"Live Strong in Character - Don't Leave Your Family"



"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> "RNK" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> >
>> > So what you're actually saying is that by default, having same-sex
>> > parents
>> > creates homosexual children.

>>
>> In ANY case it does create sexually confused children. Nothing for you ot
>> worry about unless you're concerned about the mental health of them.

>
> Kunich's ignorance and bigotry knows no bounds.


Says the queer.
 
Tom Kunich wrote:
> Says the queer.


Quite possibly one of the most intelligent, well-thought and especially
grown-up replies I've read so far.

So tell me, what's the story behind your homophobia? Have you even been
in prison or some other correctional institute?

Robin
 
On 29 Jul 2005 10:25:24 -0700, [email protected] claims:

>I have no problem with urinating from a seated position, esp. when
>confronted with one of those thick, fluffy seat covers that makes an
>interruption via falling seat so Murphy's Law likely; pretty good for a
>male heathen, wouldn't you agree? I ask for directions, too, btw.


I hate getting it caught in the spokes, don't you?

Cordially,
Ken (NY)

email: http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm

What we are responding to:
http://www.pentagonattack911.com/wtc.htm

"The day **** Cheney is going to run for president,
I'll kill myself,"
- Helen Thomas, "nonpartisan reporter" Jul 28 2005
(RUN ****, RUN!)

spammers can send mail to [email protected]
 
"Chuck Davis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Rick Donnelly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> ................Their reasoning is that the homosexual wolf stays with,
>> plays with, and protects, the pups while the alpha male/female, and rest
>> of the clan, bring back the goods.
>> .......

>
> This doesn't make sense. If the wolf preferred to play with, etc. the
> pups, wouldn't he/she be a pedophile wolf? Why would a homosexual wolf
> not hang around with adult wolves of the same sex? Are you saying that
> homosexual wolves can't hunt?
>
> Chuck Davis
>


Chuck,

Dogs, as anyone who has observed them for lengthy periods know, use sexual
displays to show dominance. The alpha male will routinely hump any other
male (or female) in the vicinity to show his status (though there is no
obvious attempt to complete the act in most cases). Any dog that attempts to
hump your leg is essentially trying to assert authority over you. Whether
this makes it difficult to determine homosexuality in dogs, I can't say,
although I'm certain researchers must find this problemmatic.

Pedophilia (in humans) is another issue. Some small percentage of gays are
sexual predators (this seems to be almost universally a male trait,
according to my conversations with former professors at the U.).

As for whether the homosexual dogs hunt or not is a matter of timing, more
than anything else. In spring, the researchers point out, when the pups are
born, the pack leaves a male animal with the pups. Observations suggest
that, almost universally, this "uncle" (probably used the term due to the
closeness of the family relationships) plays with, trains, and protects the
pups. After sufficient growth with the pups, he resumes hunting with the
rest.

Rick
 
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You heathens don't seem to grasp the far reaching consequences for
> America of the breakdown of the American family:
>
> 1. The effect on kids of divorce who are unable to witness a positive
> family situation and are far likely to end up in divorce in their own
> marriages.
> 2. The increase in juvenile crime, suicide, drug/alchohol abuse due to
> a poor family structure. Boys need a male role model and girls need a
> female one.
> 3.The abomination of gay marriage which is being used as a recruiting
> tool to create more homosexuals. If a child has two dads or moms they
> will see that as normal and copy that.
> 4. The meddling of courts in family matters both in granting easy
> divorces and the oppression of Child Serivices which tries to keep
> parents from raising kids properly out of fear..
> 5. Schools are no longer a place of learning when children have to deal
> with all of the above instead of going home to mom and dad and a
> supportive loving Christian home
>


You bible thumpers don't seem to grasp the far reaching consequences of
scientific evidence.

1) Divorce is common. In fact, it is more common amongst those who claim to
be religious. I guess words and preaching don't equate to actions.
2) The increases in crime is directly related to poverty/low economic
status. The same factors that influence success in school.
3) Gays do not actively recruit. Where this myth came from is beyond me. I
was born with a prediliction to love women. While I find male-male
relationships to be, at best, foreign, to my thinking, homosexuals have the
same visceral reaction to hetrosexual relationships. If it were simply a
lifestyle choice, would it not make more sense to choose to be bisexual?
4) We agree on something. Courts and church/religion should be separate.
Church approved marriages, dictates, etc. should be of no concern to the
state. Despite this, for good or ill, the state sets tax systems, rules for
health benefits, etc. based upon some definition of marriage. For this
reason, the courts are involved, sadly. Thus, if a church approves marriages
between any two consenting adults, then they are married. Those who feel
that marriage is about religion are deluded. By the way, I happen to know
more than one male reared by homosexual parents. None of them are
homosexual. Empirical evidence suggests that, perhaps, homosexuality isn't
contagious.
5) Schools fail, or succeed, for a variety of reasons. I have students who
come to school after deaths in the family through violence. Can you really
believe that someone who does not expect to live to be an adult cares a
flying f*** about some hypothetical future career? Can you believe that
someone, whose parents are drugged to the point of mental incompetance, and
who must take care of, and protect, their younger siblings, is going to do
well in school? It isn't about marriage, buddy, it is about a society which
allows fewer than 50% of its African-American males to fail to graduate from
high school. It is about a society that is so frickin' worried about gay
marriage and abortion that they inappropriately spend money on pathetic
political issues rather than on improving the lives of our most
impoverished. It is about a society which ignores the deaths of teens in the
low economic strata and pretends that homosexual marriage is more important.

Sorry about the diatribe, but to put it simply, your efforts are
misdirected, at best. Fallacious, at worst.

Rick
 
[email protected] wrote:
> In fact it is our duty as Christians to enforce God's laws.


Christians sure do like to pick and choose which Mosaic laws they
follow/enforce and which they consider obsolete.

(Newsgroup list edited - this garbage doesn't belong in racing or tech)
 
Bill Davidson wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> In fact it is our duty as Christians to enforce God's laws.

>
> Christians sure do like to pick and choose which Mosaic laws they
> follow/enforce and which they consider obsolete.


Jabario (AKA "Buttpacker" AKA John Poulos) has about as much to do with
Christianity as Jobst does with humility.

> (Newsgroup list edited - this garbage doesn't belong in racing or
> tech)


Keep going next time.

:-D
 
RNK <[email protected]> writes:

> Tom Kunich wrote:
> > Says the queer.

>
> Quite possibly one of the most intelligent, well-thought and
> especially grown-up replies I've read so far.


He's called me that before, although we've never met, just for
suggesting his homophobic rants left a bit to be desired in
the "let's at least get the numbers right" department.

> So tell me, what's the story behind your homophobia? Have you even
> been in prison or some other correctional institute?


Actually, Kunich has been in jail according to Kunich himself
(although he subsequently tried to whitewash it). His tendency to
call people "queers" or whatever pops into his bigoted little head
seems to be a knee-jerk response from a person with what appears to be
an abusive personality (as should be evident from his posts).

For proof, check out one of Kunich's posts at
<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/ba.bicycles/msg/3c36f891a58b1841?dmode=source&hl=en>
with message ID <_PXb9.10094$N%[email protected]>.

Then scroll to the last paragraph, where Kunich himself stated,

"I'll tell you what I think of this legal system -- I
back-handed my girlfriend 30 years ago. I was jailed and had
to pay a couple of thousand dollars bail to get out of
jail. The guy right before me was picked up with a concealed
handgun walking into a store that had been held up many times
before. He had just come "of age" but had a long juvenile
record of -- armed robbery. The same judge that gave me $2000
bail released that guy on his personal recognizance."

The guy Kunich complained about apparently had a concelaed weapon, but
was not robbing anything, at least not when he was arrested. Kunich
meanwhile had assaulted a woman by his own account.

Most guys would hang their heads in shame if it were known that they
had bashed a girlfriend. Kunich, if past behavior is any guide, will
try to justify it in some way or other or blame me.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> "RNK" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> >
> >> > So what you're actually saying is that by default, having same-sex
> >> > parents
> >> > creates homosexual children.
> >>
> >> In ANY case it does create sexually confused children. Nothing for you ot
> >> worry about unless you're concerned about the mental health of them.

> >
> > Kunich's ignorance and bigotry knows no bounds.

>
> Says the queer.


How 7th grade, all the more so when I had merely given a citation to
an article on the BBC web site discussing the issue. Maybe you can
tell us your opinion of the BBC as well.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Jasper Janssen wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:06:03 -0400, The Wogster <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > I wonder what will happen in the next 10 - 20
> > years when the US government runs out of borrowing capacity.

>
> The same thing that happened when people in 1960 were asking what would
> happen in 10-20 years when the US would run out of borrowing capacity.


Governments running on fiat money never run out of printing capacity.
Do you remember what happened 10-20 years after 1960?
Double digit inflation and 15-20% mortgage rates is what I remember.
 
Jasper Janssen wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:06:03 -0400, The Wogster <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>This always runs into problems with elected governments, in that they
>>find that they can get re-elected easier by offering incentives like tax
>>cuts, or expensive programs, instead of paying back the borrowed moneys.
>> Then you end up with what the US has now, they are borrowing during
>>the boom and the bust. I wonder what will happen in the next 10 - 20
>>years when the US government runs out of borrowing capacity.

>
>
> The same thing that happened when people in 1960 were asking what would
> happen in 10-20 years when the US would run out of borrowing capacity.
>
> At least, that's a decent enough bet. There's always the possibility
> they'll go imperalistic Evil Empire on all our asses, though.
>


Well, they can always print more, but that usually means a devaluing of
the currency, which means higher inflation, and to curb inflation, they
jack up interest rates, that results in the economy going flat, and that
huge job losses. The last time most of the jobs moved off shore, and
did not return. Maybe we do not need to wait 10 - 20 years...

Want proof of this, look at now, 3 years ago the Canadian dollar was
around 65 cents, and the Euro was floating around $1. Today CA$1.00
is 81.5 cents and 1 Euro is around $1.21 US. The bank rate in Canada
is currently 2.75% the rate in the US is 6.19% (Bank rate figures
courtesy Bank of Canada). The big difference, the Canadian government
has gotten spending under control, and isn't borrowing those big amounts
of money any more.....

Excuse me a sec .... had to go enter a TV contest for $1000.00

W
 
Stewart Fleming wrote:
> Maggie wrote:
> > Al wrote:
> >
> >>Hopefully this isn't one of those deals where, when in doubt, the guy
> >>is at fault -

> >
> >
> >
> > Of course it is. When a marriage fails, it is always the mans fault.
> > ;-)

>
> RBR Divorce Rules: She gets 75% (half of what's yours, then half of
> what's left)



Sounds Fair to me: ;-)

Maggie
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> RNK <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>> > Says the queer.

>>
>> Quite possibly one of the most intelligent, well-thought and
>> especially grown-up replies I've read so far.

>
> He's called me that before, although we've never met, just for
> suggesting his homophobic rants left a bit to be desired in
> the "let's at least get the numbers right" department.


Here's a suggestion Bill. I did meet you but then you'd never admit it. In
any case any "study" that claims that kids in a homosexual household DON'T
have sexual identity problems is plainly blind, stupid or biased.

But then it was plain that YOU had some serious sexual identification
problems. In fact, I plainly got the idea that you were raised by your
mother without benefit of any male guidance. Moreover, it shows in your
postings time and time again.
 
"Rick Donnelly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:p[email protected]...
>
> You bible thumpers don't seem to grasp the far reaching consequences of
> scientific evidence.


Just more of a demonstration that you secularists believe that division
starts in someone else's camp.

> 1) Divorce is common. In fact, it is more common amongst those who claim
> to be religious. I guess words and preaching don't equate to actions.


Perhaps you can cite a study on that one.

> 2) The increases in crime is directly related to poverty/low economic
> status. The same factors that influence success in school.


And the economic level of a family is typically directly related to whether
or not the household is a married couple or a single parent. The pretense
that the economics aren't a result of divorce is rather stupid.

> 3) Gays do not actively recruit. Where this myth came from is beyond me. I
> was born with a prediliction to love women. While I find male-male
> relationships to be, at best, foreign, to my thinking, homosexuals have
> the same visceral reaction to hetrosexual relationships. If it were simply
> a lifestyle choice, would it not make more sense to choose to be bisexual?


I don't know where you've lived but queers ACTIVELY recruit everywhere.

> 4) We agree on something. Courts and church/religion should be separate.
> Church approved marriages, dictates, etc. should be of no concern to the
> state. Despite this, for good or ill, the state sets tax systems, rules
> for health benefits, etc. based upon some definition of marriage. For this
> reason, the courts are involved, sadly. Thus, if a church approves
> marriages between any two consenting adults, then they are married. Those
> who feel that marriage is about religion are deluded. By the way, I happen
> to know more than one male reared by homosexual parents. None of them are
> homosexual. Empirical evidence suggests that, perhaps, homosexuality isn't
> contagious.


And "empirical evidence" has seldom been addressed by either side. In fact,
I have read cases of kids who were housed in institutions for the mentally
disabled who turned out to be completely normal but acted as they thought
they were expected to act. The same for homosexuals. I actually knew a man
who passed himself off as a homosexual living with his sister when in fact
he was hetero living with his lover. He was active in San Francisco society
and somehow this was advantageous to him. Though I cannot imagine how. He
was a landlord in a mostly gay neighborhood but if I understood him
correctly his tenants were mostly low income. He once screamed at me, "They
CAN'T CUT WELFARE! My tenants will burn my buildings down!"

> 5) Schools fail, or succeed, for a variety of reasons. I have students who
> come to school after deaths in the family through violence. Can you really
> believe that someone who does not expect to live to be an adult cares a
> flying f*** about some hypothetical future career?


I wonder where you grew up? Schools in low economic areas teach kids that
they are EXPECTED to know something. They aren't promising anyone a job.
Good teachers do try to show students that they CAN succeed but that it
requires the students cooperation. And it does work.

Maybe you don't remember that ne'r-do-well Bob Roll who grew up going to
school in west Oakland, one of the worst areas in the San Francisco bay
area?
 
"Ken [NY]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "The day **** Cheney is going to run for president,
> I'll kill myself,"
> - Helen Thomas, "nonpartisan reporter" Jul 28 2005
> (RUN ****, RUN!)


OH PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE - OH MASTER CHENEY DELIVER US FROM VERY EVIL.
Run! Please! Run!
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > RNK <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> Tom Kunich wrote:
> >> > Says the queer.
> >>
> >> Quite possibly one of the most intelligent, well-thought and
> >> especially grown-up replies I've read so far.

> >
> > He's called me that before, although we've never met, just for
> > suggesting his homophobic rants left a bit to be desired in
> > the "let's at least get the numbers right" department.

>
> Here's a suggestion Bill. I did meet you but then you'd never admit it.


No, you never met me. However, you once made up a lie about meeting me
at some bike shop in Cupertino that I've never even seen, much less
set foot in. Now, why don't you stop the personal **** and justify
the statement you made with some hard numbers? What's the problem?
Can't you do it?

> In any case any "study" that claims that kids in a homosexual
> household DON'T have sexual identity problems is plainly blind,
> stupid or biased.


Sounds just like your "evaluation" regarding bicycle helmets. If you
personally don't like the results, the authors are automatically
"blind, stupid or biased." Seems we have a pattern here, Kunich.

> But then it was plain that YOU had some serious sexual identification
> problems.


This is a case of transference. Kunich is the guy ranting on the
subject. I merely provided a citation to a BBC article (which seemed
like a more or less unbiased source to use given the BBC's
reputation) and didn't even comment on it.

> In fact, I plainly got the idea that you were raised by your
> mother without benefit of any male guidance. Moreover, it shows in your
> postings time and time again.


One other thing you got 100% wrong, but what else is new.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Rick Donnelly wrote:

>
> You bible thumpers don't seem to grasp the far reaching consequences of
> scientific evidence.
>
> 1) Divorce is common. In fact, it is more common amongst those who claim to
> be religious. I guess words and preaching don't equate to actions.


Not as common as you might think, they state that 50% of marriages end
in divorce, which isn't a true statement. The way they arrive at that
number is there are say 20,000 weddings every year, and 10,000 divorces,
giving 50%. However those divorces are really amoung the married
couples in the total pool of married people, which grew by 50,000 in the
same year. So really given that size pool, the divorce rate isn't 50%
but rather a significantly smaller number.

Claiming to be religous, simply means to claim to follow the teachings
of a belief system, that doesn't make you perfect, and the same factors
that affect non-religious marriages, also affects religious ones. To be
honest though, far too many people, are willing to give up on a
marriage, far too quickly. Often if they worked on keeping it together
and resolved the issue, that was causing the problem, they would save
the cost of a divorce.

W
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Rick Donnelly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:p[email protected]...
> >
> > You bible thumpers don't seem to grasp the far reaching consequences of
> > scientific evidence.

>
> Just more of a demonstration that you secularists believe that division
> starts in someone else's camp.


Oh, so Kunich's a bible thumper! That would explain his position on
bicycle helmets: "Yeah though I ride through the Valley of the Shadow
of Death, I need no helmet, for the Force will protect me." That
doesn't stop him from using one anyway. :)

> I don't know where you've lived but queers ACTIVELY recruit everywhere.


What are you talking about? With gays making up a few percent of the
population, straight guys should be getting propositioned several
times a week if what you say were true. If you must make something
up, could you at least fudge the data so that the numbers don't sound
completely ridiculous?

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
On 7/30/05 8:43 PM, in article [email protected], "Bill Z."
<[email protected]> wrote:

> "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> "Rick Donnelly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:p[email protected]...
>>>
>>> You bible thumpers don't seem to grasp the far reaching consequences of
>>> scientific evidence.

>>
>> Just more of a demonstration that you secularists believe that division
>> starts in someone else's camp.

>
> Oh, so Kunich's a bible thumper! That would explain his position on
> bicycle helmets: "Yeah though I ride through the Valley of the Shadow
> of Death, I need no helmet, for the Force will protect me." That
> doesn't stop him from using one anyway. :)
>
>> I don't know where you've lived but queers ACTIVELY recruit everywhere.

>
> What are you talking about? With gays making up a few percent of the
> population, straight guys should be getting propositioned several
> times a week if what you say were true. If you must make something
> up, could you at least fudge the data so that the numbers don't sound
> completely ridiculous?


http://www.abidingtruth.com/pfrc/books/sevensteps/Chapter1/
 

Similar threads

B
Replies
13
Views
427
Road Cycling
Alex Rodriguez
A