sex has a greater chance of spreading disease because of the very sensative tissue in the rectum getting torn from anal sex

2. sticking one's penis in a depository feces comes out of is clean

Besides, you fail to acknowledge it was the gays themselves who admitted this? Are you calling them liars?

No heterosexuals have anal sex?

retiredman

01-30-2007, 09:57 PM

when I was in school, the hot teenaged daughter of one of the heads of department was always coming on to midshipmen and wanting anal sex.... she wanted to be a "virgin" for her husband but loved to fuck.

I've known quite a few women in my life who loved it that way....anal sex is definitely not just for gay men.

Gunny

01-30-2007, 10:00 PM

This is the classic argument of why gays shouldn't be allowed into the military. During peace time and in the 90's, the military was downsizing and the argument against allowing homos to serve openly into the military was pretty much non-debatable. However, circumstances are different today and the arguments for allowing homos to serve openly has a little more weight. If we do allow gays into the military then we are going to allow them to pick up some of the burden and the hardships placed on our military due to Iraq and Afghanistan. Allowing gays to serve openly means that we would have more recruits, more translators, and less deployments for some Soldiers. I think the question being presented to some Soldiers today boils down to would I want to serve with an openly gay Soldier if it means that I don't have to go to Iraq for one or two more tours. For me, I'm married with kids and am a lot more accepting compared to when I joined the military straight out of high school. I would have had a huge problem with gay Soldiers serving openly back then especially since I was living in the barracks. But now it doesn't bother me and if it means that I can spend a year at home with my kids and wife instead of doing that 3rd tour in Iraq, I'd highly consider it.

I don't really see changing the rules to allow gays openly into the military as alleviating your concern; which, I DO consider valid. I left a 5 years old and two years old at home in Jun of 90 and didn't see them again until Apr 91.

But, the gays who want to SERVE are already serving. The gays who want to be "gay in the military" would be the vast majority that join upon a change of rules.

What no one seems to get here is that these gays are about their being gay FIRST. How does THAT fit into the military society that is about the mission first? One of the big things about uniforms and ranks is there is no individual identity ... you serve a specific function at a specific rank. Everybody does their job and the team accomplishes the mission.

I see letting a group of people in, identified by their aberrant sexual behavior as detrimental to that.

Yurt

01-30-2007, 10:04 PM

No heterosexuals have anal sex?

Don't dodge the questions with this hyperbole about alleged "hetros" having anal sex.

Yes or no:

1. ass sex has a greater chance of spreading disease because of the very sensative tissue in the rectum getting torn from anal sex

2. sticking one's penis in a depository feces comes out of is clean

Besides, you fail to acknowledge it was the gays themselves who admitted this? Are you calling them liars?

OCA

01-30-2007, 10:04 PM

No heterosexuals have anal sex?

Sure but its not the only available option, for queers thats it.

BTW this was a beautiful dodge of Yurts's questions, you truely are one of a kind.

retiredman

01-30-2007, 10:05 PM

Yurt

01-30-2007, 10:06 PM

Yurt

01-30-2007, 10:06 PM

I disagree...I have been a democrat all my life...my father was a close friend of Adlai Stevenson...but when I went into the Navy, I was a sailor and a naval officer first and foremost...my political affiliation was way down on my list of things I indentified with... the gays I have known in the military were exactly the same way - sailors first and foremost.

:eek:

jillian

01-30-2007, 10:07 PM

Sure but its not the only available option, for queers thats it.

BTW this was a beautiful dodge of Yurts's questions, you truely are one of a kind.

As opposed to using a behavior that some heterosexuals choose to engage in as proof of the errors of homosexuality?

Now...repeat after me "I, OCA, hate gays and want to be able to discriminate against them for any reason possible, including behaviors engaged in by heterosexuals and regardless of there being no rational basis for such hatred".

Now doesn't it feel better to be honest about that? :thumb:

Gunny

01-30-2007, 10:10 PM

Don't you think it's ________(fill in the blank) [foolish, counter-productive, illogical, childish] to try to delude oneself into believing that if you don't see them, they don't exist?

I am as repulsed by the public display of affection between two men as you are. However, I'm willing to acknowledge that they have the same right to do so as any heterosexual couple and not wanting to see it, I don't watch.

Sorry, I missed this.

It isn't about deluding myself into believing that if I don't see them, they don't exist. I know full-well they do.

It's about not being a self-appointed societal hall monitor. I realize you are Mr Anti-Religion, but here's some pearls of wisdom for you in the form of prayer:

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

The first verse of the Serenity Prayer, by Reinhold Niebuhr.

retiredman

01-30-2007, 10:15 PM

So you agree that sticking your penis into an asshole is a clean, good thing....

don't put words in my mouth.

how's that work for ya?

Yurt

01-30-2007, 10:17 PM

As opposed to using a behavior that some heterosexuals choose to engage in as proof of the errors of homosexuality?

Now...repeat after me "I, OCA, hate gays and want to be able to discriminate against them for any reason possible, including behaviors engaged in by heterosexuals and regardless of there being no rational basis for such hatred".

Now doesn't it feel better to be honest about that? :thumb:

You know, this attitude that just because people don't support putting a penis into an orafice from which feces come from, is bigoted. I have very dear friends and some family members who are gay, they do not however put penises into rears. They simply choose, yes CHOOSE to know they like the same sex, but CHOOSE, not to spread disease.

OCA

01-30-2007, 10:17 PM

OCA

01-30-2007, 10:19 PM

Yurt

01-30-2007, 10:21 PM

don't put words in my mouth.

how's that work for ya?

I put nothing in your mouth, you do fine on your own, howz that work for ya?

when I was in school, the hot teenaged daughter of one of the heads of department was always coming on to midshipmen and wanting anal sex.... she wanted to be a "virgin" for her husband but loved to fuck.

I've known quite a few women in my life who loved it that way....anal sex is definitely not just for gay men.

This comment explicitly implies you agree and support someone's choice in the matter. You knew my question was about anal sex being clean and you throw us a red herring about women loving it anally. Either you support it or not. It is really that simple.

jillian

01-30-2007, 10:21 PM

Throwing up the white flag are we?

No white flag, crumpet. But there isn't any point to discussion with someone who thinks it's okay to delete a critical part of a source so he can distort it into saying what he wants it to. ;)

retiredman

01-30-2007, 10:24 PM

Your simply unbelievable, did you fucking know Mahatma Gandhi, Joe Stalin and Galileo too?

Lol you expect us to believe your name dropping:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

I really don't care. My dad was a state representative from Rock Island County in Illinois from 1946-1952. Adlai Stevenson was the governor. They played golf together.
I never met him, but did meet his son, who was our US senator for a while. I never knew any of the other men you list as they all had died before I was born.

My point was, I am a lifelong liberal democrat, but I was always a naval officer first ..and gay sailors I knew were the same way: sailors first.

OCA

01-30-2007, 10:26 PM

No white flag, crumpet. But there isn't any point to discussion with someone who thinks it's okay to delete a critical part of a source so he can distort it into saying what he wants it to. ;)

Honey that was personal opinion and you know it, how do you reconcile him saying that the numbers show that gays have a higher propensity for pedophilia in one sentence and in the next he says but that doesn't neccessarily mean that gays commit pedophilia any higher than heteros....WTF?

If thats what you want to hang your hat on, so be it, its your reputation not mine.

retiredman

01-30-2007, 10:27 PM

I put nothing in your mouth, you do fine on your own, howz that work for ya?

This comment explicitly implies you agree and support someone's choice in the matter. You knew my question was about anal sex being clean and you throw us a red herring about women loving it anally. Either you support it or not. It is really that simple.

clean or not clean, it is not exclusively gay.

and I support the rights of consenting adults to figure out any number of permutations and combinations of penis-orifice that make them happy and I especially support their rights to do so without the prying eyes of self righteous prudish republoicans bothering them

CockySOB

01-30-2007, 10:30 PM

My point was, I am a lifelong liberal democrat, but I was always a naval officer first ..and gay sailors I knew were the same way: sailors first.
Most homosexuals I know are the same way - average citizens first and foremost. A few are flaming standouts, but then again we can see "flaming heterosexuals" out and around too. Some people just feel the need to "be seen" at any costs.

retiredman

01-30-2007, 10:32 PM

Most homosexuals I know are the same way - average citizens first and foremost. A few are flaming standouts, but then again we can see "flaming heterosexuals" out and around too. Some people just feel the need to "be seen" at any costs.

I agree.... and the career gay sailors were average citizens and good sailors first and foremost.... and the military is a better place because of their service - in all branches.

Yurt

01-30-2007, 10:33 PM

clean or not clean, it is not exclusively gay.

and I support the rights of consenting adults to figure out any number of permutations and combinations of penis-orifice that make them happy and I especially support their rights to do so without the prying eyes of self righteous prudish republoicans bothering them

Sheesh, stop dodging the question. I don't care about words like "gay" or "exclusive."

Answer the questions or by your silence and ommission of my claim against you, you admit that you find anal sex clean and a good thing.

It is that simple.

Missileman

01-30-2007, 10:34 PM

Sorry, I missed this.

It isn't about deluding myself into believing that if I don't see them, they don't exist. I know full-well they do.

It's about not being a self-appointed societal hall monitor. I realize you are Mr Anti-Religion, but here's some pearls of wisdom for you in the form of prayer:

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

The first verse of the Serenity Prayer, by Reinhold Niebuhr.

It's a wonderful sentiment...the real shame is it's a patently unanswered prayer, particularly among those one might believe actually make such a petition to God.

Yurt

01-30-2007, 10:37 PM

What the hell does this boil down to? Is it not spreading disease, which all experts agree is the most rampant way to spread disease, with AIDS/HIV being the current destroyer?????

There are hetro hermits of both sexes, fine. The thing with homosexuality really boils down to anal sex and spreading disease. It is not about procreating, many hetro couples don't want/have kids. It is about ass sex.

Do you support it or not.

It is that simple.

Especially with these figures about women having it. "Gay" men sleep with women, hello.

Don't be stupid, think about it.

Gunny

01-30-2007, 11:11 PM

I agree.... and the career gay sailors were average citizens and good sailors first and foremost.... and the military is a better place because of their service - in all branches.

I disagree. Any and every time a Marine was discovered to be gay, by whatever means, it disrupted the entire command until that person was gone.

The only gays who had successful careers concealed the fact they were gay. As far as anyone they served with was concerned, they were straight. They did not represent a threat or problem because they concealed their abnormal sexual desires.

So basing an argument on the fact that "gays have always served" is basing an argument on a lie. The lie the gay tells when he fills out the entrance paperwork and the lie he lives every day while concealing the fact he is gay.

Gunny

01-30-2007, 11:22 PM

It's a wonderful sentiment...the real shame is it's a patently unanswered prayer, particularly among those one might believe actually make such a petition to God.

Maybe. You paint with a pretty broad brush in a jaundiced color.

There will always be the imperfect, the hypocrites and the fools, in all walk of life, not just among the religious.

retiredman

01-31-2007, 10:53 AM

I disagree. Any and every time a Marine was discovered to be gay, by whatever means, it disrupted the entire command until that person was gone.

The only gays who had successful careers concealed the fact they were gay. As far as anyone they served with was concerned, they were straight. They did not represent a threat or problem because they concealed their abnormal sexual desires.

So basing an argument on the fact that "gays have always served" is basing an argument on a lie. The lie the gay tells when he fills out the entrance paperwork and the lie he lives every day while concealing the fact he is gay.

Like I said... there was little doubt as to who most of the gay sailors were.... they did their jobs and most, if not all, let them do so and interacted with them just fine on a professional level.

Marines...I dunno... my classmates who took the marine option were not a particularly troglodytic lot, but I really never had to serve with TOO many of them so maybe, in the aggregate, they ARE a homophobic and intolerant bunch. I can't say.

darin

01-31-2007, 10:59 AM

intolerant bunch. I can't say.

Funny - ironic? You're probably among the most hateful, insulting person on this topic I've ever met. You absolutely do NOT tolerate people's opinions when they don't match yours.

darin

01-31-2007, 11:00 AM

I agree.... and the career gay sailors were average citizens and good sailors first and foremost.... and the military is a better place because of their service - in all branches.

The fallacy of your agrument is this: You assume if they'd been allowed to FLAUNT their lifestyle choices, everything would have been the same - or better.

retiredman

01-31-2007, 11:10 AM

darin

01-31-2007, 11:29 AM

here's a tip... sex on a ship is not a good thing.... even straight guys who FLAUNT THEIR sexuality and feel inclined to discuss sexual exploits ad infinitum are disruptive to good order. Even if gays in the military could officially "come out", I doubt they would be mincing all over the place with limp wrists.... and, as I said, it's not like everyone didn't KNOW already anyhow.

The fallacy of your argument is you are creating a false delimma. You're saying "If Flaunting homsosexual conduct on a ship is bad, flaunting HETEROsexual behavior on a ship is just as bad. Heterosexual behavior on a ship isn't even the point. You're trying to imply Heteros 'need' to or 'do' flaunt their sexualilty. You're trying to compare and equate a hetero talking about having sex with a woman on the ship, with a homosexual talking about having sex with a man on the ship. You're saying they are just as bad as one-another. It's not the case; if it WERE the case, there'd be no regulations against homosexuality. Fortunately, Military leaders realize homosexual conduct is WORSE than heterosexual conduct.

I'd bet MOST heterosexuals do NOT talk about having sex on a ship because it could get them introuble. If somebody walked up and said "I'm HOMOSEXUAL" that means they DO have sex with others of their Gender. Heterosexuality is IMPLIED in the words 'man' and 'woman'. People ASSUME (rightly) Most normal people have sex with a member of the opposite gender. Homosexuals are DEFINED by their preference/conduct. If they are NOT having sex with a person of the same sex, they are NOT homosexual. Homosexuality should NOT be a label which defines a PERSON, but rather describes their CONDUCT. Just like Liars. Because they have a propensity to lie doesn't mean everything they say is a lie. They are, in effect, ONLY liars when they are lying.

People need TREATMENT and prayer and they can overcome their destructive, deviant homosexual acts. It doesn't mean they should give up being kind or sweet or FAAAAAAAAAAABOOOOOOOLOUS... It just means they should stop ruining their bodies, minds, souls, and stuff.

retiredman

01-31-2007, 11:39 AM

darin

01-31-2007, 11:46 AM

you have never been on a ship....I have. You think that homosexuality is a sickness....I think it is an imbedded personality trait no more selectable than eye color. There really is no reason for us to continue, is there?

The fallacy of your first coment is Appeal to authority. You're saying because you spent time at sea, your point of view is somehow more valid on the issue. That's a huge assumption. (nevermind the fact you are assuming I have never been on a ship).

The fallacy of your comment re: Personality is this: Somebody's personality is BESIDES the point of discussion. This thread is not about people's personality - it's about their BEHAVIOUR. Already homosexuals are allowed to serve - their personality is allowed to remain. However, their CONDUCT (actually having sex with others of their gender) is forbidden.

The ClayTaurus

01-31-2007, 11:55 AM

The fallacy of your first coment is Appeal to authority. You're saying because you spent time at sea, your point of view is somehow more valid on the issue. That's a huge assumption. (nevermind the fact you are assuming I have never been on a ship).

The fallacy of your comment re: Personality is this: Somebody's personality is BESIDES the point of discussion. This thread is not about people's personality - it's about their BEHAVIOUR. Already homosexuals are allowed to serve - their personality is allowed to remain. However, their CONDUCT (actually having sex with others of their gender) is forbidden.Have you ever been on a ship?

darin

01-31-2007, 12:04 PM

Have you ever been on a ship?

Sure have. :) Several times.

The ClayTaurus

01-31-2007, 12:08 PM

Sure have. :) Several times.What was your longest deployment?

retiredman

01-31-2007, 12:11 PM

[QUOTE=dmp;8205]The fallacy of your first coment is Appeal to authority. You're saying because you spent time at sea, your point of view is somehow more valid on the issue. That's a huge assumption. (nevermind the fact you are assuming I have never been on a ship).

look, pal...YOU were the one who said; "I'd bet MOST heterosexuals do NOT talk about having sex on a ship because it could get them introuble. " My point of view on that statement is CERTAINLY more valid than that a sand crab....

The fallacy of your comment re: Personality is this: Somebody's personality is BESIDES the point of discussion. This thread is not about people's personality - it's about their BEHAVIOUR. Already homosexuals are allowed to serve - their personality is allowed to remain. However, their CONDUCT (actually having sex with others of their gender) is forbidden.

While on duty, heterosexuals are not allowed to have sex with others of the opposite gender. That is also forbidden. Gay sex in a duty setting would be forbidden even if gays were allowed in the military... gay sex while on their own time would be allowable just like it is for heterosexual sailors today.

Look... like i said...you think this is a disease... we really have no common place to meet and debate given that position.

The ClayTaurus

01-31-2007, 12:14 PM

Look... like i said...you think this is a disease... we really have no common place to meet and debate given that position.[/b]...yet, you continue to respond...

darin

01-31-2007, 12:18 PM

look, pal...YOU were the one who said; "I'd bet MOST heterosexuals do NOT talk about having sex on a ship because it could get them introuble. " My point of view on that statement is CERTAINLY more valid that a sand crab....

Your use of quoting needs improvement! :)

I CLEARLY stated mine as OPINION - I didn't dismiss what you wrote based on poor debating logic. I WOULD bet most heteros do NOT talk about their sex activities much on ship. And the kicker is - is it IRONIC? You "debate" with even MORE LOGICAL FALLACY - You can't just state your disagreement, you have to tack-on an Ad Hominem. wow.

Look... like i said...you think this is a disease... we really have no common place to meet and debate given that position.

That means You cannot debate your point of view any longer. That's fine. I personally feel you're running out of fallacious arguments and are getting frustrated. If you'd honestly debate, perhaps we could find a common ground.

retiredman

01-31-2007, 12:24 PM

Your use of quoting needs improvement! :)

I CLEARLY stated mine as OPINION - I didn't dismiss what you wrote based on poor debating logic. I WOULD bet most heteros do NOT talk about their sex activities much on ship. And the kicker is - is it IRONIC? You "debate" with even MORE LOGICAL FALLACY - You can't just state your disagreement, you have to tack-on an Ad Hominem. wow.

That means You cannot debate your point of view any longer. That's fine. I personally feel you're running out of fallacious arguments and are getting frustrated. If you'd honestly debate, perhaps we could find a common ground.

have you ever been on a Navy ship for more than just a walk through tour while the ship was inport? If there were any way to collect on your bet, I would make the bet with you for....let's say...$10K in a heartbeat. Sailors talk about the pussy they got ashore ALL the time - in great and vivid detail.

No...I can debate my point...but it seems such a hopeless exercise in rhetoric. If you were to tell me that all church choirs are instruments of the devil, I really would have a difficult time wanting to make the argument that today's modern spiritual music was more appropriate to worship than the classics. We are that far apart on this issue and you don't seem like you would want to ever believe that gays were anything other than mentally ill deviants... and I am certain that I would never believe that gays are anything other than normal folks who chose to love differently than I do.

retiredman

01-31-2007, 12:25 PM

and you are right about the quotes thing... the multiqoute thingy is a mystery to me.

darin

01-31-2007, 12:35 PM

and you are right about the quotes thing... the multiqoute thingy is a mystery to me.

What I do is manually type in the [quote] commands to seperate thoughts. Just don't forget a /quote block after it. :)

darin

01-31-2007, 12:37 PM

have you ever been on a Navy ship for more than just a walk through tour while the ship was inport?

No - that's the extent of it.

If there were any way to collect on your bet, I would make the bet with you for....let's say...$10K in a heartbeat. Sailors talk about the pussy they got ashore ALL the time - in great and vivid detail.

That's not what I'm debating. I'm talking about them bragging about ON-SHIP sex. ;)

No...I can debate my point...but it seems such a hopeless exercise in rhetoric. We are that far apart on this issue and you don't seem like you would want to ever believe that gays were anything other than mentally ill deviants... and I am certain that I would never believe that gays are anything other than normal folks who chose to love differently than I do.

I can't believe it because no evidence - I mean NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE exists which points to homosexuals being FORCED to act as they do.

retiredman

01-31-2007, 12:41 PM

and gays who had on-ship sex would be tossed out...just like hetero sailors would be.

do you have any evidence that heterosexual people are forced to act the way they do?

darin

01-31-2007, 12:51 PM

and gays who had on-ship sex would be tossed out...just like hetero sailors would be.

That's not the point.

do you have any evidence that heterosexual people are forced to act the way they do?

NOBODY is forced to be sexual AT ALL. THAT is the point. I am not FORCED into having sex with my wife. I CHOOSE to have sex with my wife. If I were to have sex with a MAN it'd be homosexuality. That's exactly my point.

However, the problem with the "no choice" position on homosexuality is that in order to be effective it requires us to forget about the important distinction between desire and behavior. The position implies that a desire one can't help feeling is a desire one is *entitled* to satisfy: thus because homosexuals can't help feeling same-sex attractions, they should therefore be allowed to act on those attractions. However, the logic of this argument cannot hold up to much scrutiny. While we may have no choice about our feelings and desires, we routinely and continually *do* exercise control over our actions. As the right-wing opponents of gay rights point out, just because you have a desire does not necessarily mean that you should act on it.

Gunny

01-31-2007, 09:20 PM

Gunny

01-31-2007, 09:22 PM

What was your longest deployment?

301 days.

Gunny

01-31-2007, 09:26 PM

and gays who had on-ship sex would be tossed out...just like hetero sailors would be.

do you have any evidence that heterosexual people are forced to act the way they do?

Well, kinda' sorta agree with you. Gays caught having sex on a ship would be tossed out of the Navy. Hetero's caught having sex get Captain's Mast, as you call NJP.

However, I do agree that it is unlawful for anyone to have sex aboard a US Naval vessel.

retiredman

01-31-2007, 09:28 PM

Not true in the Corps. Anyone known to be gay is gone. Fastest discharges I'ver ever seen.

well..that is one of the reasons why you still report to the Department of the Navy

Gunny

01-31-2007, 11:40 PM

well..that is one of the reasons why you still report to the Department of the Navy

The DON just signed my checks and gave me rides to shitholes evrybody else gets to fly to.

retiredman

02-01-2007, 07:43 AM

The DON just signed my checks and gave me rides to shitholes evrybody else gets to fly to.

but you must admit, sea cruises are so fashionable these days. ;)

Sitarro

02-10-2007, 03:25 PM

do you honestly think that gay americans want to FORCE yout approve of their lifestyle? From the gay and lesbian friends with which I worship each week, nothing could be further from the truth.

but why should I exopect this "truthful epiphany" that would transform you from a bigot to an einlightened citizen.

If one is going to repetitively insinuate how progressive and enlightened one is, wouldn't it be a good idea to learn how to spell enlightened or even expect(the spelling of expect could be attributed to a typo because of the proximity of the o to the p, no excuse for enlightened).:lol:

Grumplestillskin

02-10-2007, 06:56 PM

wouldn't it be a good idea to learn how to spell enlightened

no..it's a messageboard, not a spelling bee...:puke:

Pale Rider

02-11-2007, 01:01 PM

Spelling bee or not, fact still remains in this thread, the general is wrong to want to lift the ban on fags in the military.

We have no accomodations for them, and it would be far more trouble than it's worth to try and accomodate them.

jillian

02-11-2007, 01:25 PM

Spelling bee or not, fact still remains in this thread, the general is wrong to want to lift the ban on fags in the military.

We have no accomodations for them, and it would be too more trouble than it's worth to try and accomodate them.

I understand it makes you uncomfortable. But the thing I don't get, you ALREADY have gays in the military. You just don't know who is and who isn't. So could be the person in the next bunk. No one is making anyone uncomfortable near as I can tell since the one thing I HAVEN'T seen on any of these threads is anyone complaining that one of their brothers in the service was flaming and made everyone around them afraid to shower.

Gunny

02-11-2007, 10:47 PM

I understand it makes you uncomfortable. But the thing I don't get, you ALREADY have gays in the military. You just don't know who is and who isn't. So could be the person in the next bunk. No one is making anyone uncomfortable near as I can tell since the one thing I HAVEN'T seen on any of these threads is anyone complaining that one of their brothers in the service was flaming and made everyone around them afraid to shower.

Gays are already in the military and no one is making anyone uncomfortable because the default assumption is that everyone is straight because they are acting straight.

Those gays are more interested in serving than being gay. The gays that want to be openly admitted as gay are more interested in being gay than serving.

If one of our "brothers in the service" was flaming, HE would be the one afraid to go to the shower. A gay amidst a bunch of alpha-male military folks is like a white wolf in the midst of a pack of gray wolves.

Pale Rider

02-12-2007, 09:56 AM

I understand it makes you uncomfortable. But the thing I don't get, you ALREADY have gays in the military. You just don't know who is and who isn't. So could be the person in the next bunk. No one is making anyone uncomfortable near as I can tell since the one thing I HAVEN'T seen on any of these threads is anyone complaining that one of their brothers in the service was flaming and made everyone around them afraid to shower.

Uncomfortable yes, just being aware that some faggot wants to lay pipe up my ass. Scared no, I'd knock out every fucking tooth in his head out with the mention of it.

It's not an "open enrollment" Jill. Queers have to "sneak" into the military now, and keep real quite about it or they're out. It would be a whole different ball game if the fags could enlist at will. It would be a disaster.

glockmail

04-09-2007, 11:29 AM

....

If one of our "brothers in the service" was flaming, HE would be the one afraid to go to the shower. A gay amidst a bunch of alpha-male military folks is like a white wolf in the midst of a pack of gray wolves.

Gang bangers? :poke:

Gunny

04-09-2007, 08:13 PM

Gang bangers? :poke:

Is that what that says?

glockmail

04-09-2007, 08:28 PM

Is that what that says?"Throw your rubbers overboard/ there's nobody here but men, men, men...." :laugh2:

Gunny

04-09-2007, 08:35 PM

"Throw your rubbers overboard/ there's nobody here but men, men, men...." :laugh2:

:smoke:

:lame2:

gabosaurus

04-13-2007, 11:42 PM

Will this apply to Bush? He has been screwing the troops up the arse since starting his war four years ago.

Pale Rider

04-18-2007, 10:19 PM

Will this apply to Bush? He has been screwing the troops up the arse since starting his war four years ago.

No... the biggest fucking up the ass the military gets is from liberals. They are, by the way, the faggot lovers and enablers. They also love to close bases and cut military budgets, and that ain't Bush.

As usual gabs, your ass backwards thinking has made you look foolish... again.

gabosaurus

04-20-2007, 10:26 AM

Pale Rider, do you get your name "the finisher" from other gays? :poke:

Pale Rider

04-21-2007, 08:10 PM

Pale Rider, do you get your name "the finisher" from other gays? :poke:

Well... when there's nothing left to say in defense of your opinion, just resort to sarcasm aye gabonauseous?

Wrong.... you lose the debate, and THAT is why they call me "THE FINISHER".

gabosaurus

04-21-2007, 10:17 PM

It is useless to attempt reason with unreasonable people. It like the old saying about trying to mud wrestling with a pig. Pretty soon, you realize that the pig is enjoying itself.

Pale Rider

04-22-2007, 03:18 AM

It is useless to attempt reason with unreasonable people. It like the old saying about trying to mud wrestling with a pig. Pretty soon, you realize that the pig is enjoying itself.

Pale Rider, do you get your name "the finisher" from other gays?

You call insinuating I'm a queer being reasonable?

You sling the first mud, then pretend you're somehow above it. YOU are the PIG. Liberal twit.

gabosaurus

04-22-2007, 11:55 AM

Pale Rider

04-22-2007, 02:42 PM

There has to be some reason why you are so adamantly and violently homophobic. When you study psychology, you fight that those who adamantly oppose a cause often feel threatened by it, or seek to hide their involvement in it. Look at Mark Foley.

Well, you're confused again, as usual. The definition of homophobic is to be "frightened" of it, to be "scared". But, I know it's you liberals favorite BUZZ WORD to use when trying to silence NORMAL people. I, on the other hand, am "sickened" by homosexuality, "repulsed", which IS, a completely NORMAL reaction.

Now YOU, you are a text book BIGOT. You DRIP bigotry when you reply. You CAN'T STAND the fact that I have the audacity to voice my ANTI-HOMO opinion. You people aren't used to it. You militant liberal faggot enablers have most people so brow beaten by your name calling and caustic ways, that people usually just say nothing. Not so in my case. So here's the deal miss BIGOT, get used to me voicing my anti-gay opinion, and dispute my points logically, otherwise, you're just another frothing at the mouth, name calling, inuendo spewing, liberal, BIGOT!

Abbey Marie

04-22-2007, 02:47 PM

There has to be some reason why you are so adamantly and violently homophobic. When you study psychology, you fight that those who adamantly oppose a cause often feel threatened by it, or seek to hide their involvement in it. Look at Mark Foley.

Ever consider that Pale is simply morally opposed to it and disgusted by it?
Are people who are adamantly against abortion somehow threatened by it personally? Your armchair psychology here doesn't hold water.

glockmail

04-22-2007, 03:34 PM

gabosaurus

04-22-2007, 09:54 PM

Ever consider that Pale is simply morally opposed to it and disgusted by it?

How can you be morally opposed to something that is not immoral? Are you disgusted by kids with MS and Downs Syndrome? How about those who were born mentally challenged? Perhaps it was a choice! They could have chosen to be mentally challenged! You could be a kid watching the Fox Network all day and decide "damm, this is fuched! I must be retarded!"

Are people who are adamantly against abortion somehow threatened by it personally? Your armchair psychology here doesn't hold water.

What makes you think they aren't? Many fundies only believe in one way of thinking -- their way. Any other thought process would invoke the wrath of God, which they are scared of.

Abbey Marie

04-23-2007, 01:23 AM

How can you be morally opposed to something that is not immoral?

Ah, I see. You proclaim it is NOT immoral, so, presto, chango, it's not. Cool for you!

Regardless of what your party-line mind tells you, Pale, and many, many, others, believe it is immoral. For many, based on the word of God. And that, I guess I must tell you, is a far cry from being homophobic You said Pale was violently homophobic, and I said that wasn't likely his problem with it. Your response does not really adddress that point.

Pale Rider

04-23-2007, 02:27 AM

How can you be morally opposed to something that is not immoral? Are you disgusted by kids with MS and Downs Syndrome? How about those who were born mentally challenged? Perhaps it was a choice! They could have chosen to be mentally challenged! You could be a kid watching the Fox Network all day and decide "damm, this is fuched! I must be retarded!"

What makes you think they aren't? Many fundies only believe in one way of thinking -- their way. Any other thought process would invoke the wrath of God, which they are scared of.

You're arguement here is bankrupt, and if men sucking each other's dicks and fucking each other up the ass is "MORAL" to you, then your morality is in the sewer along with the rest of the immoral feces.

You are so stereo typical liberal. You argue against America, you argue against God, you argue against anything that is good and decent. It's not hard to see what you liberals want as your world. You want a world deviod of a God, so that you can be as filthy and immoral as your sick minds can act out. You want a world devoid of any one person accelling over another. No winners, no losers. Just libbots mindlessly ambling about being told how important they are, as they wait in a long line for their government handout. You want a country deviod of it's history, a constitution, where killing the unborn is your right, no guns, our war policy is simply surrender, and no one ever DARE question your authority to dictate to others how they should live their life.

Frankly, I wouldn't piss on a liberal if they were on fire. You're not worth the piss. You are a cancer on America.

Abbey Marie

04-23-2007, 02:43 PM

You're arguement here is bankrupt, and if men sucking each other's dicks and fucking each other up the ass is "MORAL" to you, then your morality is in the sewer along with the rest of the immoral feces.

You are so stereo typical liberal. You argue against America, you argue against God, you argue against anything that is good and decent. It's not hard to see what you liberals want as your world. You want a world deviod of a God, so that you can be as filthy and immoral as your sick minds can act out. You want a world devoid of any one person accelling over another. No winners, no losers. Just libbots mindlessly ambling about being told how important they are, as they wait in a long line for their government handout. You want a country deviod of it's history, a constitution, where killing the unborn is your right, no guns, our war policy is simply surrender, and no one ever DARE question your authority to dictate to others how they should live their life.

Frankly, I wouldn't piss on a liberal if they were on fire. You're not worth the piss. You are a cancer on America.

:clap:

glockmail

04-23-2007, 02:48 PM

How can you be morally opposed to something that is not immoral? ..... Homosexuality is immoral, unhealthy, unnatural and abnormal. Nor is anyone born that way. Those are all facts. Fine if you're gay, just don't twist the truth to justify your choice.

gabosaurus

04-24-2007, 11:17 AM

Homosexuality is immoral, unhealthy, unnatural and abnormal. Nor is anyone born that way. Those are all facts. Fine if you're gay, just don't twist the truth to justify your choice.

And your unbiased, scientific proof of such is ... where?
What you have just stated is your OPINION. Of course, opinions are like arseholes -- everyone has one. They just use them in different ways. :cool:

glockmail

04-24-2007, 08:43 PM

And your unbiased, scientific proof of such is ... where?
What you have just stated is your OPINION. Of course, opinions are like arseholes -- everyone has one. They just use them in different ways. :cool:

It's immoral because the Bible says so.
It's abnormal because 1 to 2% of an exhibited behaivior is well off the bell curve.
It's unhealthy as demonstrated by AIDS and other diseases caused by infatuation with the anal sphincter.
It's unnatural since the Creator designed sexuality to be between one man and one woman.

Pale Rider

04-24-2007, 09:24 PM

gabosaurus

04-24-2007, 09:37 PM

It's immoral because the Bible says so.
It's abnormal because 1 to 2% of an exhibited behaivior is well off the bell curve.
It's unhealthy as demonstrated by AIDS and other diseases caused by infatuation with the anal sphincter.
It's unnatural since the Creator designed sexuality to be between one man and one woman.

There are people that don't believe in God. Or the Bible.
There are those with rare genetic diseases that comprise less than 2 percent of the population. Are they also "well off the bell curve"?
There are others that are "infatuated with the anal sphincter" -- the one between their lips.
By the way, AIDS is passed by shared needles and blood transfusions. It can be transmitted by heterosexual sex.
It is also immoral to be prejudiced and hateful. Yet a lot of people are. Do you think Jesus would approve of that? I think not.

Pale Rider

04-25-2007, 12:27 AM

It is also immoral to be prejudiced and hateful. Yet a lot of people are. Do you think Jesus would approve of that? I think not.

Jesus doesn't approve of homo's. The Bible says it's an abomination, and that the homo will surely pay for it with their blood. That's what Jesus thinks.

glockmail

04-25-2007, 06:04 AM

There are people that don't believe in God. Or the Bible.
There are those with rare genetic diseases that comprise less than 2 percent of the population. Are they also "well off the bell curve"?
There are others that are "infatuated with the anal sphincter" -- the one between their lips.
By the way, AIDS is passed by shared needles and blood transfusions. It can be transmitted by heterosexual sex.
It is also immoral to be prejudiced and hateful. Yet a lot of people are. Do you think Jesus would approve of that? I think not.
1. There are people who don’t believe in morality. What’s your point?
2. Yes.
3. ?
4. AIDS would not be the epidemic it became but for homosexuality. The heterosexual population must now pay for being tolerant of that sin.
5. No. What’s your point?

gabosaurus

04-25-2007, 01:35 PM

Jesus doesn't approve of homo's. The Bible says it's an abomination, and that the homo will surely pay for it with their blood.

I failed to find such a statement in The Bible. Perhaps you have a different translation.

That's what Jesus thinks.

When was the last time you spoke with Him? Are you sure you are quoting Him directly?

glockmail

04-25-2007, 01:45 PM

I failed to find such a statement in The Bible. Perhaps you have a different translation..... So what will you do when he provides a quote and link? Will you admit he is right, or try to pansy out of it somehow?

Pale Rider

04-25-2007, 02:01 PM

So what will you do when he provides a quote and link? Will you admit he is right, or try to pansy out of it somehow?

I guess we'll find out glock. My money is on what you said though...

Leviticus 18:22 Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
Leviticus 20:13 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

http://members.aol.com/GayMatter/h-issue.htm

gabosaurus

04-26-2007, 03:47 PM

Gunny

04-26-2007, 08:40 PM

I failed to find such a statement in The Bible. Perhaps you have a different translation.

When was the last time you spoke with Him? Are you sure you are quoting Him directly?

Try the Book of Leviticus.

Gunny

04-26-2007, 08:41 PM

glockmail

04-26-2007, 09:15 PM

Pale Rider

04-26-2007, 11:20 PM

The Bible says the same thing about "sexual sin" as well as adultery. If anyone has had sex outside of marriage, or has divorced or remarried, the Bible also thinks you are worthy of death.

EDIT: Kudos to you for finding that statement. I overlooked it.

I've read the Bible cover to cover. I have Bibles in all shapes and sizes, new and old. Very old. I find comfort in them. But, sometimes I can rememer reading something but won't remember where it was. It's common. However the passage about homosexuality, I've had to reference that one many, many different times over the years I've been blogging.

Truthfully, I just don't understand why people tend to think queers are cute and cuddly, when in reality, they're really disgusting and perverted. Mainly I think this is due to people's outright denial to themselves as to what homos act out on each other. It's the old, "if I don't think about it or see, then it doesn't exist", syndrome.

gabosaurus

04-26-2007, 11:59 PM

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 -- "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters, nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

How many of us do not fall into one of the above categories?

manu1959

04-27-2007, 12:02 AM

How many of us do not fall into one of the above categories?

all but the saved are going to hell.....

glockmail

04-27-2007, 06:05 AM

.... I just don't understand why people tend to think queers are cute and cuddly, ...... Hollywood.

glockmail

04-27-2007, 06:06 AM

How many of us do not fall into one of the above categories? Most.

Nuc

04-27-2007, 07:57 AM

I

Truthfully, I just don't understand why people tend to think queers are cute and cuddly, when in reality, they're really disgusting and perverted.

So I take it you don't think Liberace, Elton John, Dick Cheney and Condoleeza Rice are cute and cuddly?

I agree that Hillary Clinton is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTTTTTTTTT cute and cuddly I'll give you that. But Cheney is.

Pale Rider

05-02-2007, 11:27 AM

How many of us do not fall into one of the above categories?

Yourself is who you should be worried about.

Pale Rider

05-02-2007, 11:29 AM

So I take it you don't think Liberace, Elton John, Dick Cheney and Condoleeza Rice are cute and cuddly?

I agree that Hillary Clinton is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTTTTTTTTT cute and cuddly I'll give you that. But Cheney is.

Dick Cheney? Isn't he married with children? Condoleeza Rice... have no idea what her sexual preference is.

No, if your a homo, I think you're disgusting.

Hagbard Celine

05-02-2007, 11:30 AM

How many of us do not fall into one of the above categories?
Sorry, I'm sexually immoral. The missionary position just gets boring after a while. :dunno:

Pale Rider

05-02-2007, 11:30 AM

Hollywood.

VERY true.

glockmail

05-02-2007, 11:31 AM

So I take it you don't think Liberace, Elton John, Dick Cheney and Condoleeza Rice are cute and cuddly?

I agree that Hillary Clinton is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTTTTTTTTT cute and cuddly I'll give you that. But Cheney is.

So now you're calling Cheny a queer? Obviously you've run out of reasonable, logical arguments, instead resorting to the time honored liberal tradition of using gay as an insult. :lame2:

Pale Rider

05-02-2007, 11:32 AM

Sorry, I'm sexually immoral. The missionary position just gets boring after a while. :dunno:

Interesting... could you show us what or where tells you that some other position other than missionary is immoral?

gabosaurus

05-02-2007, 02:44 PM

Pale Rider

05-02-2007, 03:18 PM

I think that those vent their hatred based on sexual preference are the ones that are disgusting and immoral. Do you also kick crippled kids in the streets? I hope none of you have relatives with lung cancer. It's a choice, you know.

Well I imagine you thinking that isn't the only twisted and perverted thought in that wart on your shoulders.

And yes, it is a choice. A disgusting, deviant, vile, distructive and perverted choice.

gabosaurus

05-02-2007, 03:25 PM

And yes, it is a choice. A disgusting, deviant, vile, distructive and perverted choice.

Smokers are not going to like those thoughts about lung cancer. Not that I don't agree with you. :cool:

Pale Rider

05-02-2007, 03:41 PM

Smokers are not going to like those thoughts about lung cancer. Not that I don't agree with you. :cool:

Smokers.... wha? What are you smoking?

nevadamedic

05-20-2007, 02:00 AM

Don't ask don't tell is a pretty good policy in general, not just the military

In another post, I said how much I hate those rainbow stickers on cars. Like I really want to know who is gay.

But, since some people insist on telling us what their sexual preferences are... let me suggest a few of my own (this should be fun!)

BONDAGE
ZOO-PHILE (this one could have a picture of a pony)
SCAT LOVER (a white bumper sticker with a brown streak down the middle)
FETISH
FOOT WORSHIPPER

but here's the one that would offend people the most

S T R A I G H T

:laugh2:

Doniston

05-20-2007, 12:22 PM

But queers are singled out as abominations. where is the word Queer mentioned in the bible? please inform us.

Doniston

05-20-2007, 12:26 PM

I've read the Bible cover to cover. I have Bibles in all shapes and sizes, new and old. Very old. I find comfort in them. But, sometimes I can rememer reading something but won't remember where it was. It's common. However the passage about homosexuality, I've had to reference that one many, many different times over the years I've been blogging.

Truthfully, I just don't understand why people tend to think queers are cute and cuddly, when in reality, they're really disgusting and perverted. Mainly I think this is due to people's outright denial to themselves as to what homos act out on each other. It's the old, "if I don't think about it or see, then it doesn't exist", syndrome. You seem to neglect the fact that every single thing (action)that homosexuals do, so also do hetrosexuals. your hangup appear to be that they do it with their own gender. That is confounding to me. propogation is an entirely different matter. we are speaking of actions here, not results.

nevadamedic

05-20-2007, 12:29 PM

So now you're calling Cheny a queer? Obviously you've run out of reasonable, logical arguments, instead resorting to the time honored liberal tradition of using gay as an insult. :lame2:

:clap:

Doniston

05-20-2007, 12:31 PM

So now you're calling Cheny a queer? Obviously you've run out of reasonable, logical arguments, instead resorting to the time honored liberal tradition of using gay as an insult. :lame2:

Glock, Kindly respond to what was said, not what you want it to have said. A person doesn't have to be queer, or gay, or homo, to be cute, cuddly, and/or sexy to either orientation.

Doniston

05-20-2007, 12:35 PM

Dick Cheney? Isn't he married with children? Condoleeza Rice... have no idea what her sexual preference is.

No, if your a homo, I think you're disgusting. So what? I think you are disgusting too, and I don't even think you are a homo.

nevadamedic

05-20-2007, 12:51 PM

So what? I think you are disgusting too, and I don't even think you are a homo.

Once again the peanut gallery speaks.

Doniston

05-20-2007, 02:25 PM

Once again the peanut gallery speaks.

You are very fond of that comment aren't you? But I suppose it will suffice when you have no reasonable retort, and just want to spew.

Pale Rider

05-20-2007, 08:14 PM

So what? I think you are disgusting too, and I don't even think you are a homo.

What ever gave you the impression I give a flying fuck what you think? You are a nobody.

Have another drink... :alcoholic:

nevadamedic

05-20-2007, 08:53 PM

You are very fond of that comment aren't you? But I suppose it will suffice when you have no reasonable retort, and just want to spew.

Wow the truth hurts, doesn't it?

Pale Rider

05-21-2007, 09:47 PM

Wow the truth hurts, doesn't it?

You notice this discussion has basically ground to a halt..... we win.

glockmail

05-22-2007, 11:37 AM

where is the word Queer mentioned in the bible? please inform us.
It's just another translation. Are you denying that the Bible deals with the queer issue?

Doniston

05-22-2007, 12:38 PM

It's just another translation. Are you denying that the Bible deals with the queer issue? Not really, course I beleive you can find anything you want in the Bible-- just define it however you wish Mostly it is philosophocal rather that factual.

glockmail

05-22-2007, 03:17 PM

Not really, course I beleive you can find anything you want in the Bible-- just define it however you wish Mostly it is philosophocal rather that factual. Bullshit. The Bible is 100% factual. Prove it otherwise.

Doniston

05-23-2007, 10:35 PM

Bullshit. The Bible is 100% factual. Prove it otherwise. There are two different versions of the Lord's prayer. How can that be???? HEH HEH

Pale Rider

05-24-2007, 02:22 PM

There are two different versions of the Lord's prayer. How can that be???? HEH HEH

So you're reduced to using that lame shit to defend having fags in the military?

Give it up old man. You got nothin' left.

glockmail

05-24-2007, 03:01 PM

There are two different versions of the Lord's prayer. How can that be???? HEH HEH Translations?

Pale Rider

05-24-2007, 04:11 PM

Translations?

Mark it down glock... we win. Queers should NOT be allowed in the military, and there is no good reason why they should. All for arguements have been shot down.

Doniston

05-24-2007, 05:26 PM

Translations? Of course translations, but ALL the words in the Bible are true. aren't they??? You said so. So they couldn't have been transpated wrong--- right?

Pale Rider

05-24-2007, 05:30 PM

Of course translations, but ALL the words in the Bible are true. aren't they??? You said so. So they couldn't have been transpated wrong--- right?

Start a thread in the religious category if you want to debate the validity of the written word in the Bible. This thread is about faggots not being allowed in the military.

Doniston

05-24-2007, 05:31 PM

Mark it down glock... we win. Queers should NOT be allowed in the military, and there is no good reason why they should. All for arguements have been shot down. POOR LITTLE TYKE, no one is talking on your favorite subject so you make up the rules, and even the non-existant conversation.-- You must be really hard up.

HEH HEH HA HA HA ROTF laughing, and laughing, and....."

Pale Rider

05-24-2007, 05:46 PM

POOR LITTLE TYKE, no one is talking on your favorite subject so you make up the rules, and even the non-existant conversation.-- You must be really hard up.

HEH HEH HA HA HA ROTF laughing, and laughing, and....."

Hey... dumbass.... hijacking a thread is against the board rules. I'm not "making them up."

Christ man, you are an idiot.

glockmail

05-24-2007, 07:03 PM

Mark it down glock... we win. Queers should NOT be allowed in the military, and there is no good reason why they should. All for arguements have been shot down.

We win all the time, libs have yet to admit. :salute:

glockmail

05-24-2007, 07:05 PM

Of course translations, but ALL the words in the Bible are true. aren't they??? You said so. So they couldn't have been transpated wrong--- right? Translations can be wrong. There's about a new 1/ year lately.

nevadamedic

05-24-2007, 07:07 PM

Hey... dumbass.... hijacking a thread is against the board rules. I'm not "making them up."

Christ man, you are an idiot.

What's hijacking a thread?????????

Pale Rider

05-24-2007, 08:08 PM

What's hijacking a thread?????????

Diverting the topic to something else.

Doniston

05-24-2007, 10:04 PM

Hey... dumbass.... hijacking a thread is against the board rules. I'm not "making them up."

Christ man, you are an idiot.Yyou can't hijack a thread by responding to another poster's question. You know that as well as I do.

and You certainly WERE making up imaginary conversations.

Pale Rider

05-25-2007, 12:27 AM

Yyou can't hijack a thread by responding to another poster's question. You know that as well as I do.
If it wasn't you that changed the subject, then no, you didn't do the hijackiing. But the fact remains, it's against the rules, and I didn't make them up.

and You certainly WERE making up imaginary conversations.
Show me.

Missileman

05-25-2007, 07:09 AM

Bullshit. The Bible is 100% factual. Prove it otherwise.

Another post bereft of any logic. By your own admission, the Bible can't be taken literally. A book of 100% fact would HAVE to be able to.

glockmail

05-25-2007, 08:43 AM

Another post bereft of any logic. By your own admission, the Bible can't be taken literally. A book of 100% fact would HAVE to be able to. No.....

Missileman

05-25-2007, 04:07 PM

No.....

Something is either a fact or it's not. Anything that has to be interpreted in just the right way for it to be able to be true would be something other than a fact.

glockmail

05-25-2007, 04:22 PM

Something is either a fact or it's not. Anything that has to be interpreted in just the right way for it to be able to be true would be something other than a fact. No....

Missileman

05-25-2007, 04:52 PM

No....

Two identically succint and identically incorrect responses in a row. Neither response refuted my statement.

glockmail

05-25-2007, 05:02 PM

Two identically succint and identically incorrect responses in a row. Neither response refuted my statement. No means no, man. I'm not going to spoon feed you.

Missileman

05-25-2007, 05:14 PM

No means no, man. I'm not going to spoon feed you.

You're wrong and haven't explained in the slightest why you shouldn't be considered so. All your "No" means is you have "No" logical argument to explain your position.

glockmail

05-25-2007, 05:19 PM

You're wrong and haven't explained in the slightest why you shouldn't be considered so. All your "No" means is you have "No" logical argument to explain your position. When you come up with a reasonable argument based on something other that your assumptions then I will take the time to explain. Until then you'll have to be satisfied with my shortened responses.

Missileman

05-25-2007, 05:32 PM

When you come up with a reasonable argument based on something other that your assumptions then I will take the time to explain. Until then you'll have to be satisfied with my shortened responses.

Are you smokin dope or what? I explained my argument very clearly and it's hardly an assumption.

glockmail

05-25-2007, 05:35 PM

Are you smokin dope or what? I explained my argument very clearly and it's hardly an assumption.
You made bold assumptions with no back up in both posts responded by a simple "no".

Missileman

05-25-2007, 05:40 PM

You made bold assumptions with no back up in both posts responded by a simple "no".

I did nothing of the sort.

Pale Rider

05-28-2007, 03:57 PM

Are you smokin dope or what? I explained my argument very clearly and it's hardly an assumption.

Clear on not, it did not make sense. Queers should not be allowed in the military.

Missileman

05-28-2007, 06:21 PM

Clear on not, it did not make sense. Queers should not be allowed in the military.

The post that you are quoting is not in reference to gays in the military. It is in reference to cupcake's assertion that a 100% factual text wouldn't have to be able to be taken literally.

Pale Rider

05-28-2007, 08:19 PM

The post that you are quoting is not in reference to gays in the military. It is in reference to cupcake's assertion that a 100% factual text wouldn't have to be able to be taken literally.

Whatever... I was just trying to stay on topic.

glockmail

05-28-2007, 08:24 PM

I did nothing of the sort. Sure you did. Anyone with an IQ over 90 can see that.

Missileman

05-28-2007, 08:24 PM

Whatever... I was just trying to stay on topic.

I was only following cupcake's lead...get after him about his straying off topic. :laugh2:

glockmail

05-28-2007, 08:24 PM

glockmail

05-28-2007, 08:25 PM

I was only following cupcake's lead...get after him about his straying off topic. :laugh2:
Who is this cupcake that you have the hots for all of a sudden? You're not gay, are you?

Missileman

05-28-2007, 08:26 PM

Sure you did. Anyone with an IQ over 90 can see that.

Quote the ASSUMPTION that you claim I made.

Missileman

05-28-2007, 08:26 PM

What a simplistic view.

Very simple indeed, but apparently way over your head.

Missileman

05-28-2007, 08:34 PM

Who is this cupcake that you have the hots for all of a sudden?
You are assuming that cupcake is being used as a term of endearment...it's not.

You're not gay, are you?

I've already told you once that I'm not interested in your advances...please stop!

glockmail

05-28-2007, 09:37 PM

You are assuming that cupcake is being used as a term of endearment...it's not.
....

So is it an insult then?

Doniston

05-28-2007, 09:53 PM

Clear on not, it did not make sense. Queers should not be allowed in the military.simply your oponion.

Missileman

05-28-2007, 10:18 PM

So is it an insult then?

No

Pale Rider

05-28-2007, 11:39 PM

simply your oponion.

Welll GGGEEEEEEEEEEE doni..... WHAT AN ABSOLUTELY ASTUTE OBSERVATION!! DID YOU DO THAT ALL BY YOURSELF?... :fu:

Moron.

glockmail

05-29-2007, 07:53 AM

No If I consider it an insult then you should as well. Just like if I called a queer a faggot.

Missileman

05-29-2007, 04:25 PM

If I consider it an insult then you should as well. Just like if I called a queer a faggot.

Perception is subjective and I'm reasonably certain that mine isn't tied to yours...and vice versa. However, since it bothers you, I'll consider not using it anymore.

glockmail

05-29-2007, 04:32 PM

Perception is subjective and I'm reasonably certain that mine isn't tied to yours...and vice versa. However, since it bothers you, I'll consider not using it anymore. Great, so we're back on subject then, which is?

Doniston

05-30-2007, 10:18 AM

Welll GGGEEEEEEEEEEE doni..... WHAT AN ABSOLUTELY ASTUTE OBSERVATION!! DID YOU DO THAT ALL BY YOURSELF?... :fu:

Moron. Would you have preferred that I said you were stupid, an ass hole. out of your mind ,or some such for making such a statement. as you do???

Pale Rider

05-30-2007, 03:42 PM

Would you have preferred that I said you were stupid, an ass hole. out of your mind ,or some such for making such a statement. as you do???

No, it would have been better if you'd have demonstrated how you came to that conclusion. You know... back up what you say? What reasoning did you use?

Doniston

05-30-2007, 05:49 PM

No, it would have been better if you'd have demonstrated how you came to that conclusion. You know... back up what you say? What reasoning did you use? What reason could I have for saying I think it is simply your opinion ither than you have demonstrated just that. (Or isn't that your point??)

another conclusion that you think I have come to perhaps? Just asking.

Pale Rider

05-30-2007, 07:25 PM

What reason could I have for saying I think it is simply your opinion ither than you have demonstrated just that. (Or isn't that your point??)

another conclusion that you think I have come to perhaps? Just asking.

Well yes, almost everything I say here is my opinion, except when I post articles containing facts. And facts are what I base my opinion on, on this subject. I said in order for homos to go through basic training, IF they were allowed in the military, they'd have to be separated one by one and put into squads of girls. They CAN'T put them in with men. They're sexually attracted to men, so it won't work. You might as well put men in with women. They would HAVE to be put where they wouldn't be sexually aroused when everyone was naked in the shower, and that's in with the girls. See what I mean now?

Now suppose you tell me how that's wrong.

Doniston

05-30-2007, 08:25 PM

Well yes, almost everything I say here is my opinion, except when I post articles containing facts. And facts are what I base my opinion on, on this subject. I said in order for homos to go through basic training, IF they were allowed in the military, they'd have to be separated one by one and put into squads of girls. They CAN'T put them in with men. They're sexually attracted to men, so it won't work. You might as well put men in with women. They would HAVE to be put where they wouldn't be sexually aroused when everyone was naked in the shower, and that's in with the girls. See what I mean now?

Now suppose you tell me how that's wrong. I knew that was what you meant, and I still say it is simply your opinion. Prove what you are saying. Sexual actions can be prompted but nudity, but not neccessarly, and certainly not always. Otherwise Nudist colonies would never be able to survive And there is more to my disagreement. Gays Can be, and are in the services They can remain there so long as they don't admit it.

glockmail

05-30-2007, 08:52 PM

Queerness is unnatural, unhealthy, immoral, abnormal, a sick choice and should continue to be banned from the military.

Pale Rider

05-30-2007, 10:15 PM

I knew that was what you meant, and I still say it is simply your opinion. Prove what you are saying. Sexual actions can be prompted but nudity, but not neccessarly, and certainly not always. Otherwise Nudist colonies would never be able to survive And there is more to my disagreement. Gays Can be, and are in the services They can remain there so long as they don't admit it.

I'm afraid the proof to which you ask for doesn't exist. However, common sense does, and my argument that putting a homo into a shower full of naked men would be just as titillating to him as putting me, a hetero, into a shower full of naked women. Neither situation would work on a reoccurring basis, especially in the military, whereas if a homo were to ever say or do anything towards an alpha hetero male in a sexual manner, he'd probably leave the building needing serious medical attention. Queer boys in with real men wouldn't work, period. Not just an opinion, but a fact.

The military is NOT a nudist colony. That comparison is ridiculous.

Missileman

05-30-2007, 10:22 PM

Queer boys in with real men wouldn't work, period. Not just an opinion, but a fact.

Then how do you explain the gays who make it through basic without being found out?

Pale Rider

05-30-2007, 11:36 PM

Then how do you explain the gays who make it through basic without being found out?

They're breaking the law, and don't want to be found out. A totally different situation.

Doniston

05-31-2007, 02:39 PM

I'm afraid the proof to which you ask for doesn't exist. However, common sense does, and my argument that putting a homo into a shower full of naked men would be just as titillating to him as putting me, a hetero, into a shower full of naked women. Neither situation would work on a reoccurring basis, especially in the military, whereas if a homo were to ever say or do anything towards an alpha hetero male in a sexual manner, he'd probably leave the building needing serious medical attention. Queer boys in with real men wouldn't work, period. Not just an opinion, but a fact.

The military is NOT a nudist colony. That comparison is ridiculous. Nope, simply your opinion that is not shared by all. and no one said that the military was a nudist colony. but the comparison point-wise is just. the same conditions apply.

Doniston

05-31-2007, 02:42 PM

They're breaking the law, and don't want to be found out. A totally different situation. that doesn't even slightly equate. They aren't even breaking the law.

Pale Rider

05-31-2007, 03:10 PM

Nope, simply your opinion that is not shared by all. and no on said that the military was a nudist colony. but the comparison point-wise is just. the same conditions apply.

I know my opinion isn't shared by all. You make that point. But it is shared by the majority.

Missleman compared it to a nudist colony, which is rediculous. You're comparing people that walk around 24/7 naked with people that don't. The comparison is absurd.

Pale Rider

05-31-2007, 03:10 PM

that doesn't even slightly equate. They aren't even breaking the law.

They're breaking military law.

Missileman

05-31-2007, 03:49 PM

Missleman compared it to a nudist colony, which is rediculous.

That wasn't my comparison.

Doniston

05-31-2007, 04:19 PM

I know my opinion isn't shared by all. You make that point. But it is shared by the majority.

Missleman compared it to a nudist colony, which is rediculous. You're comparing people that walk around 24/7 naked with people that don't. The comparison is absurd. now are yoiu sure it was missleman and not I?????

Doniston

05-31-2007, 04:20 PM

They're breaking military law. What military law, Kindly show us.

Pale Rider

05-31-2007, 04:53 PM

now are yoiu sure it was missleman and not I?????

OK, I see it was you. Sorry Mm.

Pale Rider

05-31-2007, 04:54 PM

What military law, Kindly show us.

C'mon man... it's common knowledge... "don't ask, don't tell."

glockmail

06-01-2007, 05:52 AM

Then how do you explain the gays who make it through basic without being found out? I've known some pretty tough guys who were queers. But they were liars and cheats too. Same with your military queers as well, apparently.

Doniston

06-01-2007, 10:01 AM

C'mon man... it's common knowledge... "don't ask, don't tell."

Precisely. so if he is a member of the military and doesn't tell, he is NOT breaking any Law. Military or otherwise. (at least regarding that matter)

Doniston

06-01-2007, 10:04 AM

I've known some pretty tough guys who were queers. But they were liars and cheats too. Same with your military queers as well, apparently. Just a question. How were they manifested as liars and (especially) cheats? Who were they lying too, or cheating. (The poor unfortunate women whom they wanted nothing to do with?? :laugh2:)

Doniston

06-01-2007, 10:10 AM

OK, I see it was you. Sorry Mm.

I "WON'T claim that was a lie because I don't think it was intentional. It is only a lie it it is an
"intentional"deception. ( A lesson for all those who beleive otherwise)

glockmail

06-01-2007, 02:09 PM

Just a question. How were they manifested as liars and (especially) cheats? Who were they lying too, or cheating. (The poor unfortunate women whom they wanted nothing to do with?? :laugh2:)
Lying and cheating because they broke the rules of the military.

Missileman

06-01-2007, 03:44 PM

I've known some pretty tough guys who were queers. But they were liars and cheats too. Same with your military queers as well, apparently.

It's not a question of tough that was being raised. It was whether a gay could take a shower with a group of naked men without going into some kind of sexual frenzy. Since there are gays in the military who made it through basic training, it must be possible.

Pale Rider

06-01-2007, 04:03 PM

No delete post function, so just deleting text because it's a double.

Pale Rider

06-01-2007, 04:04 PM

Precisely. so if he is a member of the military and doesn't tell, he is NOT breaking any Law. Military or otherwise. (at least regarding that matter)

Oh, I see... so if I hop on down to my local bank and rob it, but don't get caught, then I haven't broken any laws either. :cuckoo:

Pale Rider

06-01-2007, 04:08 PM

It's not a question of tough that was being raised. It was whether a gay could take a shower with a group of naked men without going into some kind of sexual frenzy. Since there are gays in the military who made it through basic training, it must be possible.

I suppose there's 1 in every 100,000 that can wait until everybody else is done, and then stand facing the back corner hoping no one will see him.

JeffWartman

06-01-2007, 04:54 PM

As Barry Goldwater once famously joked, "you don't have to be straight to shoot straight"

We could learn a lot from the oft-misunderstood Senator Goldwater.

JeffWartman

06-01-2007, 04:57 PM

Oh, I see... so if I hop on down to my local bank and rob it, but don't get caught, then I haven't broken any laws either. :cuckoo:

Well, you're not really understanding the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

The policy clearly states that as long as no mention is made of sexuality, military superiors can't investigate further to see if the person is gay.

glockmail

06-01-2007, 05:01 PM

It's not a question of tough that was being raised. It was whether a gay could take a shower with a group of naked men without going into some kind of sexual frenzy. Since there are gays in the military who made it through basic training, it must be possible.

They prolly choose not to think about sex then, just like they chose to be queers.

Pale Rider

06-01-2007, 05:10 PM

Well, you're not really understanding the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

The policy clearly states that as long as no mention is made of sexuality, military superiors can't investigate further to see if the person is gay.

No, I understand it perfectly well. Not only will an admission of being queer get you kicked out of the military, but if ask your roommate if you can suck his dick you'll get booted out as well. "Actions speak louder than words."

Maybe you could explain that to doniston. HE, (and you), is the one that "doesn't understand."

Doniston

06-01-2007, 05:14 PM

Oh, I see... so if I hop on down to my local bank and rob it, but don't get caught, then I haven't broken any laws either. :cuckoo: Not at all th same thing. there is a law against robbing banks but regarding this matter, the law is specificly written to allow them to be Gay but not to advertise it. (or admit it) Nothing it that law says they can't be gay (Carter admitted commiting adultery in his heart.-but if he didn't do so physically, he didn't break man's law.)

Doniston

06-01-2007, 05:23 PM

I suppose there's 1 in every 100,000 that can wait until everybody else is done, and then stand facing the back corner hoping no one will see him. Why? because he might have an erection? Now days Junior high Boys have penis erection contests in their shower rooms. The erection doesn't indicate that they are gay. only that they consider themselves male animals.

glockmail

06-01-2007, 05:26 PM

Why? because he might have an erection? Now days Junior high Boys have penis erection contests in their shower rooms. The erection doesn't indicate that they are gay.

They may do this in california, but in Sane World they don't. :pee:

Doniston

06-01-2007, 05:27 PM

deleted

Doniston

06-01-2007, 05:28 PM

No, I understand it perfectly well. Not only will an admission of being queer get you kicked out of the military, but if ask your roommate if you can suck his dick you'll get booted out as well. "Actions speak louder than words."

Maybe you could explain that to doniston. HE, (and you), is the one that "doesn't understand."Oh, i do understand very well, but you are putting someting in that law that it doesn't contain. Nothing in that law says a person cannot be Gay, it is only if you tell or act that way, can you be kicked out. However, Gay actions do in fact constitute "Telling" so if you asked your room mate to suck you or vice-versa, that would be tantimount to "Telling"

JeffWartman

06-01-2007, 05:43 PM

No, I understand it perfectly well. Not only will an admission of being queer get you kicked out of the military, but if ask your roommate if you can suck his dick you'll get booted out as well. "Actions speak louder than words."

Maybe you could explain that to doniston. HE, (and you), is the one that "doesn't understand."

Doniston is right about this one. You bring up the example of robbing banks, but there is a law against robbing banks. There is no law against being gay in the military, just a policy not to make yourself known as one.

JeffWartman

06-01-2007, 05:45 PM

Why? because he might have an erection? Now days Junior high Boys have penis erection contests in their shower rooms. The erection doesn't indicate that they are gay. only that they consider themselves male animals.

Uh, I was in junior high only 10 years ago and I can tell you this never happened, and I'd be willing to bet it still doesn't happen.

Maybe in your fantasy :)

Doniston

06-01-2007, 07:13 PM

Uh, I was in junior high only 10 years ago and I can tell you this never happened, and I'd be willing to bet it still doesn't happen.

Maybe in your fantasy :) I have a young friend (15)who was motrified because he was not as well endowed as some of his friends. and he was laughed at because of it. I have a son who is now forty-seven who told ne of the same things in his school in wisconsin.

Doniston

06-01-2007, 07:13 PM

Missileman

06-01-2007, 07:29 PM

I have a young friend (15)who was motrified because he was not as well endowed as some of his friends. and he was laughed at because of it. I have a son who is now forty-seven who told me of the same things in his school in wisconsin.

Remind me to stay out of Wisconsin.

Doniston

06-01-2007, 07:45 PM

Remind me to stay out of Wisconsin. Note I said he is 47, that's thirty odd years ago. so it isn't something that has just cropped up. and if you talk to kids, (or rather they are willing to talk to you --as they are with me) you will learn lot of surprising things about youth sexuality.

glockmail

06-01-2007, 08:25 PM

glockmail

06-01-2007, 08:25 PM

Remind me to stay out of Wisconsin. Homophobe. :laugh2:

Abbey Marie

06-01-2007, 09:02 PM

That's nothing compared to what goes on in the girl's locker room.

(Just seeing if you all are paying attention. ;))

Doniston

06-01-2007, 09:29 PM

Both blue states. What does that tell you? Absolutely nothing. but you can infur whatever you want.

Pale Rider

06-02-2007, 12:12 AM

Not at all th same thing. there is a law against robbing banks but regarding this matter, the law is specificly written to allow them to be Gay but not to advertise it. (or admit it) Nothing it that law says they can't be gay (Carter admitted commiting adultery in his heart.-but if he didn't do so physically, he didn't break man's law.)

Wrong. Whether you freely admit it or not, if you are found out to be homo in the military, you get a one way ticket out, period. That is the law. It is against military law to be in the military if you are queer. If you are discovered to be a homo, how you were discovered makes zero difference, you will be discharged.

Pale Rider

06-02-2007, 12:16 AM

Why? because he might have an erection? Now days Junior high Boys have penis erection contests in their shower rooms. The erection doesn't indicate that they are gay. only that they consider themselves male animals.

And just how do YOU know little boys stand in the shower and have ERECTION CONTESTS? They certainly didn't when *I* was that young.

You're starting to sound a little funny here donis. I'm getting a little suspicious of how you come up with this kind of stuff, and now, why you so vehemently defend fags.

Pale Rider

06-02-2007, 12:22 AM

Oh, i do understand very well, but you are putting someting in that law that it doesn't contain. Nothing in that law says a person cannot be Gay, it is only if you tell or act that way, can you be kicked out. However, Gay actions do in fact constitute "Telling" so if you asked your room mate to suck you or vice-versa, that would be tantimount to "Telling"

Now you've reached the point of psycho-babble donis. You remind me another poster back on the old board called mattskrammer. He also advocated father, daughter sex. He thought incest was perfectly fine. He'd argue a point until it no longer had anything resembling reason in it, just as you have done. Maybe you're his dad.

I'm a little worried how it is you know little boys have erection contests though. You been down the local junior high school peeping in windows? I think it's creepy you know that.

Pale Rider

06-02-2007, 12:24 AM

Doniston is right about this one. You bring up the example of robbing banks, but there is a law against robbing banks. There is no law against being gay in the military, just a policy not to make yourself known as one.

You ever been in the military? Probably not. But don't play word games. A policy is every bit as much a law in the military. If you're found out to be a homo in the military, and makes absolutely no difference whatsoever by what means, you're out the door. That's the law/policy. Call it what you want.

Pale Rider

06-02-2007, 12:26 AM

I have a young friend (15)who was motrified because he was not as well endowed as some of his friends. and he was laughed at because of it. I have a son who is now forty-seven who told ne of the same things in his school in wisconsin.

"YOU HAVE A YOUNG FRIEND..... AND YOU WERE DISGUSSING ERECTION CONTESTS AND PENIS SIZE WITH HIM????????!!!!!!!!!"

Now I think you've stepped over the line. I knew there was something creepy about you. Now I know.

Pale Rider

06-02-2007, 12:29 AM

Remind me to stay out of Wisconsin.

I grew up in Wisconsin. I graduated McFarland High School in 1973, and I can GAURANTEE YOU, this kind of sick shit NEVER happened.

This is weird, creepy shit doniston is talking about. I think it should be looked into.

JeffWartman

06-02-2007, 01:04 AM

You ever been in the military? Probably not. But don't play word games. A policy is every bit as much a law in the military. If you're found out to be a homo in the military, and makes absolutely no difference whatsoever by what means, you're out the door. That's the law/policy. Call it what you want.

The whole point of the Don't Ask/Don't Tell Policy is the policy that, as long as you never talk about being gay and do not allude to it, your superiors can not investigate it.

JeffWartman

06-02-2007, 01:06 AM

Note I said he is 47, that's thirty odd years ago. so it isn't something that has just cropped up. and if you talk to kids, (or rather they are willing to talk to you --as they are with me) you will learn lot of surprising things about youth sexuality.

I have a feeling this whole "I'm an old man in my 70's and I can talk about youth sexuality" that Doniston has is just a gimmick.

Either that or whatever he's doing needs to be investigated by the authorities.

Doniston

06-02-2007, 10:41 AM

Wrong. Whether you freely admit it or not, if you are found out to be homo in the military, you get a one way ticket out, period. That is the law. It is against military law to be in the military if you are queer. If you are discovered to be a homo, how you were discovered makes zero difference, you will be discharged. I agree with everything you are saying here except the emboldened portion.

It is Not against military law to be queer if you do not act it or admit it.. it is against said law if you admit it, act it, etc. that is why it is stated

"DON'T TELL".

Doniston

06-02-2007, 10:49 AM

And just how do YOU know little boys stand in the shower and have ERECTION CONTESTS? They certainly didn't when *I* was that young.

You're starting to sound a little funny here donis. I'm getting a little suspicious of how you come up with this kind of stuff, and now, why you so vehemently defend fags.

I explained how I "KNOW"

You can be as suspicious as you wish. That would definitely be expected of you. (and that is also evident with your parting shot).

I do not defend Fags, vemonous or otherwise. I "ACCEPT" them as I do you, they are also part of the human animal species, as are you.
and quite honestly I don't dislike them for their actions nearly so much as I dislike your prejudices and false inuendos. (thus your actions)

Doniston

06-02-2007, 11:02 AM

Now you've reached the point of psycho-babble donis. You remind me another poster back on the old board called mattskrammer. He also advocated father, daughter sex. He thought incest was perfectly fine. He'd argue a point until it no longer had anything resembling reason in it, just as you have done. Maybe you're his dad.

I'm a little worried how it is you know little boys have erection contests though. You been down the local junior high school peeping in windows? I think it's creepy you know that.

Look, I have been very civil to you since the cage, and I had hoped you had come to some semblence of reasonability. but apparently not,

If you had read my posts, and still post this nonsense, it can only be that you don't want to beleive anything I have said. Your first paragraph is absolute nonsense, and you are arguing against the actual law, as passed.

further, there is no more just cause for you spew that stupodity than there was for you to say I was lying, to you because I didn't answere you as soon as you wished me to. or that I was a drunk because you didn't like my picture.

and furthur yet, I explained how I knew about these goings on. thru report, Not thru seeing it. Kindly cease your your unwarranted attacks.

and Stay on issue, NOT on personallities.

Doniston

06-02-2007, 11:11 AM

I grew up in Wisconsin. I graduated McFarland High School in 1973, and I can GAURANTEE YOU, this kind of sick shit NEVER happened.

This is weird, creepy shit doniston is talking about. I think it should be looked into.
maybe not in your school, and not in mine either. I was reporting things I was told in family type confidence.

Doniston

06-02-2007, 11:26 AM

"YOU HAVE A YOUNG FRIEND..... AND YOU WERE DISGUSSING ERECTION CONTESTS AND PENIS SIZE WITH HIM????????!!!!!!!!!"

Now I think you've stepped over the line. I knew there was something creepy about you. Now I know.

You think it is creepy that family frends and confidants (even kids) are willing to talk about their problems and things that happen to them. Yep, I talk to kids, and if they didn't have confidence in me, they wouldn't talk to me about their problems.

Think what you want, it doesn't surprise me in the least.that you would think this way.

Pale Rider

06-02-2007, 12:44 PM

The whole point of the Don't Ask/Don't Tell Policy is the policy that, as long as you never talk about being gay and do not allude to it, your superiors can not investigate it.

Your point and mine end up the same place. If you're found out to be a queer in the military, by WHATEVER means, you're out the door. That's the law/policy in the military in the military, and a good one for good reason.

Pale Rider

06-02-2007, 12:49 PM

I do not defend Fags, vemonous or otherwise.

The word was "vehemently." Not vemonous... whatever the hell that is. You can't spell, you can't construct a sentence, you can't make sense, and you apparently can't read worth shit. Either your education level is grade schoolish, or you really are senile or drunk. I don't know, and I don't care. Either way, I'm done responding to you. You're an idiot.

And yes, you DO defend faggots, with every breath you take. I think you're a creepy old man, and you should NOT be talking with little boys about erection contests and penis size. That is bad, bad, bad. I truely believe somebody should look into that.

Doniston

06-02-2007, 01:47 PM

The word was "vehemently." Not vemonous... whatever the hell that is. You can't spell, you can't construct a sentence, you can't make sense, and you apparently can't read worth shit. Either your education level is grade schoolish, or you really are senile or drunk. I don't know, and I don't care. Either way, I'm done responding to you. You're an idiot.

And yes, you DO defend faggots, with every breath you take. I think you're a creepy old man, and you should NOT be talking with little boys about erection contests and penis size. That is bad, bad, bad. I truely believe somebody should look into that.

Are you finished now, I hope so, and whether you respond or not is strictly up to you. when I see you making an erroneous statement, I will speak up. ("IF" I think it important to do so) And beleive me, I wonder about you too.

Gunny

06-02-2007, 08:45 PM

Are you finished now, I hope so, and whether you respond or not is strictly up to you. when I see you making an erroneous statement, I will speak up. ("IF" I think it important to do so) And beleive me, I wonder about you too.

Dude, bring back the tinfoil hat pic, huh?

CockySOB

06-02-2007, 09:25 PM

Dude, bring back the tinfoil hat pic, huh?

I gotta agree with Gunny, Doniston. The tinfoil hat picture was priceless!

Doniston

06-02-2007, 09:27 PM

Dude, bring back the tinfoil hat pic, huh? Actually no, but I am about to return to the original. Manana'

Doniston

06-02-2007, 09:30 PM

I gotta agree with Gunny, Doniston. The tinfoil hat picture was priceless! Thanks, but no thanks, I don't see anyone else poking fun of themselves.

CockySOB

06-02-2007, 09:51 PM

Thanks, but no thanks, I don't see anyone else poking fun of themselves.

Fair enough. But I still give you kudos both for the self-deprecating humor AND the creativity you showed us. Huzzah!

Doniston

06-03-2007, 12:16 PM

Fair enough. But I still give you kudos both for the self-deprecating humor AND the creativity you showed us. Huzzah!

Thanks again, but the self-depreciating humer continues. I have no choice.

If I had another face. do you suppose I would still be wearing this one??? HEH HEH.

Rahul

06-03-2007, 12:31 PM

I've read through the last few pages of this thread, and I must say - all you guys that keep putting down on Doniston are taking things a bit too far.

So, young people talk to him about their problems. That doesn't make him gay, or a paedophile, or any of the things you guys keep saying he is.

In fact, there aren't many people out there who'll talk to kids about these VERY REAL problems (re:size etc kids DO GET nervous about such things), and to skirt the issue by dumpin on someone whose actually got a heart, and who actually tries to help is just plain stupid.

:shrug: But, be that way if you want to ...