[saradippity]

I am trying to figure you out and I think it may be that you are more "progressive" than many of us are. I am responding to a post wherein you responded to chemcat.

It seems you attribute "hate" to those who prefer to look at history,facts and consequences when making decisions.Others,and I believe you may be one of the "others",look only to the here and now,and the effects of the decision made on that basis as the only criteria for the decision.It seems to me that your view places feelings first,and the other puts thinking in the first position.

Did you ever read Thomas Sowell's "A Conflict In Visions"? I think it explains pretty clearly what happens when people with different visions exchange views.

[Jorge]

I am trying to figure you out and I think it may be that you are more "progressive" than many of us are.

"Progressive" is of course the nice term for liberal. LOL.
I consider myself generally conservative.
I'm not sure my disagreements with others on this issue come down to a conservative vs liberal thing, but you are welcome to present any examples that you think show otherwise.

It seems you attribute "hate" to those who prefer to look at history,facts and consequences when making decisions.

I'm open to hearing out anyone who disagrees with me based on "history, facts and consequences".
That's reasonable.

What I attribute "hate" to are posts that are hateful.
They not only don't include any of the substance you mention, but don't articulate any consistant or coherant position on anything.

[Polycarp]

Just ignore Jorge. He's one of the few token professional pro-homo apologists here on FR. I think they let him stay because he's not quite as offensive as, say, your typical NAMBLA member.