LOL, thats the spirit bro. Yeah heated debate on a controversial issue's are fine with me but who am I to judge (wait I already did) :)

i prolly coulda made that title longer too....hrm... :D:cool: :rolleyes:

Re: Re: Re: Tolerance
 

so you are saying that you choose to be heterosexual but if you wanted to, you could also choose to be homosexual? thats not right, and if you think about it you know it. your attraction to women is instinctual.....you dont have a choice in what turns you on and what doesnt turn you on. no matter how hard you tried, if youre a true heterosexual there is nothing that could make you choose to prefer men.

most all of us have things that excite us. we get turned on not because we choose to, but because of things within us that we dont control.

my fetish is abs. i find a woman with chisled abs to be totally irresistable. she can be dog butt ugly everywhere else, if she has defined abdominal muscles she is totally irresistable to me. i dont choose to be turned on by a woman's abdominal muscles. its not a choice im making, its just the way it is. with you it may be breasts, or butt, or legs.....it might be red hair, it might even be her feet.

some people get turned on by members of the same sex. they are born that way.

besides, my personal example defeats your theory. my brother and i were raised side by side under an identical environment. we had the same parents, the same house, the same rules, the same bedroom. we spent the same time with both parents. we both camped, we both cleaned house. hes gay, im straight. explain the difference. you cant. i knew he was gay before i knew what being gay meant. he was born that way and none of you will convince me otherwise when i have an entire childhood with him by which to judge.

i dont think you read everything i wrote....

im not attracted to males because i, as do most people, was not pushed into that extreme...sexual tendancies are developed! they have to be if we dont know what a penis is for until sex-ed! there was a woman once that used to orgasm whenever she heard a dog....this was brought on by her being licked in the crotch by a dog when she was younger (and i swear its true, whatever thats means to you)....

and the fact that you and you brother were raised side by side means nothing to me...because both of my brothers and i are very close...were one of the closest set of brothers i this town...people are amazed sometimes....and like i said...my little brother was a hellraiser anyways! i never have been and the oldest went through a phase....you werent ALWAYS by your brother's side...because you had different classes in school, and different friends after school, just because you live together and are close does no mean that you will be anything like him...even when the relatives come to visit different grandparents, aunt, uncles, cousins, etc will play more with one of you...it may not even be on purpose....

but your brother is gay because his life happened to shape that way...things happened to him that didnt happen to you or things happened to you that didnt happen to him...maybe he hit puberty late and liked to have friends that were girls til he was older and when guys were telling him to like girls he was ready for it....you and him couldnt have been exactly alike through out the years...its just not possible...i honestly dont know what your brother was like as a child or what may have happened to him, etc....but i know for a fact that people are as they are because of their upbringing and experiences in their lives...

Marry her.

:D

Done!

:)

Sky-
That does suck. Try what's been suggested and see what happens.

As for Vin, I don't care one way or the other about him. He was cool in Boiler Room, but I never saw F&F. Keep in mind, he didn't write F&F, he just took a job acting in it.

Now then, how would you guys be reacting if XXX had a Mustang as the star, instead of a GTO??? You all loved Gone in 60 Seconds, and that was one of the lamest movies ever made (not as bad as the original, but not stellar, either). I don't go to the movies very much, and I doubt I'll go see this one, but I will rent the DVD when it comes out.

:)

Take care,
~Chris

Nathan:

You step in to protect homosexuals from being lumped into a group called "fags" (which btw wasn't even USED as a slur toward a true homosexual) yet you are quick to describe the majority of women as shallow and lusting after overly muscled, vein bulging men :rolleyes:

I think this is exactly what Mr. 5.0 MEANS by special treatment...I highly doubt you would pay attention if someone on here used the word biatch, or ho, etc....even though those words can be equally as "offensive" to some women. Personally I don't CARE what words/terms other people choose to use, but I get kinda ticked when you join this board and start criticizing the way we talk, when we aren't even insulting another member in any way. I would tell you to either take our forums for what they are, or find another...but I'm outtie anyways so I could really care less WHAT you do.

BTW....Welcome to Mustangworks...

Hey, nice to see yall are having a good ol' boy rally. Can I play.

Fudge packer
Homo
Fag Fagget
pillow biter
fairy
rump ranger
butt pirate
turd burgalar
*** bandit
dick jockey
Damn I think I am all out of faggot slurs



Since the word Fag is acceptable lingo "since presumably none of them are present"

I say anything goes,

YEEHAW!!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mustangbelle306

You step in to protect homosexuals from being lumped into a group called "fags"

i stepped in because i was taken back by the nature of a post that really surprised me, nothing more.


which btw wasn't even USED as a slur toward a true homosexual

??? you are kidding, right? i mean, you cant possibly take that last statement seriously, can you? the moderator has already stated that ridicule was "normal" and acceptable and youre going to suggest now that ridicule is not a slur?


yet you are quick to describe the majority of women as shallow and lusting after overly muscled, vein bulging men

show me where i ever said women were shallow. show me where i ever said the lusted over anything. i related my own personal experience and nothing more.

however, since you are on the subject, i suppose women dont like hardbodies.....i suppose that women love vin diesel for his superior acting abilities.......:rolleyes:


I think this is exactly what Mr. 5.0 MEANS by special treatment...

i think you arent paying attention to the same conversation. mr. 5.0's statements are nothing more than hate talk. i find his statements as a moderator especially deplorable. the role of a moderator on most boards is to be fair to everyone, not justify the ridicule of anyone.


I highly doubt you would pay attention if someone on here used the word biatch, or ho, etc....even though those words can be equally as "offensive" to some women.

it would really depend on the usage. "biatch" and "ho" can both be used jokingly as a term of endearment. if it were hate speak i wouldnt ignore it anymore than any other class. still, there is a bit of a difference. for the most part, the womens cause has arrived. women are not blatently ridiculed for being women, its just not publically acceptable anymore.


but I get kinda ticked when you join this board and start criticizing the way we talk

but you defend open ridicule of people who happen to be different......that interesting.

and i havent criticized the way you talk. initially i found a post surprising and the moderator opened it up into much more.


when we aren't even insulting another member in any way.


lol.....wrong! i just happen to respect the privacy of other members too much to draw their names into it.


I would tell you to either take our forums for what they are, or find another

you are certainly right about that much. i found this forum and i was really impressed with how friendly it seemed. if this is indeed a place of oppressive hate speak then i would definately be better suited elsewhere. i just have not yet determined if it is limited to a couple people or if it is a fair representation of the group as a whole.

i am by no means perfect. in the past i too have made (and defended) improper statements about women, blacks, gays, and <insert group here> and i didnt think anything of them. i have since however, learned the value and ultimate importance of tolerance.

BTW....Welcome to Mustangworks

thank you.

Originally posted by PKRWUD
I never saw F&F. Keep in mind, he didn't write F&F, he just took a job acting in it.

thats another good point! im not into ricers at all but for the same money he made making that film, id glorify them too.

btw, if youre on broadband and interested in a copy of f&f in .avi format it could probably be arranged. :-)

Originally posted by jj_jonathon
but your brother is gay because his life happened to shape that way

lol......<sigh>.....you are right. shame on me for thinking i know my own brother.

Originally posted by StreetPony

Quote:

Originally posted by Mustangbelle306 i think you arent paying attention to the same conversation. mr. 5.0's statements are nothing more than hate talk. i find his statements as a moderator especially deplorable. the role of a moderator on most boards is to be fair to everyone, not justify the ridicule of anyone. I highly doubt you would pay attention if someone on here used the word biatch, or ho, etc....even though those words can be equally as "offensive" to some women. it would really depend on the usage. "biatch" and "ho" can both be used jokingly as a term of endearment. if it were hate speak i wouldnt ignore it anymore than any other class. still, there is a bit of a difference. for the most part, the womens cause has arrived. women are not blatently ridiculed for being women, its just not publically acceptable anymore. lol.....wrong! i just happen to respect the privacy of other members too much to draw their names into it. if this is indeed a place of oppressive hate speak then i would definately be better suited elsewhere. i just have not yet determined if it is limited to a couple people or if it is a fair representation of the group as a whole.

I think whomever was "offended" should stand up for themselves. I started an entire thread when I felt that my fellow members thought my responses were too harsh. So...a 21 year old chick can confront an issue head-on, but other members cannot even cite their discomfort? Mmkay.

But apparently you've already got it all figured out buddy, we're all hate talkers :) Because we used the word FAG, HOMO, etc in a jokingly derogatory manner. I bet the Klan hats are gonna come out too!!!!

I don't dislike gays at all, but I DO dislike them shoving their BS on me by having parades to celebrate that they copulate with members of the same gender. And there aren't "just a few militant ones"as you claim...there are obviously enough to fill a big *** parade! I DO respect their right of free speech to say "I'M GAY!"...but unlike you, I am not a hypocrite. I also indulge the opposite end of the spectrum to have their FREE speech.." I DISLIKE GAYS!" I'm not going to afford rights to SELECT groups and deny them to others while citing "hate" as an excuse. Open speech is exactly that...OPEN...to ANYONE.

And yes, you said that *most* women are attracted to muscles, etc (scroll up). Which I really could care less if its true or not (which it probably is, knowing women today) you're allowed to make somewhat derogatory blanket statements about women, but we can't use "fag" in a joking manner? Ok, sure.

I defend the right of people to like/dislike whomever they please. I do NOT call that hate talk. You like gays? Cool. You don't like gays? Cool. I have my opinions, you have yours. However, that isn't good enough for people such as yourself. You say you are standing up for the rights of gays not to be offended...well I'm a straight person, offended by your allegations that we are HATE MONGERS! :) Where's my protection?? :confused:

If you so vehemently dislike the actions of our members and moderators, why are you still here? :confused: Of course I'm not/can't telling you to go, its certainly not my place to decide that, but if allowing our members to express themselves the way they choose bothers you, yes I do indeed think you will be more welcome elsewhere.

We don't condone violent actions on ANY people, gay, straight, black, white etc. But, we do respect the rights of people to like/dislike anyone they choose to. In fact, the ONLY person who has acted OPPRESSIVELY is...you. You complained about the terms used, in an effort to silence them...sounds pretty oppressive to me! :)

FYI: Actually, feminists that are militant ARE blatantly ridiculed, so you can add that special interest group to your "Protect" list as well :)

Oh boy, I can't wait until an Asian individual joins our site, and boo hoos about the use of RICE as a hurtful, degrading, tear inducing term :rolleyes:

Sad thing is, I could definetely see it happening...

Well I think calling a guy a fag cause he is built and gets all the pussy he can handle. As well as getting rich off of the so called ricer movies, that all of you watched.

Is pathetic, and only a very insecure guy would say **** like that.

BTW: No hard feelings I love all yall BIATCHES!!:D

Damn it Belle its already happened, PKRWUD and an import driver already got into it and the damn ricer called him a racist.

Makes for good reading though

I can agree with that...its just like calling him any other "BAD NAME" *sniff* *cry*. Not saying everyone is jealous of him, but I'm sure that may be the basis for some of the insults.

Excuse me, but I am very offended and hurt by your usage of a female oriented derogatory slur :mad: :D


Edit: Really??? I must have been off complaining about something else because I missed it. Ugh, how typical...I'm actually glad I didn't see it, I probably would have gone apesh!t :D

Originally posted by Mustangbelle306
So...a 21 year old chick can confront an issue head-on, but other members cannot even cite their discomfort? Mmkay.

exactly. it is socially acceptable for you to be a 21 year old chick. its already demonstrated that in this forum it is not socially acceptable to be homosexual therefore why would anybody who was homosexual speak up publically when it would only result in further ridicule?


I don't dislike gays at all

i have not asked you or anyone to like them.


I DO dislike them shoving their BS on me

as do i! i not only "dislike" it, i am offended by it. this isnt about acceptance, its about not going out of your way to be intolerant.


And there aren't "just a few militant ones"as you claim...there are obviously enough to fill a big *** parade!

lol.....if you think that the number of marchers and other extremists is an accurate representation of the true number of homosexuals, you are truly ignorant to the society in which you live. now before you get offended by my usage of the word "ignorant", im using the literal definition and its not to be taken as an insult.


I DO respect their right of free speech to say "I'M GAY!"...but unlike you, I am not a hypocrite.

unless youre making this up so youll have a catchy reply, please show me where i have been a hypocrite. ive said that i made mistakes in the past, and that i learned from them. thats not hypocrisy, thats real life.


I DISLIKE GAYS!" I'm not going to afford rights to SELECT groups and deny them to others while citing "hate" as an excuse. Open speech is exactly that...OPEN...to ANYONE.

you are born with the inalienable right to embrace or to hate anyone that you choose. a lot of straight and even gay men have died to ensure that right for you. however, with those rights come certain responsibilities. its ok for you to hate gays, but is it ok for you to publically express that hatred in a public forum? what about blacks? if you decide tomorrow that you hate blacks is it ok for you to come to this board and express that hatred including the usage of derrogatory terms that are associated with blacks? i mean, if its "ok" to use "fag" to express your ridicule of gays, it is also "ok" to use "******" to express your ridicule of blacks? just where _do_ you draw the line?


And yes, you said that *most* women are attracted to muscles, etc (scroll up)

no......_you_ scroll up because you are pitifully misinformed. i recommend that you read the thread again and find where i ever used the word "most".


you're allowed to make somewhat derogatory blanket statements about women, but we can't use "fag" in a joking manner? Ok, sure.

that response is ridiculous! i have made no derrogatory statements about women.......i love women! i love all women. there is a distinct difference that any reasonable person will know, though i dont expect you to be impartial or fair here.


I defend the right of people to like/dislike whomever they
please.

that in itself is fine. i have personally fought to preserve the right of people to like/dislike whomever they choose but thats not what we're dealing with here.


I do NOT call that hate talk.

it becomes hate talk when derrogatory comments are made.


You say you are standing up for the rights of gays not to be offended

thats not what i said! sheesh, pay attention please.


If you so vehemently dislike the actions of our members and moderators, why are you still here?

so far i dislike the actions of 2 or 3 but i refuse to judge the entire group by the ignorance of a few. im still in the process of forming my opinion of the board as a whole before i determine if i fit in or not.

are you suggesting its ok to be here so long as you agree with everyone but if you find difference with anyone you should run away?


if allowing our members to express themselves the way they choose bothers you, yes I do indeed think you will be more welcome elsewhere.

do you really think as narrowly as you express yourself? do you really not see anything here beyond what you just said or are you just trying to win an argument at any expense?


In fact, the ONLY person who has acted OPPRESSIVELY is...you.

lol.....ok......ignore my last question!



You complained about the terms used, in an effort to silence them...sounds pretty oppressive to me! :)

lol....youre just too tough.


feminists that are militant ARE blatantly ridiculed

what do extremists have to do with anything? we're talking about.....

nevermind. it is painfully obvious that you havent the experience to understand the true ugliness of the actions of certain members. youve obviously lived your life shielded from the things you speak about. congratulations, i envy you actually.

By my comment, I meant that I am extremel young, and I still have the courage to stand up for what I believe in. I have since I joined this board, and although some may think I'm a biatch for it, I'm no coward, and I would STILL act the same whether I liked women instead of men, or if I were black, or some other kind of group that has been "discriminated against". Its the personality of the individual, not who they choose to screw. What if I told you I were bisexual? Now are my "stands" worth more because of it?

I called you a hypocrite because you speak of freedom and acceptance of homosexuals. OK, that's fine. But...you can't pick and choose when and who you feel like being "open"toward. If you are truly accepting of all forms of people, you must also accept those who choose NOT to be accepting. I may not like KKK members and Black Panthers, but I wouldn't infringe on their right to express their POV. You, on the other hand, would.

Shielded? You're the first person to ever say that to me...

Its obvious that you just have the answer for EVERYTHING :) So I concede...you win :) Your condescending comments have succeeded in making me look stupid ;) The usage of "fag" toward someone who probably isn't even gay was a hateful and mean spirited attack on the entire gay community, and I'm glad you've taken the time to try and help the MW community be more loving and tolerant of people we didn't even know we hated.

BTW:

no, its really quite simple. whether they will admit it or not, women dig muscles. i wont say _all_ women do, but at least a large percentage do. before i started working out i was 140 pounds and i couldnt get the time of day from most women. i was insignificant and might as well have been invisible to the fairer sex. since going to the gym and packing on 60 solid pounds its a totally different story. i went from not being able to get a date (i really couldnt get a date), to having a full dating calendar and the only thing thats any different is the amount of muscle mass i had compared to what i have now.

i still laugh when i hear women say they just want a "sensitive" man. bull. :-)


Perhaps, as you have said, my claim is ridiculous, but if I am indeed "pitifully misinformed", it is due to your wording. To me, it does look like you are a.) making assumptions about the desires of the opposite sex, and b.) you associated a physical improvement with attracting women. Which of course it IS your right to, but my point here is that you made generalizations about a group...that just seems like something you'd be against...

This is going to be my last "catchy reply". Unfortunately I get drawn into these back and forth arguments that inevitably lead NOWHERE. You will continue to see nothing wrong with selectively defending free speech based on the individual involved, and I would continue to disagree. And since you started making cute little comments such as "pay attention please" to downgrade my argument (I'm obviously paying attention if I'm posting :confused: ) I am officially done debating with you.

Homosexuality
 

Nathan:

Where to begin?

It's painfully obvious that your brothers homosexuality has deeply affected your attitude toward any negative comments directed at homosexuals. That's understandable and I can sympathize with it. Your utter defensiveness is a bit overblown, but the source explains the reaction.

Your contention that homosexual 'extremists' don't represent all homosexuals has one problem; why don't 'all' homosexuals denounce them? They don't because they are all part of the same 'community' and the extremists are the front men that do the heavy lifting for the 'community'. I've never heard a homosexual say that guys in drag marching in 'Gay Pride' parades don't represent them.
Your hysterical accusations about my living in the bible belt are as foolish as they are wrong. Connecticut is in New England and as a well-traveled man, you should know that. CT is one of the most liberal states in the country. Joe Lieberman, 2000 Vice Presidential candidate is our Senator. Get a few facts straight.

Yes, I'm a Christian, and this seems to instantly enrage many homosexuals and atheists, but that doesn't change facts or realities and your smarmy attempt to invalidate anything I may state about homosexuality as being 'hate speech' is a fraud. This is a favorite tactic of the homo lobby. When an unpleasant fact arises, just scream 'HATE!' loudly and shout down the opponent. You learned well. Attacking a mans faith is another tactic I see you use with aplomb. You even have a friend here who joins in the fun.

Can you say 'hypocrite'? I'll bet you can.

You go ballistic defending homosexuals (which you claim not to be defending) and hysterically accuse me of 'hate speech' then ridicule my religion, babble on about the 'bible belt' and attempt to make me some sort of fanatic who gets his information from some religious group. My! What happened to your vaunted tolerance? Kind of went away when your brothers sexual orientation was chided by a few members on this board, didn't it? The word 'Fag' got you all upset, didn't it? So much for tolerance. To homos and those who support them, tolerance is a one-way street and you've neatly proven that here.

I've had these internet discussions regarding homosexuality before, Nathan. I know all the tactics. You cannot prove that homosexuality is genetic or otherwise natural in any way and we all know it. You can quote 'university studies' until we all fall asleep but nothing can be proven. Science doesn't know why some males prefer other males but childhood experiences, lack of a father or a strong father-figure are a few reasons often given. Your attempt to insist on 'proof' of why homosexuals are attracted to other men is a typical attempt to get us all bogged down in nit-picking arguments where we quote 'studies' back and forth to each other and play 'dueling scientists'. Bottom line: Who knows? You certainly don't. While sodomy may be called 'natural to homosexuals', it isn't and we don't need a university course to know that, do we, Nathan? Really.

Your apparent deep concern over 'slurs' directed at homosexuals is valid but somewhat overdone here. We have a right to an opinion, as do you. 'Fag' doesn't equate to the 'N-word' being used against a black person and the usual homosexual tactic is to pretend that it does and use it as an example of 'hate'. BS and we all know it. Homosexuals routinely call themselves 'Queer'. Your resentments of these terms are out of place but you're welcome to them. If any homosexuals are on this forum, they can respond or not. I haven't seen any, have you? I doubt it's 'fear' that causes the silence. This is an internet board, we're mostly anonymous here. You're the only one getting hysterical and angry, throwing the 'hate' label around and accusing me of all kinds of 'bible-belt' misinformation. Calm down and take a deep breath.

I understand that your brother's homosexuality has heightened your sensitivity to the issue and you are super-sensitivite about perceived slurs against someone you love who is homosexual. That doesn't mean that no one can use a word you don't like to describe homosexuals and homosexual acts on this board. We don't encourage it but unless it's personal, we don't ban it, if not overdone.

You have drawn attention to it, not us. You have made the use of a word or two that upsets you an 'issue' and have used your own intolerance to attack me and others who don't share your sensitivity toward homosexuals. You use the dreaded 'Hate' word to justify your complaints, then accuse me of being a religious fanatic and worse. For a well-traveled, mature guy, you slip into the name-calling mode rather easily when your buttons are pushed, as they were when someone made fun of homosexuals here.

I don't know what to tell you, Nathan. This a Mustang board, this forum is for off-topic issues, as you noted. We say what we want, for the most part. Some think this Vin Diesel guy is gay and they make fun of it, because he's so 'tough' onscreen. You chose to make that a big issue and chide us for doing it. My response got you hysterical and somewhat angry and now we're still at it, with the help of a few others. I suggest that you let it go.

You've stated your opinion, I stated mine, as have many others. I won't get into a flame war here, as some have already accused of doing. Heated debate is not a flame war. Mindless name-calling is a flame war. Your position on homosexuals is clear. You have great sympathy for them and consider them a minority that is in constant danger of being oppressed by words like 'fag'. I think that's absurd and a tactic used by homosexuals to play victim and elevate their choices to some sort of ultra-protected status in society. I refuse to do that.

This site is generally tolerant in the traditional sense. If you don't find it so, I'm sorry but people differ and some issues, like homosexuality are divisive. So be it.

Originally posted by Mustangbelle306
I am barely out of high school

that much is obvious....and before you get bent out of shape, i dont mean that in a bad way. you are young and idealistic and i think thats great. as your life moves on and you continue to grow and mature many things will change. i can promise you that at 26, you wont be the same person you were at 21. i too once thought a lot like you. it is my first hand exposure to the true ugliness of the world that changed me. i honestly hope you never know what i mean by that.


I called you a hypocrite because you speak of freedom and acceptance of homosexuals

<sigh>.....i have never spoken of _acceptance_ of homosexuals. i dont "accept" homosexuality either, how could i ask you to? there is a distinct difference in acceptance and tolerance.


If you are truly accepting of all forms of people, you must also accept those who choose NOT to be accepting.

i dont believe it.........i dont see how you could have possibly missed it. i have FOUGHT with my own two hands to ENSURE that you were free to hate ANYONE that you choose to hate. it isnt about your right to hate, it is about the responsibilities that come with those rights.


I may not like KKK members and Black Panthers, but I wouldn't infringe on their right to express their POV. You, on the other hand, would.

you are wrong. they also have the right to hate anyone they choose but that hatred cannot be expressed irresponsibly. free speech is one thing, but there is no free speech without responsibility. they have an inalienable right to hate anyone that they choose to hate but does that make it ok for them to express their hatred in a public school for example? can they hold a klan ralley in front of first graders and call it "free speech"? c'mon....


Shielded? You're the first person to ever say that to me...

dont feel bad, and dont take offense to that as its not what i intended. most people _are_ shielded to the true ugliness of the world. the only shame in it is when they attempt to speak from authority on the same subjects.



Its obvious that you just have the answer for EVERYTHING :) So I concede...you win

i can assure you that nobody wins. :-(


Perhaps, as you have said, my claim is ridiculous


see this key section of my post. ill quote it for you:
"i wont say _all_ women do, but at least a large percentage do."



but it really does look like you are a.) making assumptions about the desires of the opposite sex

no, i related my personal experiences. youre reaching pretty deep to try and make a point but you know i didnt mean anything negative by any of it.


you associated a physical improvement with attracting women

so youre suggesting that physical improvements _dont_ attract women? if not, what does? physical attraction is the very basis of human nature. please tell me what im missing here.


My point here is that you made generalizations about a group...that just seems like something you'd be against...

generalizations of a group (stereotyping) is not the same thing as hate speak. hate speak _hurts_ people.

think about that....it _hurts_ people.

i sincerely wish you the best as you continue to develop and mature. whatever beliefs you chose to have, i hope you at least consider all alternatives and the impact they have on others around you before you draw final conclusions by which to live your life.

Yeah, I can't even remember the idiots name, but he went off on me being racist because I used the terms Rice and Ricer. The best part of all was that this moron's avatar was an Uncle Ben's logo! Talk about being a hypocrite. LOL.

:)

Take care,
~Chris

Hey guys! Who really gives a flying ****? I mean, really?

Lets see 70 post in just a couple of days, I dont understand why but obviously people do give a ****. Just look at all these essay answers.

I am too lazy for that,:D
Later,

lol Good morning, Looks like some of you have been very busy.... hummmmmmm lets tally up the score...


lol @PKRWUD wait till ya see my new antena ball!

Re: Homosexuality
 

Originally posted by Mr 5 0

It's painfully obvious that your brothers homosexuality has deeply affected your attitude toward any negative comments directed at homosexuals.

while i use my personal experience as a source of firsthand data, my stance against intolerance is consistent with any group of oppressed people.


why don't 'all' homosexuals denounce them?

they dont denounce them because most of them just want to be left alone to their own private lives. most homosexuals are either in the closet, or they dont wish to publicize their own activities by denouncing the activities of others. the extremists you see trying to cram their agenda down your throat are a small minority indeed.


Yes, I'm a Christian, and this seems to instantly enrage many homosexuals and atheists

it doesnt enrage me at all. while i choose to be ahthiest, i think that if your religion brings you comfort in your life then its GREAT. but just like with the gay activists, i dont want religious activists trying to push their religion onto me. i dont want to be "saved" anymore than you want a homosexual activist trying to force his beliefs on you. while im not suggesting that you were trying to do that, i wanted to make that part clear. i have nothing against religion. it brings comfort to many people so its great....for them.


When an unpleasant fact arises, just scream 'HATE!' loudly and shout down the opponent.

i know its easy to dismiss what i have said to you so easily but im curious......so just how far _can_ you go without it being hate? where do you draw the line?


Attacking a mans faith is another tactic I see you use with aplomb.

show me anywhere i have attacked your faith???? i question any scientific study thats based in religious doctrine, but thats not attacking your faith.


Can you say 'hypocrite'? I'll bet you can.

i ask you to show me where i have been a hypocrite, or retract that statement.


You go ballistic defending homosexuals (which you claim not to be defending) and hysterically accuse me

<sigh>....please show me any hysteria or angry rants. please back up your statment with a firm example of what you claim. i have been just as calm and polite as you have been.


and attempt to make me some sort of fanatic who gets his information from some religious group. My! What happened to your vaunted tolerance?

??? you claim to have studied homosexuality so i am simply asking for an example of your courseware. if you cant quote an example of your courseware thats fine but dont attempt to turn it into something else to side track my request. it is my _belief_ based upon your statements that you have no experience with impartial, scientific data by which to study homosexuality. surely you dont believe that religious doctrine would be impartial on a topic such as homosexuality?


To homos and those who support them, tolerance is a one-way street and you've neatly proven that here.

that is absolutely not true. tolerance is a two way street but there is no such thing as free speech without responsibility!


Your attempt to insist on 'proof' of why homosexuals are attracted to other men is a typical attempt to get us all bogged down in nit-picking arguments

what???? i havent asked for proof of why homosexuals are attracted to other men. i know why homosexuals are attracted to other men. i have asked for proof (indirectly through requesting your courseware) that you have studied homosexuality but thats not the same thing. please remain on track here.


Bottom line: Who knows?

any homosexual knows......and i know because of my personal experiences with my brother. ask _any_ homosexual if it is a choice and show me _one_ that says he "chose" to be gay. they all say they were born gay....are they all liars?


While sodomy may be called 'natural to homosexuals', it isn't and we don't need a university course to know that, do we, Nathan? Really.

lol.....man on man is _quite_ natural for homosexuals. they get turned on by other men. it isnt a "choice", its the way they are. could you chose to be turned on about anything that didnt naturally turn you on? i think not.


We have a right to an opinion, as do you.

<sigh>....of course you do! but having an opinion is not the same thing as expressing it irresponsibly. as i asked another, would it be ok for the kkk to ralley in front of 1st graders? would that be simply a matter of free speech?


'Fag' doesn't equate to the 'N-word' being used against a black person and the usual homosexual tactic is to pretend that it does and use it as an example of 'hate'.

i strongly disagree with you. it is a derrogatory term used to hurt a socially oppressed group of people. it is indeed one in the same.
the church will teach you its different because homosexuals are "sinners" but thanks to a separation of church and state, as citizens of this country we arent governed by religious doctrine.


Homosexuals routinely call themselves 'Queer'

and??? many blacks regularly refer to one another as "******". that doesnt make it right for you or me to use that same word in a derrogatory manner.


If any homosexuals are on this forum, they can respond or not. I haven't seen any, have you?

yes. since this thread has begun i have heard from a handful of homosexuals. i havent quoted anything because the "email" excuse is a weak one but ill mention it now since you asked directly.


I doubt it's 'fear' that causes the silence.

im sorry, youre wrong. they dont want to be ridiculed further in a forum where the forum moderator has already publically stated that ridicule is ok and acceptable. their privacy is more important than an internet message board so they say nothing. i can understand why.


Calm down and take a deep breath.

im perfectly calm. im a bit taken back by your statements (particularly since as a moderator you are looked at as the voice of reason), but im perfectly calm.


have used your own intolerance to attack me and others

dude......you think ive "attacked" you? thats being a bit dramatic is it not? should i just agree with everything so that none of you are called to task when you say something i disagree with?


For a well-traveled, mature guy, you slip into the name-calling mode rather easily when your buttons are pushed,

??????? where have i called you any names? where have i called ANYONE "names"?


Some think this Vin Diesel guy is gay and they make fun of it, because he's so 'tough' onscreen.

??? what does being gay have to do with being tough???? the gym i attend, like most gyms, also has homosexual members and i can assure you that no one would question whether or not theyre "tough". some are policemen, some are soldiers, some are bouncers, and one in particular is a chef and even he is about twice the size of most pro football players. there are gay wrestlers, gay boxers, gay martial artists that are just as tough as any "real man" you can name. the assumption and belief that homosexual males are all feminine is a clear demonstration of the overall level of ignorance concerning them.



You've stated your opinion, I stated mine, as have many others. I won't get into a flame war here

i never considered this debate to be a flame war and in fact im quite impressed that no one has accused me (yet) of being an in the closet gay myself with a hidden agenda. we have core differences but id still shake your hand and say "nice to meet you".

Street pony has mr 5.0 on the ropes:D

Go in for the kill:o

Could you two possibly take this somewhere else?
Maybe:
1- over emails
2- thru PM's
3- go grab a cup of coffee somewhere
:rolleyes:

lol.....now _that_ is pretty bad and takes hypersensitivity to a new extreme.

Post a pic!

:)

Take care,
~Chris

Yeah, he was just trying to start crap. I found it kinda funny later on.

:)

Take care,
~Chris

Pic too big, working on it

Re: Re: Homosexuality
 

...you aren't gay...so you can't rely on what your brother tells you or implies...you cant know if one is born gay if you arent....do you think you were born heterosexual? i dont think so...why was there a larger percentage of homosexuals back when it was acceptable then? hundreds of years ago when it was a preferred lifestyle for so many...these men wouldnt say they were born gay, simply that they prefer men...explain to me why today's society tends not to find larger women attractive? they used to be, because society made them attractive....now we all search for that supermodel look....so anyone who happens to like the look of a larger woman should be considered "born into it" as well? because you can't say that just one sexual preference could born unto (not that you did)....so if we are all born into lives and make small decisions along the way, then how can you be an atheist?...shouldn't you believe that there is no fate destined upon people?

and i never said i know your brother better than you do...but as a person you need to be able to accept the fact that no matter what your brother thinks he feels or knows, its all about his surroundings...children in rundown neighborhoods tend to be punks, children from rish neighborhoods tend to be stuck up, children from religious homes will tend to accpect their parents beliefs and questions anyone elses because you trust your parents, children from homes with an abusive parent tend to not voice themselves very well....of course every scenario has exceptions where special circumstances have arisen at one point or another that can reshape a person beyond the scope of the house...your brother could be considered that...

YOU FORGOT!!
 

:p

Re: Re: Re: Homosexuality
 

Originally posted by jj_jonathon
you can't rely on what your brother tells you or implies

especially when what he tells me directly parallels what i already knew. again, i should have realized that you would know him better than i.


why was there a larger percentage of homosexuals back when it was acceptable then? hundreds of years ago when it was a preferred lifestyle for so many

lol......there are just as many today, only now they have to hide from people who ridicule them.


...these men wouldnt say they were born gay, simply that they prefer men

not only can you speak for my brother, not only can you speak for gays everywhere, now you can speak for men who have been dead for centuries?


...explain to me why today's society tends not to find larger women attractive? they used to be, because society made them attractive....now we all search for that supermodel look

lol.....you cant possibly be trying to compare a choice in fads with core sexual preference. im just not into big women but i would prefer a 600 pound woman to the best looking man you could find. sorry, your theorys just dont hold up.


if we are all born into lives and make small decisions along the way, then how can you be an atheist?...shouldn't you believe that there is no fate destined upon people?

what? i am born with 2 legs but that does not mean it is my "fate". you are confusing "fate" with human nature. as an athiest i dont believe in fate or fairy tales but that has nothing to do with my natural attraction for women.


and i never said i know your brother better than you do

yes, you did. you say i am wrong, that he was not born gay, and that he is gay because he chooses to be. that to me says you know him better than i. it also implies he is lying to me about being born gay.


children in rundown neighborhoods tend to be punks, children from rish neighborhoods tend to be stuck up, children from religious homes will tend to accpect their parents beliefs and questions anyone elses because you trust your parents, children from homes with an abusive parent tend to not voice themselves very well

but that has nothing to do with sexual attraction. your examples are based in behavior. homosexuality is a natural tendency for some.

anyway......<sigh>......i conceed to your vast knowledge.

Street Pony, isn't North Carolina SOUTH of Conneticut? I guess you must be confused about some georgraphy. Having North in the name of your state doesn't mean that everything else is South of it.

Is Vin Diesel gay? Who cares? Why do the big discussion just because your brother is? My old man is an A**hole. Was he born that way? Evidence says yes.(he always has been one, and showed the tendancy at a young age) Does that mean there is an a*hole gene? Its not his fault.

Get over it. Was just a comment, made in fun. And quit picking on Belle before you get beat down. Won't be a hate crime, even though it will be BECAUSE you are being a jerk.

Just let it go guys. Your not gonna change the world.
http://www.davotek.btinternet.co.uk/...1positions.gif

Email it to me!

pkrwuds@pacbell.net

:)

Take care,
~Chris

Originally posted by The Deuce
Street Pony, isn't North Carolina SOUTH of Conneticut?

yup. and north carolina sucks too.

And quit picking on Belle before you get beat down. Won't be a hate crime, even though it will be BECAUSE you are being a jerk.

lol.....dont bother trying to be an online superstar with me. i understand you want brownie points from her by pretending to rush to her aid but she is quite capable of handling herself just fine without your pitiful rescue attempt.

Re: Homosexuality
 

dude i'm a atheist and many of my friends are too. also i have many religious friends of many different religions and we all get along great. i have been torn in to by SOME not all religious folks because i'm atheist but hey thats there opinion and they can say all they want about it. i just nod my head and agree with them that they may be right, but i must learn on my know what the answers in life are. the only time people freak out about others beliefs or opinions is when they are closed minded. the only time that i have ever seen anyone bother another is when one side starts calling down ones beliefs of religion or atheistism. and before anyone says that i am intolerant i say this is what i believe --'i may not agree with what you say or believe in, but i will defend to my death your right to say it.'. if you don't like it i'm sorry to have bothered you, but thats life and you will hear many more things you don't like.

murray

Re: Re: Re: Re: Homosexuality
 

Originally posted by StreetPony

especially when what he tells me directly parallels what i already knew. again, i should have realized that you would know him better than i.

of course you would share most of the same views, you are brothers...and im not saying i know your brother better than you do...find where i actually said that i know your brother better than you...just because your brother tells you something, doesnt make it true...trust me on this one...i as well do have 2 close brothers....and they can sincerely believe as much as they want, but sometimesthey are still not right...doesnt mean i probably wouldnt back them up though...


lol......there are just as many today, only now they have to hide from people who ridicule them.

thats true that they have to, but i was accounting for those estimated numbers...


not only can you speak for my brother, not only can you speak for gays everywhere, now you can speak for men who have been dead for centuries?

im speaking on my behalf of what i believe...ive studied history and french history...and the way these people thought was obviously different from today...they would not be "blaming or excusing" their habits, merely saying that they prefer it...nowadays homosexuality is frowned upon so they need to change their "blaming or excusing" on something beyond their control to try and limit the amount of reaction to them...


lol.....you cant possibly be trying to compare a choice in fads with core sexual preference. im just not into big women but i would prefer a 600 pound woman to the best looking man you could find. sorry, your theorys just dont hold up.

its not a fad, its a sexual preference...the majority prefers a slimmer woman to a larger woman, and a larger woman to a man (well put btw)


what? i am born with 2 legs but that does not mean it is my "fate". you are confusing "fate" with human nature.

how can you actually sit there and compare apples with oranges? when you are born and are homosexual you dont have a physical "H" imprinted on your forehead (if you are born homosexual)..of course you are going to have two legs when you are born, but you are not definetly going to enjoy the company of men, of course you will have two eyes when you are born, but you are not definetly going to enjoy the game of croquet...a baby doesnt understand croquet...it will chew on the mallet....so a baby doesnt understand sexual preference...how are you born with something and dont understand it? that should mean that you have developed that skill or learned/experienced something new that you like....i cant remember before the age of 6, most dont remember past 4....because most human beings arent developed enough to remember at that age....te only things they remember are things that have been constantly pressed on by his/her parents...repetition is the only way to make a baby learn something, its like teaching a dog a trick...they arent as smart as us...so i dont understand how if babies are basically unintelligent how they could realize that they were just born into a world where they like males more than females? the only things that affect you when you are young are diseases...you can be born with downs syndrome....not with homosexual tendencies....


yes, you did. you say i am wrong, that he was not born gay, and that he is gay because he chooses to be. that to me says you know him better than i. it also implies he is lying to me about being born gay.

that doesnt mean i know what his favorite color is, etc...im using your brother as a generality...i never said he was lying or that he chose to be homosexual..he may believe it with a passion taht he was born gay because he always remembers liking men...but memories get clogged as you get older...you remember less and less back, so he could be confused and both of you could have forgetten something, or just convinced yourselves of it years ago...youd be surprised what people can lock away and actually make themselves forget in stressful situations, and especially if you have served in the military and seen horrific scenes like you discussed earlier, then how can you be 100% sure about your childhood when you are trying to block out mental pictures that get in the way?


but that has nothing to do with sexual attraction. your examples are based in behavior. homosexuality is a natural tendency for some.

and hating people can be a natural tendency for some, look at those children over in the middle east who absolutely hate the united states...they think they were born to hate us....

but sexual activity is a behavior....its all in the same category, you cannot discuss homosexuality as being something you are born into without saying that whose who practice beastiality (as gross as THAT is) werent born into that preference....

Have to add my 2 cents here (****, might as well add to my post count since there are so many posts here The way I see it, those fag comments were meant in the same way that a comedian would mean them in a stand-up routine. So are you going to get all worked up every time you see a comedian make fun of stump jumpers on TV, StreetPony? I'd say save your energy for the folks that actually are hatemongers. I'm half Japanese but I don't go telling folks here that they are bigots because they use the word Jap referring to cars, because I know it's not their intent to insult or hurt me. :rolleyes:

Yeah it is. ;) ;) ;)

Take care,
~Chris

Brownie points? Umm, yeah that's what I'm looking for.:rolleyes:

Hey, I think its time to step it up a notch.;)

StreetPony:
http://www.sparklet.com/~royce/trams/reminder.jpg

Now that's offensive.:D

lol......_you_ are just to tough! :-)

and real mature.

Damn Duece, I am offended by your lack of originality. That pic is old as hell.

Now here is a good one

http://temp6.netfirms.com/prz_f_off.jpg

My sincerest apologies Dark. Your pic is quite choice. Why didn't we think of this four pages ago?:confused:

LOVE the license plate on that Buick!!! Too cool!

:)

Take care,
~Chris

thats a good one dark 5.0:D

More
 

Nathan:

while i use my personal experience as a source of firsthand data, my stance against intolerance is consistent with any group of oppressed people.

Then your brother's homosexuality has no part in your strong objection to the word 'fag'? I rather doubt that's true, but I'll accept it just to move along here.

the extremists you see trying to cram their agenda down your throat are a small minority indeed.

Unfortunately for all those shy homosexuals, the extremists seem to represent the homosexual 'community' to many straight folks. They really should tell them to cool it. Wonder why they don't?

i choose to be ahthiest

Which was instantly apparent when you went ballistic about my being 'religious', even though I never mentioned religion, morality or anything connected to Christianity. You give it away, Nathan. I've seen this before.

i know its easy to dismiss what i have said to you so easily but im curious......so just how far _can_ you go without it being hate? where do you draw the line?

Nathan, you used the word 'hate', not I. I simply pointed out that this is a common tactic used by homosexuals to kill any discussions that are negative toward them. It's a debate-killer and you must be aware of that. I doubt this is the first time you've engaged in this type of discussion, on the net or in person.

Ridicule through the use of some otherwise tame lable such as 'fag' is certainly not 'hate'. That homosexuals choose to call it that does not make it so. I do not like being called intolerant but because you call me that does not render your judgement as actual truth, it's just your opinion.

True 'hate', to me, is wanting someone dead, which is why the homosexual's overuse of the word has rendered it almost meaningless when a tame little word like 'fag' is portrayed as 'hate'. No sensible person is buying that concept. It's simply overkill. Worked the first few thousand times, but now no one but over-sensitive homosexuals and their advocates see it that way. Oh, and the media, of course. To them, anything remotely negative aimed at a homosexual is also considered 'hate'. BS in a bucket.

show me anywhere i have attacked your faith???? i question any scientific study thats based in religious doctrine, but thats not attacking your faith.

Rather coy of you - but I'll play. When you sneeringly dismiss my opinions of homosexuality with statements such as: i seriously doubt you know anything about homosexuals other than what theyve told you to think and believe in church....... then you attempt to claim that my opinions come from what is, in your opinion, ignorance - church teaching - and so, you attack my faith, but never mind. In the interest of brevity and eventually concluding this discussion, I'll accept your premise that you never actually attacked my faith...just derided it's teachings and my knowledge of homosexuality. How's that?

i ask you to show me where i have been a hypocrite, or retract that statement.

You base your entire argument on the position that the use of the word 'fag' is 'intolerant' yet when others attempt to defend it as a legitimate (negative) opinion, you call it 'hate speech' and dismiss the defense out of hand, based on your personal judgement.

That's intolerance for others POV and yet - you proclaim your tolerance! You make judgements about who is 'oppressed' (homos) and then you make a judgement about what is 'hate speech' (fag) and from there you take it upon yourself to use your personal judgements to criticize and lecture us about 'tolerance'. That's hypocrisy.

There will be no retractions. You're as intolerant of folks who occasionally make some mild ridicule of homosexuality as we are of those who may practice it while posing as macho. That's hypocrisy on stilts - whether you accept it or not. Your assertations of sensitivity, decency and whatever other attributes you awarded yourself are your opinion and not shared by all, Nathan. Good intentions don't count here in the real world.

<sigh>....please show me any hysteria or angry rants. please back up your statment with a firm example of what you claim. i have been just as calm and polite as you have been

Please stop sighing, Nathan. Try to stay with us here. Your whole post was one long rant, but, to be fair, so are mine. Hysteria is when you take a little word like 'fag' and turn it into an long-winded 'issue' about so-called tolerance. That's hysteria....much ado about very little.

you claim to have studied homosexuality so i am simply asking for an example of your courseware. if you cant quote an example of your courseware thats fine but dont attempt to turn it into something else to side track my request. it is my _belief_ based upon your statements that you have no experience with impartial, scientific data by which to study homosexuality. surely you dont believe that religious doctrine would be impartial on a topic such as homosexuality?

Quote:i find it appauling that you would attempt to associate nambla with typical homosexuals. it is all too typical of the southern bible belt propoganda machine.

The 'bible belt propaganda machine'? Would that be anything like the homosexual propaganda machine that always denies anything to do with NAMBLA while they never denounce them forcefully? Just wondering.

Your assumption that university 'studies' are totally impartial is mistaken. The fact that you constantly refer to them and smugly accord them total impartiality is your choice but not a proof of anything but that you believe what you want to believe and use other's like-minded 'studies' to bolster your belief. It's circular but you already know that so let's move on, shall we?

tolerance is a two way street but there is no such thing as free speech without responsibility!

A few people calling a 'suspected' homosexual man who has generally portrayed tough-guys, as Vin Diesel has, a 'fag' is not irresponsible. This isn't a national TV show or a newspaper, Nathan. It's simply a Mustang messageboard, nothing more. I seriously doubt 'ol Vin would care much what he was called here.

i have asked for proof (indirectly through requesting your courseware) that you have studied homosexuality but thats not the same thing. please remain on track here.

I'm quite on track and that is what seems to frustrate you.

I didn't take any university courses on homosexuality and my brother isn't a homosexual. That you have and yours is does not impart some sort of superior knowledge to you on the subject. We're making generalizations here, Nathan. You assume way too much. I've read much literature on the subject (no, not in those much-derided church publications) and I have a reasonable understanding of the subject of homosexuality. Having a course credit or two in a very ambiguous field of study doesn't accord you the 'expert' status that you seem to award yourself by virtue of the fact that you constantly refer to these studies. Your brother's homosexuality may actually color your perceptions of what's 'hate speech' and what's simple joking at another's expense, which is human nature, like it or not.

lol.....man on man is _quite_ natural for homosexuals. they get turned on by other men. it isnt a "choice", its the way they are. could you chose to be turned on about anything that didnt naturally turn you on? i think not.

Then pedophiles 'can't help' being attracted to children, either? Especially the homosexuals? Hmmmm. Sure we want to go there, Nathan? Where is that elusive 'gay gene' anyway? lol.

<sigh>....of course you do! but having an opinion is not the same thing as expressing it irresponsibly. as i asked another, would it be ok for the kkk to ralley in front of 1st graders? would that be simply a matter of free speech?

This discussion seems to tire you out Nathan with all that sighing. Maybe you need a nap.

Equating the KKK holding a rally 'in front of 1st graders' to calling a suspected homosexual a 'fag' on an internet Mustang messageboard is quite a stretch, Nathan, even for you. Try again. Never mind, don't, it's a lame argument. I love the way 'Nazi's' are always brought in these conversations in some form. I thought we had moved on to the 'Taliban' when smearing people these days. Keep up, Nathan.

i strongly disagree with you. it (fag) is a derrogatory term used to hurt a socially oppressed group of people. it is indeed one in the same.... the church will teach you its different because homosexuals are "sinners" but thanks to a separation of church and state, as citizens of this country we arent governed by religious doctrine.

Well, now. "A socially oppressed group of people"? Is this an attempt at humor? What a crock, Nathan and you should know it. Who do you think you're discussing this with, a junior-high school kid? Homosexuals are far, far from 'oppressed'. They have laws protecting them from every possible form of discrimination possible and they are quick to avail themselves of those laws as they have a right to do.

The median income of homosexual men is usually quite high. They are 'out' everywhere you look, especially in the media (TV, movies, music). Homosexuals are oppressed? Tell that to a black person sitting in a ghetto. Using 'oppressed' when referring to homosexuals is an insult to those here and elsewher who are truly oppressed.

That's simply your skewed view, based on gay propaganda and your sympathy for your brother's homosexuality talking... or sheer ignorance. Hopefully, the former. Dragging in the church views on homosexuality is a straw man that you knock down quite well. (clap clap). I've never mentioned the church (what church, anyway?) or even touched on the morality issue so why do you keep wanting to go there? So you can attack it? Don't bother. While I have moral views on the subject, they are not relevant here, as you well know, so please stop trying to inject them into the discussion. It's cheesy.

many blacks regularly refer to one another as "******". that doesnt make it right for you or me to use that same word in a derrogatory manner.

Blacks who use the 'N-word' to each other but object to a non-black using it are galloping hypocrites, as are homosexuals that throw all the words for 'gay' around between themselves but want to file a lawsuit if a straight person uses it. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-C-Y Nathan, pure and simple. You can't have it both ways, even though many try.

yes. since this thread has begun i have heard from a handful of homosexuals. i havent quoted anything because the "email" excuse is a weak one but ill mention it now since you asked directly.

they dont want to be ridiculed further in a forum where the forum moderator has already publically stated that ridicule is ok and acceptable. their privacy is more important than an internet message board so they say nothing. i can understand why.

Are they Mustang Works members? If so, I would appreciate hearing from them via a PM or e-mail. Then, I can not only validate your claim but respond to the complaints, if there are any. If they are non-members giving you 'moral' support, that doesn't count for much with me. Like-minded people naturally support each other.

im a bit taken back by your statements (particularly since as a moderator you are looked at as the voice of reason), but im perfectly calm.

Good, and yes, I am a voice of reason but not everyone likes my reasoning.

dude......you think ive "attacked" you? thats being a bit dramatic is it not? should i just agree with everything so that none of you are called to task when you say something i disagree with?

Right back at you...dude. My disagreements with your philosophy regarding the use of words are as valid as your disagreements with me. It's form that matters. You've given as much as you've received and have no basis for any claims to being silenced. Not that you would, of course. Your 'calling me to task' is intellectually valid and I'm responding to you as specifically as I can. I could have just told you to lighten up and get over it, but I'm taking the time and effort to give you a complete reply and while I'm at it, challenge many of your assumptions and empty allegations in the process, something you're probably not used to hearing. You know, this may actually be good for you Nathan. Maybe you'll learn something.

where have i called you any names? where have i called ANYONE "names"?

'Intolerant' comes to mind.

what does being gay have to do with being tough? ... the assumption and belief that homosexual males are all feminine is a clear demonstration of the overall level of ignorance concerning them.

Then someone should tell all the millions of homosexuals doing the high voice, feminine gestures and generally acting like girls in men's clothing (and sometimes in girls clothing) to knock it off. That guy who plays 'gay' on the TV show 'Will & Grace' should be told that he doesn't represent homosexuals and he's ignorant. I wonder how he gets away with it? You would think that the homosexual organizations would be all over this by now. All I hear is silence. Maybe that's because they approve of the portrayal he presents? Think about that a moment before calling everyone who sees 'gay people' as men acting effeminate, 'ignorant', no matter how many push-ups they can do in the gym.

To attempt to claim that the majority of homosexual men are big, tough, macho types simply flies in the face of almost everyones actual experience with homosexuals. Your flawed perceptions of homos as 'Just like us in every way - except who they love' is right out of the homosexual debating handbook (if there was such a thing). I've seen it before and it's a lame argument because it clashes with everyday reality.

I never considered this debate to be a flame war and in fact im quite impressed that no one has accused me (yet) of being an in the closet gay myself with a hidden agenda. we have core differences but id still shake your hand and say "nice to meet you".

And I'm quite impressed that you haven't accused me of being a 'latent' homosexual. Good for both of us.

Yes, we certainly do have core differences but I hold no animus toward you for any disagreement. That said, I don't know where else to go with this thread, Nathan.

I don't have time to continually debate the same issue over and over and deconstructing each others posts is interesting but ultimately gets rather boring.

Mustang Works maintains a high level of quality and has for the seven years it's been on the web. We have a (deserved) good reputation. That we allow 'fag' and a few other words to be used about homosexuals is a fact and while we don't allow heavy profanity, racism or personal attacks, everyone is offended by something and we have to draw lines on both sides; both for and against.

Some here believe we're way too restrictive on what we allow - so you simply can't please everyone. Obviously, we didn't please you. I'm sorry if the use of a few words that characterize homosexuals in a somewhat negative way annoys or surprises you but we will not change the policy and while it's been an interesting discussion, it's getting really old. I suggest we both retire from the debate - but in order to not be accused of being dictatorial I'll leave the thread open awhile for any final words you may wish to add, but please, let's not continue the same discussion. Been there, done that.

If you wish to make a final statement and have it uncontested, as long as it's civil and not personal, it will stand unanswered by me (I cannot vouch for other members).

Beyond that, I have nothing more to add, Nathan.

Nice meeting you, too. Drop by again sometime, hopefully under friendiler or at least less intense circumstances.