http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15416613/

New Jersey’s Supreme Court opened the door to gay marriage Wednesday, ruling that homosexuals are entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals, but leaving it to lawmakers to legalize same-sex unions.

The high court gave lawmakers 180 days to rewrite marriage laws to either include same-sex couples or create a new system of civil unions for them.

The ruling is similar to the 1999 decision in Vermont that led to civil unions there, which offer the benefits of marriage, but not the name.

“Although we cannot find that a fundamental right to same-sex marriage exists in this state, the unequal dispensation of rights and benefits to committed same-sex partners can no longer be tolerated under our state Constitution,” Justice Barry T. Albin wrote for the 4-3 majority’s decision.

Which is why we need a consitiutional amendment, which will establish marriage, as between one man and one woman.

Thats exactly right and I hope that happens someday. I don't see how a court can tell a legislative body what it can do and what it can't. There is a separation of powers act isn't there? Isn't that a violation of it? It sure looks like judicial activism to me. I hope a higher court hears this!

I have no problem with civil unions so that two people can enjoy the economic benefits of marriage, but no way is same sex "marriage" acceptable in my view. What's next, marrying your dog?

Yes.

Well, not dogs, per say. But sheep. We want to marry animals. Yep. You caught us.

Next!

I asked my dog, but she's holdin' out for the german shepard down the street.

She's a slut. THAT BITCH!

Folks, same sex marriage and civil unions ARE THE SAME THING. They differ only in pronunciation of the word.

Either you are for equal rights, or you are against equal rights. It's very apparant who favors rights for some, but not all, and it's most un-American.

Then I'm against equal rights. Or, maybe I'm just against nonsense.

I'm fine with it. not one arguement against it has been strong enough to convince me otherwise. It has ZERO effect on me. Good for them for wanting to declare their love like the rest of anyone. " But, It's a SIN! "

No it's not. But so what if it is?

As I've said before, today's oponents of gay marriage will someday look as silly and narrowminded as those people opposing civil rights in the 1950s and 60s look to us now. The arguments are in fact very similar.

And no, allowing two consenting adults to marry legally, regardless of their gender, will not lead to people marrying their dogs, Deane.

My own position on marriage is to get the government out of the marriage business entirely and leave it to churches - and legalize only civil unions, which would presumably include marriages. From the government's point of view, issuing a civil union license should be on the same scale as issuing a driver's license.

Andrew

Because you are in favor of civil unions, you are in favor of equal rights. All these people want are the same rights, tax benefits, and legal benefits that are available to married couples. Whether that is given to them via same sex marriage or a civil union, I don't think it really matters. When the state government grants rights to some, but not all people, that's discrimination.

People that are against equal rights are bigots.

Yep.

And if you don't believe that last line from Pete, then define bigot. Go ahead.

You guys are rockin! Count me in too.

Glad to see this ruling. I like Andrews take. Years from now, opponents of this are gonna look very foolish.

Where marriage is concerned, we should have civil unions at the government level, then let the church do whatever it deems approprate to the faith.

That way, everybody gets the legal protections and the ability to involve their religion any way they see fit. It is a win-win!

As far as I know nobody ever has had the right to marry. When has marriage ever been a right? Does the constitution say that marriage is a right? And what right does any court have to tell any legislators what to do? Aren't they separate branches of government?

Right there, compelling evidence to the importance of a 6th grade education.


Mr. Wayne, I believe a Mr. Johnson here has a number of questions on the table for you. Please be kind enough to answer so that we can all learn a few things from you.

Ignore the troll, Skep! :-)

Andrew

You are the ones that are doing the fighting. You want censorship, not me.

The issue is not having the right to marry. The issue is having the same rights, which are granted by the state, when it comes to taxes, healthcare, family planning, etc. The government discriminates when it allows one group to have rights that another group does not have access to. A union of 2 people, regardless of sex, should be afforded the same rights by the state. Anything less than that is a violation of our Constitution.

Same sex marriage is not something that I can ever be for. I would hope that you would understand my objection to that. Having the same rights is one thing. What concerns me is that civil unions could lead to gay marriage. I wish there could be a way we could have civil unions with the assurance that we would not have gay marriage.

So you agree that gays should receive the same benefits? It's just a matter of what term you use to describe it?

I think we need to define what we mean here. If we could somehow guarentee that there would be no gay marriage than I might be okay with civil unions. What concerns many of us who are Christians is that civil unions could lead to gay marriage. But I am for everyone having the same rights. What I don't want is to pay for the tax breaks of a gay couple! I hope that is understood. I do think we need a marriage ammendment proposal that would keep marriage between a man if a woman. You see if we allow gay marriage then we must allow other possibilities, like polygamy and marriage between men and their pets.

OK. Can we just DATE an animal? No commitment. Just, you know, casual sex between me and say, oh I don't know, a manatee? I'll even pay her taxes for her. What if she's Muslim?

But she'd better be a good cook. A barefinned in the kitchen. And NO sass or it's back to the canals for her.

Wayne is for DATING animals. Just not marriage.

Got it.

( For the record, I just don't buy Wayne anymore. It's just a social experiment. Like Andy Kaufman. I really admire the subtle things you've done too. Like the Paul Anka on the Amazon page. Nice touch.

But I will say, for a while there, I totally bought it. You REALLY nailed me. You should write a book or a TV show about this. I know I've already started working on one and this will be a great way to end season one.

Well done though, man, Sincerely. You got me BAD. )

I am not for marriage between anybody but a man and a woman! I don't think you got my point here. We have to allow all possibilities if we allow any other kind of marriage. I just can't support anything else except marriage between a man and a woman. I live with my cat and she likes to climb on top of my lap. But I don't consider that dating her! Are you willing to pay the $1000 deduction for me and my cat?

anything GOES?
what about two men/one woman,
two women/one man
or...
"I now take this heavenly cow to be my lawfully wedded..."

create your own threesome

There you go.

who cares who marries who. We all end up taking a dirt nap at the end of it all anyhow, might as well enjoy life as you have it be it gay or straight.

hmm . . . now this is a bit of unexpected commentary from mc74. I agree with him.

what about a man and his dog?

this week, man (in Washington state)f***ked their pooch when his wife walked in

I wonder if her response was...

"and you told me he was just your best friend!"

"she" pooch

Shouldn't you be getting ready for your big date with Wayne?

You two have so much in common, it's scary!


(One of you will have to convert though.)

I should think PITA would get involved in this controversy. If unnatural same sex marriage becomes the norm, can man and sheep be far behind?

The comparison of gays to sex with animals is ridiculous and cheapens the entire debate.

Pita is a middle eastern bread product.

I think you mean PETA.

Remember that WA guy who died last year after visiting that "special" farm?

I bet that horse is still traumatized, but at least he (the horse) had some justice.

Like it or not equal protection would demand that other kinds of marriage would have to be allowed if we are going to allow gay marriage.
Are you willing to pay the $1000 deduction for my cat?

Yes. But you have to marry him first. Where are you two registered? PetCo? I'll get you a scratch pole and your cat some books to read.

No it wouldn't.

Simply define marriage as a union of two and only two people. Done, next.

This is not hard.

It won't work that way. If we have gay marriage equal protection would apply. That would demand all possibilities.

Yeah, and how would you get formal consent from an animal for marriage?

It's not the law that prohibits it currently. It's the paperwork. They can't sign their name.

If that were true (and it's obviously not), equal protection would require that we give dogs driver licenses too. Right Wayne?

(I try to ignore him, but it's so difficult!)

I don't see any problem with multi-party unions though. To each his own.

I've seen a squirrel waterskiing. Even had a life jacket on. Very responsible, that rodent.

Maybe mating humans with animals IS the answer!

But they have to be " of age." That's important to me. I mean, marrying an underage billy goat would be sick, man.

Deane sez: "unnatural same sex marriage"

Unnatural? Really? Marriage is a creation of man, not a natural thing. Besides, same sex relationship occurs in the animal kindom too. How can that be "unnatural"?

By Tadc on Thursday, October 26, 2006 - 1:30 pm:
If that were true (and it's obviously not), equal protection would require that we give dogs driver licenses too. Right Wayne?

(I try to ignore him, but it's so difficult!)

I don't see any problem with multi-party unions though. To each his own.


sure why not? But I don't think my cat can see over the wheel! How can she take the driver's test if she can't read?

cj sez: "But they have to be " of age." That's important to me. I mean, marrying an underage billy goat would be sick, man."

Yup.

"marrying an underage billy goat would be sick, man."

you're not a kiddin'!

>>>"The comparison of gays to sex with animals is ridiculous and cheapens the entire debate."

Is that actually possible? And besides, I didn't compare being gay with having sex with animals. I compared same sex people getting married with marrying animals.

Which infers that gay people are less than human, otherwise there'd be no logical basis for the comparison you made.

Well, actually, there isn't, but for arguments sake, if you WEREN'T saying that gay people are less than human, then you couldn't make the comparison with animals.

Nobody thinks that. We just don't think gays should marry. If we allow that than we have no choice but to allow other marriages too.

"If we allow that than we have no choice but to allow other marriages too."

Nobody who supports gay marriage thinks that.

It doesn't matter what you think about that. Its the reality of having gay marriage. We have to apply equal protection everywhere.

Does this line of reasoning extend to everything then?

Like people, for example. Don't they deserve equal protection? --all of them? Is that not a statement that speaks to our equality?

If we allow one religion, for example, to become part of the law. Would we not have to allow all religions to become part of the law? This would mean you would have to share the law and the interpetation of gods will with muslims, catholics, buddists, etc....

It would not be a evangel only show would it? Everybody, who is religious, would have a say right?

Is that as acceptable as is preventing gay marriage for the same slippery slope kind of reasoning?

Maybe this is why sex is such an issue for you folks as well. Allowing some kinds of sex to be ok really means allowing all kinds of sex to be protected equally. People might actually end up doing what feels good instead of doing what a bunch of prudes tell them should be good.

Afterall, what if a gay man and gay woman chose to marry? Don't they deserve the equal protection, especially if they are Christians?

Hm.... Seems like that would be what?

(drum roll)

Gay Marriage!

Schumk.

The equal protection demands that we have marriage for every possibility if we are going to allow for gay marriage. Do you want to pay the $1000 deduction for my cat?

Y'know Wayne, you use the same logic that was used in the Civil Rights fight of black people, or AGAINST black people in the South in the 50s and 60s. "If they are allowed to integrate into our schools, what's next?" "It's going to hurt the education of my white kid!" "It's morally reprehensible!" "IT'S AGAINST THE WILL OF GOD!!!"

So what you are telling us is that a gay couple, who is in love, can't enjoy the same rewards of marriage, whether it be a tax credit, or health insurance for a spouse, or the basic knowledge that they, as a gay person, WON'T be fired from their job or discriminated against for housing a car loan or any other kind of social program solely based on their sexual orientation? (And gay folks have NO protection against these factors.) You are so damn deadset against the basic rights of a human being, an American citizen, because of WHO THEY ARE?!? And if you don't think marriage is a RIGHT, then you are truly a sad sad person. EVERYONE deserves the right to find the one they love and spend the rest of their lives with that person in a union of marriage recognized both by the state and whoever their God happens to be.

Bigotry and persecution "in the name of God" sickens me more than anything I can think of.

A married couple and a gay couple take title differently when purchasing a home. They are looked at differently under the law. That's not fair, and in my opinion, deprives them of the Constitutional rights.

There are ONLY two possibilities in "Equal protection" Gay and Straight. That's it. There are no others. Bestiality is illegal. Being homosexual is NOT. Bestiality's criminal nature means it can't be offered equal protection. Same with Pedophilia, Necrophilia, Incest, and various other crimes against nature. Equal protection then can't be afforded to these types of relationships because of illegality. Whereas homosexuality is NOT illegal, nor should it be.

Besides which, as I already outlined, being homosexual doesn't make you less than human anyway, so the animal comparison is pointless.

I know Fatboy. And I agree. I was just surfing the absurdity wave.

Just for the record.

Sarcasm doens't always translate in type. Just wanted to be clear.

Heck, some of my black slaves are gay.

LOL. I know what you were doing--I was responding to someone else, actually

"Heck, some of my black slaves are gay."

what a helluva guy, Sean

Gays have equal protection, there are no laws, that discriminate on sexual orientation, gays have exactly the same rights as everyone else, they are demanding seperate rights based on their sexual orientation.

Actually there are. We have laws that say only some of us can marry, not all of us. That's discrimination.

By Brianl on Thursday, October 26, 2006 - 6:50 pm:
Y'know Wayne, you use the same logic that was used in the Civil Rights fight of black people, or AGAINST black people in the South in the 50s and 60s. "If they are allowed to integrate into our schools, what's next?" "It's going to hurt the education of my white kid!" "It's morally reprehensible!" "IT'S AGAINST THE WILL OF GOD!!!"



you are comparing apples and bananas here Brian! there is a big difference. Marriage has never been anybody's right. Being forced to sit in the back seat of a bus is a different matter.
Gay marriage is definatly against the will of God. But I don't think you can compare that with discrimination against Blacks.

Foley is "gay" 'cuz he was sexually assaulted by a Priest (as a boy)

if you've not seen "Capturing the Friedmans"
I recommend it. Disturbing, insightful & eyeopening

wow, brianl and mc74, two right-leaning pdxradioers supporting equal rights for all humans . . . I'm impressed.

"Gay marriage is definatly against the will of God. But I don't think you can compare that with discrimination against Blacks."

1) I CAN compare it with discrimination against Blacks, because so many people for so many years used the same reasoning to discriminate. The Ku Klux Klan was a VERY "religious" organization and if you read into their doctrine, you notice that they feel that they are doing God's work by cleansing their neighborhoods and towns of these "subhuman" beings. Wow, sounds a lot like the hatred and venom that comes out of the fundamentalist churches aimed at gay people now!

2) Gay marriage may be against what YOU deem is "the will of God", but others DO have different Gods. Some Christians do happen to be gay, and would love to be recognized by the church in marriage with the person they love. They don't see the bigoted God you seem to love so much (after all, God created these gay people, doesn't he love them and want their happiness too?)

Everyone can marry,they just have to follow the law.

The law doesn't apply equally to everyone that can marry. That's unconstitutional.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Brianl on Friday, October 27, 2006 - 6:17 am:
"Gay marriage is definatly against the will of God. But I don't think you can compare that with discrimination against Blacks."

1) I CAN compare it with discrimination against Blacks, because so many people for so many years used the same reasoning to discriminate. The Ku Klux Klan was a VERY "religious" organization and if you read into their doctrine, you notice that they feel that they are doing God's work by cleansing their neighborhoods and towns of these "subhuman" beings. Wow, sounds a lot like the hatred and venom that comes out of the fundamentalist churches aimed at gay people now!

no they are not the same thing. One who is gay is gay by choice. Like that or not thats the truth. One does not choose to be black.You need to stop making hate something that is only done by fundamentilists! Liberals have hate too. their hate against Conservative Christians is amazing. There is plenty of hate from the left toward us that I have seen here in this forum! The hate toward us comes from probably our vote for Bush



2) Gay marriage may be against what YOU deem is "the will of God", but others DO have different Gods. Some Christians do happen to be gay, and would love to be recognized by the church in marriage with the person they love. They don't see the bigoted God you seem to love so much (after all, God created these gay people, doesn't he love them and want their happiness too?



its against what the Bible considers to be the Will of God. Did you know the Torah also condemns homosexuality? So does Islam. God certainly did not create gays. They chose to be that way. Of course God loves them. But they won't be in heaven according to the scriptures I have read. And if we are "bigoted" against sin then so is God!

"One who is gay is gay by choice"
yes, for consenting adults
not for sexually abused children

all things being equal, adults who molest/sexually abuse children could conceivably marry that child upon reaching the age of consent

It's been proven scientifically that being gay IS NOT choice, it's biological. The rest of your argument falls apart from there.

The crowd that thinks "gay" is by choice is living in the dark ages. They are showing their ignorance.

My question to these people is "when did you make the decision to be hetrosexual? Was there a specific day, did you do some reseach, just what was the procedure?"

I guess I missed "decision day". I just started liking girls at an early age.

I guess this is an area where Wayne and I disagree.

Deane said - "My question to these people is "when did you make the decision to be hetrosexual? Was there a specific day, did you do some reseach, just what was the procedure?"

You know, I have never heard it put that way. I have heard variations. It's not like I needed MORE convincing, but I like the logic there. That would be an impossible-to-answer set of questions if I believed that people decided to be gay.

It's not a HUGE deal, but I thought it was a new one that was worthy of noting. So thanks.

noted here too.

I could probably add the question "did you try both before deciding to see which you liked best?"

Yes. But I was in college and needed the money.

Well, Wayne doesn't have children... is he married? Is he a virgin? Does he secretly feel attracted to men but refrains from acting on it to avoid angering his god or attracting the scorn of his fellow churchgoers?

DA said>>>
Then I'm against equal rights. Or, maybe I'm just against nonsense.


Or your just for plain IGNORANCE.... I'd say it's the ignorance....

Trixter's back on line, there goes the neighborhood.

Oh well, we had at least a few hours of good discussion before the name calling and insults started up again.

They can't argue any other way, Deane. It shows some desparation on their point to me.

"Which is why we need a consitiutional amendment, which will establish marriage, as between one man and one woman."

Nwokie, if we go that route, guys like Limbaugh and even Lars Larson would be arrested, as each has had multiple marriages.

If you want to be safe, go for

One man and one woman (at a time)

"what the Bible considers to be the Will of God"

Coupla pesky things:

1. Says who exactly?

If we are all equal, one mans opinion of Gods will is as good as another mans.

In another thread, Wayne has already implied we are all equal under God. Is this true or not and if so, for all people or not?

2. If god is perfect and all he does is good and harmonious (however you spell it), then how can Gay people exist outside of God's will and vision?

This, of course, is exactly why every ignorant religious person will assert no matter what, that being Gay is a matter of choice. To say otherwise puts both their interpetation of Gods will into question, or brings the idea of God being somehow less than perfect into the realm of possibilities.

It's all circular. Wayne believes his vision of God's will is the one true one out of billions of others over time. His is the "right" one --the truth.

In order for Wayne to be right then, gay people must choose to be gay, because it's not "gods will".

See how this works?

It's a self supporting argument and therefore false on it's own merits, no matter what one happens to believe about God.

Rational People 1 - Wayne 0

Next.

this topic IS a complex issue;
most everyone shares little pieces of the truth
on this thread

"One who is gay is gay by choice. Like that or not thats the truth."

Wow, your church REALLY has you snowballed.

I feel really sorry for you if you honestly think that homosexuality is a CHOICE.

A very close family member of mine is gay. Do you think she CHOSE this? Do you think she CHOSE to be outcast by other family members? Do you think she CHOSE to have to live a lie for the first 40 years of her life so she could have a career, a job? Do you think she CHOSE the ridicule she has received over the years? Do you think she CHOSE all of this? For what?

Don't give me this crap about it being a "choice". You CHOOSE to be led around like a damn sheep by the noose, and you CHOOSE to REFUSE to think and decide for yourself. Don't you dare go there on a subject that you obviously have no idea what the hell you are talking about.

I was waiting at a bus stop in NW Portland
a woman yelled at her two young boys, "stop, don't do that." The other people waiting for the bus stepped back. The two young boys were about 3 and 5 yrs of age. She continued. They did nothing, EXCEPT for being "normal" children.
They bothered no one.

I waited. They sat near me on the bus. I stayed calm. Encouraged this young mother to
choose her battles; let the rest go. One of the boys grabbed my arm, before I deboarded the bus.
He knew I was trying to help.

What was very clear, not only to me, but to others, was that this mother was
emasculating her boys.

Rational People 1 - Wayne 0

Next.


rational means one thing and one thing only: total blind agreement!

Nope.

Oh, and Wayne: Are we equal or not --as people?

That's a question you are gonna have to answer here at some point, or others will realize you are just taking them for a ride.

(if they haven't already)

Rational has a specific meaning. It has to do with clarity and consistency of thought.

If you discuss things rationally, you don't end up making circular arguments! (like the one you made above)

Rational thought passes the test of elementary logic.

Agreement is totally dependant on the topic at hand.


Coupla things for you to consider:

Truth is always true for all people in all times and in all places. This is absolute truth and very few things are known to be absolute.

A label is not true for all people in all places and in all times, therefore it is false --being a generalization, it may not be used as the basis for a proof, or point taken.

One cannot argue with labels and establish any truth that matters. Additionally, if one cannot speak their mind, sans labels, one knows not what they believe, thus becoming a mere tool in the greater scheme of things beyond their understanding.

That's all you Wayne. You are not rational. You use false labels. You do not answer questions.

You may not agree with me, but I am rational, I do answer questions, I avoid the use of labels where core elements of my points are at hand.

At least you know exactly what I believe and why I believe it. You don't have the backbone to actually go the distance and be honest with us in that regard.

You are a coward.

Tell me Wayne, are we or are we not, as people, equal?

OK - look. I don't fully intend on spoiling potential fun to be had. I really don't. But I feel the joke has gone on for too long. And Wayne, you can paticipate or not - I just don't care. So no man-made rules for you here. OK?

OK.

So here it goes;

I really do sleep better believing that Wayne is a well crafted character. In every sense fo the word. Think about Tony Clifton for a moment. Does anyone know who that is? Google him.

Anyway.

Think about the sheer precision it takes to push our buttons. The subtle uses of words used, the lack of support, the ABSOLUTE stonewalling, never giving a single inch, the purity of it all that encompasses Wayne. Google Wayne Blazer now. Look at that. It's TOO perfect.

The cat. The retired postal worker. Living with his mom. The simple church going man. Come on.

I know I'm not the first one to note this. I've been scanning the older posts to give credit where it is due. It was something like " C'mon. A guy this dumb can't really operate a computer."

There are other subtlties that have now, fully, and with great back and forth on my part, have convinced me that this guy is not real. Like I said, I don't want to spoil the fun that could ensue. It's a royally fascinating experiment. The discipline it must take. And I get the vibe that it comes really naturally for the writer. It's so impressive that I actually started telling people about all this at parties. It's really good. Like the first time you got suckered into a Phil Hendrie bit. C'mon. We've all been there. Think about it. It's pristine and perfect.

Now think about what has been happening around here. It's a fucking masterpiece.

I want to shake this guy's hand. " Wayne " is gifted.

I only hope that I can be this creative someday. Honestly. I'll never forget this.

" Wayne " , if you ever decide to take off your mask, please, please, email me at chickenjuggler@aol.com and give me the chance to meet you in person.

Until then, man, you are pointing out some deeply interesting things about the human race, to me.

Keep me in the loop.

Yours in Chirst - Sean.

I'm not sure this is the case. What we have here is somebody who has swallowed a lotta dogma whole. They are feeling the need to express it because the political winds are shifting in ways that are not in their favor.

When called on it, as I have, they go silent just like all the others have.

There is nothing wrong with having faith. Nothing wrong with advocacy of it, discussion, whatever. All good and healthy.

There is no defensible justification for trying to impose it on others. This is what Wayne is all about, despite his claim to the contrary.

Edit: If he's gonna troll it here, he either needs to put up or shut up. That's what the pressure is about.

Ignoring never works. What happens then is that we all end up yielding to a bunch of BS. We've been through many cycles of this and it's always the same. So, I've decided the best thing is to just apply the pressure hard. Wayne can always just step up and admit his agenda and be done with it. That's honest and the conversation can go from there.

That's all it's about really. But this string of false justifications, as if he has some high ground is just crap. Either we see some support for it, or eventually it will be seen for what it is and we will all move on, eventually reaching a nice place where we all are conversing just as we always have.

One difference though. I'm gonna only apply the pressure where it matters, thus keeping the door open for good conversation elsewhere in the interim.

And he has yielded --quite a bit actually. More than others here, who have pulled this crap have. Gotta give credit where credit is due.

If wayne was a rather new poster, I'd consider CJ's position, however, wayne has been here for a long time (and he had a different user name before "waynes world" that too) so I'm inclinded to agree witj KSKD. I don't think he is very computer/internet savvy (apparently unable to do searches on his own at google.com) and here's something else we haven't though of -- he may be getting "help" at home to some of his responses.

What you really mean is that you don't agree with me! Your problem is that you want the whole world to agree with you! And don't tell me you don't care what I think because thats not true.You can't handle people who don't agree with you! Why are you so against free speech if the speech is conservative.

I can't handle idiots. I make it a point to avoid them in real life, and I should probably do the same here. And it has nothing to do with you being a conservative. You are a stupid, ignorant, waste of air.

There are other subtleties that have now, fully, and with great back and forth on my part, have convinced me that this guy is not real.

DUDE, I've been trying to tell you this for like a WEEK now. Trust me. I know how to spot the Clifton's.

KSKD: He's yielded just enough to ensure that a lot of you DON'T give up on the joke. It's not an altruistic, open gesture. It's letting the reel go slack for a second so he can pull the line tight the next minute.

Ignoring never works.

Yes. It does. Seriously man, it does. You ostracize someone enough, they leave. He'll either adapt to a new joke, or become SO irritating that he'll get himself banned, because with no one responding, it simply becomes 50 posts worth of spam.

Let me tell you guys a personal story that might shed new light on how you look at Wayne.

I, personally, on a messageboard about this size or smaller, a general discussion messageboard, have had my own personal troll who followed me around for THREE YEARS. THREE YEARS. And he's playing a character much like Wayne plays. Same sort of right wing retardation with all the gleeful ignorance that Wayne loves to project. He's admitted it ONCE, and only once did he give a bit of insight into why he does it. The answer was facile and stupid, but at least there was a glimpse.

But the idea that simply because it's a small board and he's done it a long time means nothing. It doesn't need to be a large board when every day you check it, there are 10-15 different responses that give you the dose of negative attention you CRAVE so much that you have no problems creating a Tony Clifton and sticking with it for YEARS at a time.

Because he's not looking to get out of this board what the rest of us are. To him, this board isn't about discussion. It's about feeding whatever weird e-sadomasochistic self-flagellation vibe he gets by stirring people up and letting them thrash him. And we feed him well.

The 3-year troll finally stopped earlier this year when--guess what--everyone IGNORED HIM UTTERLY. He eventually got banned because he upped his posting in the hopes ANYONE would respond, and got axed for littering the website with useless spam.

No reason that can't happen here.

Should probably happen with Eastsideguy, too, to tell the truth. At least Wayne isn't as needlessly meanspirited.

Well thanks. I would hope I am not that way. But lets face it if you want gay marriage you will have to get through us conservatives first. This is quite an emotional issue. As shown earlier both sides are 100 per cent sure they are right. We can never solve this matter or any matter by throwing stones at one another. Joe South had a hit called "Walk a mile in my shoes" remember that one? Maybe the Stoner has it! There is a line in it that says "unless you have lived a life of total perfection be careful of stones that you throw." I would hope that at least people can understand the religious objections here.

fatboy, I believe we are slowly going down the ignore route too. I believe many here had a pet theory or two that they wanted to try out on the guy and none of them produced desireable results.

Eventually everyone will tire of him and his nothingness.

Blaming your religion for your ignorance is no excuse.

At least I have a religon. What do you blame your ignorance on?

By Skeptical on Saturday, October 28, 2006 - 2:20 pm:
fatboy, I believe we are slowly going down the ignore route too. I believe many here had a pet theory or two that they wanted to try out on the guy and none of them produced desireable results.

Eventually everyone will tire of him and his nothingness.


go ahead and ignore everyone you don't agree with. You don't want a debate do you?

Interesting points guys...

I'm inclined to follow suit, but for one thing:

Wayne is advocating some non-defensible positions. I wrote a piece here to frame that issue and present it front and center. He's not answered the core question of equality.

(Which is the one big nut to crack on all his BS)

If a significant percentage of us choose to ignore him, I'll go along but for the equality bit. That one I'm gonna press until it hurts. (And I hope it does!)

If one is going to hold the kinds of views that advocate discrimination or entitlement for groups of people, one needs to feel the pressure for that and be able to support it.

Wayne is a complete ignorant ass in this regard.

(That's just how it is Wayne, don't like it? Support it or deal with being an ass everyday --sometimes life is just tough buddy!)

Fats: You may be completely right in this. That's why I'm going to simply focus on one primary issue he cannot be allowed to dodge. Maybe in the end I'll do more harm than good.

Sorry all in advance, but I've a secondary reason for pushing really hard on this one matter:

I've yet to hear anything defensible on this topic over a multi-year period. (Here and elsewhere) Wayne, and all those who attend his fucked up church are flat out wrong ass bigoted selfish people, who frankly need each other for support.

Either he's got something, or he's gonna see in spades just what those kinds of views mean to other people. I want to know.

If I end up doing harm, let me know and I'll suck it up and do what we feel must be done.

go ahead and leave. You don't really want to debate anybody unless you agree with whats being said. I don't see how you can learn anything that way. Its too bad you have to be so mean spirited. We will never agree on much and its probably best that way

Maybe we can agree on this: OSU 33 USC 31!!

Fats: You may be completely right in this.

Here's another bit of weirdness that plays into my general read of the guy: I've posted about 3 pretty detailed posts regarding why he does what he does, and I've been pretty harsh about what it is he does--and I've posted them in threads either Dedicated to, or heavily visited by Wayne himself.

For someone so quick to play the martyr card, notice that he STILL has not directly responded to anything I've said regarding his motives and his real reason for being here. Not even ATTEMPTED to give it a cursory dismissal.

This guy will drop a non-sequitur nonsensical forum turd at the drop of a hat if it doesn't jibe with his personal beliefs--I attack his entire IDENTITY in-depth and...and he doesn't respond ONCE? He's made it a point to respond directly to every single critic he has, everyone who calls him out by name, specifically--except me?

It reads to me like the magician trying to ignore the heckler who tells the audience where he hid the coin.

What do you want to do? Censor everyone who disagrees with you? I get the feeling you are more interested in fighting than debating.

Gee we can't even agree about OSU's great win! Thats how desparate you people seem to be.

the troll has pretty much ignored fellow conservative deane's politely phrased questions too.

no problem with trying to keep the equality thing going too. if he says we're not equal then that's a pretty big smackdown awaiting at the pearly gates for the troll.

Wayne is the real deal. He's not an actor. He's a run of the mill "dumb guy". I'll bet my salary that Wayne's pastor has told him and all the other little brainwashed idiots of Rolling Hills church to speak out and speak up about your beliefs during this election season, because a lot is at stake for these nutjobs. Wayne is simply being that asshole standing on the street corner yelling at everyone that they're going to hell, only Wayne is doing it on the internet. This would explain the sudden explosion of activity by this nutball.

maybe a little visit to a sermom to this church is in order . . . a videocamera would be a nifty thing to take. I'll be happy to edit and burn off a bunch of DVDs. The only problem is that there is NO WAY I'd be able to sneak in -- I look like a "lib" from miles away.

You blamed me for everything else are you going to say that I caused USC to lose its game with OSU? And most everyone who is a Christian at Rolling Hills that I know opposes homosexuality and no swearing or smearing will change anyone's mind. Have you ever tried reasoning? I guess liberals don't reason with conservatives. Only with each other!

Hey, this works fairly well actually.

(third person)

Wayner, are we equal as people or not?

Who knows KSKD? After all, the only thing Wayne is concerned about now is that USC wasn't equal to Oregon State today in Corvallis. (Congrats out to the Beaver Nation, now don't burn down ALL the single-wides in Corvallis in celebration!)

You know, I've never seen a mobile home in Corvallis. I'm sure there are some, but Corvallis doesn't seem that kind of town where trailers are set afire.

Now Albany . . .

Reinstate I'll bet you are right. Check this piece out:

http://www.worldviewweekend.com/secure/cwnetwork/article.php?&ArticleID=1190

Every bible thumper from here to Maine, bent on legislating morality for the rest of us, is very likely echoing this call.

They should call it "Battle for the Weak Mind." That's what it really is.

Totally.

Suckers all of 'em. Well, maybe they are not all complete suckers. Those that have a brain, but lack the strength of character to use it properly are cowards.

Neither looks good.

By Missing_kskd on Sunday, October 29, 2006 - 10:52 am:
Reinstate I'll bet you are right. Check this piece out:

http://www.worldviewweekend.com/secure/cwnetwork/article.php?&ArticleID=1190

Every bible thumper from here to Maine, bent on legislating morality for the rest of us, is very likely echoing this call.


I would say the only people who are legislating morality are the secular left.

By Skeptical on Saturday, October 28, 2006 - 4:58 pm:
maybe a little visit to a sermom to this church is in order . . . a videocamera would be a nifty thing to take. I'll be happy to edit and burn off a bunch of DVDs. The only problem is that there is NO WAY I'd be able to sneak in -- I look like a "lib" from miles away.


I really think you need to visit my church and talk to my pastor and ask him if he would reconsider his position on the subject. I am betting he wouldn't. I know many who go there and I think they would welcome you

It's simple. Most of us, you identify as being the left, are not advocating a more restrictive society like you are. We don't have a huge list of can't do's because "god" says so.

Might as well say it's because "bob" says so. At least we can see bob in the court room and hear his reasons. Your entire justification for a very long list of restrictions for the rest of us essentially boil down to this:

somebody said god said so.

That's hearsay. It's complete and utter bull shit where telling others how to live their lives is concerned.

You've every right to it, but you have exactly zero right to tell others what they should and should not be doing with their lives.

Of course your pastor won't change his position. You guys all pay him to deliver the message of truth to you that fits your particular brand of bigotry. If he did change, he would be looking for work seriously!

Has zero to do with any sort of rational justification for all of these efforts to restrict others actions.

By Missing_kskd on Sunday, October 29, 2006 - 3:02 pm:
It's simple. Most of us, you identify as being the left, are not advocating a more restrictive society like you are. We don't have a huge list of can't do's because "god" says so.


st I believe in moral standards and I believe that we have a God from the Bible who sets them Do you have any moral standards at all? Or is that limited to political affiliation?



Might as well say it's because "bob" says so. At least we can see bob in the court room and hear his reasons. Your entire justification for a very long list of restrictions for the rest of us essentially boil down to this:

not mine. its what I believe the Bible says. Your argument is with God not me


somebody said god said so.

That's hearsay. It's complete and utter bull shit where telling others how to live their lives is concerned.

the Bible says so. I say your problem is with that not me.

You've every right to it, but you have exactly zero right to tell others what they should and should not be doing with their lives.

do I? I wonder what you mean by that. If you mean I have zero right to tell you what my moral standards, think again.


Of course your pastor won't change his position. You guys all pay him to deliver the message of truth to you that fits your particular brand of bigotry. If he did change, he would be looking for work seriously!

Our pastor preaches the Bible. Thats it, nothing more. I think the bigotry is from you and the rest of the secularists. Maybe you need to go to my church sometime


Has zero to do with any sort of rational justification for all of these efforts to restrict others actions.



what do you mean by "rational justification?"
Don't you really mean liberalism? Can't any conservative think rationally? Why do you want little babies killed who have harmed no one? Thats what I mean by pro death. It is that not "pro choice."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't want any pastor to change his belief in God. It is their business, not mine. I DO want to know what Wayne's pastor thinks of wayne's behavior in this forum. SURELY Pastor Ebel did not build up a 10k congregation by behaving like wayne is in this forum . . .

Speaking of Churches, why did wayne leave his old Church? Good money says he was asked to leave.

I know you are wrong and I don't think I would still be there if it were true. I wasn't asked to leave. I think most everyone at both churches agree with me on abortion and homosexuality. Like I said you need to talk to my pastors if you don't believe me.

Do I have standards? Totally have them. Our difference is this: I don't try to legislate my morality onto others without some solid justification that is defensible and rational.

"god says so" is as good as "my buddy bob thinks that's just not ok" where writing laws that regulate others is concerned. That's the nation our founders, many of whom were Christians, created. Why? Because matters of the church are not absolute. We don't yet have truths, only faith.

That really sucks for all of us because we really would much rather deal with truth, but it's the cold hard reality we live in today. Undisputed. Even our founders understood this.

Doubt me? Explain the bazillions of churches and their followers each saying they know gods will then. Somebody has got to be wrong. Could be me! Could be you! Could be Bob down the street! Could be all of us! We just don't know.

My argument is with God?

Really? Care to quote him on that?

Thought so.

Again, the reality is that we have differences that exist because of at least two factors:

one, you don't believe we are equal as people; otherwise, you would have said as much with no worries

two, you confuse your faith with truth and seek to impose it on others because you are sure you are right.

That's the meat of it right there. God has nothing to do with it. It's all you Wayne.

Moral standards and rights:

You've every right to express your morality. No biggie. It's a valuable contribution. However, you've zero right to enforce it on me whatsoever without some justification that is rational and based on known truths.

Your pastor:

He preaches what he thinks the Bible means. I can do the same as can you! He just happens to be particularly good at it. None of this establishes any truth at all. It does help like minded people come together and explore their faith. Nothing wrong with that.

Rational Justification:

Rational has zero to do with ones political leanings. It's about bringing ones point to the table without said point being in bad form (fallacy, circular, faulty cause and effect, etc...), and tying ones position to known truths.

Saying to someone, "you can't do x because I think god would not approve of that" is ok. That's one person expressing their views to another.

However when the target says, "Buzz off, I think god would think highly of it", that's really where it all ends. Neither man, being equal, has any entitlement or power or stature over the other from which to base any authority.

You are crossing that line, along with everyone in your movement that seeks to get laws passed that define your morality for others. You've got essentially nothing but "I don't think god would approve of that." as your basis for your authority.

Wayne, that isn't shit.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Missing_kskd on Sunday, October 29, 2006 - 6:40 pm:
Do I have standards? Totally have them. Our difference is this: I don't try to legislate my morality onto others without some solid justification that is defensible and rational.


I get the feeling that your standards can only not involve God. And I still want to know if "rational" is really liberal?

"god says so" is as good as "my buddy bob thinks that's just not ok" where writing laws that regulate others is concerned. That's the nation our founders, many of whom were Christians, created. Why? Because matters of the church are not absolute. We don't yet have truths, only faith.
Its too bad if you don't think so but I do and many of the founders agree with me.Every one of the colonies had its own church. My pastor spoke a lot about Separation of Church and state. Did you know it has a religious history and was written in 1644 by a baptist minister? its true! The secularists have misused it


That really sucks for all of us because we really would much rather deal with truth, but it's the cold hard reality we live in today. Undisputed. Even our founders understood this.

that doesn't change the truth. You see the truth remains regardless of whether or not it suits our fancy. Our founders understood that. Why do you think we have laws at all if "it feels good do it?"


Doubt me? Explain the bazillions of churches and their followers each saying they know gods will then. Somebody has got to be wrong. Could be me! Could be you! Could be Bob down the street! Could be all of us! We just don't know.

what matters is not what the church says but what the Bible says. I have been to church many times and have heard pastors often misquote the Bible and it has caused a lot of problems. That happened to my old church that I left.


My argument is with God?

Really? Care to quote him on that?

Thought so.

how about Psalms 14 verse one: the fool in his heart says there is no God


Again, the reality is that we have differences that exist because of at least two factors:

one, you don't believe we are equal as people; otherwise, you would have said as much with no worries


again I must ask what you mean by "equal?" If you are talking about homosexuals marrying I cannot agree.

two, you confuse your faith with truth and seek to impose it on others because you are sure you are right.

Its not me thats doing that its the Bible.
sooner or later we will have to deal with our relationship with God. Whether we believe in him or not won't matter someday.

That's the meat of it right there. God has nothing to do with it. It's all you Wayne.

Moral standards and rights:

You've every right to express your morality. No biggie. It's a valuable contribution. However, you've zero right to enforce it on me whatsoever without some justification that is rational and based on known truths.


nobody is doing that. Its beginning to sound like a broken record. Why are you secularists so paranoid of forcing when all who believe are just sharing our hearts. How is that forcing? Have I ever said "follow God or else?" that would be forcing. I don't believe in that but I have friends who approach non believers that way and I don't think thats right.


Your pastor:

He preaches what he thinks the Bible means. I can do the same as can you! He just happens to be particularly good at it. None of this establishes any truth at all. It does help like minded people come together and explore their faith. Nothing wrong with that.

I think the world of my pastor for that reason. I think the pastor preaches from the Bible and tries to help those who are struggling. We had someone share how she had struggled with lesbianism and found victory and is involved with "Portland fellowship." I don't know if any have heard of that.


Rational Justification:

Rational has zero to do with ones political leanings. It's about bringing ones point to the table without said point being in bad form (fallacy, circular, faulty cause and effect, etc...), and tying ones position to known truths.

its something I want too but its really hard to do that when everyone is so sure that they are right! I fear that both sides are handling matters with religious fanaticism. I see it from both the left and the right!


Saying to someone, "you can't do x because I think god would not approve of that" is ok. That's one person expressing their views to another.

However when the target says, "Buzz off, I think god would think highly of it", that's really where it all ends. Neither man, being equal, has any entitlement or power or stature over the other from which to base any authority.

I have no desire to tell you what to believe. Thats something you have to decide in your own heart. If you don't want to believe thats no skin off of my chest. I mean its your funeral. Some Christians might have been more pushy than that and its too bad if they were. I suspect it probably turned you off. I am sorry if it did. But many Christians I know would rather do it in a more gentlemanly manner. I hope you understand they meant well and care about your soul

You are crossing that line, along with everyone in your movement that seeks to get laws passed that define your morality for others. You've got essentially nothing but "I don't think god would approve of that." as your basis for your authority.

Wayne, that isn't shit.

you must realize that I alone can't do that at all. Thats why we have elections. We had measure 36 passed because we believe that marriage has always been between a man and a woman. We didn't want Oregon to become like Massachusetts. We have measure 43 which merely says that a kid has to let a parent know if it is having an abortion. The measure nowhere forbids abortion. Something else too. If Rowe vs Wade is ever overturned it won't ban abortion at all, thats a myth some liberals have. All it does is place the matter before the states and away from the federal government.

Rational is not liberal. Said it a few times already. Why not take a visit to www.criticalthinking.org.

Truth is not something we can change. Agreed. However, you've not tied your positions to truth at all, only faith.

"nobody is doing that..."

Your whole movement, "you have no idea what a force we are!" is all about nothing but that! It's offensive and an abuse of religious freedom.

Have I ever said "follow God or else?"

Actually you are! In essence, your position here is that you and your fellow believers are becoming a powerful force. A force for what pray tell?

Getting the law to reflect your view of God's will using nothing but the Bible for support. Sorry, but that's not only forcing, it's an outright denial of anyone elses right to live freely.

"[it's] something I want too but its really hard to do that"

Hate to say it, but you are a coward. Sure it's tough to bring solid support for your beliefs to the table! Understandable. However it is necessary if you are to get others to see where you are coming from and actually respect you for it.

When you say crap like, "I don't believe in homosexuality", or "we are all born sinners, that's just something we all have to deal with", you can expect a pretty serious pushback from a lot of people.

Why?

Because not one word of is has any real basis in truth.

"I have no desire to tell you what to believe."

Bullshit. If this were really true, you would not be supporting an administration that has done this nation grave harm, committed crimes against the people, legislated away rights many of us died for, etc....

That's a lotta damage. Why continue to support it? Because they are letting you get your way, despite not having any solid basis for it on a majority of your issues.

Yep. We do have elections.

Seems our two party system has a very serious flaw here. You can blindly support the GOP, turning a blind eye to a whole host of things that are not ok. (Not ok in God's eyes as most people interpet that too!)

In return you get to pack courts with people friendly to your beliefs, same with legislators.

That's not advancing truth or promoting your faith in good faith. It's a straight up back room deal where other people get their freedom limited because it makes the both of you (GOP and your brand of evangels) feel better.

However you don't care about that. Why? Because you are so convinced your brand of Christianity is the RIGHT one, that you will do most anything to see it embodied in the law, regardless if it makes any real sense to us as Americans for it to be there in the first place.

The measures you speak of are short term squabbles in a much larger battle. Frankly, all of those can be changed again with another vote. All just chest thumping for the cause.

And again we have a dodge.

Are we equal as people Wayne or not?

people, I know, I know, I'm not following my advice, but is see a slither of an opening here so I am going to respond to wayne . . .

Wayne, yes I believe your pastor and most of the congergation opposes abortion and the other stuff you mentioned. No problem and I'm NOT trying to change their minds. Thats settled.

What I DO wonder if Pastor Ebel agrees with you about how you are behaving IN THIS FORUM! What you are doing is making GOD, religion and ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH look real BAD. I believe that Pastor Ebel would prefer you did things differently.

Have you talked to him? Has he visited this forum?


Are we equal as people? yes or no?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Missing_kskd on Sunday, October 29, 2006 - 7:48 pm:
Rational is not liberal. Said it a few times already. Why not take a visit to www.criticalthinking.org.

Truth is not something we can change. Agreed. However, you've not tied your positions to truth at all, only faith.

"nobody is doing that..."

Your whole movement, "you have no idea what a force we are!" is all about nothing but that! It's offensive and an abuse of religious freedom.


What movement? what in the world are you talking about? should we have laws or not? do you know where they came from? Thats right, the Bible! thats the fact. And if its an abuse of religious freedom then its okay to kill isn't it? Do you have any idea hat you are saying?



Have I ever said "follow God or else?"

Actually you are! In essence, your position here is that you and your fellow believers are becoming a powerful force. A force for what pray tell?


show me where I have said you must follow Jesus as your savior! You can't can you? I think maybe God is writing his truth on your heart and its making you a bit uncomfortable. Truth is supposed to be that way! Whether its my faith or not thats something thats supposed to get one out of his comfort zone! If thats powerful than thats the way truth is supposed to be. But the difference is that we have a God that is a more loving supplier of truth than wherever else you may want to find truth!



Getting the law to reflect your view of God's will using nothing but the Bible for support. Sorry, but that's not only forcing, it's an outright denial of anyone elses right to live freely.

"[it's] something I want too but its really hard to do that"

Hate to say it, but you are a coward. Sure it's tough to bring solid support for your beliefs to the table! Understandable. However it is necessary if you are to get others to see where you are coming from and actually respect you for it.



me a coward? I think you might feel a bit that way if you argued by yourself! Why do I even bother to come in here if I know I will be trampled on by every secularist in Portland? How does that make me a coward? Would keeping away from here make me any less of a coward? Answer that!


When you say crap like, "I don't believe in homosexuality", or "we are all born sinners, that's just something we all have to deal with", you can expect a pretty serious pushback from a lot of people.

Why?


because the Bible says homosexuality is a sin and we all are sinners and only the love of God can free us from that. What would you rather me say than deal with it? believe or else? Where have I ever have done that? And forget about other Christians you may have had a bad experience with in the past I am talking about me. One thing I have tried to be is not pushy

Because not one word of is has any real basis in truth.

"I have no desire to tell you what to believe."

Bullshit. If this were really true, you would not be supporting an administration that has done this nation grave harm, committed crimes against the people, legislated away rights many of us died for, etc....

thats your problem not mine. I am a big supporter of Bush and think we are very fortunate to have him as President and what does that have to do with what we are talking about?

That's a lotta damage. Why continue to support it? Because they are letting you get your way, despite not having any solid basis for it on a majority of your issues.

Yep. We do have elections.

Seems our two party system has a very serious flaw here. You can blindly support the GOP, turning a blind eye to a whole host of things that are not ok. (Not ok in God's eyes as most people interpet that too!)


I agree on this part!
There are problems the GOP has. I wish they wouldn't spend like little Democrats. I wish they would deal with immigration. But as a voter I must consider the alternative. I would rather
GOP represent me or a party, the Democrats, which has turned into actually a socialist party. Someone said that the GOP is now what the Dems were under LBJ and thats probably true, except that the GOP actually has people who care about moral issues.I would much rather have that than people who think everything is relative like liberals do.

In return you get to pack courts with people friendly to your beliefs, same with legislators.


I will settle for that anyday over activist judges who insist on legislating from the bench. This election is so important because whoever controls capitol hill will have a big impact on selecting our judges. Of course Bush will still do that but we know Kennedy and his pals will stand in the way unless they are activist judges and thats what scares me the most about the Democrats

That's not advancing truth or promoting your faith in good faith. It's a straight up back room deal where other people get their freedom limited because it makes the both of you (GOP and your brand of evangels) feel better.

However you don't care about that. Why? Because you are so convinced your brand of Christianity is the RIGHT one, that you will do most anything to see it embodied in the law, regardless if it makes any real sense to us as Americans for it to be there in the first place.

what I see is the left doing the exact same thing. They are so convinced they are right that they can't say anything without smearing anyone they don't agree with. It comes from both sides.


The measures you speak of are short term squabbles in a much larger battle. Frankly, all of those can be changed again with another vote. All just chest thumping for the cause.

And again we have a dodge.

Are we equal as people Wayne or not?
I will not answer that at all unless you tell me what you mean here. I will not budge if you mean gay marriage and I am sure thats wht you mean and you will never get me to support that no matter how many times you repeat yourself. My faith won't allow it and neither will the Bible!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Skeptical on Sunday, October 29, 2006 - 9:09 pm:
people, I know, I know, I'm not following my advice, but is see a slither of an opening here so I am going to respond to wayne . . .

Wayne, yes I believe your pastor and most of the congergation opposes abortion and the other stuff you mentioned. No problem and I'm NOT trying to change their minds. Thats settled.

What I DO wonder if Pastor Ebel agrees with you about how you are behaving IN THIS FORUM! What you are doing is making GOD, religion and ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH look real BAD. I believe that Pastor Ebel would prefer you did things differently.

Have you talked to him? Has he visited this forum?


Are we equal as people? yes or no?


I have and I have talked to many people there and more people agree with me than with you. We know the Bible condemns homosexuality. There is no way you can get us to change on that.
What do you mean by "equal?" if you mean gay marriage forget it, thats not going to work. I am sure that is what you mean by "equal." What else could that mean?

I think you need to schedule an appointment with my pastor about this matter because I would say you are very concerned about it. Maybe he could help you see what the Bible really says about homosexuality.

so, you're saying people are NOT equal then?

There is no hidden meaning.

Either people are equal or they are not.

If, we consider people to be equal in the eyes of the law, then we must apply the law to them all equally. Period.

What ramifications that has is another discussion.

"Why do I even bother to come in here if I know I will be trampled on by every secularist in Portland?"

Hey, if you feel bad, that's really up to you. All I'm asking is for some fundemental support for your positions on things.

It's in the Bible, or God says so, isn't enough.

Your faith is your business. However, if you find you cannot defend it, or even properly articulate it without false labels, you might reconsider it at some point --or not. Again, up to you.

But there is absolutely no way you can expect others to let it stand at face value when your own actions and words show it to be indefensible.

The things you say here, your actions you take and the influence you have on others is doing people harm that would not otherwise have to occur.

If ones faith advocates harm to others, isn't that just a bit at odds with the whole idea of it in the first place?

Think about it.

Are we equal or not?

It's not a difficult question. There really are only two answers: yes or no.

Law coming from the Bible?

Who wrote the Bible Wayne?

People.

So we know which came first of the two. People came first.

Law is written by people and existed in the form of merchant co-ops and community justice before the Bible was written.

Therefore, the Law did not originate from the Bible.

ALiens wrote the bible for their entertainment and amusement.

we are all like a bad episode of Melrose place.

Wayne should be put in jail for his beliefs, and never let out.

You cannot watch television anymore without some gay overtones or material in it! The networks are just caving into political pressure to air this crap and make our children numb to it!

TV.....Political, Social, and Moral novacaine for society.

Resistance is futile....your re-programming will now commence...do not turn of your TV until complete! Reminds me of the subliminal messages in the movie "They Live". Networks are no better than drug pushers. They get behind a belief and just keep cramming it down your throughts until you just give in to it and except it. It starts out innocent enough and before you know it two dudes are kissing on prime time free television. I about wretched the other night channel surfing and saw a prime time show that did just that.

Why are there so many shows with gay material and so few with religious content?

I would watch 7th Heaven re-runs over "Wilma and Grace" any day. 7th Heaven is not overdone and deals with real issues.

Watched the news the other night....Shootings, Rape, Burglary, Car Accidents, Vandalism, Court Cases, Political Rhetorect were the major topics.....where is the good in the news these days......it is there but good news is bad ratings so they choose not to air it.

Just venting........

Ohhhmmmmmmm.....ohhhhmmmmmm......ohhhhhhmmmmmmmm


BTW...I have my own beleifs and will not force them on any of you and will not accept anyone forcing theirs on me or my family. I would discuss them openly but will not get into any arguements about them as I am entitled to them the same as you are entitled to yours. Discussing them is fine but who is anyone to tell someone that they are wrong in their beliefs or try to force their beliefs on them. I certainly do not want to point a finger at anyone because I have many things fingers can be pointed at as well.

Have a Good one

When it comes to the state issuing rights, the only thing that matters is equality under the law. Otherwise, someone's constitutional rights are being denied. I can understand why some people have problems with gays. Usually, that's due to ignorance more than anything. But, when it comes to the law, we must all be looked at the same. Anything less, is wrong, regardless of your personal opinions.

That's perhaps the best way of saying that I've seen in a good long while.

Its not because of ignorance that we oppose homosexuality its because the Bible condemns it.
Its really too bad that you people can't understand the religious objection here.




Are we equal or not?

It's not a difficult question. There really are only two answers: yes or no

The answer is gays don't have the right to marry.
Nobody has that right!

Why are there so many shows with gay material and so few with religious content?

because without God homosexuality is okay and without religion in America anything goes.

My personal views are just that. I believe in equality so the day two men or two women can conceive a child on their own is the day I will consider bennefits for their partners. Until then I consider and personally believe that a marriage is between one man and one woman. Out of curiosity do people in a civil union have the option to file a tax return as "married filing jointly"?

Nope. This violates the principle of equality inherent in our law. It's one element of the problem.

I know most people are not opposed to getting the legal issues straightened out so they can enjoy the same benefits. That measure of equality seems to fly with a lot more people than when the word "marriage" is evoked.

IMHO, the whole opposition to this boils down to a fair number of people who really don't like gay people. Not addressing this issue really continues a government sanctioned stigma on gay people, despite clear scientific evidence it's not a choice issue.

(That small fraction of gay people, who have managed to 'convert' are very likely bi-sexual and thus able to basically deal for the most part.)

There is another way to fix this. We simply take the government out of marriage altogether! Getting married then has two parts:

-the legal part where two people become joined legally

-the religious part where they utter their vows before God, or whatever suits them.

Frankly, I think that's more in line with the roles that government and the church currently play a majority of the time anyway.

Think God marries you?

Check in with me after paying for your license.


Oh, and Wayne are we equal under the law as people or not?

The gay marriage thing is such a waste of energy. Marriage in the eyes of the state is one thing. Marriage in the eyes of the "church" is something else.

This whole brouhaha is such a no brainer.

The "church" need not condone, authorize, or regulate any marriage outside of its congregation. The "church" has no and should have no say in the eligibility of benefits under state law.
The state, in ruling for equal distribution and application of laws pertaining to benefits, and the federal government as well, does not need to obey the laws of any church or religion.

You only need the approval of any given church to be married under the guidelines or laws of that church. You do not need their approval to be married in a civil ceremony.

Wayne's continued attempt to project the beliefs of the evangelical christian right on the whole country is part of the problem, not part of the solution. Two Hindu's getting married in a Hoboken court don't need the approval of the evangelicals.
If the state, therefore, allows for a union of same sex individuals, then it's none of the church's frikkin business.
If the states do not want to allow for this, then they had better rethink their adoption laws, their single mother laws, etc. etc. because all that denying same sex couple benefits does is hurt children.

That's what Wayne wants, Wayne wants all non evangelical children of single mothers and gay couples to be denied benefits. Isn't that true, Wayne?

As applied to homosexuals, the state(s) need to clarify their laws concerning the inclusion of said married couples and their legal children, but in so doing they are not breaching or overturning any church's doctrine.

This is mostly a problem caused by the church trying to get into the business of governing the state. If they would just butt out these problems and issues would get resolved a lot faster.

A gay couple that have lived together as one household for 20 years and have built joint assets over that time still have to file as unmarried, just the same as if they were college roommates. I don't believe that's equality under the law. They also must make special concessions when purchasing a home, saving for retirement, financial planninig, insurance, etc.

My CPA always runs our taxes as unmarried and married, and by being married, our return was about $2K higher than if my wife and I were just "roommates." Is this fair?? If you were gay and were willing to make the same committment, isn't this blantant discrimination by our government?

Also, even though gay couples obviously can't conceive a child on their own, many gay couples have children and deserve the same rights under the law that their hetrosexual counterparts enjoy. So, by not allowing equal recognition, you are hurting the families and children as well.

I hear Deadeye Dick's big fat lesbian daughter is heading to New Jersey to marry her sweetheart -- a 300-pound trucker named Rosie with the coolest mullet you ever saw.

Now, if only Mrs. Cheney would come out of the closet, like those crazy rugmunchers she wrote about in "Sisters".

Lars gave it a thumbs up and more extremities!

Get it?

Some gay couples come into relationships with kids already. Such was the case with my sister. Her partner had 2 kids (3 & 6) when they became partners. They own two homes, one in town and one on the coast.

Pete you make some good points about the extra dance same-sex couples must perform in order to keep their assests within their joint custody.

By Missing_kskd on Monday, October 30, 2006 - 12:46 pm:
Nope. This violates the principle of equality inherent in our law. It's one element of the problem.


you really did mean gay marriage didn't you? Thats what you really meant by "equality?"
With the libs here thats the ONLY thing equality can mean!

That's what Wayne wants, Wayne wants all non evangelical children of single mothers and gay couples to be denied benefits. Isn't that true, Wayne?


you are absolutely right. I don't want to pay for their $1000 deduction. Thats probably why you really want gay marriage isn't it? Forget about "equality." Its just a smokescreen, isn't it? We have that already!

This is mostly a problem caused by the church trying to get into the business of governing the state. If they would just butt out these problems and issues would get resolved a lot faster.

its the exact opposite. Its a matter of the government becoming so big and telling the church how to handle its affairs. You want to force churches who oppose gay marriages to perform the ceremonies! Yet you say you are against forcing? Please!

Bullshit

Last time I checked, the church does not collect or pay taxes, and is not the authority on anything in regards to law.

I doubt any couple would want to wed at a church that is hostile towards their existence, so you need not worry that anyone would "force" any church to perform a ceremony that they don't want to do.

And, I'd like to know about the $1000 tax deduction you're talking about, as my CPA would like to know about this as well.

I'm thinking we should limit church property tax exemptions to one acre for the actual building and and one acre for parking, period. If a church needs more buiulding space or parking, like for Rolling Hills's 10K members, they can pay tax on that extra property. No need to give them a tax-free windfall from the dough of 10K members to blow on trying to get God legislated in government. Eh?

This ought to raise enough funds for Bush's war.

eh?

Why stop there? Why not make all churches illegal so you can have your gay marriage? Would that make you happy?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Reinstatepete on Monday, October 30, 2006 - 3:48 pm:
Last time I checked, the church does not collect or pay taxes, and is not the authority on anything in regards to law.

I doubt any couple would want to wed at a church that is hostile towards their existence, so you need not worry that anyone would "force" any church to perform a ceremony that they don't want to do.

And, I'd like to know about the $1000 tax deduction you're talking about, as my CPA would like to know about this as well.



You are so filthy rich I guess you don't worry about that do you? Everybody gets that $1000 per deduction. What you want is that I pay for a deduction for a gay couple. Isn't that you really want? And whether or not a church is hostile won't matter. If gay marriage becomes law no church will have any say. Its either perform the ceremony of the couple will sue the churh. And the activist judge hearing the case will side with the couple! Can't you at least understand why we object to gay marriage?

No.

That sure figures.

My household does alright, but I'm not "filthy rich." If I was, I'd pay to have someone come break your kneecaps for clogging up this board with your BS

With that said, there is no $1000 deduction that I'm aware of. There is the standard deduction of $5150 for single and $10,300 married. Where are you getting the $1000 deduction from, Wayne? Is this more made up bullshit spewing forth? Tell me what $1000 deduction you're talking about, I want to make sure my CPA gives this to me as well.

If gay marriage or civil unions become recognized by the state, as they should, church's will not have to perform ceremonies if they don't want to, and that's fine. Someone else will. That's called a free market.

The core argument is not weather you object to gay marriage or civil unions, the core argument is whether not allowing gays to be a recognized union (whatever you want to label it) is unconstitutional. I believe it is.

Thats the $1000 deduction I pay every year when I fill out my tax forms Pete! You must be wealthy to have a standard deduction of over $5000! I object to gay marriage because it violates everything that I have been raised and taught as well as the Bible condemns it as well as other faiths. Nobody is saying that people shouldn't have the same rights. But I get a bit resentful when people think marriage is a right. Civil unions are one thing. I would be willing to talk about that. But the concern I have and so do many other Evangel Christians is that unions like that are the next step toward gay marriage. I say if civil unions can be worked out with a guarentee there would be no gay marriage thats something at least I might be for. I have many Christians I know who don't want even civil unions.

I know that my ULTRA-RIGHT winged father gets every tax cut known to man because he is FILTHY rich. He complains day after day about the fact that we pay to much towards taxes in this country and that we shouldn't have to pay for every-one's stuff. What he doesn't understand even after telling him 8 million times is that he wouldn't have parks, roads, schools, libraries and other things in the community if we didn't pay taxes. He still pisses and moans while he rakes in MILLIONS upon MILLIONS every year.
Has it hurt me??? Not in the least.... Do I enjoy the fact that I'm making good money and benefit from his wealth. F NO! But I do NOT complain when a school needs to be built or a levy needs to be passed so we can improve road conditions in Washington County. Tax money pays for things in America. Until BIG BUISNESS steps up and pays for schools, roads and parks then we have to with our tax money.
Wayner...
Show us where this $1000 deduction is I'm looking for it in my tax book and I simply can't find it......

Whats "ultra right?" everyone that is more conservative than you are? I guess my deduction is probably closer to $1500. But the point is the same. I don't want to pay any part of a gay couple's benefits. And its wrong to force a church to perform a gay wedding. And I thought you were against forcing! Apparently only if you are the victim.

ULTRA-REICH is everyone that thinks their way is the ONLY way and that we should think like minions and follow what the Government says!!!
SEIG HILE!
SEIG HILE!
SEIG HILE!

ahem, he does his own TAXES??!!! sounds like an audit is in order.

Wayner said>>>>
I don't want to pay any part of a gay couple's benefits.

But yet you sit there on your computer using pension money that WE as TAX-PAYING American's payed for??? HYPOCRITE!!!!

Not me. You are the hypocrite. You are the one who is accusing me of forcing. Yet you are doing the forcing when it comes to gay marriage.

At least I pay taxes. It sounds like some of you dont. That probably explains why you people are such liberals!

On the kneecap issue....I hear Tanya Harding is looking for work and she will do it for cheap....Her number is 1-900-KNEECAP. LOL

I posted a thread once about disliking the fact that I live in Washington and work in Oregon and have to pay Oregon income taxes. The consensus was TFB if you dont like it work in Washington or move to Oregon. I have done this for a long time and still do not like it. I accept it as a fact of life but I still dislike it.

Until both state and federal government brings into law that gay couples have rights to bennefits same as a married man and woman then all I have to say is "TFB". You chose that lifestyle and know the laws involved with it so live with it! Feel free to express you dislike for it and lobby to change it but until then quit crying that your rights are being infringed upon because under current laws they do not exist so they cannot be infringed upon. I do not dislike gay people but I beleive that a marriage is between one man and one woman. Apparantly the government agrees with that (at least until the polls say they should not).

Actually Wayne, you are treating them differently than you would other people. You are discriminating for no good reason other than you think they could choose to be like you and don't.

That's ignorant and really selfish.

Looks like I might be done for a while folks.

Wayne has made it clear he does not believe in equality. Some of us are less than deserving people in his eyes and he justifies it with God.

Not only does that make Christians everywhere look really bad, but it's an insult to anyone who does recognize we are all human.

Bigot.

I think I'm going to write a letter to a Church in the near future. It's not gonna be pretty.

Let me make that clear.

I'm taking some leave.

All yours Wayner.

Vote Dem folks if you haven't already.

I do not dislike gay people but I beleive that a marriage is between one man and one woman. Apparantly the government agrees with that (at least until the polls say they should not).


thats exactly what I feel. Every state that has tried a "measure 36" has passed it by a wide margin so that tells me that most people don't want gay marriage either.

Wayner once again IGNORANTLY said>>>>
Not me. You are the hypocrite. You are the one who is accusing me of forcing. Yet you are doing the forcing when it comes to gay marriage.

At least I pay taxes. It sounds like some of you don't. That probably explains why you people are such liberals!


Wayne your such a tool! Do you worship Satan by chance???
Who the F said I forced gay marriage on ANYONE? You don't know a GD Fin thing about me when it comes to that do you old man???? Huh? Didn't Fin think so.
Thanks for wasting every one's time on OUR dime! Could I get whatever I contributed to your pension back PLEASE!

You want gay marriage don't you? Thats what you are pushing aren't you? No matter what language you want to use I can't support that. And I worship the Lord. Who do you worship? Yourself?

"Nobody is saying that people shouldn't have the same rights. But I get a bit resentful when people think marriage is a right."

By you wanting to deny gay couples the RIGHT (and yes, it is a RIGHT) to marriage and the laws and privileges that come with marriage, YOU are saying that gay people shouldn't have the same rights.

What do you want, Jim Crow laws? Plessy v. Ferguson? Separate but Equal? Segregated drinking fountains, one for "straights" and one for "gays"?? Different restaurants and other establishments? Is that what you would rather have?

I love it how people twise the "word of God" (though the Bible was completely written, and continues to be interpreted by MAN) to hate and discriminate against others. Wayne, bend over and I have a better place for that Bible of yours.

The government used to agree that blacks shouldn't have rights either, and polls backed it up, along with German Shepherds, billy clubs, and fire hoses.

Those of you bigots who are against equality from our government are shameful, ignorant people. When I hear people using excuses like "they chose that lifestyle" or "the bible says being gay is a sin" you know it's time to move on. The ignorance of both of those statements is pathetic and overwhelming.

jo sez: "You chose that lifestyle"

Oh really, gay people CHOOSE to be gay? Did you CHOOSE to be hetrosexual? If so, exactly when did you make that decision?

Being gay is NOT a choice. All things being equal, why would one CHOOSE to be gay in a backward thinking time as things are today?

You CHOOSE to live in Washington. Gay people don't CHOOSE to be gay. Two different things entirely.

Do you beleive people are born gay or that this is a result of many factors in the developement as a person and the influence of society? I do not think people choose to be gay but it is the lifestyle they become involved in. It is not currently supported by state or federal government. It is the right of anybody to lobby to change or add ammendments to any law they feel treats people unfairly. By all means please do so as I will also support the other side of this issue as it is my right. My beleifs are not better or worse than yours but they are my beleifs as yours are yours and completely entitled to them. This issue is going to get ugly as it gains momentum. If it becomes law then I will accept it but not agree with it. I appreciate the problems here and wish those involved luck with their efforts but cannot support that point of view.

"Please note no insults in this post to either group as is the norm in a civil discussion."

By Skeptical on Monday, October 30, 2006 - 10:29 pm:
jo sez: "You chose that lifestyle"

Oh really, gay people CHOOSE to be gay? Did you CHOOSE to be hetrosexual? If so, exactly when did you make that decision?

Being gay is NOT a choice. All things being equal, why would one CHOOSE to be gay in a backward thinking time as things are today?

You CHOOSE to live in Washington. Gay people don't CHOOSE to be gay. Two different things entirely.


I am sorry I have to do this but I must disagree. Gay is a lifestyle that is chosen. No matter how early in life it happens its not something we are born with. So I believe Jo is absolutely right.

By Brianl on Monday, October 30, 2006 - 10:21 pm:
"Nobody is saying that people shouldn't have the same rights. But I get a bit resentful when people think marriage is a right."

By you wanting to deny gay couples the RIGHT (and yes, it is a RIGHT) to marriage and the laws and privileges that come with marriage, YOU are saying that gay people shouldn't have the same rights.

What do you want, Jim Crow laws? Plessy v. Ferguson? Separate but Equal? Segregated drinking fountains, one for "straights" and one for "gays"?? Different restaurants and other establishments? Is that what you would rather have?

I love it how people twise the "word of God" (though the Bible was completely written, and continues to be interpreted by MAN) to hate and discriminate against others. Wayne, bend over and I have a better place for that Bible of yours.


You obviously have never read the Bible if you think it doesn't condemn homosexuality. I think you need to read the Talmud if you don't think Jewish tradition doesn't condemn it either. And I dare you to hold hands with a guy down any street in the mid east and see how long you will get in a Moslem country before you get stoned! You see, Brian, we are tolerant compared to other religions. The difference is that through God we have forgivness. We had someone at church who is a lesbian who shared her struggle in that area.

And NOBODY has any right to marry and that never has been a right! It is clear to me that by "equal" what was really meant was gay marriage.

Wayner said>>>
I am sorry I have to do this but I must disagree. Gay is a lifestyle that is chosen. No matter how early in life it happens its not something we are born with.

So someone at 5 chooses to be gay? At 5???? At 5??? And you have proof that we are NOT born gay?

"I do not think people choose to be gay but it is the lifestyle they become involved in. It is not currently supported by state or federal government. It is the right of anybody to lobby to change or add ammendments to any law they feel treats people unfairly."

Now this is something with a little more credibility to it ... because people don't CHOOSE to be gay, they are BORN that way. (Sorry Wayne, you are just flat-out wrong, despite what all your Bible thumping brethren tells you.) Now I can see how someone might be offended by the "gay lifestyle" as it is portrayed, but trust me that is very much the exception rather than the rule.

Just like most Mexicans are hard-working good honest family people, not what is portrayed as the dirty lazy thief type. Just like most African-Americans are hard-working good honest family people, not the lazy slobs who grow giant afros and rap all day that is portrayed. Just like Muslims are mostly good, honest, very religious people who believe in peace and goodwill, unlike what so many of us think because of a few radical nutjobs who make EVERYONE in that religion seem like power-hungry zealots. I bet you wouldn't know if your neighbor was gay or straight half the time, they are just like you and me. Yes, some CHOOSE to take part in the "gay lifestyle" ... good for them. If one doesn't like it, they don't have to be part of it. My close family member who is a lesbian is revolted by the "traditional gay lifestyle" and stays out of it like the plague ... guess what, she's still gay and no preaching or gospel or church is going to change that.

I guess it boils down to the act of self-censorship that so many who preach legislating morality should really look at. If you don't like gay marriage, DON'T HAVE ONE!

I have never seen any medical facts that fully support this. It is like saying people are born fat or criminals. People are a blank presentation when born. It is how we develope along the way and outside influences that mold who we ultimeately become. I will admit that there is a great possibility of the existance of chemical imbalances in the brain which may result in certain behavioral traits. The human brain is so complex that this will probably remain an issue for debate forever. I do not beleive people are born gay but that it is a result of differnet chemical reactions in certain peoples brains along with the social surroundings and emotional and physical issues everyone deals with along the way that mold who you become.

Joamon, know any gay people?

I once thought the same thing you did --until a really great friend came out.

The discussions we had in late high school were frightening to both of us. He wanted to just kill himself right then and there.

(And this is in a small redneck down to boot)

It's no choice man.

If you know somebody who is gay, strike up a conversation. You will make a great friend, feel some deep sorrow and anger and wonder.

The anger will come from the reality that you are still repulsed by the whole thing. It all sucks.

The sorrow will come from their plight.

The wonder will come from the realization of just how much we don't know.

After my experiences, I offer this for you to consider:

Science is leaning strongly toward people being wired in specific ways. Our minds are malleble, but only to a degree. Brains are not a completely blank slate, but have specialized systems that work together to bring meaning to our consious (however you spell it) mind.

Face blind people (those who cannot associate a face to an identity), have one small part of their brain that no longer functions. Some are born this way, it happens to others through events of life.

Many of these systems are being discovered now that we can image living brains while they are doing their thing.

Sexual systems are very low level and wired into a lot of other things. This makes it hard to identify, unlike the face blindness thing.

Still that's all voodoo science to a lot of people. It didn't convince me completely, that's for sure.

Here's my reasoning that did:

Why do you like some girls and not others? Ever think about that? Did you choose this, or did some women simply start becoming attractive to you, while others remain a member of the opposite sex, but with no spark?

This occured to me in my 20's after having left town one day thinking about my friend, choice and other matters.

I remember looking at images of women like every young male has. Some had that spark and others didn't. We all varied too. Never gave it another thought until years later thinking about gay issues.

I didn't choose the kinds of women I'm attracted to. Nobody I know did.

Think about it. You might find some strong evidence in favor of non-choice right within your own head!

Won't make it any less repulsive. Also means if you are not gay, you've nothing to fear because you are not going to choose it --ever, because it's not a choice. With this realization comes tolerance and understanding.

Homophobia then becomes gone. A whole lotta things in life become easier.

There it is. Take it for what it's worth, but that's basically how I resolved the matter.

now that makes way too much sense for some to actually read and give some consideration to.

Well said.

So you are saying it is like dislexia for example? I see 123 and a person with dislexia see's 213. There brain is just wired that way.

Quote from my post:

"I will admit that there is a great possibility of the existance of chemical imbalances in the brain which may result in certain behavioral traits. The human brain is so complex that this will probably remain an issue for debate forever. I do not beleive people are born gay but that it is a result of differnet chemical reactions in certain peoples brains along with the social surroundings and emotional and physical issues everyone deals with along the way that mold who you become."

People are not born gay but I beleive these things lead a person very strongly in one direction or the other and that social surroundings and pressures are a contributing influence in that.

I agree to disagree with you just a little on this one and have pretty much said my mind on this. Anything further will be just argueing over our point of views without science to back it. I appreciate your last post and will keep it in mind. Both have merrit.

Take It Easy Or Any Way You Can!

Joamon4sure, the notion that "People are a blank presentation when born" has been completely debunked. Genetics for one have a huge influence over not just physical appearance but also personality. Genes often express themselves despite environmental factors. This has been proven convincingly by numerous studies of idential twins separated at birth. If your notion of "people are blank" when born were true, then two identical twins, on average, should be nothing alike as adults, right? But it turns out that twins are remarkably alike in personality even when raised separately and not even having contact as children.

So it certainly seems completely plausible that people could be gay completely apart from any environmental influences. In fact, famous sex researcher Alfred Kinsey showed that homosexuality is not a yes or no question; rather, all people are some part gay and some part straight. Think of all people as being on a scale; some people are completely straight, some people are completely gay, and many others are somewhere in the middle. So the "leaning gay" people may have some attraction to the same sex (maybe without even realizing it) but perhaps won't act on it unless circumances are ideal; otherwise they may live out perfectly average hetrosexual lives. Others may be obviously gay from birth.

But to me, the "biological or not?" argument about homosexuality is moot. It bugs me that both sides even talk about it, and the gay rights groups should stop taking a stand on this moot argument. Instead, they should simply argue that in a free society, whether consenting adults are gay or not is no one else's business and should still get equal protection under the law, regardless of how they behave with other consenting adults. Whether you are gay or not certainly should not be a conern of the government's.

Andrew

That is very well said. I still believe a baby is a blank slate but will agree that the wiring in the brain will be a big factor in a great many things as they develope into a person.

Have a Great One

Do you have children?

Some people are beginning to believe based on research that genetics are not just "a big factor" but are in fact the most important factor in how a child develops and turns out. You should really reconsider your "blank slate" analogy. Instead, think of a baby as a bunch of buttons (genes) that can be pushed. Only every baby's buttons are different. Some get pushed almost automatically; some are "easy" to push others hard or impossible to push. One child may go through a trauma and cope badly; another may react entirely differently, based on genetics.

If you want to take this a step further, some mavericks are even questioning how parenting itself influences a child's development. If you want a very eye-opening read (even if you find yourself having trouble agreeing with the author on everything), try reading one of the books by Judith Rich Harris. Her most well-known book was the controversial "The Nurture Assumption" which contends that peer groups, not parents, have the biggest influence on pushing those genetic buttons. I read the follow-up "No Two Alike" which considers why even two identical twins, while much more similar than two random people, still have different personalities.

Andrew

jo sez: "Do you beleive people are born gay or that this is a result of many factors in the developement as a person and the influence of society?"

just a short addition to the many wonderful responses from kskd and andrew et al.

there are people who experiement no doubt, including gay people who try the hetrosexual "lifestyle", but deep inside they eventually find themselves longing for the other "lifestyle".

You too Joamon.

It's a lot like dislexia, only at a lower level. Dislexia is a fairly high level problem. It's compartmentalized much the same way face blindness or inability to speak is.

The parts of us that involve sex are lower level and contribute to a lot of systems at once. Who knows, it may be a combination of systems together that do it, with no girl/boy switch that can be isolated to the degree other aspects of the mind can. This supports the enigma of the bi-sexual, IMHO. They consider people in general attractive, without significant regard for gender.

However, even they have notions of who they are attracted to that they did not choose and appear to have little potential to change...

I'm with you on the blank slate bit overall. Many things can happen through nurture. We are not hardwired things in all regards. --only some regards.

Very perplexing, and interesting as well.

Oh, the idea that we are completely hardwired denies us hope and the incentive to learn and improve. Our nature discounts that empirically.

My life experience in general support this as well. Looking back, I can see elements of who I am today, but clearly it could all be very different depending on where I travelled through life.

Interestingly, those lower level things we don't often think about have been constant for me however. Again, suggesting a hybrid --some genetic, some experience.

The whole nature / nurture discussion often does not account for the idea that we may actually be a blend, with our race in general making lower level changes over very long spans of time.

I've always wanted to meet a person from 1000 years ago for this very reason. (Who knows on that too. Maybe the scientists might actually get that done. It would be one exception to the ban on cloning that I would support. Trust me, ban or not. Somebody some day is gonna do that. We may yet get to experience that understanding.)

Another clear pointer toward being hardwired in some respects: Handwriting.

I do analysis on handwriting. It identifies many core elements of the persona with a very high degree of accuracy.

Ever try to change your handwriting? It's a very difficult, if not impossible thing to do. For nearly all of us, handwriting just is. You've either got elegant writing or you don't. We can choose style, type (script, sans serif print, shorthand, etc...), but almost none of us can choose the lower level constructs we use to build the characters themselves.

People having brain injury, often have significant changes in their writing as well. Something else to consider in the grand scheme of things.

At the very least, there is enough to discount the idea of choice from being an absolute truth. We all will continue to believe what we will from our experience. No biggie.

However this lack of established truth in the matter (though it leans strongly one way for sure), means we have no justification upon which to base authority over those thus affected.

And that's where I really push hard. --too hard here recently and I'm gonna just back off for a lotta reasons. Wanted to just completely go --and might for times, but thought I would try to moderate things within myself.

Anyway, the biggie with this whole, "Are we or are we not equal under the law", has this fundemental meaning where our law and society is concerned that lies beneath all of these issues.

We all have those things we believe, however we also all have the freedom to believe them! This is a really great thing.

Those who would pass laws to satisfy their beliefs, also trash the very freedoms that allow them to hold beliefs and advocate for them in the first place!

Now this is something with a little more credibility to it ... because people don't CHOOSE to be gay, they are BORN that way. (Sorry Wayne, you are just flat-out wrong, despite what all your Bible thumping brethren tells you.)

sorry Brian but I am right. No matter how early in life you want to put it, homosexuality is a chosen behavior. And I am sorry that you resent Christians the way you do because we dare to take a stand on that subject!

So Wayne, if people are not born with the genetic disposition to be gay and choose instead to be gay, you're saying you could also choose. In other words, it would be just as easy for you to be comfortable with having gay sex and having hetro sex. Am I correct?

why are you telling me I should be gay? I have no desire to be gay.

Right. You are not gay. How do you know that? Really. How?

>>>"I have no desire to be gay."

So, you must be gentically engineered to be hetrosexual. It was never a choice, right.

I never was gay because I didn't choose to be gay. People aren't born gay, Deane.

I believe people are born gay and it is not a choice. Can you show me some evidence that might prove me wrong?

When did you make that choice Wayne. Was there a specific day? Did you do some research before making the decision? Did you try both to see which you liked best?

I'm just trying to figure out how this choice thing works.

"why are you telling me I should be gay? I have no desire to be gay."

Neither do the majority of gay people. If they had their druthers, they would much rather be STRAIGHT and not have to deal with the intolerant types like you, and all the hatred and bigotry aimed at them.

But, they aren't straight. They are gay. There isn't a darn thing they could do about it ... I guess they can TRY to hide who they are and live a straight, Leave It To Beaver-type existence and be absolutely miserable because they are living a lie. Now isn't lying a sin too Wayne? Aren't you asking gay people to "stop their sinning ways" by SINNING about WHO THEY ARE?

And people wonder why the suicide rate in the gay and lesbian community is so high. These religious zealots preaching so damn much hatred and venom about how homosexuality is "an abomination" and how gay people should go straight to hell, I might be apt to jump too.

book, you are free to believe whatever you want but the choice thing is supported by flimsy evidence.

gotta hand it to the rational thinking conservatives on the board who aren't easy swallowing the "choice" bs and choose to question.

By Brianl on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - 12:48 pm:
"why are you telling me I should be gay? I have no desire to be gay."

Neither do the majority of gay people. If they had their druthers, they would much rather be STRAIGHT and not have to deal with the intolerant types like you, and all the hatred and bigotry aimed at them.

But, they aren't straight. They are gay. There isn't a darn thing they could do about it ... I guess they can TRY to hide who they are and live a straight, Leave It To Beaver-type existence and be absolutely miserable because they are living a lie. Now isn't lying a sin too Wayne? Aren't you asking gay people to "stop their sinning ways" by SINNING about WHO THEY ARE?

And people wonder why the suicide rate in the gay and lesbian community is so high. These religious zealots preaching so damn much hatred and venom about how homosexuality is "an abomination" and how gay people should go straight to hell, I might be apt to jump too.


I guess you never read what I said earlier did you? you need to see what other religions think of homosexuality. I can guarentee that only through Christ can one find forgiveness for sins. You won't find that in any other religion. And the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination. I just happen to agree. Maybe gays can't help themselves. But they still chose to be that way. You see we all are born in sin and can't help ourselves. I include myself. Only Christ can free us.We had someone at my church who shared her struggle with this area. Our church is involved with "Portland Fellowship" which deals with gays.

By Deane_johnson on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - 12:48 pm:
When did you make that choice Wayne. Was there a specific day? Did you do some research before making the decision? Did you try both to see which you liked best?

I'm just trying to figure out how this choice thing works


I can't give the exact date but I was a kid. But I know I wasn't born gay. When you are a kid you don't know much about research or anything you live by faith. Why do you care about that?

Folks like Wayne who fear gays so much only do so because when we accept that being gay is OK he would come out of the closet and find a pretty man or maybe he fears his wife would prefer a woman if she really had a fair choice.

Wayne, you had such an enlightening conversation with an African-American woman, maybe you should do the same with someone who is gay...maybe ask if he or she made a choice to be gay or finally accepted the reality of the way that person was born.

"I agree to disagree on this one and have pretty much said my mind on this. Anything further will be just argueing over our point of views without definite undesputable science to back either side. so rather than beet this one up anymore think I will retire to the political jokes for awhile......some good ones there. I pound my head against walls to much as it is.

There is NO scientific research that says being gay is a "choice." For those that still want to believe it is, you may as well believe that the earth is flat and the moon is made out of cheese.

>>>"But I know I wasn't born gay."

So, now we get down to reality. You have confirmed you were born hetrosexual, you didn't make a choice.

I beleive there is merrit in both perceptions with a slant towards the pre-wired.

BTW....Swiss to be correct on the Moon Issue.
Also the Earth is not flat...it is convex all the way to the edge before you all off!

It's certainly a choice to engage in homosexual behavior, just like it's a choice to engage in hetrosexual behavior. But you can't choose your impulses and desires. The Christian fundamentalists (not all Christians) seem to believe that if you have gay desires, you should just pray harder and still live like a hetrosexual, no matter how miserable that makes you. Sure, you can choose to deny your desires with consenting adults and be miserable, or you can simply behave how is natural for you and be happy. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Andrew

We all struggle with our desires, Andrew! You don't lose them all the minute you follow Christ! The lady at our church had struggled with her lesbianism for a while. She could have divorced her husband. But she made a choice to stay with him. It has made her a better person.

By Deane_johnson on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - 3:00 pm:
>>>"But I know I wasn't born gay."

So, now we get down to reality. You have confirmed you were born hetrosexual, you didn't make a choice.


\\\
I wasn't born gay. Thats the point. What I am trying to tell you people is that with Christ there is forgiveness with that. I bet you won't find that in any other religion. I bet you won't find many other religions that tolerate homosexuality. Try that behavior in Israel or in a Moslem country and you probably will get stoned!

By Radioblogman on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - 1:48 pm:
Folks like Wayne who fear gays so much only do so because when we accept that being gay is OK he would come out of the closet and find a pretty man or maybe he fears his wife would prefer a woman if she really had a fair choice.


I am not afraid of gays I just don't want them to marry and they should stay in the closet. We don't allow people who aren't gay to perform their sexual acts in public, why allow gays to do that?

By Bookemdono on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - 1:51 pm:
Wayne, you had such an enlightening conversation with an African-American woman, maybe you should do the same with someone who is gay...maybe ask if he or she made a choice to be gay or finally accepted the reality of the way that person was born.


I would be willing to do that. Have you ever lived next door to someone who is gay? I have!

"What I am trying to tell you people is that with Christ there is forgiveness with that."

Why is it that more and more of the Christian sect churches are saying now that homosexuality is NOT this giant sin you fundamentalist Neanderthals say it is? Why is it that the Lutheran church is allowing gays to become bishops and priests? How about the Unitarian church? Is their teachings of Christ not acceptable because they embrace the gay community? You seem to like to denounce the actions of the Catholic church, I guess their Bible isn't good enough for Wayne?

My goodness, I would hate to think what you might have to say about the Seventh Day Adventists and Mormons!

"I would be willing to do that. Have you ever lived next door to someone who is gay? I have!"

Wow, congratulations. Living next to someone who is gay must make you an all-out expert.

When you are RAISED by a gay person, come talk to me. Until then, don't try to come across as knowing something about it when you don't.

"We don't allow people who aren't gay to perform their sexual acts in public, why allow gays to do that?"

What sex acts?

I see heterosexuals kissing all over the place and fondling also, but I have never seen gays or lesbians having sex on the streets.

Where do you hang out Wayne?

The ignorance is just astounding! I can't believe there are people that think this way!

"The ignorance is just astounding! I can't believe there are people that think this way!"

It's amazing what people can and will do when they are sheepishly led around by their religion, or whatever force drives them.

Most of the more infamous despots of all time led by brainwashing. Hitler, Stalin, Mao ... force, intimidation, and a well-oiled propoganda machine.

Not really much difference here, just plug in religion instead of politics and you get the same drone.

Did you ever speak with the person when he/she lived next door to you or did you close the blinds and lock all the doors the moment that person stepped outside?

Actually, I have lived next door to a gay couple, and without question, they were the best neighbors I've ever had.

My guess is that it was a one-way conversation, mostly full of bible quotes until his trapped conversation partner thought of a polite way to excuse himself.

Andrew

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Brianl on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - 3:40 pm:
"What I am trying to tell you people is that with Christ there is forgiveness with that."

Why is it that more and more of the Christian sect churches are saying now that homosexuality is NOT this giant sin you fundamentalist Neanderthals say it is?

and whats Neandrethal? Don't you really mean Conservative? Why do you have such a hate for Conservatives because we oppose sin? Is everything relative in your view?
Many of the churches you have in mind are more liberal than mine is but that doesn't mean they have the corner on truth.


Why is it that the Lutheran church is allowing gays to become bishops and priests? How about the Unitarian church? Is their teachings of Christ not acceptable because they embrace the gay community? You seem to like to denounce the actions of the Catholic church, I guess their Bible isn't good enough for Wayne?

my goodness you don't give a hoot about those church groups! If they did condemn homosexuality you would be the first to condemn them. As far as I know the Pope has spoken against homosexuality. The Bible I believe in is different from the one some churches believe in. Not all churches are Christian.


My goodness, I would hate to think what you might have to say about the Seventh Day Adventists and Mormons!

I have disagreements with Mormons and SDA's but I believe they oppose homosexuality as much as I do. Your problem is with God not with church I would say

By Brianl on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - 3:42 pm:
"I would be willing to do that. Have you ever lived next door to someone who is gay? I have!"

Wow, congratulations. Living next to someone who is gay must make you an all-out expert.

When you are RAISED by a gay person, come talk to me. Until then, don't try to come across as knowing something about it when you don't.


of course my statement wasn't good enough. It won't be good enough for you unless I become gay! Thats how sick some of you are!

Kiss me with tongue, you sexy bastard.

"Don't you really mean Conservative? Why do you have such a hate for Conservatives because we oppose sin? Is everything relative in your view?"

So you are insinuating that I hate conservatives. Does that mean that I hate myself, seeing as I am fiscally anyways, quite conservative?

And where did I say I FAVORED sin? Just because I don't buy into the dogma the fundamentalists spew "in the name of God"? I suppose you align yourself with those God-fearing folks from Missouri I believe that travel around the country to any pro-gay rights rally or function with those bullhorns and those big signs that say "AIDS KILLS FAGS" and "GOD HATES FAGS". I suppose you support the persecution of those gay folks, and that you laughed all the way to church when Matthew Sheppard was killed by some of your self-righteous Bible thumping friends in Wyoming.

Yeah, I want to be associated in any way, shape or form with THOSE winners.

BTW - your boy Dick Cheney is on the record for gay rights. Why not join him in the festivities? Even The Dickster can think for himself once every blue moon, and he supports and stands behind his daughter for WHO she is.

I have a question Wayne - if you had a son or daughter who came up to you once they were of age and grown up and told you that they were gay, what would you do? What would you say to them? How would you handle it?

"As far as I know the Pope has spoken against homosexuality."

The Pope also said that witches are to be burned and a stake driven through their hearts to ensure their spirits don't return to earth again.

What century do you live in?

CJ, I just choked on my (Baby Merkin's) Halloween candy from laughing so hard...

"What century do you live in?"

The one Bush is trying to make us relive, the 17th century.

I just thought of something pretty funny and almost posted it....then thought...why get in the middle of this....while laughing to myself!

By Mrs_merkin on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - 10:14 pm:
CJ, I just choked on my (Baby Merkin's) Halloween candy from laughing so hard...

Ditto on the laughing bit...just glad I had already finished my Pop before I read this....could have been painful blowing that through your nose....did that once and never wnat to again.....

Wayne, tell us about your gay neighbors. What did they do that offended you?

I have a middle aged gay couple next door to me, and they are the nicest, most helpful, friendly and generous neighbors I have.

One of them even complemented me on my hair, and no, I didn't think he was coming on to me!

Well the house next door to me was later condemned by the city. It was owned by a Greek lady who never mowed the lawn because she was allergic to grass. I think I said hi to one of them once but that was the extent of the conversation. The place is now owned by a fellow from Guatemella who has done a better job of keeping it up, and as far as I know he has a family and is not gay.

tadc, please read the "wayner" thread!

By Tadc on Friday, November 03, 2006 - 7:15 pm:
Wayne, tell us about your gay neighbors. What did they do that offended you?

I have a middle aged gay couple next door to me, and they are the nicest, most helpful, friendly and generous neighbors I have.

One of them even complemented me on my hair, and no, I didn't think he was coming on to me!


If they were gay at least they kept their behavior in the closet and didn't try to parade it in front of my house like the liberals would have wanted them to do.

Preferably naked! On Solstice Nights! Wahooo!