Jerry Klein's Dialogue Page - July 11

Voices In The Wilderness -- Jerry's Dialogue Page

July 11 - July 18, 1998

Site Contents:

My Front Page

The Progressive Alliance
PA Home
PA News
PA Mission
PA Supporters
PA Events
Join The PA

JK News
What's Happening

JK In Print
My Latest Column
Archives

JK On The Air
The Link Lounge
Current Playlists

Interactivity
Send Me Email
The Dialogue Page
* Rules
* Sign-In
* Archive
Favorite Email
Join My Email List

JK Concerts
Hall Of Fame
Who's Coming

Live In Person
Come See Me

Bio
About Me

Search
Search This Site

Please Sign My Dialogue Page
( To View Previous Dialogue Pages, click here)
Read This First: Rules For Jerry's Dialogue Page

Just a thought...on this military issue...I'm against nukes, but why expand it or lessen the military personell since we have enough tonage to blow up the world 40 times over with nukes? If someone would throw a nuke our way, I'm sure we would respond in kind, they would respond, soon everyone would be pushing buttons and we'd be space dust. Doesn't take even a small army to push all those buttons.
Mary T. <Aatredes@email.msn.com>
Milwaukee, WI USA - Saturday, July 11, 1998 at 09:10:26 (EDT)

Ahhhh...the Weekly Site Flushing :) Hi Randy
Mary T. <Aatredes@email.msn.com>
Milwaukee, WI USA - Saturday, July 11, 1998 at 10:54:48 (EDT)

My ... my ... my ... lookie, lookie at all the "new people" we have contributing on Jerry's Page (use the archive, folks) and all with fake e-mail addresses? Does anybody think that the reason for such measures is because they are ashamed of their post s or because they lack any intestinal fortitude or because they have previously been run off this site due to moral, mental or sociopathic disabilities, by which no decent person of any conservative political persuasion would want to converse with, but wh om (sadly to say) make up the mainstream of the liberal democratic party today. I would like to submit to all that these reasons are jointly and severally true for all making these posts. They are weak, whiny, simple minded little men with no backbone and less intellect who cannot carry their own weight in any discourse --- intellectual or otherwise, heck folks these people can't even "flame" correctly. hahahaha -------------- Okay Guys, perk up your little pointed ears, here we go with "Flame 101." In the manly art of intellectual debate sometimes it is necessary to stress a point with other than conventional methods when the discourse "boggs down" due to the idiosyncratic or redundant tendencies of your opponent or just a "bull headed"refusal to concu r with or accept common or conventional sense. In such cases, it is permissable (and in some circles encouraged) to resort to what we would call "down and dirty"or "in your face" tactics. If this methodology works and you are able to get past your stalem ant with your opponent and he acknowledges the "freakish homunculus" of his position --- fine! If not, you are obviously dealing with one who is so boring that he couldn't even entertain a doubt and the conversation is better off dropped. Let's face it fo lks, there are actually people in this world whose minds are not only twisted, but actually sprained.
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Saturday, July 11, 1998 at 16:30:52 (EDT)

However, even when engaged in these "down and dirty"tactics, it is necerssary to maintain a level of civility, otherwise all you do is hurt someone else and make them more resistant to changing their position. Therefore, the words you choose to use sho uld not be of a "crude" nature or brashly designed to rip someone apart emotionally. The best "cuts" are those which are designed to make the other person "lighten up", chuckle or even roll in the floor laughing. Granted, these words may be a little hard to come by, but a little inventiveness never hurt anybody and is an engaging mental gymnastic. I noticed that "the Evil One" is getting better at this methodology in his position of advocating genocide against Christians and is significantly better than previous posts which merely conveyed anger for being ripped to shreads on his intellectual content using explatives of a vile, crude and crass nature --- however he still lacks the humerous content necessary. Here is an example of how I would choose to re ply to the post of either "the Evil One" or "Ms." and as you read it --- try to imagine the facial convulsions and the slow rising snarl which must be coming from the corners of their mouths as they read these simple but true words. "Dear Ms/ Evil One, No one will know you've had a frontal lobe lobotomy if you were to wear a wig to hide the scars and learn to control the slobbering. Why is it that I feature you to be a small, thin, spectaculed man with ears that look like a taxi cab with both front doors o pen, whose hair color (blond) is coordinated with his teeth color, having a face like that of a harrassed rat. It's really not necessary for you to run around for the rest of your life as though you had a Mixmaster stuck up your rear end, a condom full of walnuts on your front end and questioning wether you will eventually die on the gallows or of some loathsome disease.
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Saturday, July 11, 1998 at 17:18:41 (EDT)

It is readily apparent to all who frequent these pages that your moral character is such that you will undoubtedly die with a mouthful of wet toilet paper. I don't mean to be abusive, but .... any political party which cannot cough up anything beter th an a treacherous, brain-damaged old vulture like Bill Clinton deserves every beating it gets. They don't hardly make 'em like that anymore --- but just to be on the safe side, he should be castrated anyway." ---------- Now as you can see, although all the alligations are undoubtedly true, they are of a sufficiently humerous nature that your opponent is not only disarmed, but is ready, willing and able to accept and admit defeat. Remember --- a guy with your IQ, should have a low voice too!
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Saturday, July 11, 1998 at 17:33:27 (EDT)

Hi Mary ;-) ... Glad to see you back on the site again. Hope all is well with you and yours!
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Saturday, July 11, 1998 at 17:35:32 (EDT)

Is there something wrong with d'Pressin? He seems to have a mental problem, no doubt coming from his low IQ stemming from his parents being brother and mother, his complete lack of education, and his gutter religion. I saw he started to write some "fla mes", but they were so pathetic and limp I couldn't keep my interest going. D'pressin is one flacid flamer. To bad he/she/it has nothing better to write, since this is supposed to be an issues board, not a place for trailer bait to throw up their hate mai l over and over. If he is an example of a christian, I am sure glad I am not one.
Mashin <mash@pressinisinsane.com>
Snowhill, NC USA - Saturday, July 11, 1998 at 22:26:08 (EDT)

Why do conservatives hate blacks and other minorities? Is it the fun they have, being a gang, picking on those weaker and smaller? It sure seems like republicans and conservatives do all they can to hurt blacks. They turn affirmative action, a program that has helped open a lot of doors for capable blacks, into a wedge issue, convincing whites that their own future is in danger. They were certainly against intagration of the schools. What is it with conservatives that make them all racists?
a nanny mouse <sowhat@nonyorbuznes.com>
Pinetops, NC USA - Saturday, July 11, 1998 at 22:33:24 (EDT)

Anybody watch NYPD Blues? Started recently watching the show. Reruns of course. Always late for the party. There is this one show where Andy is talking to this priest about marrying this woman, the ADA. The priest asked if Andy still believes in G od. Andy said "NO". The priest replied that he could understand since Andy is a cop, homicide, who sees the worse of mankind everyday. *** Which got me thinking about Jesus. Who He spent his time with and why. Jesus spent His entire life with the outcasts of society. Why? It occurred to me [based on Andy's faith] that Jesus did it to overcome His own doubts and questions of faith. If Jesus could retain His faith in such unpleasant surroundings, then He would be able to die on the cross for the sins of the world. Jesus knew those sins first hand, but kept His faith even in death.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 02:12:50 (EDT)

One other comment about NETSCAPE. Netscape requested a hearing before Chairman Orrin Hatch's [R-Utah] Senate Judicial Committee regarding a claim that Microsoft was violating the Federal Anit-Trust laws with respect to Microsoft's Explorer Internet Br owser that is included with Windows95 and Windows98. At the hearing, Netscape's CEO kept telling Hatch that Netscape does not want any new anit-trust legislation passed by Congress. So why did Netscape request this Senate Committee hearing? *** Reminds of a man taking a woman out for a dinner and movie and then telling her he is only interested in her for her mind, not her body. Like he doesn't want sex????? *** Netscape wanted something from Hatch and paid big $$$$$ to get the time before his committe e. Netscape wants the anti-trust legislation against Microsoft, but lacks the gonads to say it publicly. No wonder Netscape hired Bork to represent them as Netscape's lobbyist to Congress. *** Netscape's CEO is a whimp.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 03:36:23 (EDT)

Mark McColl <mccoll@gateway.net>
Charlotte, NC USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 08:30:10 (EDT)

Mashin'& Nanny Mouse: it seems that your problem stems from an educational system which no longer educates. I have always thought that the "sorriest"thing in the world was a "wasted"mind, someone who is taught 'what to think' rather than 'HOW TO THINK' , for himself. The process involves taking a look at ALL the available information and then, through a process of consistant logical evaluation, coming to the proper conclusion. I guess I could say that your problem stems from the fact that you have never had an origional idea in your life, but that is obvious as you continually repeat the same old, dead slogans over and over. Your problem is not so much the facts which are floating around in your head as much as the fact that you do not have the ability to synthesize that informtion or put it in it's proper perspective. Mashin' I realize that you are used to dealing with "mealy mouthed Christians" whom you can "use, abuse and make to feel cheap" --- you know, the kind whom you throw out one insult and th ey run for cover, the kind you can lead around by the nose, who neither know what they beleive or why they believe it. Apparently there are many who do not know the difference between the words "meek & weak." They are not synonomous, they have different m eanings. Meek could be rightly defined as strength under control, like that of a stallion with a bridle and a bit in his mouth. I do not think Christianity is best served by people who continually run for cover everytime the going gets rough. It is not a question of wether I am willing to "turn the other cheek" or not --- there comes a time when "turning the other cheek" simply becomes well ... "turning the other cheek" with no higher meaning to it other than absorbing punishment.
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 09:26:44 (EDT)

What you need and what you want on this site, to give your "cultural Marxism" validation is a few more Christians who are willing to discard their common sense and their faith in order to legitimise your propositions. GOOD LUCK, you wont get it from th is Christian, I stand "four square and sure footed" against your attempts to bring this country down to your level of mediocrity. Oh BTW (hahahaha), you attempt at flamin' should be best relegated to "Club Dead" --- a sharp tongue is no indication of a ke en mind, nothing is as frightening as activity without thought.
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 09:43:22 (EDT)

A new page and already it has turned sour. You, John, of all people, should be able to turn the other cheek. Now, may I recommend a book that should be interesting to folks of all political leanings: Up from Conservatism by Michael Lind, former golden boy of conservative think tanks and magazines, protege of William F. Buckley, George Will, William Kristol, etc. It gives a close look at the current shape of conservatism and raises some very interesting questions. You should be able to find it on the di scounted books table, since books that question conservatism aren't too popular in this town. Play nice, everyone.
Al Christensen <straay@mindspring.com>
- Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 09:55:17 (EDT)

Hi Al, Of course you are right, I should be able to turn the other cheek and I am sure that you have probably noted that I have not only turned the other cheek 7 times 70 times, but 70 times 700 times since I origionally came on this site, yes --- it c an be done and be done well by"yours truly." However, it does appear that we have generated some people in this society and culture who have the mistaken idea that it is a sign of strength, and possibly even wisdom, to drop to a lower level of discourse a nd lean more on insults and derrogatory language to make their points, than it is to use inductive and deductive logic in common sense evaluations of various propositions put forth to them. The "flaming" I have been engaged in recently has been an attempt to point out that such measures are indeed NOT necessary, serve no intellectual purpose, and reflect more on the indivisual than on the position he/she has decided to take, (in other words, it is the last, best effort of a scoundrel to "get back at"someo ne else) rather than to justify a position through intellectual or logical means. Al, when I told you that my background included 7 years of being a "rottin' on the street corner junkie", I wasn't just whistlin' Dixie and though those years are long gone now, I can revert back to that mindset in dealin' with people who choose to use that particular brand of "con man mentality" or "play prison games"with those of us who choose to dwell in such places no more. --- Yes, I do realize that much of what is said on this site by certain indivisuals (you know who they are as well as I do) is nothing more than "baiting"and should not (nor is it) to be taken seriously, they are merely pathetic attempts to validate a bankrupt position, taken by a certain "wanna be,"w ho knows no boundary to obnoxious behavior.
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 12:40:52 (EDT)

Great birdcage liner in today's "Charlotte Disturber". Check out the Article on 1F and 4F. It certiainly is not a slim fast ad. I will commend Ol' Jer on one thinh, this is being done with private money (for the time being). Although Bruce Parker probally borrowed money from Bill Culp. Or is that vice versa. Also you may check out the "Christia n Defense League" on line.
"Christian Defense League Defender"
USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 12:55:04 (EDT)

Have I been mean? --- yes! Has my conduct been less than that ascribed to a Christian? --- undoubtedly! Have I lowered myself to their level? truly! Did it make me feel good to demean them? Absolutely not!!! After becoming a Christian, I learned the re al value of human life and something of what it means to be "made in the image of God." To the degree that I have participated in flamin' certain indivisuals, I have sinned. However, I learned a long time ago that being a Christian does not necessarily me an that you will never sin again --- what it means is that you cannot enjoy doing it in the same manner or degree that I enjoyed it before becoming a Christian. In other words, speaking on a theological basis, if the Holy Spirit dwells within my very bein g and I jump into bed with a whore, I am inviting the Holy Spirit within myself to engage in such a practice along with me. Sure I can rationalize it, make a dozen excuses for my behavior like everyone else does, but in the end, when I am all alone, I kno w that I have done something which has placed a boundary between myself and the God who has been so very generous to me all my life. Sometime, I would like to tell you EXACTLY what I mean by that, I think (even) you would find it MORE than a little diffic ult to rationalize. I would like to point out however that my motive for engaging in all this flamin was simply for one purpose. To prove beyond a shadow of a doubt what a "cheap shot" it all is and to try and discourage it's use by those who seem to find it as their primary avenue of assaulting those who opose them. I take no pride in having done what I have done and to those whom I have hurt I apologize and ask forgiveness, especially to my Lord.
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 13:10:04 (EDT)

Hi Al, Pressin.....nice to see you guys. Comment: Pressin' appears to be the type of Christian that I would proudly associate with; I have never had a beef with Pressin. It appears he is living by example and not preaching and damning me to hell all over the place. It's like my roomie, the nun...she doesn't preach, but has a real peace about her that I am certain that can only come from God. She doesn't knock on doors trying to get people to go to her church, she just lives well, and that quality I see in Pressin', so why can't we all just get along? And to all you people out there who put ridiculous email addresses at the end of your posts...what a bunch of chicken s----. Wassa matta, 'fraid someone's gonna spam up your mailbox? Afraid to real ly take a stand? Apparently so. Well you all have a good day and I'll be talkin' to ya.
Mary T. <Aatredes@email.msn.com>
Milwaukee, WI USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 14:36:34 (EDT)

What I am amaze at is the critics of how Congress taxes its citizens until the discussion of the military budget. Exactly where does the Pentagon get its funds to pay for all its programs? The taxpayer. Now those who cry out that they are overtaxed cry the loudest about "NOT" cutting the military budget. *** Like the Conservative/Republicans love to cite that Washington must learn to live within its means just like all the American families must do. That families can balance their checkbooks, so w hy can't Congress balance its budget. *** A family buys the car it can afford, not the one with all the extras beyond their ability to pay. So the same should be true for Congress and the Pentagon. Congress must only buy a military its citizens can affo rd through taxation. *** Who is the United States protecting with American armed forces scattered throughout the world? It ain't America. This notion of being number one is great for sports, not for Foreign Policy. Most Americans complain that Sassem Hu ssein is evil and the United States must stand up to him. But, none of these same critics of Saddem are willing to sacrifice one American life to get rid of Saddem with land combat troops. They support bombing the Iraqi "people" instead as if that will stop Saddem and his Republican Guard from controlling Iraq. *** Lastly, if nationalized health care is too expensive a program to fund in order to "protect" American citizens, then why should Congress pay for more military then it needs to "protect" Ameri can citizens as well?
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 19:48:05 (EDT)

Ah, 'Truck I'm afraid I have a problem with that against which you rail in your last post. First of all I'm not at all certain that your premise is correct, viz. that those who complain the most about being over taxed are also supporters of unlimited m ilitary spending. It seems to me that the loudest voices complaining about taxes (as opposed to complaining about IRS tactics, which is a completely different matter) include those who essentially complain that the well to do don't pay enough taxes, and t herefore presumably that they themselves pay too much. But the "let's have the rich pay for everything" crowd is rarely associated with increased military spending. The larger problem that I have with your post, however, is that you compare two very diffe rent things when you juxtapose military spending and nationalized health care delivery. Our national survival and the survival of world freedom has been known to depend in the past on our ability to field overwhelming force. It cannot be said that the exi stence of our nation or of the free world has or is likely to depend on every American having uniform access to medical care. That is not to denigrate the importance of medical care to those who are faced with a life threatening illness, but rather to poi nt two things: The matter of nationalized medical care is not one of equal importance to every American, whereas national survival is, and while individuals CAN be left with the responsibility for their own medical decisions without threatening the existe nce of the nation, there is no practical means by which each individual can be left with the responsibility of protecting himself alone from foreign threat.
Mark Hodroff <mhodroff@juno.com>
CLT, NC USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 21:52:00 (EDT)

The question of whether our military budget is loo large, too small, or just right is really an entirely different issue. It is a fact that inflation adjusted dollars our military spending has declined fairly consistently for the past about 20 years, a nd it may well be that it is too large still. Indeed it's a fair question to ask whether or not we need more than a minimalist self defense force. The difficulty in pat answers to that question, however, is that if we pursue such a policy and guess wrong, all other questions become moot. We had the ability, in 1941 to rapidly modify production of civilian vehicles to military production and to rapidly produce competetive combat aircraft and ships in large numbers. The changes in technology since then have made a similar ability to go from zero to combat ready in a very short time much less likely, both in terms of hardware, and more particularly in terms of personnel training. So the question then is, I suppose, how much are you willing to gamble with the existence of our country. I don't know that there is an easy answer to that question, but I'm reasonably certain that anyone who says that they have the definitive answer is blowing smoke.
Mark Hodroff <mhodroff@juno.com>
CLT, NC USA - Sunday, July 12, 1998 at 22:13:33 (EDT)

In contemplating what is enough personnel and firepower, let’s look at what we’ve learned from the past. We bombed the crap out of the Mekong Peninsula, but people who carry loads on their backs and push bicycles can get along without roads. In the end , they outlasted military might. We sent our latest and greatest to the Gulf just so malnourished and terrified Iraqis could surrender or flee. We put troops in Lebanon, Somalia, Bosnia, etc. so they can wander about trying to make nothing happen. I wonde r if there will ever again be a great clash of mighty armies, a la WWII. Or will it be a never-ending series of stinky little house-to-house guerrilla skirmishes?
Al Christensen <straay@mindspring.com>
- Monday, July 13, 1998 at 11:38:54 (EDT)

Good question, isn't it Al (regarding large scale vs guerrilla)? And the corallary question is to what degree the state and expense of our military is defined by its role as an instrument of foreign policy? You can make the case that the Iraq war was a n issue of economics and certainly the Somalia, Bosnia, and Haiti adventures were cases of a President exercising the military for narrow foreign policy purposes. (I don't know that Korea and Vietnam fit that model as closely as the more recent examples, since both N. Korea and N. Vietnam were viewed as surrogates for superpowers.) And I suppose that raises the question of the necessity and value of the stick vs the carrot.
Mark Hodroff
USA - Monday, July 13, 1998 at 12:52:40 (EDT)

Then there’s the question of war as a tool of economic policy. We all know “protecting American interests” means protecting business interests. We’ll pull out the stops and whip together an ad hoc coalition to protect the freedom of oil. But Serbs and Croats and all that? Um, well “ethnic cleansing” is probably not a good thing, but golly, where’s the payback in all this? They got anything we need? Then let’s just send a few of our boys to rattle their swords on behalf of the UN. We fight less and less on the side of Freedom, more and more on the side of the Free Market. But then, if global economic interdependence can help keep us from fighting the big one, maybe it’s not such a bad thing.
Al Christenen
- Monday, July 13, 1998 at 14:47:47 (EDT)

Mark H., WHERE DID YOU GET THIS NOTION THAT THE UNITED STATES MUST DEFEND THE "FREE" WORLD? Let's see where this leads us. Americans were sent to Nam to defend their generals, not the people. NAM never had a government nor a nation for that matter ** * There was this Shad of Iran that the United States imposed on the people of Iran to protect the free world. Well, the Iranians didn't like it.*** Then there was Markos of the Phillipines. One of the great dictators of Asia right up there with Mao and Hoe Chi Min. *** Let's not forget the corrupt General Chang Kei Chek who led his people to Taiwan. Left about a billion behind back in China. His government was so corrupt it is no wonder that Mao defeated him. But Shang Hi was America's anti-communis t. So we paid him for his services. *** South Korea, never once coinsidered to be a communist nation, nor a free nation for that matter. But they never had free speech, a free press, or even elections until about two years ago. It was run by a haunta m ade up of generals that America supported. *** Then there is General Suharto in Indonesia. His family is raking in billions from its corruption and foreign investments. *** Then when the people of Chile voted in a communist, Allende, the United States ma de sure this democracy did not last. Brought back the generals to control Chile. *** Did I forget Iraq. America needed a monster to stop Iran, so it got Saddem Hussein. At least the CIA made the right choice here, they got themselves a monster they can 't even control. Funny how president Bush ended up fighting with one of his own monsters. *** Mark, this idea that America must defend the free world is ludicrous. Sounds like a slogan for the "MILITARY-INDUSZTRIAL-COMPLEX".
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Monday, July 13, 1998 at 20:54:37 (EDT)

Mark, if you are so worry about all these other nations, why don't you establish an insurance business to pay the insured if the free world should become unfree. --- I don't need a rolls royce military nor can the taxpayers of the United States afford it. Maybe if you are so worry about this free world, you should leave America and go to a country where you may be safer, like Russia? Mark H., American taxpayers cannot afford to buy your kind of military. *** It is not the United States place to be th e leader of the free world nor the number one super power. Too many young Americans died for nothing in NAM. It was a phoeny war whose price tag America should never have paid. --- For me, if I had a choice between funding national defense [the Pentagon] and National Health Care, I will opt for national health care. *** Let the world protect itself. Only the rich have the wealth to lose. Poor Americans should not be forced to die to protect other peoples wealth when the wealthy refused to share with th e less fortunate Americans by paying higher taxes.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Monday, July 13, 1998 at 21:06:45 (EDT)

FT, Goodmorning, Just back from NJ, but, you are slightly wrong about Jesus. You and most have missed the point as many before you and behind you will do. He didn't "HANG" with the low lifes to convince himself of anything, he was already GODS son, he did it to show the SO CALLED upper level priests and leaders that gods peace, love and protection was for everyone! Thats why he revealed himself to a prostitute when he rose from the dead. The ones that needed to test their faith were the priests and hy pocrits that didn't think that lower class citizens were worthy of GOD !!! Jesus certainly wasn't thinking like Andy Sipowitz on NYPD !!!! The people that understood gods love and what Jesus was all about were exactly those that were not included in the upper class life style, hence an example, the poor women washing Jesus's fee t, she had nothing but yet had the faith and felt the honor of washing her Lords feet, something the priests thought was totally absurd, Jesus had it all figured out and thats what he was teaching, and still is, to those that are ectually listening. Late r..have a good day. James
James <Jazzbass97@aol.com>
Charlotte, NC USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 07:31:10 (EDT)

Gee, 'Truck, where did YOU get the notion that I think the U.S. must be the world's policeman? Seting aside your rather simplistic take on U.S. foreign affairs, you're arguing against a statement I didn't make. Fact is I can't even see a rational way f or you to have drawn the inference that I took a position AT ALL that relates to what you've posted. You sometimes remind me of Emily Latella. . .
Mark Hodroff <mhodroff@juno.com>
CLT, NC USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 08:32:15 (EDT)

Al, this may be a minor point, but it's fairly difficult to separate on a broad scale the economic interests of business in general from those of the American people. I'm refering, of course, to your statement:<<<<<<We all know protec ting American interests” means protecting business interests. We’ll pull out the stops and whip together an ad hoc coalition to protect the freedom of oil.>>>>>> I don't think there's much question that oil was, if not the only issue, ce rtainly the major issue in the Iraq war. But readily available and in expensive oil does a little more than benefit business. And scarce $3.50 gallon gas has a far broader effect than simply curtailing personal transportation. The cost and availability of oil impacts everything from your ability to communicate via this device to the cost of virtually every item you purchase. The food you eat is produced, harvested, processed, transported and sold to you with the use of oil. Your ability to turn a faucet and receive potable water and to flush away your wastes rely upon petroleum fuels. Indeed petroleum is the one product upon which you rely virtually 24 hours per day one way or the other. For an object lesson in what happens to the economic health of the nation and ALL its people when there is a relatively small increase in cost and decrease in availble supply, contact Jimmy Carter! I don't know what you do for a living, but I'd be willing to bet that your employer relies on power, transportation, and pet roleum based products and processes to the extent that choking off the supply or dramatically raising the price would probably threaten your job as well.
Mark Hodroff
USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 08:51:57 (EDT)

Right On Mark, Someday maybe we can get together and I'll take yall up to the terminals in Paw Creek and show ya how everything works up there. It really is a trip, everything is computerized. When ya pull a wagon under the load racks and hook up the v apor recovery lines, the gas goes in at the ports at 3000 gallons/minute and the vapors are pushed towards the incinerator to be burned. Kinda gives ya the "willies" when ya start seein' flames shooting 30 or 40 feet in the air and realize that is what yo u have been yankin' around all over Charlotte. There havn't been any "empty" tanker wrecks in Charlotte since the EPA laws went into effect in NC concerning the transportation of vapors. The next one that does occur wont result in a fire, it will result i n detonation. It helps to keep the air clean, but it is a hundred times more dangerous than it ever was before. I havn't been able to get on the site for the last couple of days, guess Jerry was doin' a little work, but it sure sounds like FT is advocatin g an isolationist policy --- that's kinda strange, I had him figured as a One World affectionado! Go Figure!!!
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 09:33:35 (EDT)

John, I am not advocating "isolation" for the United States foriegn policy. What I support is that the Pentagon live within the means that the American taxpayers can afford. Even if America is no longer a super power nor number one, that does not mea n the United States is isolationist. What it does mean is that this free nation is not a militarized nation. *** House members Gingrich and Archer support reduction in the tax rate for Capital Gains. They believe the notion that reduce taxes on Capital Gains helps the economy. My answer to them is to get it from the Pentagon budget. Whatever spending reductions [savings to the taxpayer] are made in the Pentagon's budget, use those cost savings to repay the taxpayers. Spending reductions should be used to allow taxpayers to ha ve their taxes reduced, in this circumstance for capital gains taxes. *** By no means, I do not advocate isolationism. What I advocate is that America's military might should "NOT" be placed as a burden on the backs of its taxpayers. As I stated previou sly, National Health Care is far more important to Americans then the Pentagon budget. If the People were to choose, they would pick National Health Care over the Pentagon. One healthy American child is worth far more then a hundred war jets on a carrie r in the Middle East or even the Adriatic.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 11:17:45 (EDT)

Why would Jesus not find it difficult to keep His faith surrounded by such misery? In the Garden and on the Cross, Jesus showed signs of questioning His faith. Would not it be easier to have faith when in the accompany of the wealthy who have the ple asures of life to keep them happy? *** When in the desert for 40 days, Jesus rejected the offerings of Satan. Satan offered Jesus wealth, power, and dominion. But, the Rev. Pat Robertson succumbed to such temptations when Jesus did not. Robertson sold his soul for 2 billion $$$$. *** Jesus showed not anger, but contempt for those who would use the Temple of His Father to make a buck. No different then Robertson and Dabson selling their religious products on television. In Jesus day, it was buying a offering. Today, Dabson and Rober tson are selling redemption and forgiveness. It is not for Dabson nor Robertson to sell, but for Jesus to give "free of charge". Bauer, Dabson, Robertson, and Falwell are the new money changes in Jesus's Temple. *** So why should not one's faith be found among the poorest of the poor, where Mother Theresa found hers. Working in the soup lines for the most needy is far more appropriate to increase one's faith and acceptance of God's will then picketing the abortion clinics. Picketing abortion clinics is a cheapen and gaudy version of true faith as found in the lives of Mother Theresa and Jesus.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 12:41:08 (EDT)

Yes, yes, Mark. I know oil is what makes our version of the world go ‘round. The US has always been about money as much as anything else. The colonization of this continent was primarily a business venture (religious and political refugees notwithstand ing). So we shouldn’t be too shocked when war is used as an economic tool, or when preserving the American Way of Life translates into protecting the sources of our material wealth. But maybe we should be a little more dismayed when we can’t seem to get u p a good fight purely for freedom and democracy and all those noble concepts. In fact, we’ll often do just the opposite. As Fire Truck noted, under the guise of keeping people free of communism we’ve propped up oppressive totalitarian dictators who, for s ufficient cash, were willing to let American businesses operate unmolested. And in nearly every case it has come back to bite us in the ass. The US has done some very despicable things in the name of protecting business interests. But like they say, what’ s good for GM is good for America.
Al
- Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 13:41:54 (EDT)

I agree heartily Al, if your point is that we don't often act with force out of pure philosophical motives. I disagree equally, however, with your effort to find a demon from whom you can distance yourself. You seem to be saying that your elected gover nment acts despicably in the world for one identifiable interest group (business) to the exclusion of the kinder, gentler interests of the people, and that the interests of the populace are distinct from those which the government addresses. To be blunt, I think that's hogwash: a false dichotomy. Again, ask Carter how easy it is to get re-elected by that populace if you DON'T successfully serve those economic interests. I take that as a fairly clear indication that the intersection of the pure and wonderf ul interests of the people and the evil business interests is a bit more direct than you seem to admit. It might be comforting to look at the ugly reality of what gov't does for economic reasons and blame business, but it also strikes me as a bit too conv enient for most people who beat that drum to ignore that their own way of life is almost wholly dependent on our economic health. About the only way I can see for you to remain consistent in creating that distance between yourself and the economic interes ts of the country is to be an activist for higher prices, fewer choices, a less varied diet, poorer healthcare, less economic freedom, more unemployment, lower wages, more uncertainty in retirement, and so forth. In other words, don't just talk the talk o f economic de-construction, walk the walk. Bet you don't.
Mark Hodroff
USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 14:30:06 (EDT)

In 1995 Mother Teresa spoke in Washington at the National Prayer Breakfast on the subject of abortion. This is a brief excerpt of her full speech which is on the web. "Many people are very, very concerned with the children of India, with the children o f Africa,where quite a few die of hunger, and so on. Many people are also concerned about all the violence in this great country of the United States. These concerns are very good. But often these same people are not concerned with the millions who are be ing killed by the deliberate decision of their own mothers. And this is what is the greatest destroyer of peace today: abortion, which brings people to such blindness." Anyone who knows anything about the ministry of Mother Teresa, or the ministry of Jesu s understands their clear teaching on the sanctity of life. People who have the compassion to do sidewalk counseling in front of a place that turns a profit on the dismemberment of infants deserve our admiration. There are many ways to minister to others, savings lives,even tiny lives, is a pretty good choice.
Stelle
USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 14:30:44 (EDT)

Stelle...Right on.... It's very easy for one to talk the talk, but walking the walk is a totally different deal....It's very easy to side with whats popular and sounds good for all kind, but to actually do something, take an action, represent your true self in front of the mass populace is another th ing. No one condons any violence of any kind, no one thinks hungry children is ok, no one thinks that children killing other chidren or adults for that matter is ok, but in the political scope it's easy to comdemn the "OTHER" party and publicly humiliate when it appears to have an edge in an election. ....James
james <jazzbass97@aol.com>
charlotte, NC USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 16:15:18 (EDT)

A further thought Al: You said that this country has always been about money. I'm not sure you should stop at this country. To some degree the history of humankind from the time when most of us were no longer hunter gatherers has been about money. Much as the politics of envy and class warfare are in vogue these days with the consequence that we think of money as somehow "dirty", the fact is that work is natural to the human animal, and money is nothing more than a convenient way to exchange work at wh at we CAN do for the product of some one else's work at what we can't do. We, as a people, certainly have more than our proportionate share of the world's output. And while one can make the case that it's not "fair" for that it be so, fairness in the dist ribution of wealth seems to be something that people only call for when they believe that the result for them will be net gain. I wonder how many Americans would actually support (hypothetical, obviously) a world wide referendum calling for the EQUAL dist ribution of the worlds wealth, food, etc., realizing that the result would be a net loss for virtually ALL Americans, including those who seem themselves as poor.
Mark HOdroff
USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 16:40:46 (EDT)

Stelle, you lost me. What does Mother Theresa'a opposition to abortion have to do with picketing abortion clinics? Why not have these same Christians serving food to the homeless or washing the feet of the poor just as your Savior, Jesus, did? He li ved among the poorest of the poor in His day on earth, yet you and your reborn Christians cannot find the time to serve these people. *** Stelle, where is your faith? Picketing the abortion clinics, the easy targets for self-righteous reborn Christians. Picketing abortion clinics is not a testimony to the reborn Christian faith. It is an act of self-righteousness to preach to others about how much better a person you are then those women who have abortions whom you consider to be sinners. *** Jesus pr oved His faith among the masses, the outcasts. Again Stelle, I asked again, where is your faith and your reborn Christians faith? I dare you and your reborn Christian friends to spend a year living in an Urban ghetto and still keep your faith rather the n protest at an abortion clinic, the cowardly Christian way.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 17:12:55 (EDT)

Mark H., billions for defense but not one taxpayers cent for National Health Care for all Americans. If the United States cannot protect its own at home from disease, why use taxpayers money to protect the world? *** BILLIONS FOR HEALTH CARE, BUT NOT ONE AMERICAN TAXPAYER CENT IN TRIBUTE TO THE PENTAGON TO PROTECT THE WORLD'S WEALTHY. AMERICA FIRST, THEN THE WORLD.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 17:18:57 (EDT)

Mark, I'm not one of those who think money is inately dirty. It's just that people will do dirty things for it, including those with the most power and wealth exploiting the weak in order to perpetuate their power and wealth. As in sports, I can cheer those who play hard, but not those who play dirty, even if they're on my team.
Al Christensen
- Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 20:57:37 (EDT)

Firetruck, "Why not have these same Christians serving food to the homeless or washing the feet of the poor just as your Savior, Jesus, did? He lived among the poorest of the poor in His day on earth, yet you and your reborn Christians cannot find the time to serve these people." You're making the false assumption that these are two entirely distinct groups of individuals. What makes you think that the sidewalk picketers do not also help the poor? Do you also have information that Stelle in particul ar does not show compassion for the poor? Read your last sentence again, you'll find that you're making a specific assumption about Stelle and a general assumption about "your reborn Christians" (as if she owned them) that are wrong.
David S. <colorcraft@trellis.net>
C harlotte, NC USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 21:28:31 (EDT)

Evening all...a couple of things. First, Stelle...suppose your obstetrian found that your baby had no brain and part of a spine. Now, if you were even to carry this baby to term, the baby would be born dead. Sure this baby has a soul. All living th ings do. But to make this baby and mother suffer would be deplorable. I am Catholic and do not believe in abortion as a means of birth control, however I did believe in saving my baby from unnecessary suffering. I also continue to grieve for that littl e life that was inside of me. Also, I've never seen Mother Theresa picket an abortion clinic. Instead, I saw her loving and caring for the poor. And the oil thing. Our government should be putting mega $$$$ into research for alternative fuels (the sun shines above us) instead of pouring all that money and personnel into defense. Because one day, after stripping mother earth of all her defenses, no oil will be left. PS It's hotter than H--- here in Milwaukee. I'm thinking of moving to Caribou, Maine . See ya...
Mary T. <Aatredes@msn.com>
Milwaukee, WI USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 21:36:01 (EDT)

As some wag once said, conservatives believe every fetus has a God-given right to life, but not necessarily a very good life.
Al
- Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 22:41:53 (EDT)

Some reborn group has an anti-abortion program. That all they do is picket abortion clinics. Stelle is the one who brought up Mother Theresa is against abortion, not me. My conclusion is that all I hear from Stelle and her reborn Christian friends i s same old nonsense about abortion. *** My entire point was about faith. That Jesus showed the true meaning of faith by living with the outcasts of society. Many cannot retain their faith under those conditions. I question that those people, like Ste lle, who spend their entire life bemoaning abortions never truely learn about faith or are able to manifest it. *** When Jesus died on the cross, His faith was intact. The same CANNOT be said for Dabson, Bauer, Robertson, Falwell, or even Stelle. For the former group of faith sayers, they live in comfort and ease. They are surrounded with the best of live. They only associate with the "INCASTS" of life. So how can they speak of faith and abortions when they never lived the life of their Savior, Jesus?
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Tuesday, July 14, 1998 at 23:43:44 (EDT)

Dear Firetruck --- Soooo much anger, soooo many presuppositions, soooo little regard for the facts. There must be a reason for all this, why don't you tell us about it someday, I'll be glad to listen. However I would lke to say something about the poor and their relationship to God. You seem to think that the economic status of someone has a bearing upon that person's ability to have faith. I would like to point out that it is much easier for someone who is truly poor to have faith than it is for those who are surrounded by wealth. People who are truly poor know beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are in need of redemption. They know not only their dependence on God and on powerful people, but also their interdependence with one another. They have the ir security not on things, but on people. They don't have an exagerated sense of their own self-worth nor an exagerated need of privacy. They expect little from competition, because they can't really compete, but they expect much from cooperation. They ha ve an inate ability to distinguish between necessities and luxuries. The poor can wait, because they have acquired a dogged patience that comes from their acknowledged dependence. Their fears are more real and less exagerated, because they know from exper ience how to survive great suffereing and privation. But most importantly, when they hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ preached to them, it DOES sound like good news, not like a threat or a scolding and they respond with a certain kind of abandonment and un complicated totality because they have so very little to lose and they are ready for anything. Firetruck, perhaps it has been a long time since you have spent some time with those who are truly poor and truly humble because poor people have ALWAYS --- ALW AYS --- ALWAYS found themselves in a posture perfectly suited for the grace of God.
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 05:37:58 (EDT)

I have to agree with Pressin' regarding faith and the poor. I do volunteer work (website and office work) at my friend's school. It's a school set up for poor Hispanic families in the inner city of Milwaukee. These people, in the face of predjudice, uncertainty and poverty have great faith. These people believe in their daughters' educations. Yes they have to pay tuition (about $900 a year) and some can't even pay for that and it costs about $6K to educate one of those kids per year. But they kno w their God, they love their God and pray fervently for their futures and the futures of their daughters. I do too. So you don't have to be rich to love and trust God, and faith spans all economic levels. See ya...off to teach computer class. Oh if yo u want to check out the school and the people there....http://www.angelfire.com/wi/notredamems
Mary T. <Aatredes@msn.com>
Milwaukee, WI USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 08:34:42 (EDT)

Al I don't think we're far apart on the issue. The more wealthy and powerful indeed may maintain their position at the expense of the less well to do. We do that as a nation vis a vis other nations. It's the WHOLE nation, not just the so called "busin ess interests", however. And I guess that was pretty much my point. People spend so much time trying to carve out a nice clean little niche where they can esconse themselves and point out how one or another "them" is the problem while they themselves are more pure, all the while ignoring that ALL of us (with the exception, I suppose, of the few people like Mother Theresa) are playing the same game. There is no magic level of income or wealth above which everybody is engaged in the exploitation of those be low, while those below that level are innocent of the same sort of exploitation. If the case can be made that a billionaire has his money and things because he exploited those with less, an equally valid case can be made that the lower middle class man wi th a net worth that consists of a paid-for 5 year old car and 20k in equity in his home did the same thing to those with less than he. And so can an equally valid case be made that the American below the poverty line who is in fact very well off compared to much of the world's population, is no less guilty of that exploitation than is the man with great riches. It doesn't work to say that only those with more than average wealth or only "business intersts" are in that game.
Mark Hodroff
USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 09:40:40 (EDT)

Got an e-mail yesterday with the claim that a local political figure was a “liberal extremist.” I nearly laughed my butt off. The sender is so far over on the right edge that a garden variety Southern Democrat looks like a raving Maoist to him. I’m sha king my head at the silliness of it all. Some days I long for the return of the cold war so we could all bark at someone on the outside instead of each other. Guess it’s the downside of peace and prosperity.
Al Christensen
- Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 10:02:30 (EDT)

It's probably just payback for the rising cry of Democrats referring to everyone right of Paul Wellstone as "right wing radicals", "dangerous right wing extremists" and "mean spirited conservatives". Kind of like Gore referring to every program not com ing out of his own party as a "scheme". Besides, all of you left wing wackos and liberal wiennies are either just the running dogs of communism, bleeding heart liberals or tax and spend Democrats, aren't you??!! (No, FireTruck and others of the sarcasm ch allenged, this is not where you jump in to refute my use of those terms. This is what passes for humor in my world.)
Mark
USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 11:14:36 (EDT)

So now 15 religious groups, including the Christian Coalition and Focus on Family, have joined together to run an ad campaign claiming homosexuality is a disease treatable with therapy, similar to alcoholism. Okay, let’s say that’s true. We’ve stopped calling alcoholics evil; we don’t deny basic rights to alcoholics; we’ve gotten over trying to outlaw alcohol; no one would talk about pushing alcoholics from the earth; we don’t think it’s great sport to beat up alcoholics; no one would picket a producti on that contained alcoholic themes; and we've even come to tolerate the occasional mass public display of drunked revelry. Does that mean they’ll start treating homosexuals the same way? If what they claim is true, they should also know you can’t force a person into therapy, at least not successfully. You can’t compel mental health. But if this new slant from the religious right means a kinder, gentler view of homosexuality, so much the better. We’ll see.
Al Christensen
- Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 11:31:47 (EDT)

Thanks Al for pointing out the waco reborn Christian advertisement campaign against homosexuals. Their campaign is to persecute gays, not help them. Which is what I have been trying to define as exactly what faith is. *** Jesus would have lived with the gays, not throw stones at them like Bauer, Dabson, Roberson, Falwell, or Stelle do every chance they have. These reborn Christians have NO faith but are pure outright hypocrites who are the Pharisees of today. It is these reborn Christians that Jesu s would be scolding today for their genuine lack of both love and faith. *** Like the Pharisees in Jesus's day, the reborn Christians of today live by the literal scriptures as their faith, not by love as Jesus preached. Everything these reborn Christia ns do is pretense to show to the world that they have faith. Faith must be shown only to God through love, mercy, and forgiveness which includes tolerance that reborn Christians grossly lack in both their lives and faith.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 14:57:09 (EDT)

Al, I can't resist asking: what basic rights do we deny homosexuals?
Mark Hodroff
USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 15:35:13 (EDT)

I also have a few questions,open to all responses, 1)Why is it necessary for Gays or Homosexuals to advertise their life style ? EX: parades and flags ??? I will never understand this. 2) What is the difference between Christians picketing an bortion Clinic ( peacefully always) and being vocal about abort ion VS citizens protesting war EX: Vietnam, etc.. or expressing their opinions on any subject, ( peacfully always )!!! I'll tell you what I think then you can all blast me.. Liberals don't like anyone to disagree with them on any subject ever, if you do, you are wrong and out of line..When I walk down the street or in the Mall, I don't advertise my life style, I don't know of anyone that does other than the gays. They obviously have a desire for others to know their personal business which I think may be the whole problem here, they don't want privacy. I don't get it... never will, and I don't even care if they are gay or not, but it bothers me that they find it necessary to tell me,......Later..James
james <jazzbass97@aol.com>
charlotte, nc USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 16:57:27 (EDT)

AL, I'll answer Mark's question for you. *** MARK H., what rights do gays lacked? It is the right not to be pester for their sexual preference by homophoes like yourself and reborn Christians who use their religion to throw stones at others for not b elieving in the same concepts and beliefs as the reborn Christians do. That if one does not accept the reborn Christians values and beliefs as the standard for society, then those people should not be allowed to have or practice their own personal value s or beliefs; thus, these people become the OUTCASTS of that reborn Christians' society. *** MARK, if the gays had rights, you would not need to ask a stupid question like you just did.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 16:59:44 (EDT)

JAMES, those reborn Christians who picket abortion clinics do so for their own effort to force others to accept their relgious beliefs and values. Those reborn Christians pickets are never peaceful. It is the reborn Christians effort to intimitate an d coerce others to follow the reborn Christians standards. The reborn Christians picketing of abortion clinics want to deny other women access to these abortions clinics. It is that intimitation and coercion by reborn Christians that is wrong, immoral, a nd unconstitutional. *** Gays have the right to parade in public, which is not a picket line to coerce or intimitate others into being gay. Like reborn Christians need to pray in public? why the public prayer? *** Public prayer is the way of the Pharis ees. Literal interpretation of the Bible and scriptures is also the way of the Pharisees. Jesus did not like Pharisees. Jesus was not a Pharisee. Reborn Christians are Pahrisees.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 17:10:55 (EDT)

GoodGolly Miss Molly FT, chill out dude !!! By the way it's Born again, not reborn, and NOT all Born Again believers pickett, not all picketts have violence, so come on boy lets chill...gays, yes have the right to parade, but my question still wasn't answered by your viscious yelling at me, Why do gays need me to know they are gay ? It is not against the law to pickett, it is not against the law to protest, at least not yet, so I ask, what is the difference between Christians protesting abortion clinics with their point of view and someone picketting a war with their point of view ? Remember now, violence is not toleratied by anyone with half a brain so don't bring that into the mix. Your view on Liberal politics is equally emotional to Christians with their view of God. Can you find no common ground on anything ?? I'm drinking an MGD and it should ne an MGD lite, oh well, here come the carbs... James
james <jazzbass97@aol.com>
Charlotte, nc USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 17:58:02 (EDT)

Amusing that you call me a homophobe because I asked Al a question. Foolish, small minded, stupid, and by the way wrong, but amusing. And you probably should have let Al answer; yours makes no sense. (For what it's worth, neither you nor I nor anyone else has a right to not be annoyed or offended, which seems to be what you said.)
Mark Hodroff
USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 18:33:38 (EDT)

Hey James - Don't you think that straights advertise their "lifestyle"? We straights marry in large public ceremonys, we go to "straight bars" to meet, we have tons of advertising on TV, radio, and the press that are aimed at straights and have straigh t messages. A straight couple can hold hands and kiss in public. Gay people, in general (not the ones you see on TV) don't advertise that they are gay, but they do want to live their lives. That means being able to be in a piblic place with their partner, to be able to rent an apartment or get a house, and have a job. Those are the "special rights" that the Family Research Council hates so much. Does that make sence?
Marc <a@b.c>
A, NC USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 22:38:52 (EDT)

Mark H., not that you care, but their are many rights that we deny gays in the law. #1 They can be fired from their jobs for being gay. This is not so for having an odd religion, although religion is clearly a "lifestyle choice". #2 Gays can be turned down for an apartment for being gay. This is not true for blacks, although Micheal Jackson proved that being black is also a "choice". #3 Gay couples do not get the legal benifits of being married, which is in itself a legal contract. #4 Gays may not lega lly have sex with eachother in most states. As well, laws pertaining to sexual acts are overwhealming carried out against gay people. #5 Gays may be kicked out of the armed forces for no reason other than being who they are. This is not true of left hande d people, even though left handed people require special consideratoins and are more likely to go insane than right handed people, and after all, left handedness is just a "choice". Hope you found it interesting.
Marc <a@b.c>
A, NC USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 22:45:00 (EDT)

Liked Stell's quoting the late Mother Teresa. Too bad there are almost no Christians in America. Christians in America wouldn't know Jesus if they met him in the street. I haven't met many Christians in the South who understood 1/100th of Jesus' messag e. Mostly they hear what reenforces their own lifestyles and ignore whatever is inconvenient (like a few I could name here). So fo r the political debate in this country, whatever Mother Teresa or Jesus said has absolutly no bearing at all.
Marc <a@b.c>
a, nc USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 22:51:46 (EDT)

JAMES, MARK, and STELLE, it is your fiend that the FBI is looking for in western North Carolina. The anti-abortion anti-gay bomber is yours. It is the reborn Christians with their holier then thou attitude that created that monster. That ad in the ne wspapers that Al commented on in a previous post, that is causing the problems. Those ads give monsters like your friend life. *** JAMES, you argue about why should gays be free to exercise their rights. So why do bauer and dabson need to place an ad in the newspaper attacking gays on the premise that gays are sinners and need Jesus to save them from their sinful life? What gives these reborn Christian the right to protest another's lifestyle? It is the Born Again Christians who must clean their own ho use before looking into the eyes of others for sin. *** But, then again this is all election year politics by the waco born again Christians to get their republican bigots elected to Congress. *** In case ya'll haven't heard. The name for Newt's congress is the "TITANIC". Cause it is sinking fast with no hope of saving their ship of doom. The religious right is so desperate to keep their republican congress afloat that they resorted to throwing gays overboard. *** The problem in America aint't Liberals , it is the right wing religious fanatic Christians who make up the bulk of the Republican party. Bet cha, Abraham Lincoln would choose to be a Democrate rather then a Republican if he were alive today. *** JAMES AND MARK H., if you don't like America wh ere gays are free to exercise their rights, then leave. You are the minority here. Go back to where you came from and take your violence and hatred with ya. No one is forcing you to stay.
Firetruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Wednesday, July 15, 1998 at 23:08:17 (EDT)

Ya know these "right wing conservative Born Again Christian" zealots are no different then the orthodox Jewish religious fanatics in Isreal. I believe that it was both the Israeli Orthodox Jewish Rabbis and the Israeli political conservatives [ie. Ben Netanhayu] who are responsible for and the cause of the murder of Israeli Prime Minister Itzak Rabin. *** Currently, the rhectoric of both the Conservative Reborn Again Christian zealots and the Conservative Republican political leaders against President Clinton have reached a cresendo where certain conservative activist may feel they have the support of God and the people to murder President Clinton due to that anti-Clinton rhectoric. *** I heard on the news that some militiamen from Texas were arrested for being involved in such a conspiracy to kill the President. *** My greatest fear is that the leaders [and the membership] in both the conservative Born Again Christian congregations and the conservative Republican party want such a murder to happen. That they, like Netanhayu and the Orthodox Rabbis, have purposely used such inflamatory rhectoric to promote and encourage the murder of the President. *** Lastly, Ken Starr's actions with regard to the protection of the President by the Secret Service ma kes that murder even more likely now.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 01:13:54 (EDT)

First a quick note. Firetruck, you grow ever more ridiculous. Here's a little therapy for you: find one single example of a posting that I have made which would lead a sane person to believe that I'm a born again Christian, or for that matter a Christi an of any sort. Find a single example of statements from me from which a sane person would infer hatred or fear of homosexuals. Find a single statement I have made that a sane person would interpret as expressing a preference that gays be denied rights. I f you have trouble with the qualification that a sane person would agree with you, I'll understand. As soon as you come up with your evidence, I'll be happy to respond to you. Until then . . .
Mark Hodroff
USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 08:26:10 (EDT)

Marc: Indeed I did find your listing of rights denied gays in the law interesting. I also find a few of them flawed. By the numbers: 1. Jobs. Essentially true. An employer can deny someone a job because they are gay, but not due to their religion. That is because religion is one of the six protected categories (race, religion, national origin, gender, age between 45 and 70, and ADA related). A person CAN be denied a job lawfully because they are left handed, blue eyed, brown haired, or for a host of ot her reasons over which the applicant has no control, including the whims of an employer. That stems as much as anything from the fact that no individual has a right to a specific job. 2. Rental housing. Again true, and again the issues are exactly the sam e as for jobs: you can be denied a rental for reasons over which you have no control. 3. Marriage. Let's skip this for a moment (see next post.) 4. Sexual relations. Several states have laws that regulate private sexual conduct among adults. Those laws a re the same for gay or straight individuals. The disparate enforcement may have more to do with the frequency of people practicing those acts in venues where they are likely to come in contact with law enforcement. The last time I remember a "peeping Tom" type law enforcement action in this regard was about 15 or 20 years ago in Wisconsin (It's usually referred to as the "Wauatosa lovers" case.) Can't think of a reason in the world for gov't to have such laws, but they aren't typically specific to gays. 5 . Armed Forces. No question that Congress, whether Republican or Democrat, has never seen fit to change this rule. I don't particularly agree that anyone has a right to serve in the military, but in that regard homosexuals are treated like people who are overly tall, short, thin, fat, etc.
Mark Hodroff
USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 08:49:51 (EDT)

Mark H., then are you against the persecution of gays by the born again bigots? Do you believe that homosexuality is "NOT" a sin? Do you support President Clinton? Are you pro abortion? Do you want National Health Insurance? Do you prefer that the United States spend less for defense and the Pentagon toys? Do you believe that taxes are too low for the wealthy? Do you believe in a progressive income tax where those Americans who have more then the average income pay more then the average tax rate? Do you believe that the EPA should provide America with clean rivers, soil, and air? Do you believe that all children are entitled to free education regardless if they live in the burbs or the city? Do you belive that all children should be provided w ith the same educational environment and opportunities regardless if they live in the burbs or in the city? Do you believe that prayer and the bible do not belong in public schools? Do you believe that creationism as a science is a hoax? Do you believe that the Republicans purposely killed the tobacco legislation to protect their friends in the tobacco industry? Do you support gun control? Do you believe in affirmative action for minorities and women? Do you support labor unions? **** MARK H., if you a nswered "yes" to all the questions above, then you are absolutely right that I don't know your view points on many areas. My gut guess is that you said "NO" to more then 80 percent [if not no to all] of those questions. If my gut is right, then I am rig ht about you. So there is no need for me to read your back history. *** Since Mark you have not spoken out against these fantics and you support Tom Bush, you are what I say you are.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 09:06:21 (EDT)

OK so gay people have parades and the Christian right wing doesn't like those parades. The KKK has parades too, and I've never seen good Christian folks complain about the KKK marches. At least gay people show who they are and don't wear sheets over their head. 'Nuf said. See ya!
Mary T. <Aatredes@msn.com>
Milwaukee, WI USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 09:24:05 (EDT)

Oh yeah, forgot to mention...gay people are about expressions of love and the KKK about hate...
Mary T. <Aatredes@msn.com>
Milwaukee, WI USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 09:25:56 (EDT)

Until it was struck down, Colorado’s Amendment 2, excluded homosexuals from the right to petition the state government for redress and denied them due process. Similarly, Cincinnati Charter Amendment 3 (still in appeals) would single out homosexuals fo r exclusion from municipal protections against discrimination. The claim that homosexuals are unfit for military service or other jobs is presumption of guilt and prior restraint. When parents are denied child custody because of their sexual orientation, they are presumed guilty. Banning gay and lesbian clubs in schools is a denial of the right to peaceably assemble. When police put gay bashings on the back burner, they deny equal protection of the law. When police lock up homosexuals, transvestites and t ransgender arrestees with the general jail population just for sport, they inflict cruel and unusual punishment. And so forth.
Al Christensen <straay@mindspring.com>
- Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 09:34:05 (EDT)

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha ......... My Lord Firetruck hahahahaha ... You transend your talent to the point of dispensing wi thit altogether! Mark, you gotta admit --- this dude is one-of-a-kind --- I love his work, but I couldn't warm up to him --- even if I was cremated next to him. If ignorance ever goes to $40.00 a barrel, I want "drilling rights on his head." -------firet ruck, you are prescious! Gotta book, catch ya later.
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 09:40:23 (EDT)

Your number 3, marriage, is an extremely complex issue. The first problem, of course, is in figuring out what the legal benefits of marriage might be. Not tax treatment, that's for sure. Used to be inheiritance, but no longer. In truth, it's pretty har d to make the case that marriage confers any benefits under the law other than Social Security survivor benefits. The fundamental question of state sanctioning of marriage is why it is done in the first place. I suspect that if you were to follow the hist ory of gov't involvement in marriage you would discover that it is a relatively recent practice that has foundations in recording a religous ceremony. To some degree you could probably make the case that it verges on crossing the line between church and state in sanctioning marriage! The social reasons behind marriage are fairly clear however. They are rooted in biology and practicality related to the desire to enhance the likelihood that children are born into the small self-contained units we call nucl ear families with the bio-parents remaining engaged in the care, support and raising of their offspring. Doesn't always work out, but it's not a perfect world. Obviously that is a non issue for people who are not capable of producing children within that unit, whether because they're of the same gender or for whatever reason. No question that we deny marriage to people of the same gender, but I believe it has more to do with why we DO sanction marriage than it does with an anti gay agenda. And just as obv iosly people marry for other reasons, principally emotional. I don't particularly think that emotional affirmation is the business of government. And the bottom line is that there really are not any significant benefits in the law to marriage.
Mark Hodroff
USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 09:53:22 (EDT)

Has anyone been keeping up with the Orange Order marches through Catholic neighborhoods in Ulster, Northern Ireland. These Protestant orange orders have been marching since 1690 when the Protestant King William of Orange defeated the Catholic King Jam es II in Northern Ireland. After the Protestant King's victory, all Irish Catholics could not own land, a horse, or vote. Their property was seize by the protestant victors. *** So why the need for these Orange Orders to march in Catholic areas where th e Orange Order is not wanted? It is the way the Protestant Orange tells the the Catholic Green Irish who is in charge. Who's laws are to be obey. And who's standards of society will be valued. *** Thus, those born again Christians who picket abortion cl inics are no different from the Orange Orders who march in Ulster. These Chrisitian fanatics want to set the stardards for all Americans. Be it abortion or homosexuality, they are right. When they picket abortion clinics it is to state that their stard ards are what this society will use, not yours. *** More then that "The Christian Identidy", "Born Again Christians", and so-called "The Army of God" will all willingly use brute force, even murder, to accomplish their agendas. NO different then the days of the KKK in the South. And NO different from living in Iran either.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 11:17:30 (EDT)

Thanks, John, for making this window wider than my monitor. ;-)
Al
- Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 12:16:43 (EDT)

Al, your first two examples of "denying rights", the Colorado and the Cincinnati amendments, seem to me to block the establishment of yet another protected minority group. Mark H. listed the six protected groups in an earlier post and I don't believe in adding more groups to the list, whether they're homosexual groups, obese groups, or black-haired blue-eyed groups.
David S. <colorcraft@trellis.net>
Charlotte, NC USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 13:51:00 (EDT)

The laws in question could have been written to say, in effect, we aren't going to recognize any new "minority" groups, but instead, they singled out a particular group, leaving the door open for all the other agrieved factions, all the rest of us, to seek protection, to be heard, to have their day in court.
Al
- Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 14:57:35 (EDT)

Guys, I need to remind you about the rules for this page, as the content's gotten a little too rough and personally-directed lately: "2.Given that, you are respectfully requested to exercise good judgment here. That means restricting the length of your comments to a short paragraph, and remembering that we're all human beings. No trash! 3.Be forwarned that, while I will not edit your postings, I reserve the right to delete comments that I find offensive, potentially against the law, or otherwise inappropriate." Please watch your tone. No personal attacks. Okay?
Jerry Klein <jerryk@jerryk.com>
Charlotte, NC USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 15:50:23 (EDT)

Al ... Moi? My goodness, what power my words must have. They just stretched out everybodys screens. Ahhh shucks, and I thought it was the "hand of God" at work ;-) Sorry to all --- and especially to you Randy because you had to be the one to fix it. Honestly, I didn't know it would do that, I'll be careful to not let it happen again. Uhmmm, let me write that down here somewhere, how should I put it, Oh yea --- don't write words with more than 200 letters ---- roger-doger, wilco, over and out, ------- again ... it was ignorance on my part ... sorry!
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 16:55:45 (EDT)

Truck, how did I know that you wouldn't take up the challenge of supporting your statements with fact, but would rather simply waste space with what is arguably the longest single collection of non sequitur that I can recall reading? Not only that, but you've added to your mistaken presumptions with the statement that I support Tom Bush. Tell you what: if it makes you feel good to beleive such silliness, you go right ahead. Doesn't cost me a thing, so you're welcome to whatever misapprehensions you want to entertain. ************************************** John: the text has expanded out to the extreme right of the screen. A really caring person would have made it go left. Didn't I tell you that right wing hate mongers like you were dangerous? And don't tell me you're not; I can prove it. Here, answer this: do you support PETA, Al Gore, and the rights of the Chinese to freely contribute to Democrats? 2 out of 3 ain't good enough, now. Ha! I thought so! You are what I say you are!! **************************** See you later, folks. I've spent a tiring week oppressing the less fortunate and serving as the only Jewish conservative reborn Christian in town, so I'm escaping to the bike trails in Durango for the week-end. Bye.
Mark
USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 20:01:06 (EDT)

Jerry Klein, so what is the problem? Your last post sounded as if one of the postings got to ya. Was it mine? Sure hope so. You should elaborate on what you found offensive. *** I guess Mark H. want off to meet his friend, the anti-abortion bomber, in Durango. *** Lastly, Jerry Klein, if you can "NOT" see the similarities between the rhectoric in Israel that got RABIN murdered and what is happening today in the United States with the conservative and fundamentalist Christian rhectoric towards President Clinton, then you are either a fool or an ostridge. It ain't politics as usual. The right wing are playing for keeps, even murder is now possible with them.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 20:37:04 (EDT)

Mark, if you see no benifits to being married, I feel sorry for you. Maybe you ought to read a book or something before you shoot your mouth off about subject you know nothing about. Nothing else you have said has any meaning to any real American, and that's why the vast majority of Americans are against discrimination against Gays. You will never be a trial lawyer.
Marc <a@b.c>
A, NC USA - Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 22:34:57 (EDT)

Hey Marc, yes good points about "STRAIGHT" people in public, weddings etc... I never really thought about that. I really don't have a problem with gays in public, never said I did, FT, I would ask you to scroll around and find anyplace where I said I was against their rights to do whatever they want, it's still America. I personnaly don't care for that life style and when you start down the road of only Christians are against gays you are dead wrong. It's a society thing, not just a Chtistian thing but I will give you that it's the Christians that are more vocal about it. In know plenty of folks,Jewish etc...that feel the same, and so do you. Don't pretend that all things rotten come from Christians and Republicans just because we expect you to type that. I still don't understand why it's important for gays to let ME know they are gay when I am not asking. Last night I watched some DEM congess guy make a total fool of himself an one of those talking head shows, he actually said "This Republican Congress has passed laws which allow the independent Councel power", good god did he get blasted when he was reminded that it was the Democratic Congess that started this whole Indelendent Councel thing in the first place , he tried to weazle out but pretty much just slid under the table. I'm having fun now.... still need to drink the lite beer though..less carbs..James
james <jazzbass97@aol.com>
charlotte, nc USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 05:08:04 (EDT)

Mark ... Hate mongers like meeee? Moi??? Wait a minute here dude, let me take this bed sheet off my head and put the charcoal lighter fluid in the kitchen, I got splinters all in my hands .. hold on a second ... That's better ... Let me make one thing perfectly clear Mark, it's not me who sits out in the woods on weekends thinking about groping Janet Reno, flipping the slide back and forth on my .45 auto nor do I have handcuffs between the box springs and mattress on my bed, that's your thing! But we shouldn't have a falling out over a few discrepencies. I just need to get you to understand that in the world today everything is controlled by a conspiracy made up of Jews, Bankers, Jewish Bankers, Marcia Clark groupies and Illuminati members with VISA cards who get help from pointy-headed liberal intellectuals, secular humanists and evil men in black wearing glasses. It's nothing new, these conspiracies started way back in achient times when men were men and sheep were nervous. I think it was in California about the time of Micheal Jackson's second nose job. Working incognito, these conspiracies have been responsible for many events over the years like the Fench Revolution, the Russian Revolution, the Disco Revolution and "Police Academy" sequels #2-#7. Today these conspirators are everywhere. You can identify them by secret handshakes, tattoos of Elvis on their butts and the way they never put the toilet seat down. They want to kill, maim and mutilate all God-fearing Christians, true patriots, Dick Armey, Rush Limbaugh as well as Hooie and the Blowfish while they have them imprisoned in secret concentration camps, on UFOs and in the Bermuda Triangle.
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 07:52:16 (EDT)

Mark, you gotta stay on your toes, these guys are everywhere, they are probably watching you at this very moment from black helicopters, black surplus Disneyland monorail cars, super enhansed golf carts and 3-speed Schwinns. We gotta be careful and we gotta be prepared for all this, we must start stockpiling lotsa weapons, start blowing up large buildings, send death threats to Margaret Thatcher and watch re-runs of Mork & Mindy. Don't believe anything you see on the TV cause they are all controlled by liberals, gays, secular humanists, Morely Safer, Dick Clark and Lee Iacocca --- we can only trust American Spectator, Guns & Ammo Magazine, Charleston Heston, Assault Rifles Illustrated and secret messages which only I can hear. Take care my friend, Semper Fi, have a good weekend, kiss the wife and kids for me --- I'm gonna take a trip up to the mountans of NC and see if I can bag a few yankee FBI types. If I don't have any luck, I'll start writing my new book --- "Alone --- In Bad Company."
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 08:09:41 (EDT)

Joan of Arc heard voices too.
Mary T. <Aatredes@msn.com>
Milwaukee, WI USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 09:12:05 (EDT)

MARY T., so did Charles Manson. What's your point?
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 12:33:03 (EDT)

Fire Truck...hi. Just the general paranoia that seems apparent on this page these days, that's all. Not directed at any certain person, just a feeling that I get...maybe Jerry had the same feeling I do, who knows. Comments are getting way too personal.
Mary T. <Aatredes@msn.com>
Milwaukee, WI USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 14:40:10 (EDT)

Mary T., can you be a whole lot more forth coming in your last posting. I guess I have too much wax in my ears to know where you are going with this. What comments are too personal? And what paranoia are you speaking about?
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail>com>
Orlando, FL USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 14:51:11 (EDT)

MARK H., Ya know that somethime back you try to correct my statement about Tom Bush messing up the Meck County budget. Why were you so defensive about Tom Bush and his budget? Tom Bush is the County Chairman which makes him responsible for the budget, not the democratic county commissioners. With his position as Chairman, Tom Bush accepted both responsiblity and leadership for the Meck County Budget. Tom Bush failed misserably in both departments. Tom Bush even tried to blame others for his failure in his apology. Like Gingrich in the House, Tom Bush has shown that conservatives can't govern nor lead. But, they do know how to destroy and make mischief in both the community and the country. THUS, MARK YOUR DEFENSE OF TOM BUSH FOR MAKING A TOTAL MESS OF THE COUNTY'S BUDGET IS MY BASIS FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF TOM BUSH. *** So Mark have ya got together with your freind, the anti-abortion bomber? Or is it John [pressin'on] who is the one responsible for making contact with the Christian monster that murders innocent people and children?
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 15:19:06 (EDT)

I have to type fast, there's a black 'Coptor over my house, they know I like diet sprite. Well FT, don't even pretend that this page has not been with "PERSONAL FEELINGS" attaced and aimed at those who don't agree with topics of choice,... RE-Borns ring a bell?,,Republican are all liars, UhMM., I think Prez Bill will change that definition real soon. This is really not a site where you can actually share a thought or feeling or opinion, I think thats what Jerry had in mind , but, what the hey, it was a good venture. This site , and I'm ok with it, is one where you type your opinion, sometimes even spell correctly( and sometimes get ridiculed for poor typing) then sit back and wait for the launch of character killing. I wonder if this would be the same if everyone sat at a lunch or dinner table together, or is it ok to launch cause no one really knows who you are, why I might not even be who I say I am, but then again, I might be...It's ok for gays to parade,cool..but it's not ok for Christians to pickett or parade for what they believe...It's because liberals, not all, are totally non flexible in there thought cycle, no room to tolerate a conservative on any issue, ever,...later all... James
James <Jazzbass97@aol.com>
Charlotte, NC USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 16:21:22 (EDT)

JAMES, you have the right to present your views, even picket, if its peaceful. But considering the numbers involved in some of these pickets, it becomes initmination not information. Blocking access to abortion clinics is not a "right" for those protesting abortions. *** At some point those who picket and protest abortion clinics do not want to "just" tell others it is wrong, but to STOP all access to abortion clinics. These picketers want to change society standards to represent their opinions and beliefs. Those who picket abortion clinics refuse to accept other opinions other then their own [Toleration denial]. The same applies to homosexuality. One standard applies to all. But with those oppose to abortions and gays, it must be their standards. *** For others like myself, those standards are of personal conscience for each person to decide for themselves. It is not to be mandated morality like many "Born Again Christians" want as the standard. They resent that their standards no longer apply in this society for everyone. Then, why should it be their standards? *** Abortion clinics are for those women who want to use those facilities regardless of the reason the woman decides to have an abortion. But, it is that woman's choice and her conscience. No Born Again Christian woman is mandated by society or law to have an abortion. To that anti-abortion woman, I ask what is your problem? *** For gays, there exist no mandate by society nor law that forces a "Born Again Christian" to be gay. That is a decision made by individuals, not society nor government.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 17:30:05 (EDT)

*** So Mark have ya got together with your freind, the anti-abortion bomber? Or is it John [pressin'on] who is the one responsible for making contact with the Christian monster that murders innocent people and children? Copy and paste are great. This is what I mean about personal and paranoid. Look, Truck, you make some really good points and for the most part I enjoy your posts as I do everyone's here. But like Jerry said, let's calm down here. That's all I meant.
Mary T. <Aatredes@msn.com>
Milwaukee, WI USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 17:41:56 (EDT)

MARY T., Guess you have not heard the comments made Seantor George Mitchell [Chair for the Northern negotiations] on the repercussions of inflamatory statements made by extremists in Northern Ireland. Mitchell's concern is that someone will take these extremist comments seriously and do something to threathen the delicate peace now underway in Northern Ireland. One current example is the innocent deaths of the three little boys after several days of confrontation between the police and members of the Orange Order. Someone took what these Orange Order's leaders statements seriously enough to fire bomb the house where the three boys were killed. *** Rudolp (sic), not the raindeer, is being help by reborn Christians in the Western Part of North Carolina to escape the manhunt now under way to catch this beast. Rudolp ain't human, that's for sure. Would not surpise me if either Mark H. or John [pressin'on] knows the monster. Rudolp is no different from the monster that fire bombed the three innocent boys in Northern Ireland. *** With these kinds of people who don't have a mind or conscience, I am very concerned for the President's life. Some of the inflamatory statements currently made by the conservative and religious anti-Clinton extremist may cause someone like Rudolp to take a shot at the President. *** So Mary, how's the lake?
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 20:53:24 (EDT)

Nope, I haven't heard and I'm sorry about the 3 little boys, being a mom myself. But I am not posting on this page to fight with people; only to express how I feel and interact with others. I don't always agree with everyone here; nobody can but diversity of opinion is good. Oh, and the lake...it's polluted and cold. But the view is great. See ya!
Mary T. <Aatredes@msn.com>
Milwaukee, WI USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 21:08:14 (EDT)

website with much better debate than this one - http://www.bianca.com/interests/us_politics/bbs/ still lots of conservatives
NancyBoy Red <Nancyboy@nancyboys.org>
Nancyland, NC USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 23:15:03 (EDT)

Hey Ya James. I agree that it prejudice against Gays is not exclusively Republican or Christian. I will say that RW Christian groups and Republicans are using fear and hatred of gays to score political points. Isn't that wrong? To use issues to get political power that involve demonizing a minority (like Nixon's "Southern Stratagy"). TO be unconfortable around people that are very different from you is normal. ONce I took a train ride to NYC because I was in a show at the American Craft Museaum. I didn't check ahead and find out that the same day was the Monday after a big Gay Pride march in DC, so I was in a rain with about 1000 gay men (I was the only straight man). Boy was I in the minority!
Marc <a@b.c>
A, NC USA - Friday, July 17, 1998 at 23:21:50 (EDT)

FT, Most assuredly it is wrong, whatever the nature of a protest, to do it with any violence or with any inconvenience to those that are being protested against, EX, Abortion clinics. BUT, lets be accurate here, there are say "a kazillion" Christians in the world, and only a handfull are protesting abortion clinics, and only a handful of them are causing a ruckus...So what I'm saying to you is that you only have one soup bowl and you put all Christians and Republicans in it together. I've been , as well as my family has been, Christians our whole lives, went to Christians churches, went to Church socials, whatever, I don't recall ever going to an abortion clinic or ever causing a ruckus. The problem you are facing here in America is that most citizens, even democrat Liberals, are Christian faith, so when you blast the Christians you are definetly going after folks on both sides. Whats the diffence, ? Glad you asked, When a Liberal Senator goes to his or her Christian church, proclaims the same Christians values and beliefs, recieves the Holy communion( the highest sacrement of faith) and then turns around and blasts his across the aisle republican partner for expressing Christian values,who is the one that can be relied on and is not mixing utheir value system to get the votes.? ....later,,,James....PS...Marc, heck of a train ride...
james <jazzbass97@aol.com>
Charlotte, Nc USA - Saturday, July 18, 1998 at 05:14:58 (EDT)

JAMES, then there are republicans who appear before their national conventions and call Democrates "not" Christians because the democrates don't see Christianity like the Republicans. IS NOT THAT WRONG AS WELL? *** JAMES, what do you think of Christians like Bauer, Dabson, Falwell, and Robertson who attack other Christians for supporting gay rights and abortion choice for women? ARE THEY GOOD CHRISTIANS TO ATTACK OTHER CHRISTIANS? **** JAMES, what do you think of Tom Bush, the Meck County Chairman? Is it right for Bush to attack other Christians who disagree with him? **** Going to church does not make a Christian. Picketing an abortion clinic does not make a Christian. Calling gays sinners does not make a Christian. Neither selling Christianity on the 700 Club like Robertson nor preaching hate on the airwaves like Dabson does not make a Christian. *** LASTLY, THE REPUBLICANS ARE NOT MORE RIGHTEOUS THEN THE DEMOCRATES. BUT THAT IS WHAT THE REPUBLICANS PREACH AS THEIR NEW POLITICAL AGENDA, or should I say gospel.
FireTruck <orlando_66@hotmail.com>
Orlando, FL USA - Saturday, July 18, 1998 at 08:05:44 (EDT)

Please Sign My Dialogue Page
( To View Previous Dialogue Pages, click here)
Read This First: Rules For Jerry's Dialogue Page

This site was produced by Soundview Communications.

It is maintained by Jerry Klein, jerryk@jerryk.com .