Free Speech
- Thread starter judge09
- Start date
bchcky
New member
i agree with what johnny said about parenting. with everything that goes on in the world today, the most important thing in the upbringing of children is their parents or guardians (as i believe it always has been). parents need to be there to teach their kids wrong from right. when i was a kid, i wasnt allowed to watch beavis and butthead, with good reason. but sometimes when i was at my friend's houses or home alone i'd sneak a peek. nothing wrong with that. kids are mischievous, they are going to do things they are told not to do because they're told not to do it.
think about it in this light....everyone remembers the unfortunate incident that happened at columbine high school a few years back. after that there was a public outcry against all things violent. everyone wanted to look to the media for blame, but nobody wanted to consider poor parenting. people are quick to point fingers at everyone but themselves, and parents stick together (just like teams, or kids, or jeepers) the matrix movie had just been released, and violent video games were also blamed for the cause of this. lets get this straight, those two kids were not the norm. there was something seriously wrong with them, and thats too bad. i've seen the matrix, i used to play doom, i play halo on my xbox, but i'm not going out and shooting people and killing aliens :wink:. and this is what people fail to realize, this is where the parents come into play. to any normal kid, those things are not going to make them more or less violent, it is the kids that need some kind of help in the first place that are affected by this. maybe it was something as simple as those kids not getting enough love/attention from their parents, should the rest of society be handicapped for something like that? no. (hey white hangs out here and talks to us, yet he still drives a chevy :roll: it must have been his parents that taught him wrong :wink
listen...if kids want to see porn, they'll get it. hell they can watch the scrambled channel and think they saw a boob, or pick up a national geographic. if they want to hear swears in music, they'll find a way to hear it. if they want to see violence, they'll go to a friend's house with more lenient parents. what they do after they see it is up to the parents, its up to them being involved in their kids lives.
let us not use sensorship as another crutch to babysit our kids for us. people need to be more involved with their children. the tube is not a babysitter. nor is the radio in the car. use the time in your car to talk to your child, about their day or anything else, let something play in the background if needed. when you're at home....tv is fine. let your kids watch it, god knows i've watched plenty, but just regulate it. not to the extent that you have to watch every second of tv with them, but set some guidelines, and make sure they're followed.
people must be involved enough to trust their children. and NO, your child will not always do exactly what you tell them, but they might make you proud with some decisions they make after they do something wrong. some stat shows that an overwhelming majority (not sure of the numbers) of underage kids drink, surprise surprise :roll: this does not mean parents have to give up the battle on underage drinking, but teach them right from wrong. if your kid calls you for a ride home from a party, are you going to be mad that they were there and drinking in the first place? of course you are. but arent you going to be more proud that they had the fortitude and the sense of mind to call you and admit to their wrong rather than trying to drive home themselves? its things like this that can show the parents that their children trust them, and in return the parents should trust the children.
it all comes down to parenting. you cant be there all the time. you might not catch them trying a cigarette, or trying alcohol. you might not catch them from finding pornography. and most people would be surprised at the words their children use when they're around their friends and not their parents, but hey, this is part of growing up. i'm sure that 99% of you in here that cry for more sensorship and freedom infringement tried somet things when they were young that they shouldnt have. i'm sure they heard things or saw things that they shouldnt have. and i'm sure that most of them turned out to be law abiding citizens and positive contributors to society. your parents raised you, and they did a good job, do the same for your children, dont leave it up to government regulations.
and FINALLY, for those of you adults who are concerned about howard stern, but are not concerned because of children, let it go. if you're over 18, you have the inate ability to change the radio station. you can switch the channel on the tv, and you can choose which magazines or movies you buy. then do it! use your freedom of choice. but dont take away from the choices of other people. i dont like howard stern, but i dont mind him either, he's there for ratings, nothing else. ratings = money, and that is all he cares about, dont let anything else fool you. its a capitalistic society, and lets keep it that way. if you dont like him, give someone else the ratings, and maybe they'll take over as the king of morning radio.
think about it in this light....everyone remembers the unfortunate incident that happened at columbine high school a few years back. after that there was a public outcry against all things violent. everyone wanted to look to the media for blame, but nobody wanted to consider poor parenting. people are quick to point fingers at everyone but themselves, and parents stick together (just like teams, or kids, or jeepers) the matrix movie had just been released, and violent video games were also blamed for the cause of this. lets get this straight, those two kids were not the norm. there was something seriously wrong with them, and thats too bad. i've seen the matrix, i used to play doom, i play halo on my xbox, but i'm not going out and shooting people and killing aliens :wink:. and this is what people fail to realize, this is where the parents come into play. to any normal kid, those things are not going to make them more or less violent, it is the kids that need some kind of help in the first place that are affected by this. maybe it was something as simple as those kids not getting enough love/attention from their parents, should the rest of society be handicapped for something like that? no. (hey white hangs out here and talks to us, yet he still drives a chevy :roll: it must have been his parents that taught him wrong :wink
listen...if kids want to see porn, they'll get it. hell they can watch the scrambled channel and think they saw a boob, or pick up a national geographic. if they want to hear swears in music, they'll find a way to hear it. if they want to see violence, they'll go to a friend's house with more lenient parents. what they do after they see it is up to the parents, its up to them being involved in their kids lives.
let us not use sensorship as another crutch to babysit our kids for us. people need to be more involved with their children. the tube is not a babysitter. nor is the radio in the car. use the time in your car to talk to your child, about their day or anything else, let something play in the background if needed. when you're at home....tv is fine. let your kids watch it, god knows i've watched plenty, but just regulate it. not to the extent that you have to watch every second of tv with them, but set some guidelines, and make sure they're followed.
people must be involved enough to trust their children. and NO, your child will not always do exactly what you tell them, but they might make you proud with some decisions they make after they do something wrong. some stat shows that an overwhelming majority (not sure of the numbers) of underage kids drink, surprise surprise :roll: this does not mean parents have to give up the battle on underage drinking, but teach them right from wrong. if your kid calls you for a ride home from a party, are you going to be mad that they were there and drinking in the first place? of course you are. but arent you going to be more proud that they had the fortitude and the sense of mind to call you and admit to their wrong rather than trying to drive home themselves? its things like this that can show the parents that their children trust them, and in return the parents should trust the children.
it all comes down to parenting. you cant be there all the time. you might not catch them trying a cigarette, or trying alcohol. you might not catch them from finding pornography. and most people would be surprised at the words their children use when they're around their friends and not their parents, but hey, this is part of growing up. i'm sure that 99% of you in here that cry for more sensorship and freedom infringement tried somet things when they were young that they shouldnt have. i'm sure they heard things or saw things that they shouldnt have. and i'm sure that most of them turned out to be law abiding citizens and positive contributors to society. your parents raised you, and they did a good job, do the same for your children, dont leave it up to government regulations.
and FINALLY, for those of you adults who are concerned about howard stern, but are not concerned because of children, let it go. if you're over 18, you have the inate ability to change the radio station. you can switch the channel on the tv, and you can choose which magazines or movies you buy. then do it! use your freedom of choice. but dont take away from the choices of other people. i dont like howard stern, but i dont mind him either, he's there for ratings, nothing else. ratings = money, and that is all he cares about, dont let anything else fool you. its a capitalistic society, and lets keep it that way. if you dont like him, give someone else the ratings, and maybe they'll take over as the king of morning radio.
bchcky
New member
LGR said:
hehe, thanks, i need a break too after typing all that.
ps - to anyone who disagrees with what i said, thats fine, lets hear it. that was simply my opinion, it is by no means a guideline that anyone must follow. i simply do not have patience for parents shrugging their duties off on the media. dont let your kids find out about things through the media, have the tough talks with them. nobody said raising a child is easy, sometimes you must bite the bullet.
Great thread.
I wrote this about 9 years ago. I thought it might be appropriate here.
RIGHTS CANNOT BE
ABUSED!
This is not about the infringement of rights by others, but the claim that a person can abuse the
Rights that he has.
Two very popular misconceptions of how we abuse our rights are related to:
· 1) The right to keep and bear arms,
· 2) Yelling “Fire!†in a crowded theater
Let's first cover right to keep and bear arms.
It was proposed to me that if I take a gun and murder someone, it is an abuse of my right to keep and bear arms. It is not! It is an abuse of my power to use that gun to violate someone else's right to life. My right to keep and bear arms is then surrendered because of my actions. My right to life (death penalty), liberty (incarceration), or other rights (probation) may also be surrendered. We cannot allow the term “Abuse of Rights†to be used, for the right was not abused, the object/subject of the right was abused, i.e., the gun.
It is very easy to say that using a gun to murder is an abuse of your right to keep and bear arms. It would be just as easy to say wounding someone with a gun is an abuse of your right to keep and bear arms. Would it then also be an abuse of your right to keep and bear arms if you threaten someone with a gun? Most would say yes! What if the cap is raised to include offending someone by having a gun? If that answer is yes, then you could not carry open for you may offend someone because your gun is visible. Then what if you offend someone by talking about guns? Would that be an abuse? And if so, would that not violate your right to free speech? The cap could conceivably be raised until you could only “keep and bear arms†in an armory, unloaded, dismantled and handled with permission from the state. At that point, it would not truly be a right, even if it were labeled as such.
Therefore, the misuse of the gun is not an abuse of your right to keep and bear arms, but of the gun, which is the object/subject of the right.
As to "yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater" and your right to free speech, we must first find the object/subject of the right to free speech (just as we did in the right to keep and bear arms).
Our founding fathers put free speech together with free press for a reason. It is the expression of ideas, not the act of speaking, that is protected. If you yell FIRE! in a crowded theater, causing panic and possible injury, you are abusing your power to speak. However, you could hand out to theater patrons paper flyers with the word FIRE! “screaming†from the page in bold print. You could stand in front of the audience and say, “Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to get your opinion of the following word,†and then yell FIRE! You would get a very different reaction from the crowd. You might even be laughed at. Nevertheless, you would not have abused your power to speak while still exercising your right to free speech. It is your right to put forth your ideas, it is not a right to merely vocalize.
I hope this explanation will help you to understand how the term "Abuse of Rights" is misused. I also hope that you will not allow others to use the term to usurp YOUR rights
Norman Westrick
I wrote this about 9 years ago. I thought it might be appropriate here.
RIGHTS CANNOT BE
ABUSED!
This is not about the infringement of rights by others, but the claim that a person can abuse the
Rights that he has.
Two very popular misconceptions of how we abuse our rights are related to:
· 1) The right to keep and bear arms,
· 2) Yelling “Fire!†in a crowded theater
Let's first cover right to keep and bear arms.
It was proposed to me that if I take a gun and murder someone, it is an abuse of my right to keep and bear arms. It is not! It is an abuse of my power to use that gun to violate someone else's right to life. My right to keep and bear arms is then surrendered because of my actions. My right to life (death penalty), liberty (incarceration), or other rights (probation) may also be surrendered. We cannot allow the term “Abuse of Rights†to be used, for the right was not abused, the object/subject of the right was abused, i.e., the gun.
It is very easy to say that using a gun to murder is an abuse of your right to keep and bear arms. It would be just as easy to say wounding someone with a gun is an abuse of your right to keep and bear arms. Would it then also be an abuse of your right to keep and bear arms if you threaten someone with a gun? Most would say yes! What if the cap is raised to include offending someone by having a gun? If that answer is yes, then you could not carry open for you may offend someone because your gun is visible. Then what if you offend someone by talking about guns? Would that be an abuse? And if so, would that not violate your right to free speech? The cap could conceivably be raised until you could only “keep and bear arms†in an armory, unloaded, dismantled and handled with permission from the state. At that point, it would not truly be a right, even if it were labeled as such.
Therefore, the misuse of the gun is not an abuse of your right to keep and bear arms, but of the gun, which is the object/subject of the right.
As to "yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater" and your right to free speech, we must first find the object/subject of the right to free speech (just as we did in the right to keep and bear arms).
Our founding fathers put free speech together with free press for a reason. It is the expression of ideas, not the act of speaking, that is protected. If you yell FIRE! in a crowded theater, causing panic and possible injury, you are abusing your power to speak. However, you could hand out to theater patrons paper flyers with the word FIRE! “screaming†from the page in bold print. You could stand in front of the audience and say, “Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to get your opinion of the following word,†and then yell FIRE! You would get a very different reaction from the crowd. You might even be laughed at. Nevertheless, you would not have abused your power to speak while still exercising your right to free speech. It is your right to put forth your ideas, it is not a right to merely vocalize.
I hope this explanation will help you to understand how the term "Abuse of Rights" is misused. I also hope that you will not allow others to use the term to usurp YOUR rights
Norman Westrick
Why should one group of people who dont want to hear Stern take away the right of those that want to hear him? That seems to be the issue at hand, and the anwser is that they shouldnt be able to. Stern may cross boundries, but we live in an immoral world surrounded by immoral role models. For those of you with children, I completely understand your not wanting your child to hear/ see him, but what about when they go to school? Again, it is an issue of education, and values that we preach. Are you the same people that allow your children to have Kobe Bryant posters on their wall(not saying he is guilty, just saying at this time he is an immoral role model), or Britney Spears posters? I find it funny that people dont mind their kids seeing Britney in sexual situations and singing about them, but freak when someone like Stern uses a word they probably wont understand. Gimme a break, people look for any reason to complain about anything in this world. Move to some country where people have no rights, and people like Stern arent on the air because you live under an authoritarian govt. that prevents freedom of CHOICE and speech. I think we need to embrace America and people like Howard Stern, he proves that anyone can do anything, and thats what America is all about. I will admit the guy isnt the classiest, but there are far worse things out there that need censoring. On another note, I respect everyone's opinion and am not trying to irritate anyone, but America is about choices, and I think people should have the right to hear Stern if they want to. And if you dont want to, turn em off, what are you going to hear in two seconds that will hurt you, the guys voice is so recognizable it would be hard to not know you accidentaly stumbled upon his show.
bchcky
New member
he's talking about stern for those of you who didnt read his post. and i strongly agree with that statement.laneiac said:
there was a great quote from terrell owens 2 (?) years ago. he said "there are guys getting arrested for having drugs, beating their wives and driving drunk, and i get national attention for a sharpie?"
i think that hits home to what the biggest problem is in society today. people tend to focus on the easy thing to blame. terrell pulled a sharpie out of his sock during a game, so we shouldnt admire him. well what about the athletes that get caught for DUI? assaulting their spouses? come on, these are the real issues, who cares if owens wants to be a prima donna athlete and piss off the other team. if i had a kid, i'd much rather see him pull a sharpie out of his sock than call me to bail him out for DUI. and like my previous post, after the columbine incident, the media was the obvious and easy thing to blame for that horrific incident, but nobody seemed to care to look closer.
just because something makes the news, doesnt mean its worthy of making the news. news isnt news, its entertainment. they're selling their channel to make money, and violence and lude and crude things sell. so dont believe everything you hear, read or see. or believe it, just dont take everything to heart. because as bad as the media might make our country look sometimes, can one of you here (american citizens) honestly say you'd like to move to another country?
TwistedCU
New member
Let me make a couple things clear.
1. Nobody tries harder to get Howard Stern removed from radio as much as Howard Stern. He is a big boy who doesn't play by the rules. Rules that were there before he was on the radio and rules that are still there today. Like the rules or not, they are the rules. As I said before, he should try to change the rules instead of merely breaking them and then crying foul after being punished for it.
2. As far as those giving parenting advice, saying that kids will do what they do well let me say this:
My children have the strictest parents in the neighborhood. We censor TV, video games, and music. We watch for and police the language that they and their friends use as well as the way they act. One of us is almost always going outside and teaching one of the kids that if they don't respect our home and our rules they will not be welcome. Funny thing is as strict as we are the neigborhood kids love to come here. As soon as school lets out they start showing up. My Son's friends play here even if he is elsewhere. Those kids know we are strict and know if they get out of line they will leave and their parents will get talked to but they also feel secure here. They know we will love them like our own children and dispite being so strict they prefer to play here than anywhere else in the neigborhood. We don't have a pool or the biggest yard or the best toys, we just love and welcome the children, especially the ones who have been labeled troublemakers.
3. Being Gay is not a right. Having privacy is, and what you do in the privacy of your own is your business. I won't preach to you that it is wrong if you don't preach that it is right. I will win that arguement every time. I don't appreciate the fact that there is a huge effort to convince society "not that there's anything wrong with that". I have heard they people are born gay and can't help it, well next you'll hear that you are born a pedophile and will that be okay as well? Then throw in beastiality, and all the other nice little things that are illegal (not to mention sick
). You're not born with it. It is a sexual perversion, but I don't want to tell anybody what to do behind closed doors anymore than I want to be told what to do behind mine. Just don't try to tell me it is an acceptable "lifestyle" and it can't be helped.
4. The philosophy that we live in an immoral world and might as well just put everything into perspective and live with it is either a weak arguement for or an apathetic surrender to immorality. Like Tug said a little candle can light a whole room full of darkness. (great line Tug).
5. "procreator"??? lol
Signed the procreating jeeper
TC
1. Nobody tries harder to get Howard Stern removed from radio as much as Howard Stern. He is a big boy who doesn't play by the rules. Rules that were there before he was on the radio and rules that are still there today. Like the rules or not, they are the rules. As I said before, he should try to change the rules instead of merely breaking them and then crying foul after being punished for it.
2. As far as those giving parenting advice, saying that kids will do what they do well let me say this:
My children have the strictest parents in the neighborhood. We censor TV, video games, and music. We watch for and police the language that they and their friends use as well as the way they act. One of us is almost always going outside and teaching one of the kids that if they don't respect our home and our rules they will not be welcome. Funny thing is as strict as we are the neigborhood kids love to come here. As soon as school lets out they start showing up. My Son's friends play here even if he is elsewhere. Those kids know we are strict and know if they get out of line they will leave and their parents will get talked to but they also feel secure here. They know we will love them like our own children and dispite being so strict they prefer to play here than anywhere else in the neigborhood. We don't have a pool or the biggest yard or the best toys, we just love and welcome the children, especially the ones who have been labeled troublemakers.
3. Being Gay is not a right. Having privacy is, and what you do in the privacy of your own is your business. I won't preach to you that it is wrong if you don't preach that it is right. I will win that arguement every time. I don't appreciate the fact that there is a huge effort to convince society "not that there's anything wrong with that". I have heard they people are born gay and can't help it, well next you'll hear that you are born a pedophile and will that be okay as well? Then throw in beastiality, and all the other nice little things that are illegal (not to mention sick
). You're not born with it. It is a sexual perversion, but I don't want to tell anybody what to do behind closed doors anymore than I want to be told what to do behind mine. Just don't try to tell me it is an acceptable "lifestyle" and it can't be helped.
4. The philosophy that we live in an immoral world and might as well just put everything into perspective and live with it is either a weak arguement for or an apathetic surrender to immorality. Like Tug said a little candle can light a whole room full of darkness. (great line Tug).
5. "procreator"??? lol
Signed the procreating jeeper
TC
LadyJeepFreak
New member
:lol: LOL Any thread that contains the following has GOT to be interesting:
Hypocrytical non reproducing religous sheeple, peeing sections in pools, Anti-Gay Sentiments, Panties in a bunch, non-nude, smokless, drinkless strip clubs, and "metrosexuals".
LOL
All joking aside though, interesting reads. I've looked forward to reading this thread myself. I don't agree with alot said but hey variety is the spice of life. It's too early in the morning for me to bring any other good points of view to light so I'll just move on. Great Posts!
Lady
Hypocrytical non reproducing religous sheeple, peeing sections in pools, Anti-Gay Sentiments, Panties in a bunch, non-nude, smokless, drinkless strip clubs, and "metrosexuals".
LOL
All joking aside though, interesting reads. I've looked forward to reading this thread myself. I don't agree with alot said but hey variety is the spice of life. It's too early in the morning for me to bring any other good points of view to light so I'll just move on. Great Posts!
Lady
bchcky
New member
a big amen to you. you seem to be doing the right thing. all i'm saying is that the road works both ways between parents and kids, how can you expect them to listen to you if they cant trust you. and you my friend, seem to have figured that out.TwistedCopper said:
you get another amen TC. i have no problem with people being gay. but my classic example is those people with the rainbow stickers on their cars. they preach equality, and then make themselves stand out like that?! something isnt right there. i dont advertise that i'm straight on my car....why would you think it necessary to say that you're gay if you just "want to be treated like everyone else?"TwistedCopper said:
this goes for any other minority group for that matter. i go to college, there are indian, black, asian, gay and lesbian and countless other minority groups on campus. what is the point? they go to the meetings and talk about unfair treatment, yet they separate themselves from the rest of the student body to the extent that they only hang out with others from the group. and to anyone who thinks i'm a biggot(sp?) about this, i am asian, and refuse to join those groups, so this isnt just an outside opinion. i just dont feel the need to separate myself from the rest of the student body.
same problem again...
Very well put. Twisted, I was not giving parenting advice, I was aiming at people who say Stern is immoral and yet let their kids worship the likes of Britney Spears and such. Not once in my post did I mention tolerating an immoral world. My post was about the aim of our society to turn our back on worse things than Stern, such as the stars that we pay money to see who in turn use that money to buy dope or hookers etc, and people let their children worship these people, perhaps these stars should be "taken off the air". And I agree with you and bchcky's posts, about being gay. I personally do not like any forms of public "gayness", it needs to be done in the home. I simply used the example of a gay sex line as one of the immoral things you will see when flipping through the tv. So if you mistook that as support for the gay, maybe you should re read my post.
Very well put. Twisted, I was not giving parenting advice, I was aiming at people who say Stern is immoral and yet let their kids worship the likes of Britney Spears and such. Not once in my post did I mention tolerating an immoral world. My post was about the aim of our society to turn our back on worse things than Stern, such as the stars that we pay money to see who in turn use that money to buy dope or hookers etc, and people let their children worship these people, perhaps these stars should be "taken off the air". And I agree with you and bchcky's posts, about being gay. I personally do not like any forms of public "gayness", it needs to be done in the home. I simply used the example of a gay sex line as one of the immoral things you will see when flipping through the tv. So if you mistook that as support for the gay, maybe you should re read my post.
Snitty
New member
a gay man one time... one who knows that it is not accepted, and does NOT try to tell people that it is ok, he feels bad about it... he just can't do anything about the fact that he is attracted to males... he knows he doesn't fit what nature intended.. he admits that people ARE NOT supposed to be gay... he's not a sissy.. he wears flannels, rides dirt bikes, played football, gets dirty, bla bla bla... just doesn't find women attractive, and know's its not right... it doesn't make him a bad person, but it still is NOT the correct way... he once told me this... and it told me a lot of how much he understands of the topic... "Gay is not a lifestyle, it is a sexuality, and just like everyone else's sexual life, it is to be kept private" He was very right with that... Homosexuality has nothing to do with a lifestyle... one's lifestyle is based on so many other things, and is not to be influenced on sexuality
mingez
New member
This is interesting AND funny. Nice summary of all the funny jargon Lady Jeep Freak.
TC, yes being gay is not a right. But neither is being straight. Food for thought. That's right, you heard me... "procreator"... :lol:
Remember, it is you who believes homosexuality is a sexual perversion. That is a value that you have placed on it. Many don't share that same opinion. And I don't think pedophilia and homosexuality belong in the same sentence anymore than pedophilia and heterosexuality. (Here we go again)
You are an awesome debater, you cunning liguist you!!! :lol:
Snitty, wearing flannels doesn't preclude a person from being a sissy. :lol:
bchky, Did you say you're an Asian?? Me too. I didn't know you were a "Brotha" !!!! Yellow Power!!! LOL. I'll be sending you your bumper sticker in the mail. PM me with your addy! :lol: JK.
Now, back on topic: I think you and I are close our opinions reguarding this thread. But of course you aren't advertising the fact that you are straight on your car, straight people aren't being persecuted. Do you know anyone who got there butts kicked for being straight??
I think the major difference in my opinion about gays and those who are against them, is that I don't have a vested emotional interest in them. Thus, my opinion of them is "live an let live."
Once one gets agendas or religious beliefs all intertwined amongst this topic, one is unable to seperate the two.
BTW- I'll be putting my "Straight Pride" bumper sticker on after my XJ get's it's new paint job. I'll be sure to post pics. :wink:
"Not that there's anything wrong with being straight."
TC, yes being gay is not a right. But neither is being straight. Food for thought. That's right, you heard me... "procreator"... :lol:
Remember, it is you who believes homosexuality is a sexual perversion. That is a value that you have placed on it. Many don't share that same opinion. And I don't think pedophilia and homosexuality belong in the same sentence anymore than pedophilia and heterosexuality. (Here we go again)
You are an awesome debater, you cunning liguist you!!! :lol:
Snitty, wearing flannels doesn't preclude a person from being a sissy. :lol:
bchky, Did you say you're an Asian?? Me too. I didn't know you were a "Brotha" !!!! Yellow Power!!! LOL. I'll be sending you your bumper sticker in the mail. PM me with your addy! :lol: JK.
Now, back on topic: I think you and I are close our opinions reguarding this thread. But of course you aren't advertising the fact that you are straight on your car, straight people aren't being persecuted. Do you know anyone who got there butts kicked for being straight??
I think the major difference in my opinion about gays and those who are against them, is that I don't have a vested emotional interest in them. Thus, my opinion of them is "live an let live."
Once one gets agendas or religious beliefs all intertwined amongst this topic, one is unable to seperate the two.
BTW- I'll be putting my "Straight Pride" bumper sticker on after my XJ get's it's new paint job. I'll be sure to post pics. :wink:
"Not that there's anything wrong with being straight."
TwistedCU
New member
Being straight isn't a right it is the natural state of all things living. I guess the fact that there are so many gays really disproves "Darwinism" hahaha.mingez said:
No that would have been God who determined that. Says so in a book I read. Why would homosexuality not be a perversion?mingez said:
Here's a little excerpt from
Mirriam Webster:
Sounds like a perversion to me.
LadyJeepFreak
New member
:lol: ::Claps her hads and cheers wildly::
Now were gonna talk theology? Woo hooo, I have something slighly interesting to say on this matter, and I will share it tonight. I've done some study on this. I LOVE theology. lol
Twisted, I won't flame you because I understand what you are saying. I'll share tonight unless people don't want to go there.
Lady
Now were gonna talk theology? Woo hooo, I have something slighly interesting to say on this matter, and I will share it tonight. I've done some study on this. I LOVE theology. lol
Twisted, I won't flame you because I understand what you are saying. I'll share tonight unless people don't want to go there.
Lady
Wow...you guys were busy over the weekend. Good stuff everyone. I still think he (Stern) has gone too far. Yes I understand parental responsibilities and I don't want to take Stern off the air. But there DO need to be limits. There have been limits ever since there has been radio and ever since there has been TV. Stern has gone too far.
The last time I watched Stern on TV was a few months ago. After some mindless chatter between him and the others some hot blond comes on. Why she was there I don't know. I don't think she was famous or anything. He spent the entire time telling her what nice butt and nice boobs she has. He asked her over and over and over and over again to show her breasts. She finally did. Then he begged her to show her butt. Over and over again constantly oohhhhing and aaaahhhhhing over the shape over her body. She finally pulled her pants down for him.
Another time I watched it, a similarly attractive and voluptous woman came on. She was subjected to the same oohhs and aaaahhs over her body. That was all they talked about. She then proceded to lie down on the studio floor and masturbate until she climaxed! Of course they didn't show this but the did show her head and shoulders and there was no mistaking what she was doing by the sounds she was making.
Limits people! There is nothing wrong with it. Yes, I love free speech and will stand next to you and march on Washington with you if someone tries to truely take that right away from us. But that is not what we are talking about. There is no place for that kind of "entertainment" on free television. Stern knows it, he is just trying to push the limits to get ratings. Ratings = money.
And if the mods feel the need to edit this then so be it, whatever.
Whew
The last time I watched Stern on TV was a few months ago. After some mindless chatter between him and the others some hot blond comes on. Why she was there I don't know. I don't think she was famous or anything. He spent the entire time telling her what nice butt and nice boobs she has. He asked her over and over and over and over again to show her breasts. She finally did. Then he begged her to show her butt. Over and over again constantly oohhhhing and aaaahhhhhing over the shape over her body. She finally pulled her pants down for him.
Another time I watched it, a similarly attractive and voluptous woman came on. She was subjected to the same oohhs and aaaahhs over her body. That was all they talked about. She then proceded to lie down on the studio floor and masturbate until she climaxed! Of course they didn't show this but the did show her head and shoulders and there was no mistaking what she was doing by the sounds she was making.
Limits people! There is nothing wrong with it. Yes, I love free speech and will stand next to you and march on Washington with you if someone tries to truely take that right away from us. But that is not what we are talking about. There is no place for that kind of "entertainment" on free television. Stern knows it, he is just trying to push the limits to get ratings. Ratings = money.
And if the mods feel the need to edit this then so be it, whatever.
Whew
