TVTalkShows.com - Reply to Topic

12-08-2000 11:11 AM
Not Fooled	I explain things in simple terms, and the best you can do to combat it is some lame comment that I'm old (I'm 19), and the fact that I use a word that some of you can't understand? Let me break this down for those of you who have poor language skills. Homo is a Greek word that means same. Philia (which is New Latin, based on the Greek word philos). Philia is defined as having an abnormal attraction to, or a tendency towards something. Thus we get same-attraction. Or an attraction to the same. Homophilia. It is the same process that gave us such words as necrophilia and pedophilia. Just becuase a dictionary doesn't recognize it doesn't mean the word is not real, or does not have meaning. Language is great like that, just take some prefixes and some suffixes, slap em together and you get a new word. Nomad, it scares me that you are in the medical profession and you can't recognize this. Pretty much the entire medical lexicon is based on Greek or Latin. Furthermore, you failed to see that I said homophilia. You somehow got homopElia. And in truthfulness, even homopElia is a word. Take the meaning of each parts of the word, same and lack of. Slap em together, and what you do get? The lack of similarity. Where exactly do you work nomad? I need to know so I never get placed under your charge. To the person who accuses me of tap dancing. When are YOU going to address anything? All you do is say I avoid things (if that's what you mean by tap dancing), but not once have you pointed out what I have avoided. If you want me to address something, just tell me and I'll respond. Or is this the best you people can do?
12-08-2000 10:10 AM
nomad99	To Not Fooled: go ahead and hide behind those rose colored glasses of yours. Even though you have argued the point several times, I have yet to fine homophelia in a dictionary. I am in the medical profession, and had to learn all types of medical and physchological terms. Homophelia was not one of those. Phelia means "lack of" such as Macrophelia, where one has a shortage of macrophages, to boost the immune system. I could go on with many other examples but I am afraid that they would be "lost" on you. Perhaps you suffer from priapism, (look that one up). That would explain all of your pain and suffering, There is a treatment for this condition though, go to your nearest E.R. and get a shot for it.
12-07-2000 07:18 PM
To not schooled	Once and for all quit making shit up.....HOMOPHILIA is a product of your narrow brain ....It is NOT a WORD!Moronic Tap Dancer! I will not explain again WHY I SAY YOU TAP DANCE.....YOU ARE JUST WAY tooooooooooo CLUELESS TO GET IT.
12-07-2000 04:33 PM
Junky	Shad up Not Fooled, nobody cares what an old fart like you thinks anyway.
12-07-2000 04:26 PM
Not Fooled	Yes, informing people that just becuase society says something is ok, doesn't mean it is what you could call my "ministry". By saying intolerant, you imply that, gasp I don't tolerate gays. I do tolerate them. Except when they tell me I'm evil for having religion, or otherwise try and destroy the foundations of religion by claiming that in the eyes of God, such a thing is ok. NO religion says homophilia is an ok thing. The only people I do no tolerate are the ones that try and step on my rights as a human being and the rights of other humans (unborn children), and try and destroy my religion. Fortunately for the second type, they aren't going to die for it unless they try getting physical first. I will not wait for a tyrant to step on me before I do something about it. There is a time and a place for everything though. And the time for war is not yet. The tyrants currently in power will have to deal with freedom loving people across the nation eventually... You also imply though..that somehow I am incorrect...or evil by association, becuase some nuts who thought they were doing the Lord's work went and tried to reclaim the holy land. Sorry, but when all is said and done, don't be suprised if the Catholic church turns out to be the whore of babylon. Do not compare me to the Vatican faithful. On a very secret and sinister level, the Catholic church is corrupted beyond repair. There are good Catholics out there, but they simply don't see what is happening. For some reason they pray to saints. Bearing false witness isn't a nice thing. Well intentioned or not, it's still idol worship. But forget all the religion and forget all the politics. The bottom line is that homophilia is unnatural. You can call it nature or you can call it divine creation. You just can't propagate with it. Every species on the planet has mechanisms to preserve it's own life, and thus continue the species. And don't give me this junk about the darwinian theory, becuase that's precisely what it is. A theory. It is as much of a theory as religion is. Strip away the evolution, strip away what God thinks about it, strip away it all. What you are left with is a situation which is simply unnatural. It's not how the the tools are supposed to be used. What reason would drive someone to do such a thing? There are only 2 possible options. 1 is that the person doesn't have a choice. They are born with it. Obviously, such a trait isn't natural, becuase if it was, then the species would being to fail, and ultimately die out. The trait must then be a mutation or some other anamoly on the genetic level. 2 is of course, the opposite. That it IS a choice. Decisions made throughout a persons life (not necesarily his own), affect what the person may soon become. Or maybe they just simply like oen thing better (self indulgence). Regardless of how destined someone seems to be to become something or stay that way, however, it is entirely possible for such a situation to be overcome. All that is required is that the person be willing. And in the end, it is entirely up to the person. If someone says they tried and they "really wanted to change". They're lying. If they wanted to change they could have. Just like I had to make the switch off of tacos to less...erm...disagreeable. Man I loved tacos, but my bowels didn't. For my own good, and the good of those around me, I gave up tacos. And I'm not talking about Taco Bell tacos. These are the home made variety. I have my own special mix and everything.... Ok enough silliness. Somewhere in there is the difference between choice and genetics. Add in the factor of religion now. It makes things even more clear cut. Regarding being born gay, that is an improbability, unless God really is purposely trying people, which I don't believe He is. God would not create a person who will never be able to reside in the Kingdom of Heaven with him. Making "gayness" a result of genetics eans the person would truly have no ability to change his ways. This means biological error is not applicable. Which leaves us with human control (choice). For which religion has an answer fortunately. Call it prayer, good vibes, or simply love, religion offers anyone the ability to better themselves. If I somehow missed something, just bring my attention back to it. I've been up 24 hours, which is 24 too many. Leave a message, and I'll get back to you yadda yadda..
12-07-2000 01:05 PM
chris long	if i had a child visiting my work with his mother and was miss behaving by watching porno i have to say i would not tell his mother and i have two boys why because to lust over the beauty of woman is totaly natural and to embarras him is a wrong reaction or displine him is wrong too. understand that when boys are young they embarras easily and can often be reached by talking to him about correct behavior and how this behavior makes him feel. use the example maybe what if we were sitting here looking at pictures of youre mother naked how would you feel and just through talking and respect he should get the picture see the problem with boys today is woman just can not successfuly raise a boy maybe you treat girls with humiliation and ridicule getting them in trouble and scaring them but why use scare tactics with a natural instinct much better to explain why it is that we believe it to be wrong in society and if you think you need to scare children and annimals into correct behavior you suck and need to be scared very scared because he is here and obviously you are not ready for the true dangers of the comming hollocaust and will parrish.
12-07-2000 11:58 AM
all hail king george	ok, I'm no scholar either what ever the hell that means you claim your motivation is your love of your fellow man and yet you talk about how much better and smarter you are than all of the rest of us when we disagree with you. You seem preoccupied with telling gay people they chose to be gay and they are condemned in the Bible you think they haven't heard that before,is that your ministry?I don't agree with you so that makes me a trogladite. Thats why I call you intolerant but I'll give that word a rest from now on, I will retire it.I'll just use it one last time.The wars and the violence on this earth and the ideological divisions in this country are not caused by gays, or women who live with their boyfriends,or mothers with jobs,most of the wars and the violence and the division are caused by Religious Intolerance.
12-07-2000 11:38 AM
To Not Fooled...	This is excellent! The way you're working these idiots reminds me of the "dog act" at the circus. You're the "trainer" and these guys are the "poodles" you have jumping through hoops & dancing on thier hind legs!
12-07-2000 03:47 AM
Not Fooled	Fine, show me what I'm "tap dancing" away from and where I'm being hypocritical and I'll address the issue. If you can't or you refuse to, then of course I will take it to mean you're just accusing me of something becuase you can't come up with anything to continue the defense of your position. <3 paragraphs deleted on account of the fact that some people in the viewing audience cannot deal with more than 1 subject at a time> Am I going to have to address these things 1 at a time in order to get any semblance of an answer out of you guys? Or are you just going to keep accusing me of hypocrisy and dodging without examples to back it up, in the process denying me the oppurtunity to respond and clear my sullied name?
12-07-2000 03:29 AM
To Not Fooled	Face the facts Not Fooled, your repeated failures in this forum to back up your hilariously weak talk is ample proof you cannot even defend your own viewpoints. Sad part is ....you dont even have the maturity to admit you are wrong. I truly feel sad for your parents.
12-07-2000 02:26 AM
To Not Fooled	LAAAAAAAAADIES and GENTLEMEN....MORE INCREDIBLE TAP DANCING!
12-06-2000 06:36 PM
Not Fooled	If I didn't respond it's becuase your response was too pointless to respond to. Such as..no new information... "Someone" In that silly post of yours, you failed to mention one example of why I'm so wrong. Is demagogery all that oyu have left? You truly are shocked and amazed at what I have to say. You've really never seen it before... "To not fooled" What laws am I picking and choosing? I've already gone through this, I'm not choosing to disregard anything. Judge not lest ye be judged yourself. Quite true, but does that make it a sin? I'm unaware of the verse that comes from, but I'll wager the context isn't that of things not to do. That phrase is more of a warning. If I hadn't touched this subject, I wouldn't be called hateful and intolerant (that's judging too). I was fully aware of the response I was likely to get. George Stop calling me hateful and intolerant. It's silly to do so, as I've explained many times now. Instead, if any of us is hateful, it is you for being complicit in peoples downfall. The more you call me hateful, the stupider you look. Prune hater I'm not here to defend Dr. Laura. I'm here to point out the flaws in your logic. I disagree with her on alot of things. She said homophilia was a biological error. That of course, as I explained, is incorrect. It is a choice. If somethign she says falls in line with what I've said, so be it. George I'm not a scholar, but I do know your summation is fatally flawed. Why have someone come to earth to die for our sins, if sinning doesn't matter just so long as you love everyone? Why even bother trying not to sin, just so long as you love everybody? Why do we even need to include the Old Testament if sinning is no longer a relevant factor, just so long as you love everybody? Where in the New Testament does it explain this? Where does it say it's ok to sin? You somehow thinkg I'M condemning someone who "is" gay. I've done nothing of the sort. Homophilia was condemnable long before I arrived on this earth. And it was the Lord who decided it would be that way. How have I condemned anyone? Do you want me to ignore what the Bible says, and disregard that, and say my word is stronger than the Lords? No can do, bucko. Everyone... Time and time again you conveniently forget everything I've said. If I have to explain one more time about hate and how you dont want people you hate to be around you...
12-06-2000 02:45 PM
all hail king george	not fooled,on two other threads you have posted insults then when I responed you didn't reply.That is what I was refering to.The Old Testament is a series of laws. Jesus birth and death fufilled the law the Bible says that the laws were nailed on the cross with Chirst because no imperfect man could live up to them.and the new law was the principle of love that principle fufills all the other laws. The Hypocritcal Pharocies which remind me of that pig Dr. Laura heaped what Jesus called unecessary burdens on the common man then they critcized Jesus for being around prostitutes and criminals and Jesus response was these are the people who need me, these are the people who need love and compassion and understanding not comdenation.So therefore working on the sabbath is not a violation of Gods laws because this was a Jewish Law that was part of Gods law for a time and it did fufill a purpose but that purpose came to an end when God opened up worship to all nationalities not just the Jews before every one else on the earth was a pagan, with Jesus death the way was opened up for anyone to worship God.I do not disrespect the Jewish faith in anyway.But as a Christian I will not condemn anyone no matter what their lifestyle. That is up to God not you and certianly not Dr.Laura.Your arguing that homosexuals choose that lifestyle doesn't mean anything.Your comdenation is cruel.Your Judgement against gays means nothing.You claim you argue these things out of love.Yeah right.
12-06-2000 04:38 AM
Prune hater	Not fooled, since you brought up the topic of giving in to resistance on the grounds of moral weakness and sinfulness. Why don't you set your sights on the prune faced quack Doc? Like most of her followers all that matters is she says the right thing...(Meaning she speaks for the extreme right). It does not even seem to matter she broken every moral law she claims to stand behind. The woman never would have made it to radio had she not hooked her herself up with Bill Balance in the 1970s and slept with him (while married) Typical of the sell-out she is...her on air personality was as liberal as they come until she discovered there was a major market for conservative radio personalities in the 80's. While clawing her way to the top she developed a long list of enemies. It seems Dr prune-face had a problem with some of the women who were "real" doctors or even worse if they were attractive or more charismatic and popular, so she would back-stab them by trying to turn one against the other or attempt to get them fired. To her fans it does not matter that she talks about the importance of family while never speaking to her own. Rails about the sins of pornography while providing her own peep show on the Net. All that matters is she says the right thing. Her insistance that she became anti-gay due to her conversion is pure crap..she only adheres to the teachings of her religion that benefit her, and for the moment she is trying to latch on to right-wing fundamentalists. She is a fraud and a sell-out and her fans know it, yet they still defend try and defend her by saying she is morally correct. If you are going to stand behind the teachings of fake doctor who slept her way to the top...Then don't bring up morals...sexual or otherwise!
12-05-2000 09:33 PM
all hail king george	I'm not gay but I stay out of people's bedrooms,whether they were born that way (there are studies to suggest this)or whether they chose to to be gay is completely irrelavant to me.If that makes you a better christian than I am then so be it.Don't preach your hate and intolerance at me. Hate and intolerance causes violence and problems in society,not gay men,not poor single mothers that have to work,not fornicators.And people that preach hate and intolerance like its a sermon on sunday make me puke.
12-05-2000 07:02 PM
To not fooled	...just can't respond with out TAP DANCING...You base your beliefs on a book filled with discrepensies...and you continue to pick and choose which LAWS to OBEY. FRAUD! What the hell business is it of yours what any two people DO in their lives. You RANT AND RAVE about government taking over...I believe it is small thinkers like yourself that we should be afraid of. You take care of your salvation I'll take care of mine. JUDGE NOT LEST YOU BE..........?
12-05-2000 06:52 PM
someonepleasefuckher	For anyone interested: "not fooled" is a perfect example of the sickness within humanity. It demonstrates that people actually believe in this "chick publications" generic form of so-called Christanity. Where no research is needed, just ones own "belief". The sickness here shows that this person actually believes they are sincere. This person does not see the mask of benevolence they wear. They are completely unaware of the masks influence over their entire dispostion. Most sleep walking Goyem wear this same mask, and they actually believe they "care" about you. When the sick truth is, that their lives consist of secretly praying for bad things to happen to their neighbor, all for the single shallow reason, so they can say "I told you so". It is a plague. This animals mask fools it's driver.
12-05-2000 05:59 PM
Not Fooled	If I hated you, why am I try to convince you to see things my way? It doesn't make sense, given the fact that people of a certain persuasion are well on their way to an eternity of suffering. You don't wish hell on loved ones, George. What is so hard about this to accept? I'll wager you've never heard this from a conservative, huh?
12-05-2000 05:51 PM
Not Fooled	I've already gone through this. Heterosexuality is not a choice. It's what comes naturally. It requires no effort. Unless the person believes he is gay. He may choose this path simply becuase he likes the same sex better than the opposite, or it might have been bred into him due to crappy parenting, no discipline, etc. Then it becomes a challenge. But the only reason it becomes a choice then, is becuase due to someones error, the option of being gay was arrived at earlier. Heterosexuality is the way of living by default, in other words. It's genetic. It's natural to want to continue the species and reproduce. Homosexuality however is not genetic, as what sense would it make to make a creature, ask him to worship you, but have him condemned to hell from the very start. No..homosexuality, like any other sin, is a choice. And it most cases, the path of sin is the path of least resistance, and in these troubled times, the resistance is at an all time low (barring Soddom and Gomorrah of course). Working on the Sabbath (technically...isn't that Saturday anyways?), is indeed a sin. Says so right there, as you stated. Are you expecting me to overturn His rule, based on "It's the year 2000 man! Get with it!"? I think not... As far as I am aware, there is no differentiating between the degree of sin. It's not the point of it all. When it all comes down to it, all that matters is if you are repentant (read: remorseful and wanting change and forgiveness) and you believe in Christ. There is no scorecard that tracks your sin points and your good deed points. You are either in or you're out. You could've lived the most perfect life, and maybe only sinned once or twice, but if you reject God then you're pretty screwed. Likewise, you could be the worlds most violent murderer, but if you are truly repentant, then forgiveness would be yours. And when have I ever dodged a question?
12-05-2000 05:40 PM
all hail king george	I'm not afraid of Dr.Laura most people see through her- thats why her show is in the crapper.I don't care to hear your ignorant views on homosexuals or anything else.Why don't you conservatives stay the hell out of peoples bedrooms? I'll tell you why its because you are sick. And as for mudslinging--you sick bastards invented it.You fail in your actions to live up to the princlples you claim.Hate fuels you on, not God and certainly not Christ. We came to this country for freedom of religion.Try think about what the hell that means just for one second.
12-05-2000 03:01 PM
Captain	To not fooled.....You state that homosexuality is a choice....then you believe heterosexuality is a choice as well? You state all over the place that you believe such and so as if you are the expert. You are entitled to your caveman opinions. But just because you believe them does not make them so...in fact most people actually believe just the opposite. Now that I have your attention. Once and for all will you please address this question. No more tap dancing around the question...just a straight answer. The Bible states EXODUS 35:2 Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you a holy day, a sabbath of rest to the lord: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to DEATH. Early on you said, "Times change, the word of God doesn't." What does that mean? You stated the Laws of Leviticus are your basis for finding homosexuality an abomination. But those same laws state eating Crab, Lobster, and Shrimp are also an abomination. Are you the authority we turn to, to find out are these abominations the same in God's eyes? Or when God says it is an abomination ....an abomination is an abomination. So please...two questions.... 1. Are people who work on Sunday REALLY supposed to be killed as your Bible states? 2. Is eating shellfish as bad as homosexuality as your Bible states? No tap dancing please.
12-05-2000 11:19 AM
Not Fooled	That's exactly what I'm talking about. This dudes entire argument was a flame. It was the only thing that came out of him. When someone does this, I take it to mean they have no answer for what I have to say, they've hit a brick wall mentally speaking. Apparently HCI or whoever hasn't given them the proper talking point yet. Have you got none of your own? Can't you forumalate an opinion other than someone elses? Can't you work out your reasoning for why you think I'm wrong and put it in words for me to see? Yes? No? When you simply throw insults out, it means no. You've run out of talking points, you've run out of things to counter with. All you are left with is insulting remarks which server no other purpose but to make you feel good. I assume you need to make yourself feel better because you know I'm right, and at the very least, you've run out of thoughts to support your position. Which brings us to the fact that liberalism on the part of the people is simply mindless reactionism based on whatever a liberal leader tells you that tugs on your heart strings. The ultimate goal of liberalism is simply to keep the elite liberals in power (Clinton, Boxer, Etc.). It's much like the class people that Booker T. Washington spoke of when he said... "There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs. There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don't want the patient to get well." Perhaps not exactly, but the premise is the same. Keeping a group of people in power. You do the hokey pokey and you get down on your knees, that's what it's all about. For those of you in Floriduh, the hokey pokey is being used as a metaphor for liberalism. :)
12-05-2000 10:52 AM
Junky	Not Fooled just talks to hear his nuts rattle.
12-05-2000 10:21 AM
Not Fooled	Conservatives are not hurting anyone, except the fringe element of conservatism. Liberalism PERIOD is fringe. Every single one of you has displayed your "disdain" of conservatives. The difference is that you aim your hate at a CLASS of people (anyone who thinks homosexuality is wrong, or has a gun, etc.). I aim (literally) for the specific people that seek to ruin those very same classes. There is a very large difference. If you can't see it, I don't blame you, as you are trying to grasp what I'm saying looking from the inside out. Fortunately for Baldwin, Clinton, O'Donnell, and the rest of the gun grabbers, they won't be forced to deal with them til the final hour. But make no mistake about it, removing guns, instituting hate crimes bills which punish people differently for the same crime, and forcing religous groups to accept something that their own guiding light shows as wrong will not be tolerated. There may be small pockets of places that have such laws, but they are liberal places, and when things are tried nationally, it will be rejected, and if now by house and senate, by the people. In other words, I seek to keep tyrants from doing their dirty work. You on the other hand, are one of the tyrants faithful who can't see the folly of their own ways. You try to liken me to Hitler, but it simply doesn't wash. I am an advocate of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all. I seek to enslave noone, repress noone. I want what is best for people. Not everyone knows what is best for them. Like the vast majority of liberals. They think they are doing the right thing, there's no doubt they're well intentioned. But they are WRONG. History proves it. Gun bans for example, have been a prelude to every single genocide that has taken place. Some places have them and have managed to escape genocide, but it's merely a matter of time. In the meanwhile, they are left to contend with soaring violent crime rates, as the honest folk are no longer able to defend themselves effectively. Criminals are after what nets them the biggest profit, with the least amount of danger. A person in a city where firearms are banned are great choices. This includes Nazi Germany, firearms were banned there. I wish everyone was armed and trained, people would be much safer. Again, I want what's best for people, whether they realize it or not. Which brings us to homophilia. As a whole, they are more diseased, sick, and violent than the rest of civilization. They might earn more money, but that of course, is no measure of how healthy and secure one is. They have shorter lifespans, you know. And above all, damnation is what awaits an unrepentant queer. And as I've said, I don't want that for anyone. I want what's best for people, whether they realize it or not. There is nothing derogatory about queer, Jesus freak, or gun nut. You may interpret it that way, but it's not meant to be. What's that slogan? "We're here, we're queer...." And isn't that was atheists and agnostics and other non-Christians call Christians? Jesus freak? For crying out loud, Jesus freak is the name of a Christian rock band. The sword and it's constant use as my icon represents to me, eternal vigilance, which is the price of freedom. It is also a warning, right infringing tyrants will not be tolerated. There are things in the Bible about following the law of the land if it all possible, but if it infringes on God's law, then it is unacceptable. Banning firearms creates such a situation. It denies me the best protection I have against someone who wants to harm me. I will not bow down before a criminal or a tyrant, only God. There is a definate conflict of interests there. Special rights for certain people also creates turbulence, along with pretty much any other liberal program. It is possible to use strong language and not be a hypocrite. I never objected to the use of flames and insults. I simply objected to the use of flames and insults as ones entire means of discussion. Colorful language makes reading fun, you know. By the way prune hater, I said marked, not should be killed right now. The Clintons, the Gores, the Baldwins, the Sheens, Rosie, and ANY person who sees fit to trample on my God given rights is marked for death. Whether or not it has to come to that is yet to be seen. Personally I'm hoping there will be a mass exodus of the liberals from the country now that GW is president-elect. Maybe we can push things back 4 years, eh? Some of you need to learn to spot jokes and sarcasm better, also.
12-05-2000 08:37 AM
gypsyguy	Not fooled, I am truly surprised by your language. You professed in an early post to be such a devout christian. Then you make such statements as "Jesus Freaks"? I am totally confused by you. You also say that all liberals on this board begin their message with a flame. Why do you always place a sword there, if you really do not hate anyone? Also you used the word "Queers" in one post. I take offense to that, I could always call you a "breeder".
12-05-2000 03:46 AM
Prune hater	Not fooled your last paragraph cancelled out everything you had to say...Marked for death for speaking out? You cant get more Hilter-esque than that. Laura has had a public forum to lash out with all her venom for years. Her detractors are not hiding they have had enough and have used their own rights of speech to stand up, protest and challenge the network and it's sponsors, and it has worked the show is now on life support waiting for the plug to be pulled which for the media hungry hypocrite Laura is the ultimate punishment.
12-04-2000 11:33 PM
Not Fooled	I love the smell of fear. You chumps are practically scared shitless. You've given up on trying to discuss things on a point by point basis, and now you've resorted to all out flaming. You must like your message board threads like you like your queers. In summation... A) Homosexuality is a choice. See my previous posts in other threads, I don't feel like rehashing this, it's too long. and B) The moral conservatives on this country hate noone. If I hated you, King George, I'd wish you would go to hell, but I don't. I love you, and everyone else, and I wish they wouldn't look at life as if this is all there really is. You can call it tough love if you want, but don't call it hate. Hate is such a strong word. In all cases, when confronted with my reasoning, you have all fallen back on your tried and true mud slinging campaign. And I get the impression, that somehow, you think you are walking away from this as the "winner". Apparently, to the liberals, the person who has more people insulting the other person with him is in the right. Mobacracy ladies and gentlemen. That's what led to the holocaust, and from what I've seen here on these boards, if it were up to people like you, there would be a death camp in every district for Jesus Freaks, Gun Nuts, and anyone who dares to call himself a conservative. Take a step back and look at what you people are promoting and supporting. In your zeal to affirm the rights of gays (they have the same rights as the rest of us anyways...), and the "rights" of mothers to kill their unborn children, you have become precisely what you somehow think you can call conservatives. You have become nazis. Just stop for a minute, and take a look at what you are saying. But perhaps this is all a facade, and you wouldn't have the balls to say such a thing in person. I garauntee you, if you tried to pull this tyranical bullshit off in a general election where people actually knew who you were, you'd be marked for death. But still, you have it inside of you to say the things that you do, and thats why liberals scare Dr. Laura.
12-04-2000 05:41 PM
Dr Laura	Not Fooled is an example of what happens when people have no morals, shack-up with their studs, and have sex with their daddy's fishing buddies. Now, I can't be expected to solve all of Not Fooled problems on a message board, but I can suggest one thing for Not Fooled: GO KILL YOURSELF. Now go do the right thing. :-) Dr. Laura
12-04-2000 04:42 PM
someonepleasefuckher	oops. My sincere apologies for the use of the term retard. It is truly an injustice to associate actual mentally handicap persons with the likes of "not fooled". Sadly, the fact is that no matter what one might say to or about the "not fooled" types it will never even make a dent nor be heard anyway. The intellectual capacity of the "not fooled" types have atrophied long long ago. These "types" usually appear quite conservative, when in fact they are usually the perpetrators of the most terrible crimes against humanity. In this new decade, what was once called "mob mentality", can be more accurately defined as Human Cattle Rustling. Pure mammalian politics, emotional button pushing. "Dr" doolittleLaura is an excellent example of how one can influence such unevolved minds so easily with no sincerity whatsoever. She does not believe what she shouts. I wonder if there exists a single hominid critter with more than a half inch of forhead who can take her seriously? OK, now to make a point about the original topic of Homosexuality: From a Darwinian perspective, Homosexuality represents the withdrawal of certain females and males from the breeding population. This means that they will play no role in the future gene pool of humanity. Considering the types who have taken this path -- e.g. Steinem, Dworkin etc. -- this appears to be a quite desirable eugenic choice. Now if only we could persuade the Radical Right to withdraw from the future gene pool, too, I would like the results even better. Here is a perfect example of lauralogic: <RAW> Let us consider the U.S. Congress for a moment. I have chosen this body, not with the satirical intent of exhibiting a Horrible Example and not with the Platonic intent of showing an Ideal Form, but with the empirical intent of looking at how persuasion actually operates in the normal world of ordinary experience. A new bill is before Congress, and to avoid any prejudice on my part or the reader's, we will assume that this is a bill to distim the frammisgoshes. Since we know nothing about the frammisgoshes and cannot guess what effect distimming will have on them, we can consider this case with some objectivity. Some Congressentities (I am trying to avoid the human chauvinism of writing "Congresspersons") will vote to distim the frammisgoshes because they have been bribed with money or with more intangible rewards. This is sad, but we all know it happens on occasion. For convenience, we will call this Argument by Self-Interest; it has the form The frammisgoshes should be distimmed because you will profit from it Outside Congress, many people make important decisions on this basis. Although there is a great deal of "sincere" racism and sexism in the United States, there can be little doubt that the most outrageous racist and sexist institutions exist because certain persons are making a profit out of them; nobody who can pay Black or female workers half the salaries of white males is very eager to listen to arguments that conflict with this very potent Argument by Self-Interest. Presumably, there would be hearings on an issue as important as the frammisgoshes and various interested parties would give testimony. Perhaps the Archbishop of Chicago, the Chief Rabbi of Los Angeles and the Celestial Yap of Cleveland will inform the legislators what the Catholic God, the Jewish God and Yog the Almighty think about distimming the frammisgoshes. In one sense, this is the classic form of Argument by Authority: The frammisgoshes should be distimmed because various well-known deities and divinities say so Outside Congress, we also find many persons making decisions on this basis. Falwell hates homosexuals, for example, because the Old Testament god is on record for disliking that group. Cynics will say that, since deities and divinities do not appear in person, this is not only Argument by Authority but also Argument by Imposture: The frammisgoshes should be distimmed because certain witnesses declare that they have been informed that various deities and divinities have that opinion In fact, there is also Argument by Intimidation involved here, since the Archbishop, Chief Rabbi and Celestial Yap control several million voters; so such testimony also includes Argument by Self-Interest: The frammisgoshes should be distimmed because you will lose the next election if they aren't distimmed There will probably be expert legal testimony as well, and this amounts to Argument by Precedent: The frammisgoshes should be distimmed because a frammisgosh is like a farble and distimming is like gosketing and our ancestors always gosketed the farbles Again, many people decide matters that way outside Congress as well as inside. The doctrine of eminent domain, which allows the government to steal anything it wants, is regarded with repugnance by most people, but lawyers say it is legal and proper, because government has been stealing things for a long time. There will also be scientific evidence heard on such a socially important decision as frammisgoshes. Ideally, in accord with scientific method, this will take the form of Argument by Evidence: The frammisgoshes should be distimmed because in 186 studies, 66.34 percent of all frammisgoshes found undistimmed were also suffering from hangnail, poor school attendance and abuse of controlled substances With what some will regard as incredible optimism, I assume that some Congressentities will examine this evidence and form their own opinions of whether the statistical techniques used really "prove" the conclusions alleged. With what some will regard as dark cynicism, I also assume that some Congressentities will not bother with that at all but will accept what they heard as another form of Argument by Authority: The frammisgoshes should be distimmed because 186 scientists say so Again, outside of Congress many people make decisions on the basis of scientific evidence, either because they understand it, or because they think it is another form of Argument by Authority and they are conditioned to accept whatever Authority tells them. That's why there are so many nuclear plants around these days. There is also the Argument by Logic. This can sometimes be combined with scientific experiments and if the two mesh we have a "fit" of theory with fact and scientists are delighted. Pure Argument by Logic, however, does not require this experimental backup and only demands that the conclusions be reached by the game-rules of an abstract symbol system. In our hypothetical case, some witness might inform Congress: All mome raths need to be distimmed All frammisgoshes are mome raths. Therefore, all frammisgoshes need to be distimmed. This method of logic can lead to some remarkable results, and Lewis Carroll once employed it to demonstrate that some dowagers are thistles. It is for that reason that Pure Logic is in rather low repute in scientific circles thes days and a scientific proof is regarded as requiring not only logical coherence but experimental, sensory-sensual or instrumental verification in the space-time world of ordinary perception. There is also the method of argument ad hominem, which consists of variations on "The frammisgoshes should be distimmed because the people who deny this are all sons of bitches." This is a favorite form of argument with demagogues and hysterics but it has no validity. E.g., even if it were proven that Darwin was a child molester or Einstein an axe-murderer, this one would not disprove their scientific theories which still have to be judged on empirical evidence. The Argument of guilt-by-association is the Argument ad hominem one step removed and even more obviously invalid. This is the position which holds "the frammisgoshes should be distimmed because the leader of the anti-distimmation movement was seen at a saloon in 1957 where known Communists and Satanists were also drinking." There do not appear to be any other methods of argument ever invented; what seem to be other methods generally turn out to be variations on these basic forms. For instance, "You better believe it or God or Allah or Yog or some other deity will throw you in Hell" is a combination of Argument by Self Interest and Argument by Intimidation. "You better believe it (or pretend to believe it) or you'll lose your job" is a secular equivalent of this combination of Self-Interest and Intimidation. Einstein's equations are Argument by (Mathematical) Logic; the empirical confirmations of Relativity are Argument by Experiment; and the agreement of the two is a typical example of the synthesis of logical validity and sensory-sensual experience that science always seeks to find. I believe that everything admirable in the modern world results form the use of Argument by Experiment together with Argument by Logic (without making an Idol of either), whereas everything heinous and terrible results from the persistence of the older habits of Arguments by Authority, Intimidation, Self-Interest and Legal Precedent, or the various forms of calling the other side sons of bitches. This logical-experimental bias in my thinking is as old-fashioned and almost quaint as my Jeffersonian notion that "no laws" means "no laws," and I realize that I sound like a reactionary to those New Age people who much prefer Authority (if it comes from the East), Intimidation (if it is called the politics of confrontation) and Self Interest (if it is called getting in touch with your real feelings)...... </RAW>
12-04-2000 03:10 PM
Not Fooled- Retard??	Here's a fact for you: I have a 23 year old cousin who is retarded, and I am offended that you would use this term in reference to "Not Fooled." I have heard statements of much greater substance and wisdom come from her than from our Human-Hater counterpart. Not fooled is a neurotic sociopath.
12-04-2000 02:43 PM
Deryk	To someonepleasefuckher I wish that I had read your post first. I just got home after a bad day at the office and fighting with my detailer over new orders to Spain and sort of really let not fooled have it. I then saw your post and just by reading it got a sense of justice toward that poor individual. Thanks for expressing into words something I could not D
12-04-2000 02:39 PM
all hail king george	Let me put it in simpler terms Dr. Laura doesn't belive in the New Testament where the scriptures say that all the laws that were impossible for imperfect man to fufill were fufilled in Christ's sacrafice and that the new law was not a law but a principle love thy fellow man. Have tolerance and consideration for others, do unto them as you would have them do unto you.Dr. Laura is a persona she plays a part to get ratings. she could care less about her fellow man. No insult against her is in bad taste, She is a whore-an actual whore and a figurative whore for ratings.She isn't telling it like it is she isn't standing up for what she believes in or whats right her agenda is to make money. God I hope no one out there is taking her advice If they are geuinely fooled by her I feel sorry for them. Its the narrow minded hate filled people that make me truly sick.Her 'psychiatric' theory of gay people was disproved about 50 years ago.Not Fooled I notice you have tactic of insult then when I make a real point you never respond.
12-03-2000 01:10 PM
all hail knig george	I have just started posting on this board so I don't know who the "you people" are but I have been known to make a point or two without flames. When it comes to Dr Laura there is no such thing as bad taste the woman has no redemptive qualities. As a shock jock without principle she has gotten rich spewing hate and intolerance in the name of religion. The Bible has laws, many arcane now, but the main thing that God wanted us to do in the New Testament which Dr. Laura doesn't believe in BTW was to follow the principles of love and tolerance for our fellow man. Dr. Laura hasn't even lived up to her own laws she is a pig and a slut and a hack for the republican party.Her job isn't to help people it is to shock people into listening to her stupid radio show the reason she is bad and bad for this country is that she gives really narrow minded hate filled people ideas.And "you people"don't need anymore ideas.
12-03-2000 02:28 AM
Not Fooled	None of us can make a point? How bout the people who start their every discussion with a flame? HA! I may throw in some derogatory terms every once in a while, but you guys can't exactly claim the moral or intellectual high ground now can you? I'll remove all colorful remarks from my point-driven posts, when ONE of you is able to make a SINGLE post that relies on facts and information, rather than simple name calling to give it any weight.
12-02-2000 08:28 PM
Okay "all hail"...	Do your mommy & daddy know that you're on the computer?
12-02-2000 01:44 PM
all hail king george	To: To Not Fooled Re: Not Fooled is a pretentious loser and to not fooled is working on his pretentious loser degree. Neither one of you can make a point, that is express an opinion that is informed and or intelligent without saying something about another posters intelligence or education level, thinking that this has somehow proven your point. You are ignorant and you lack creativity.Retarded is a strong word though how about jackass.BTW at what age did you move out of your parents basement?
12-02-2000 10:37 AM
To "Not Fooled"....	I'm with you, the "regulars" on this board are a hoot! I guess the main objective to their postings is to, at ALL costs, NEVER MAKE SENSE! Which is why I think they're attacking you so viciously, you make TOO much sense! Plus, they don't like their hating frenzy interrupted. I enjoy your postings immensely. They're insightful, intelligent & articulately submitted. To "all hail"...If you don't mind my asking, what's the highest level of education you've completed?
12-02-2000 02:45 AM
all hail king george	Not Fooled not an intellectual.
12-01-2000 11:19 PM
Not Fooled	Someonepleasefuckher, you make me moist.
12-01-2000 10:22 PM
Not Fooled	Excellent! I'm almost on the level of Inde! Only a few more flame specific topics to go! hahaha Lady...that was a funny piece of work. At least I can manage to include some substance to my posts. I've never laughed so hard in my life, thanks. :P
12-01-2000 07:20 PM
someonepleasefuckher	not fooled is retarded All humans presuming to know the Gender of the Creator of Universe and/or her/his/its thoughts/plans it would please those of us who actually care about this planet if you would jump into a churning vat of the emissions of 127,593 rodents, then hook yourselves up to a lie detector machine, stuff yourselves into a bodybag full of the shit of 905 bermuda dogs, lie on your back while a tractor weighing approx. 75,009lbs squashes you until your head pops like a zit. Talk about biological errors, the disease you think of as yourself and internal dialogue is nothing short of robotic responses you turd on a stick. What kind of idiot are you to even presume you have the capability of rational thought let alone free will. If you had any free will it would scare you to death you anticipator of cum guzzling, you old useless whore. Who are you to talk about anything sexual at all when it is so obvious that you are one hard up ugly old hag that could'nt cause an erection in a man nor moisten a vagina in a woman if your useless, tired life depended on it. "not fooled" is perhaps a fine example of how the elimination of certain humans would benefit us tremendously. At the very least, your existance is a good argument for forced halucinogenic/hypno-therepy. Go felch yourself idiot. At least most gays have broken free from one cultural idiocy implemented for the sole purpose of keeping you idiots in check like the dumbass animals you really are. Try it you might like it bitchy lying old hypocrite just like your idol. Here is a possiblity, there are not any Gay men or women, they simply do not exist. What exist are people who have found someone to relate with (to a degree) that happens to be of the same gender, and they have sex. WHOPPIE-dee-doo!!! If a guy wants to suck another guys dick who gives a flying fuck? More women for us anyway. And if a woman wants to lick another snatch, good for her. What reasonable person would object to expressions of love? Maybe you would prefer the homo's hold back their sexual inclinations only to result in mass executions and worse. Fuck off you old hag, we the people of the future are still waiting for you to pass away by your own sick mental disorders. The GALL!!! You actually believe you understand the creator of all that is and then go around shouting you "KNOW" the gender of Universe and her/his/its motives. Someone put a stick of dynamite in her ass or at least dose her with some heavy acid and fuck the cunt like she needs. Fuck, hard up people like "not fooled" with sexual hangups cause the worst fucking facist bullshit on this planet.