Skip to comments.
Future Clash (A 'South Park conservative'/libertarian counterculture emerges)
The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette ^
| June 23, 2005
| Bradley R. Gitz
Posted on 06/23/2005 9:51:17 AM PDT by quidnunc
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 201-213 next last
Comment #81 Removed by Moderator
To: LizardQueen
There's too many fruitcakes in the LP right now for it to be a viable party.Sadly, you may be right. I still read the LP's publications from time to time, and sometimes I swear I'm reading Chomsky when the subject of the war is raised.
82
posted on
06/23/2005 11:44:35 AM PDT
by
bassmaner
(Let's take the word "liberal" back from the commies!!)
Comment #83 Removed by Moderator
To: quidnunc
Trey Parker and Matt Stone are conservatives. Actually, Trey is a staunch libertarian.
84
posted on
06/23/2005 11:47:54 AM PDT
by
snowrip
("Going to war without the French is like going hunting without your lawnmower.)
To: bassmaner; All
Why I'll never vote for the LP is that it seems that they wanted Kerry to win... If the LP went after Bush and Kerry who knows...
85
posted on
06/23/2005 11:48:17 AM PDT
by
KevinDavis
(the space/future belongs to the eagles, the earth/past to the groundhogs)
To: lugsoul
Which part of that definition applies to those who don't have sex with persons of the same-sex, but also don't view it as 'perverted'?
That's the point I'm making. That group of people, as you defined above, doesn't exist. Simply, if you don't view the homosexual act as perverted then you are a homosexual. Whether or not you have actually engaged in the homosexual act is irrelevant.
86
posted on
06/23/2005 11:48:31 AM PDT
by
Mulch
(tm)
To: Mulch
That's the point I'm making. That group of people, as you defined above, doesn't exist. Simply, if you don't view the homosexual act as perverted then you are a homosexual. Whether or not you have actually engaged in the homosexual act is irrelevant. So, if we ever do reach a society that has no concept or understanding of "homosexuality", every there would, by your definition (which I'd still like to see a link for, or for you to use another word than definition), be a homosexual?
A child, who has no concept of sex, yet alone homosexuality, and therefore does not view the homosexual act as perverted, is therefore homosexual?
By your "definition", every baby is therefore born into this world homosexual. I have to say, that concept disturbs me, and I reject your definition.
Please work harder at your definition ...
87
posted on
06/23/2005 11:51:56 AM PDT
by
bobhoskins
(potentially deadly poster)
To: Mulch
That's the point I'm making. That group of people, as you defined above, doesn't exist. Simply, if you don't view the homosexual act as perverted then you are a homosexual. Whether or not you have actually engaged in the homosexual act is irrelevant. And someone engaged in homosexual acts, who thinks to himself "Gosh, this is perverted." is NOT a homosexual?
88
posted on
06/23/2005 11:53:13 AM PDT
by
bobhoskins
(potentially deadly poster)
To: Mulch
"That group of people, as you defined above, doesn't exist."
Well, you made your statement in an exchange with someone who fits exactly within the group you claim doesn't exist. Are you calling him a liar?
There are many people who neither engage in nor desire to engage in sexual activity with members of the same sex, but who also do not view same-sex activity as 'perverted.' By what contorted logic are those persons 'homosexuals?'
89
posted on
06/23/2005 11:53:18 AM PDT
by
lugsoul
("She talks and she laughs." - Tom DeLay)
To: USAFJeeper
This is really starting to confuse me.
I *thought* that the Liberal v. Conservative thing was about 'collective', or govt, solutions v. 'individual' solutions.
I thought 'conservative' meant "for minimal govt intrustion".
If so, then 'Social Conservatives' aren't political conservatives.
Libertarians would actually be 'radical conservatives'.
What has happened to the meanings of these words?
To: Mulch
Hmmm:
- Is 'anal sex' between a man and a woman, 'perverted'?
- Is oral sex perverted?
- Is 'S & M' perverted?
And even so -- where does the idea that 'perversion' between consenting adults should be legislated against?
I believe that 'S & M' is perverted. But I don't think we should change the law to say that 'S & M' practitioners can't get married . . .
To: bobhoskins
Sexuality, in human development, is influenced both genetically and socially. Homosexuals are born with a curtain proclivities, similar to the way an alcoholic may have a weakness. But as a society, we don't encourage alcoholism and we shouldn't encourage homosexuality. Like alcoholism, homosexuality is a destructive behavior for the individual and society as a whole.
92
posted on
06/23/2005 12:02:24 PM PDT
by
Mulch
(tm)
To: Mulch
The question wasn't "Do you care..?". The question was "do you think the act is perverted..?"
You want to try to answer the question again?
When you put it that way, yes, it IS perverted. It is literally a perversion of the reproductive act. But, by the same standard, so is ANY sexual act that has no chance of resulting in pregnancy. or any sex for that matter. Sex with a condom is a perversion as well, though not on the same scale, but by the same definition.
And as others said, I think America has bigger problems to worry about than where a few Americans stick their dick at night, so long as all parties are consenting adults of sound mind.
93
posted on
06/23/2005 12:07:12 PM PDT
by
Alexander Rubin
(You make my heart glad by building thus, as if Rome is to be eternal.)
To: Mulch
Fantastic, that's more of the typpe argument you should stick with, rather than making up definitions out of whole cloth for words that have pretty clear definitions already.
However, now you equate homosexuality with alcoholism, and if you're willing to PUNISH one you must be willing to PUNISH another the same way.
So, you may want to revise a bit. I don't think the alcoholism comparison QUITE works.
To: bpjam
Good afternoon.
You should be a pollster, bpjam.
Who says we only get two choices?
Michael Frazier
95
posted on
06/23/2005 12:08:58 PM PDT
by
brazzaville
(No surrender,no retreat. Well, maybe retreat's ok)
To: Mulch; All
So basically you want the Government to monitor people's behavior then??? You want the Government to go into people's bedrooms then??
96
posted on
06/23/2005 12:09:30 PM PDT
by
KevinDavis
(the space/future belongs to the eagles, the earth/past to the groundhogs)
To: Alexander Rubin
And as others said, I think America has bigger problems to worry about than where a few Americans stick their dick at night, so long as all parties are consenting adults of sound mind. Sound mind?
No, I don't think we should worry about where Democrats stick theirs, either.
:-D
To: Alexander Rubin
But, by the same standard, so is ANY sexual act that has no chance of resulting in pregnancy. or any sex for that matter. Old people sex is gross.
To: Mulch
That group of people, as you defined above, doesn't exist.You really couldn't be more wrong. I don't give a damn who is screwing whom in my neighbor's home. I myself am not a homosexual and I don't care about what homosexuals do in their bedrooms.
To: Bella_Bru; All
Basically I don't care what happends in the bedroom between conseting adults... Hell if there is an orgy going I don't care.. What I don't want is the Government monitoring our bedrooms period...
100
posted on
06/23/2005 12:17:59 PM PDT
by
KevinDavis
(the space/future belongs to the eagles, the earth/past to the groundhogs)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 201-213 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson