Posted on 05/04/2005 5:59:04 AM PDT by OESY
Lets just say that it's like watching "Island of the Lost Hunks"
Call me shallow, but they sure are purty ;)
I've never seen one minute of South Park, so the term "SP Conservative" is lost on me, and I don't give a rip. I found nothing vulgar in Laura's remarks. It was a ROAST, for grown ups, and her husband loved it.
There's nothing wrong with looking!
Because they are the acts of consensual adults and do not interfere with rights of others. Therefore, murder is a crime -- it interferes with the rights of others. Pornography should not be a crime. Assuming the models are not forced, everything involved is a consensual transaction for God, not the state to judge.
Adultery is actually a tough call for me. Marriage is essentially a contract and, unless the adulterer has permission of his or her spouse, the adultery is a breaking of the contract without one party's consent.
Abortion comes down to when you think the fetus becomes a child with a right to life. Personally, I think it's viability -- I'm not going to argue why here -- so I'm pro-choice before than and pro-life afterward. However, there are decent arguments stating that a fetus gets the right to live earlier than that and those who believe it should oppose abortion.
Euthanasia is a tough call, too. On the one hand, out-and-out suicide is usually insanity and therefore not the act of a consenting adult. OTOH, many people have risked and sacrificed their lives to save others. We don't call them insane -- we call them heroes. There may be a point where one must step back and say, "You are suffering so much that, if you want to end your life, you should be allowed to," but I haven't found a point I'm comfortable with yet.
But the overriding point is that God gave us free will. It seems to me, in that light, that to be compelled to virtue counts little, if any to our credit. Those acts that are consensual ought to be a matter between God and the individual. Indeed, we are imperfect and can easily have misinterpreted God's word; therefore to interfere in such a manner -- even if we think we are acting on a moral basis -- runs the risk of crossing God's will.
You're right. I don't see it either as being something about 'horse masterbation.' That didn't even enter my mind.
That is what I understood the joke as. However, it seems that the unending indignity and pontificating about this little harmless joke is really got people unfocused.
On top of that, a lot of people from Texas have a vulgar sense of humor but are still as moral or religious as they come.
President Bush loved it so much, he said her middle name was Leno.
Well, mary, there MUST be something wrong with you, too!
I would simply ask, would it have been appropriate, say, twenty or forty years ago? Is it sufficient for the GOP to remain a few steps behind the Dems in the drift to a coarser society, even if they are now occupying a zone that used to be considered inappropriate? Does that contribute to the incremental creep - or, as you say, is it inconsequential towards such?
I agree that you can't blame the Bush Admin for MSM guests.
What is with the masturbation stuff? If Laura Bush had said the word "masturbation", then I might be in agreement with the folks who said the First Lady had crossed a line. However, she simply made a joke about how her husband couldn't tell the difference between a male horse and a female cow. As a child, I would have gotten the joke. It's the folks with their minds in the gutter who have such a problem with the joke.
For me this is rather enlightening about the minds of some who would equate milk with the stuff on Monica Lewinsky's blue dress. Gutter minds. Laura Bush is probably aghast that these folks have taken her joke in such a way. I would be. And, yes, I would tell such a joke. In front of my innocent children. They would get it. And they would "get" the humor. My teenagers might see some perversion possibilities. That is the way I was as a teenager. Then I grew up.
Thank you for the ping and that great post. I'm a "stick in the mud" for old-fashioned values, esspecially where the kiddies are concerned, but there's a time to laugh, and time to flip the channel.
Off-color humor are as old as humanity. I'll bet the first cave man joke involved fire and flatulence.
>>With a screen name of by melancholy,Rule 1218 states "you cannot post on a thread about humor"<<
With a screen name of woofie, rule 1218A states "You cannot post on a thread about animals.
Not only that, but the woman from Texas who IS vulgar is that old bag GWB knocked out of the Governorship: Ann Richard/Richards.
I think it has more to do with being very in touch with nature via ranching, horses, livestock etc.
Animals don't hold back, they do it all, right there in front of you. So being dainty and 'oohhhh myyy' is sorta silly when you're out there workin' around it all day.
Hrmpt,
Right now in my aviary, the all I need is 'boom boom chucka chucka' music playing cuz it's spring and the parakeets are frisky!
Yes, it was appropriate and funny when Nancy Reagan poked fun at Ronald Reagan in 1982, more than 20 years ago.
I'll address the rest of your comment after lunch. Bye for now.
Ya know, I think you're on to something with that statement.
I'd really like to know why it's different.
Did he? LOL - I hadn;t read or heard that.
Your #484:
THAT was eloquent.
Thank you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.