Galen

Jonny Lingo: "I have an eighteen year old who is way out of line on the "hetero-sexual" thing, in that he certainly loves the girls...Oy vey!" I hear you. Both of our sons have had to 'endure' as girls drool all over them. In Italy, Bonnie got upset when two of the girls that worked for me were hitting on our eldest son. The girls wanted to take him to a Beach resort for a weekend. I was all for it, but Bonnie was totally against it. The beaches along the Italian Riviera are really nice. Now our second son is in high-school, and girls call him all afternoon and evening long.

sharon: "... Remember I asked Galen the same question his response (he also disagrees wiith homosexuality)" True. "Galen says: Would I prefer that he get a good education, a solid career, and most of all a smart capable wife ..." Isn't that what we all would prefer for our sons? "But no matter what our children do in their lives, we will still love them." I dont know, I have seen young folks do some really bad stuff, while I dont think Homosexuality is G-d's Will for our lives, I also just dont think that it compares to the really bad stuff that a kid could have gotten into either. And besides my sons are still my sons. :-) "If I was looking for parental guidance I sure would prfer Galen's to yours." Thanks :-) "... I bet is I'd brought cookies to your Pfal class you'd thrown me out as well." You can come and enjoy PFAL in my home anytime that we are running a class, you would be welcome. [Not right now, we are running CF&S, sorry]. :-)

Abigail: "I hear ya Galen. A little girl was abducted from her grandmother's house, a few blocks from mine, and killed. We have two convicted pedophiles living up the street - one a repeat offender. And we have a corner store that always has gangs of teenagers hanging out in front of it. Yet I see kids as young as 5 and 6 riding their bikes in the street, totally unspervised." It did not seem as bad, back in 1990 when we bought this place. But since then we have had two indian casinos built, both within 5 miles, both trying for the title of 'biggest casino in the World' [Foxwoods and Mohegan-Sun]. They both ship in a lot of workers from around the nation, from all of the territorys [Puerto Rico, Guam, etc] and from Europe. "As for mine - we fenced off the back yard and put locks on the gates. If the kids want to go to the park or go for a bike ride, an adult goes with them." LOL We had so much foot traffic through our backyard, you would have thought it was a sidewalk connecting our back property-line with the sidewalk in front of the building. The year after we bought it, they built a 200-unit apartment building on the hill directly behind us. The city even "re-drew" our back property line to accomodate their parking lot. :-( In 2002, I built a row of 'hunting blinds' along our rear property line, and installed a row of beehives there. They can not be seen from the parking lot of the 200-unit complex, but they fill the wooded area with lots of bees. Which cuts down on the foot-traffic some. I also got a large german shepherd and made a 100foot 'run' behind the house that goes from one side-propertyline entirely across my property to the opposing side-propertyline. She has a big 'effect'. She broke her run once to trap 3 teens in my parking lot 'looking' at my bike. Another time she broke her run and treed a kid at 3am, the police were already on the street chasing the kid, but it was our dog that caught him. We live on a corner where two streets meet, both streets end at this corner, so the traffic in fact has to stop and make a right angle turn. Since returning stateside we have had 2 different cars, pull into our parking lot while being chased by police [both times it was a teen stealing a car, both times they turned into my lot thinking it might have a rear escape route]. If you continued straight on our street, the path of where the road would go [if it were to continue which it does not] is a large rocky knoll. But at night looking at it from the street you can't really tell exactly what it is and the city has not marked it with any signs. So I have laid down two 'tracks' of concrete, so in the dark it kind of looks like a vehicle path. I am waiting to see if the next kid driving a stolen car, will hit theses 'tracks' thinking it will give him escape. [of course it will just pile his vehicle into a large rock face]. "I have also (thanks ExC) begun talking to the kids about the dangers of our society, and we talk through the different tactics pedophiles will use to try and lure them away. We discuss what if scenarios and teach the kids what to do should one occur." That is a good idea. When we had all the foster-children we did that too. Often. "One of the really interesting things I've learned is that it is usually not the stranger your kids have to fear, but the people they know. When we teach our kids they should NEVER talk to strangers we give ourselves a false sense of security and may actually hinder a child's ability to seek help when they really need it. Instead it is better to teach them which adults are safe to seek help from and to teach them the tactics people will use to tear down their natural insticts and boundaries." Last year our city joined a program for that very thing, it envolves the city's Public Utility men. A few of them went into each elementary school classroom with one wearing the big dog suit "McGruff". They taught the children a 'Secret' call-sign to use if they need help, and that every Public Utility truck has a police-capable radio, and all city employees are now 'trained' to respond when they see this 'secret' call-sign, should any child use it. Our children ate it up. They were so proud that they knew the 'secret' call-sign, and everytime they saw a Public Utilitys truck they just had to wave to their buddys. Of course the 'secret' call-sign, was to yell "HELP" while waving both arms up and down over your head. But the kids loved it. :-)

Abigail: "CHEYENNE, Wyo. A train operator in Wyoming was able to stop his locomotive just inches from a young brother and sister who were crossing the tracks." "... If your kids are too young to understand basic safety concepts like not wandering on a train track - why are they being allowed to roam around unsupervised??????" Sadly it happens all the time now days. People with kids think that they live in mayberry and that it is safe for their little ones to wander freely, without supervision. Since returning stateside and to this neighborhood, we has seen drive-by shootings at a park 1 and a half blocks away, and multiple reported 'attempted' child abductions [from the newspaper reports, people driving around will stop and talk to loose children asking them to go for a 'ride'.] At this city park, is the continous presence of a group of teens, who occasionally are busted with drugs or getting into fights. And yet on my block, we have at least three families whose children [ranging from 5 to 10] roam the streets freely without supervision. I commonly have to drive around them as they play in the street, I see many of them out playing as late as midnight; but all without any adult outside or monitoring where the children are. :-)

sharon: "would you? and since I'm writing Galen, what about you?" Do you never get bored of reading the same thing posted over and over again? It is my understanding that Our Heavenly Father loves everyone. The Great Architect of the Universe desires people to worship and draw close to Him. He has laid out those things which He sees as being 'good', and those things which He sees as being 'bad'. He would prefer us to do those things which are 'good'. They tend to draw us closer to Him, and to build a society which is over-all closer to Him. The 'good' things lead us toward healthier and wealthier lives. I certainly dont understand all things that Our Creator does, I am merely a creation of His. I do know that as a father myself I love my children: and that my Spiritual Father says that He loves us too. I want the best for my children, I want them to be their best, so that their future's can be the best they can possibly be. Does that mean that each time they do something that I dont think wise that I should love them any less? No, I dont think so. I am still here for them, to help them, to love them, to set them back on their feet again and wish them well. I have certainly done many things in my life that were wrong, does that mean that the Ears of Heaven are forever closed to me? I dont think so. How could I do any less, when this is the example that I see set before me? The more sin that I do, certainly hurts I should imagine, but does it over-come my Sonship with my Heavenly Father? I dont think so. Whether I go through life and only kill a few men, or if I go on to kill a few more, will it ever really detract from My Hevenly Father's love? But should I? Wouldn't I do far better, walking through life ever nearer and nearer to Him? Ever 'in tune' and listening to His gentle sweet voice. Offering me guidance and advice, who to minister to, and which lane to drive in, and which chorse to do first. Wouldn't living life striving to be closer to Him, be a better idea? I think so. Now I am certainly a far worse father than He. But I do see His example. What could a child do, that would remove my seed from him? Nothing. He is always going to be my child. Would I prefer that he get a good education, a solid career, and most of all a smart capable wife? Certainly. But no matter what our children do in their lives, we will still love them. "Jbarrax, yes there are homosexuals, (especially women) who have been hurt and mistreated, who fall back in to the comfort of a woman woman relationship, but the topic here is "teenage" homosexuality, and most teenagers(hopefully) haven't felt that pain." LOL It is interesting, our different perspectives here. See I have dealt with and ministered to so many men who have been hurt, mistreated and desserted by females. Often they it takes many years for them to climb back out of the debt, and they will continue paying [financially] for the remainder of their lives. But I suppose that I could see your point of view as well, obviously having seen so many men that have been treated so, there must have been some female somewhere who was mistreated as well. :-)

GarthP2000: "Okay, I see your point about the 'promiscuity' part." Cool, look you want to start throwing mud, yes I can throw mud, too. No big deal. It gave us something to do while underwater for months at a time. :-) "But I still see a bias here in your trying to put the 'higher risk' factor on homosexuals (at least that's what it appears to me), than on heterosexuals, never mind that STDs don't discriminate." Okay I may well be biased against things that has been / still is / and remains to be a felony, as determined by our federal government. I am a servicemember subject to the UCMJ, which Congress and the President enacted in the 1950's. Article 125 [sodomy] is still enforced, and I am still subject to it. Article 78 - which says basically that if I know of anyone commiting such a crime and that I dont report it, than I am also guilty of that crime and subject to it's full penalty even if the original criminal is never convicted. That is the system within which the public expects our military to live. "Read what I posted again. I was addressing the 'general public perception' as it were, of homosexuals being more sexually promiscuous than heteros, and that's what I thought I saw in your post. Seems we could both use some reading comprehension improvement skills." cool. "Frankly, I still oppose your bias against gays, and as far as I'm concerned, I'm straight. (I'm not Jewish either, but I can still oppose anti-Semitism.)" Fine, we have opposing stances, I can live with that. :-) "Look, I used to have the same 'homophobia' that I see plenty of here on this thread, both subtle and overt, and I've come to realize that there is nothing in homosexuality that is the *dire threat* against Western Civilization that many try to make it out to be, regardless of how some people try to use/twist/mangle bible verses to drum people up with, and usually it's the gays (and their friends/family) that wind up getting hurt/burned/ripped off. ... And for what? Some ignorant and rabid fear of some vengeful god/fear of not being 'man' enough/some other *stoopid* reason to make them the **vile evil ones**. And all for doing something in private that doesn't touch anyone's life here at all!" I have known homosexuals, a few have been my friends. I have served with a few [eventually they were each convicted of their crimes, or they left the service]. I have likely served with others, who kept their desires secret. Which is fine, it is not a crime so long as they dont act upon it. I dont really feel that I have any 'fear' of them. I really dont think that I have a homophobia. I dont 'approve' of it, though nobody has ever asked for my approval. That is like 'approving' of red hair. Either someone has those drives, or they dont. I do read the Bible, and I do see that the Bible makes it fairly clear that such behavior is not the 'best'. As I have said many times here on GS, everyone still needs love. "Now if that goes against your sense of ((cough)) 'morality', .... Deal with it!" I dont really have a problem 'dealing' with such. My issues in dealing with things is more often my memorys of close friends that died in service to others, and those that I have caused to die. :-)

GarthP2000: "What you posted was flawed and dishonest was because you portrayed your own perception of homosexuals hitting on you AS tho' it was the general promiscuity of homosexuals." No, it has been something that 'promiscous' people did, and not the general public. But you wont admit to that possibility. " ... Yet here you are trying to add to that judgement, a flawed judgement regardless, that homosexuals are overall more promiscuous than straights. ... And I think that deep down, you know that it's a flawed argument, ... " And yet here you stand saying that homosexuals are more promiscous than anyone else. I carefully did not say such a thing, you did. I said that there is a general public perception that they are, but in honesty I have no idea if they are or not [which I have said before but you refuse to hear, now is that your dishonesty?]. heh heh heh "Hey d*ck, I never had that experience happen to me, and if you were honest enough and read the WHOLE of what I said previously, ie," Well your the one calling me dishonest. "And all this .... in the Name of your God?? One that expects worship??" ??? Did I say something in the context of worship? Or are you being dishonest again? :-)

Sharon- That sounds good. Or He dislikes followers who treat each other 'treacherously'. :-)

http://www.usaweekend.com/05_issues/050327...jesus_life.html What would Jesus do -- in his day? Geza Vermes, a world-class biblical scholar takes you back 2,000 years to show what life was really like in Jesus' time. Before his Hungarian-Jewish parents were killed in the Holocaust, they and their 6-year-old son, Vermes, converted to Catholicism. As an adult, Vermes was ordained a priest, but later, while teaching at Oxford, reaffirmed his Judaic origins. Today Vermes, who has spent his life studying religion, considers himself a non-practicing Jew. Vermes' spiritual journey and interest in Jesus have been very public. His translations of the Dead Sea Scrolls to English; his study of the Gospels and non-Christian sources such as the work of the first-century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus; and his five books on Jesus, including the recent "The Authentic Gospel of Jesus," have made him one of the world's leading biblical scholars. Here, he evokes the historical Jesus and shares with us the details of what life was like in the Holy Land in Jesus' time: EDUCATION. "Every Jewish boy was educated in the Bible from early childhood," says Vermes, who explains that the writings of ancient rabbis refer to a system of primary education based on the synagogue and the schoolhouse next door. Boys learned to read and write, but the textbook was the Torah, the first five books of what we now call the Bible. ATHLETICS. Jews with Greek education and culture introduced athletic games like running, wrestling and discus throwing in Jerusalem. "We know from the Books of Maccabees [books of the Old Testament included in Roman Catholic and Orthodox Bibles, but not Protestant ones] that the Jews in Jerusalem decided to build a stadium for sporting events," Vermes says. "But the Greeks competed naked, and the pious Jews didn't allow nudity in public." Those who could afford it built private swimming pools. "We know that King Herod arranged for the murder of his brother-in-law and disguised it as a swimming pool accident." POLITICS. Shortly after Jesus' birth, King Herod the Great died, and the Romans divided the Holy Land into sections: Judea, including Jerusalem; Galilee, the rural region where Jesus lived; and Gaulanitis, which included what is now southern Syria. Each was ruled by a different son of Herod. As long as the sons paid taxes to the Romans, the areas remained relatively free. But 10 years after Herod's death, the Romans demoted Judea's ruler and planted a Roman governor. Jesus spent most of his public life in Galilee and didn't experience Roman rule until he went to Jerusalem, where he was eventually arrested and put to death. RELIGION. Religion was the center of daily life. The temple in Jerusalem was divided into separate areas. There was a large external courtyard where anyone could go. Then there were several inner courtyards only Jews could enter. Those courtyards included one open to both women and men, one open only to men, and one only priests could enter. Finally, there was the innermost chamber, which only the high priest could enter, and only on the Day of Atonement. If anyone entered on any other day, he or she would be put to death. The Jews also put to death any non-Jews who passed beyond the first courtyard. "We know from Josephus that there were inscriptions in Latin and Greek along the bordering area warning non-Jews that they risked their life if they crossed that barrier," Vermes says. "One of these inscriptions was discovered in the temple area in the 19th century. [Today] it's in a museum in Istanbul." MARRIAGE. "Monogamy was not a rule imposed by the Bible," Vermes says. "Jewish men could have several wives, but by the time of Jesus that became rare, and only the very rich could afford it. Sex was important in a marriage and considered the duty of the husband to his wife." An engagement was as binding as marriage. Often parents brokered engagements when their children were very young; when the time came to seal the marriage, there was a feast, and the bride moved into the bridegroom's house. Divorce was not frowned on, and some Jews said if a woman was a bad cook, that was grounds enough for divorce. Others said sexual misbehavior was the only appropriate grounds. Adultery resulted in both lovers being stoned to death. DEATH. Stoning was the most common Jewish form of execution. It was the penalty for blasphemy in addition to adultery. Beheading and burning on the stake were less common forms of execution, for other offenses. Crucifixion, practiced by the Romans, also was very common. Criminals could be crucified by being nailed or tied to a cross. The crucified died of asphyxiation and often had their legs broken to accelerate death. Josephus reports that during the final Jewish war in the ancient Holy Land, which ended with the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70, the Romans captured many Jewish rebels. In the last months of the rebellion, as many as 500 people a day were crucified.

Watered Garden: "ADD: attention deficit disorder ADHD: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ODD: Oppositional defiant disorder" We also have dealt with children labeled: IED: Intermittant Explosive Disorder RAD: Re-Active Attachment Disorder FAS: Fetal Alcohol Syndrome BiPolar and 'Sexual-Predator' "However, I do believe that many children diagnosed with these socalled disorders are really just brats." heh heh heh sometimes I agree, other times these kids do seem to have major problems. " ... And sometimes kids are not in the best learning environment. Watching TV for main recreation is said by experts to (pediatric association) to be a factor in developing attention deficit. This is difficult for parents to believe becuase the child is sitting in front of the tube, open mouthed in what appears to be rapt concentration." We have a study stuffed in a drawer that says with every addition of one hour per day of TV or computer monitor, it coolerates to an additional 10% chance of developing ADHD. [1 hour/day = 10% chance, 2 hours/day = 20% chance, 3 hours/day = 30% chance, etc] I dont know what the real answers are though. :-)

GarthP2000: “That 'observation' is so flawed and dishonest, even on it's face, ... and you know it. (So why do you make it?)” My observations from my own personal experiences are ‘dishonest’? If I see ‘X’, and I tell you that I see ‘X’, that is not dishonest. Even if what I saw was flavored by my prejudice, or bad-lighting, or if I truly did not understand what I saw; if I give an honest assessment of what I saw then it is honest. Rather than dishonest. “L'see, where to begin. First off, using ONLY women on the heterosexual side compared to homosexual men in your example of coming on to you, as a means of showing why homosexuals are more promiscuous than heteros. ... Ahhh, what about heterosexual men? And no, not in coming on to you, BUT in coming on to women. So how promiscuous is that, hmmm? I notice that you leave that out in your 'observation'. -->” It has not been my experience that non-promiscous-heterosexual men have ever made passes at me [unlike you] so obviously I could not be capable to making any comments on how that happens, or when, or under what circumstances. Perhaps you who are so experienced could possibly enlighten us? My post was made purely within the limited context of comparing Promiscuous ‘A’ with Promiscuous ‘B’, you insist on wedging into it Non-promiscuous people. I am sorry. Obviously I did not state it clearly even or with enough multiplicity for you to catch it. This direct quote: “From that life-experiences impression that I have gained, I would have to side with the assumption that promiscuous-homosexuals are at higher risk than promiscuous-heterosexuals.” For example perhaps missed your notice. “Two, when you are going to include your own observation in a conclusion about a group of people, it would be more honest to include what you have observed other people doing in the same context to come to a more well rounded observation.” Again we disagree about what makes 'honesty'. Again I am sorry. But I really don’t pay any attention to others so would you please do the honours of telling us exactly what happens each time that non-promiscuous heterosexaul men hit on you? Than both sides will be covered, both: promiscuous people hitting on strangers for spontaneous sex, and non-promiscuous people hitting on strangers for sex. “Come on, Galen. You can do better than that.” Since you are so eager to find fault perhaps you could help. :-)

sharon: " ...i'm sorry, i was going to keep quiet, but that one couldn't be left alone..." I beleive that what you were reffering to was specifically and purposefully stated within the context of: promiscuous-heterosexuals verses promiscuous-homosexuals. Which specifically leaves out the "long-term couples" that you wish to use as examples of why promiscuous people dont have higher risk. The higher the promiscuous-ness of a person, it is generally assumed that they lead a higher risk life than non-promiscuous people, which is why the posts were plced within that context. :-) "and as a side note, divorce is far more condemd in the bible then homosexuality." Huh? The Bible gives specific guidelines for divorce, it allows divorce. Even Jesus re-confirmed such. Neither the Old Testament, nor the New Testament is found to 'condemn' Divorce. Whereas homosexuality is specifically mentioned and drawn out as a bad thing. Granted I think that we should still love everyone. :-)

Jonny Lingo: "Would it be fair to say that frisky "risky" homosexuals have a lower life expectancy than frisky "risky" heterosexuals? I do believe that homo sex is riskier than hetero sex, due to the penchant for buggery... " It is generally assumed that Homosexuals are more promiscuous than Heterosexuals. Saying this will likely enrage the 'pro-homosexual' crowd, and I am sorry but it needs to be said. I have no statistics on the subject, and I would tend to doubt any statistics shown anyway. It has been my experience that heterosexual women don’t make a pass at me, unless I am talking to them and 'opening' up to them to begin with. Whereas Homosexual men have been far more likely to approach me and make a pass, without even a conversation having already been in progress. From those experiences alone I would have to say that promiscuous-homosexual men are far more ‘at-risk’, than say promiscuous-heterosexual women. From that life-experiences impression that I have gained, I would have to side with the assumption that promiscuous-homosexuals are at higher risk than promiscuous-heterosexuals. On the other hand, I don’t know that ‘buggery’ is such an entirely high risk adventure. [it is kind of neat that in America buggery can be used in public without being considered such a horrible word, whereas when we lived in Scotland. It was used, but like ‘bloody’ they were bad words not to be used in public]. :-)

Mark Sanguinetti: "Thanks for the information on beards Galen. I am wondering if Song thinks that your beard makes you look like a rocker. He likes that, but wants to know if you have ever played with ZZ Top or been on one of their videos?" LOL Sometimes people do yell "Hey ZZ-Top!" When I drive by them. They only videos of theirs that I recall, had young girls with really looong legs, and short short hot pants. :-)

TheSongRemainsTheSame: "I'll be damned ZZ! What kinda bike you ride?" Thanks, I have a Gold-Wing. :-)

Mark Sanguinetti: "Thanks Galen. What is most important is that your gal Bonnie likes your beard. I just hope that it does not scratch her when it comes to kissing time." There does exist a common myth, that a beard would/should/or even could scratch [beyond it's 'stubble' phase]. Does your head-hair scratch? Or your arm-hairs? What is there about facial hair that makes people think it should scratch? :-) When you have recently shaved, but then let it grow out just a little bit, that stubble is stiff and does stratch. Just like a woman's legs 3 days after she last shaved them. A woman who lets her leg hairs grow for a few weeks though, no longer has rough stubble, the hairs relax as they get longer. I shampoo my beard and use conditioner, sometimes a de-tangler, sometimes a softener. On occasion I do hear women say some comment about my beard and the possibility of it being 'scratchy'. I always challenge them to touch it and if they find it to be soft they owe me a kiss. [it has gotten me kissed a few times over the years]. Bonnie likes my beard as well. I had a full-beard when we courted, and our wedding pictures show a full-beard. When the Navy finally said that I had to shave while in-port, our eldest son did not recognize me, the first time he saw me without a beard. Daniel was 3, he was mad that some other man was kissing his mother. "I like your photo too. It makes you look like a rugged mountain man. I am just wondering if the photo was taken before or after you traveled to town for provisions?" LOL Thank you. Here in Connecticut, I stand out a bit. When I go travel up to Maine [was up there last week] I fit in totaly.

Mark Sanguinetti: "Galen, I have been meaning to ask you. Is that a photo of you with the big smile and long black beard?" Yes, it was. The Proportions of the Height ahd Width got messed-up in the process of shrinking it down small enough so this website would handle it. I recently trimmed it to rid split-ends, Bonnie was a little upset as I took off over 4 inches. It is now about seven inches as measured from my chin. I put it in a scrunchie to hold it in place when I ride my bike, or else it gets in my eyes. :-)

Shortly after publication of Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Systems of the World - Ptolemaic and Copernican the Inquisition banned its sale and ordered Galileo to appear in Rome before them. Illness prevented him from travelling to Rome until 1633. Galileo's accusation at the trial which followed was that he had breached the conditions laid down by the Inquisition in 1616. However a different version of this decision was produced at the trial rather than the one Galileo had been given at the time. The truth of the Copernican theory was not an issue therefore; it was taken as a fact at the trial that this theory was false. This was logical, of course, since the judgement of 1616 had declared it totally false. Found guilty, Galileo was condemned to lifelong imprisonment, but the sentence was carried out somewhat sympathetically and it amounted to house arrest rather than a prison sentence. He was able to live first with the Archbishop of Siena, then later to return to his home in Arcetri, near Florence, but had to spend the rest of his life watched over by officers from the Inquisition. After Galileo had completed work on the Discourses it was smuggled out of Italy, and taken to Leyden in Holland where it was published. It was his most rigorous mathematical work which treated problems on impetus, moments, and centres of gravity. Much of this work went back to the unpublished ideas in De Motu from around 1590 and the improvements which he had worked out during 1602-1604. It was a sad end for so great a man to die condemned of heresy. His will indicated that he wished to be buried beside his father in the family tomb in the Basilica of Santa Croce but his relatives feared, quite rightly, that this would provoke opposition from the Church. His body was concealed and only placed in a fine tomb in the church in 1737 by the civil authorities against the wishes of many in the Church. On 31 October 1992, 350 years after Galileo's death, Pope John Paul II gave an address on behalf of the Catholic Church in which he admitted that errors had been made by the theological advisors in the case of Galileo. He declared the Galileo case closed, but he did not admit that the Church was wrong to convict Galileo on a charge of heresy because of his belief that the Earth rotates round the sun. So even JP2 confirmed the point that Galileo was a heretic for his beleif that the Earth rotates around the Sun, and that he deserved to die imprisoned as a heretic. :-)

Long Gone: " ... The Fundamentalists I know are every bit as decent, loving, and law-abiding as anyone else. I have no problem with them being open about their Fundamentalism, as long as they’re not “in your face” about it. I wouldn’t choose that lifestyle, but I don’t feel threatened by others who do. I also have no problem with people engaging in consensual Fundamentalist acts. I figure that what consenting adults do in private is none of my business. I do think that public displays of Fundamentalism can sometimes be unseemly, but that’s a matter of courtesy, rather than a problem with Fundamentalism itself. Fundamentalists should not be shunned, denigrated, or denied equal protection of the laws and decent treatment in society." I admit that I am a 'fundy'. I am not real evangelical about it though. To the degree that fundys can fit in with the rest of society, I think that they should get equal treatment along with all other citizens, but I do not think that they should be a sepearate class sepearately guaranteed any rights. :-) I have heard that Fundys can seek treatment.

Watered Garden: "Do you think it's okay to say, "Little Johnny, your teacher is an a$$ and you don't have to show that person any respect or do anything they say"? If they bother you, just hit them?" Hmm, on one hand it is considered 'wrong' anytime anyone hits anyone else. but ... We once had a child living with us [he was 7 at the time], and we told him: "that anytime anyone climbs into his bed with him and trys to 'mess' with him, he had our permission to punch and bite, and to scream for us to come help him." We thought at the time that we were doing 'good', by telling this young and troubled child this advise. As he had complained that his elder brother had been 'messing' with him in bed. Many months later it turned out that the elder brother was a sexual predator and that he was 'messing' with his yougner brother. We got into terrible trouble with DCF over it, and very nearly lost our license, because of what we told that child. Today, I truly have no idea of what is appropriate and legal, in the context of personal space and what to tell a child about his ability to defend his space or his own body from being hurt or 'messed' with in a manner that he does not desire. :-) Our society is changing very fast.

TheHighWay: "I work in an old building. A very old building. Somewhere in its lifetime elevators were installed, and so the corner stairs don't seem to get used much. Every once in a while I get the urge to exercise my desk-job-bound legs and I take these stairs. And sometimes when I do, I am instantly transported to Rome City, IN." "Work in old buildings": Do you or your work-mates ever feel that you suffer more respiratory illnesses than you should? Mold in air-ducts can be a culprit. My wife [bonnie] suffered 2 heart attacks [one in November and one in December], they are now thinking that the primary culprit may have been mold growing in the air-ducts where she works. The ducting has been tested by a EPA air quality company and they did find way too much stuff growing up there. Now we begin the process of getting her employer to re-emburse us for that portion of the medical bills that came out of our pocket. She had her first heart-attack while at work. Even though I am military, so the military's insurance [Tri-care] covered some of the expenses, we did have to pay a few thousand in partial payments for various treatments. 'Old build' air ducts need to be cleaned routinely. And those filters are not a joke. Yes, I know that I am starting an 'off-thread' rant. I apologize to the 'Off-Thread' Police, but it is important. Now back to your regular thread topic. :-) "Smells effecting memorys": I really dont smell much, I think. Perhaps the chemicals used to manufacture atomospheres on-board subs are at fault. Everyone has always complained that every item of clothing that I ever took under-water carried a strong smell, and most of my uniforms have to be stored in the garage due to their smell. But yes it is my understanding that smell is often strongly connected to memory. :-)

I admit that sometimes when I post, I look back over what I have written and I see that I did lots of miss-spelling, etc. I was once taught that when writing, you need to write, then put it down and go do something else and come back. A fresh mind will look over what you wrote 10 minutes previously and say "Wow what junk, I can fix that". I also use MS-Word a lot. Not always [like right now]. But commonly when I see that I am making more mistakes than is good. I Alt-tab into Word and type a response there, so it is spell-checked grammar-checked and I have immediate use of a thesarus. Then I can paste it back onto the thread. :-)

outofdafog: "I have seen this movie before here on GS. Nobody changes their opinions (and that is what they are because no one has any proof to validate their argument)." Well this is a kind of open debate forum. "Some of these answers give me flashbacks to STS in the auditorium with Loyboy spitting all over himself and others in his rage against homosexuality." I apologize if I have made you to feel bad, or caused distress. :-) "All I know is that I have a gay daughter and I love her with all my heart, soul, mind and strength and would fight to my death for her. My child is no different than yours, she gets all A's and B's, works part-time after school, has lots of friends, goes to parties, shops for clothes, chats on the phone, internet and listens to her MP3 player." I am sure that you do love her, as we should all love our children. She sounds like a fairly average kid. "According to some of you posters, she has demons, or I sinned in a previous life or some other crap like that." I have no idea why one person is homosexual and another is not. It does seem to be far more often of late though, I dont think that there would ever really be any method of tracking such, as previously society did not approve and as such even if someone had tendencies leaning toward homosexuality they were under far more pressure to hide that part of themselves. So any statistics would likely be suspect. I did not mean to imply that you had sinned in some way which caused your daugher to be so. I do realise that the Bible does mention how the sins of the father are carried over to the son. I understand this in the context that when we walk in sinful habits ourselves then our children learn to walk in the same way. My father has terrible impulse control when it comes to controlling his temper. But around adults he manages to control himself, when he is around children or pets is when he lashes out. But as he told me many times, when you train a child or an animal you beat them and eventually they will figure out what you want them to do, so just keep on beating them. There are others who would say that you can train using 'love' but that takes more time and effort. It is easier to beat things, and hurts less if you use whips or rods then if you used your own hands and feet. Now in my life, I have 'fought' that lack of impulse control, and I have fought against my bio-father's teachings. So I do know that to some degree what a parent does gets carried over to children, but it can also be controlled. In the case of Homosexuality, I dont think that it absolutely must be spiritual. I do think that in our society today being surrounded by others who say they are such, or seeing it on TV everyday, etc. Would certainly make it easier for anyone with a pre-disposition towards that, to more openly go there. "I notice that since I posted about my child, not one person has really directed their comments at me." Again I apologize. "... They preach their little sermons all around and sound so self righteous. If you ain't gotta live it, then don't worry about it. She's not gonna pollute your little self-righteous gene pool, nor would I ever let her go to church with you." I did not intend to be preaching at you, sorry. I know that I was a sinner, and that 'Grace' has been my only hope of 'Righteousness'. If I sounded like it was from myself, then I am sorry. I think that we all need the Love and Grace of our Heavenly Father. Obviously I do feel that if your healing has progressed enough, then you should search out some church, or some group of beleivers somewhere, to assist you and to offer you their support directly. "Whoa to you scribes and Pharisees and hypocrites! My bible teaches that the "law of love" now supersedes the law. Oh I am sorry except for homosexuals, God really didn't mean that when it comes to them. Shame on you!" :-)

GarthP2000: "When did the gays specifically ask to be given rights that no one else has?" I assume that they were the ones who fought for protection as a seperate class, so your asnwer would be when THEY did it. I can't imagine that the NRA decided "Lets go find some group and lobby for them to have more rights". "And besides, what is it about renting to a gay person or couple that really takes your rights away, hmmm?" You have not read everything previous in this thread? "And this thing about 'seperating them to be a separate caste in our society' is hardly what the vast majority of gays/lesbians want." I have no idea what they want. "That's Yet More Propaganda from Focus on the Family machine." Thats Pat Robertson isn't it? What is their stance? Do you follow them now? "You know, and I know that this 'special rights' song-and-dance is just a straw man argument covering up for this 'gays are sinners and do not deserve equal rights' mentality. Hell, how many times has a Christian gotten special treatment one way or another, and you didn't raise this much of a fuss over it, hmmm?" You can't give biased treatment over religion either. If you think that you have been passed-over for a job due to religion, you have remedys available because again such is listed among the various things that you can not discriminate for. I don't like anyone being listed, for special treatment, due to anything. When their is a job opening, the employer should be able to fill the opening with anyone he wants to fill it with. In theory he should be able to pick whom he feels is the best qualified, but that is not the case. If he picks through favoratism, then fine, his company will not do nearly as well and he will suffer for it. But that should be his choice, if he is an employer. "I know that mentality well; hell, I used to embrace it myself, so I know the game plan, chief" I am not a chief, I am a First Class Petty Officer. I was once accused for presenting myself off as a chief, I was found innocent. However to allow someone else to thnk that you are a higher rank, is a federal crime under the UCMJ. Having been charged with this previously, I learned from the experience. In the previous case, someone addressed me as "Chief", and I did not immediately correct them. Which led to charges being filed against me. :-)