[Taxman]

"You can't post it enough."!!!!!!!!!

Absolutely! And I have another thought: Why don't we use the word "homosexual" as opposed to "gay" on this forum?

Seems to me that "gay" hardly describes how sick "homosexuals" really are?

Our use of the language to communicate thoughts and ideas suffers greatly when it is "toned down" to aviod offending offensive people!

IMHO, we ought to be about offending offensive people in the hope that they will quit being so damn offensive!

[JesseHousman]

I never use the word "gay" to describe a homosexual degenerate pervert.

The word "gay" still has meaning for me, but always in the proper sense.

To create a new race of people and call them "gays" is so repugnant that descriptive words fail me. Their agenda moves forward with the help of the courts, congress, media and, unfortunately, (dis) organized religion.

[gunnedah]

Taxman,you may be correct I guess I was just being PC. I guess some think being nice and passive are one iand the same. It is almost like Americans have become squeamish when addressing those with criminal behavior. We have stood by and allowed any and all type behavior to become socially acceptable.

[John O]

Absolutely! And I have another thought: Why don't we use the word "homo" as opposed to "gay" on this forum?

The problem with 'homosexual' is that it lends a small amount of credibility to the idea that they were born that way.

I prefer Same-sex Attraction Disorder Sufferer (SADs) as it is more accurate and still describes what their problem is. Or the old fall back, sodomites.