|From: Rod Swift
|To: Jim Staal
|Sub: Staal stinks a little 2/
|Date: 03 Apr 97 02:52:30
EID:3dfc 22831680
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3342aaee
>>> Continued from previous message
[...]
The mother and Wade "moved in together" in September 1992.
From that time, with the exception of a two-week period, the
mother and Wade have lived in "a lesbian relationship."
According to the mother, the relationship involves hugging and
kissing, patting "on the bottom," sleeping in the same bed,
"fondling," and "oral sex." The mother testified that she loves
Wade and that they "have a lifetime commitment."
At the time of the juvenile court hearing, the mother, the
child, and Wade were living in a two-bedroom apartment with
"Evelyn," another lesbian. "At one time," the child's bed was in
the room where the mother and Wade slept, having "sex in the same
bed." At one point in her testimony, however, when asked "how
many times did you do it when the child was sleeping in the same
bedroom," the mother responded, "None."
[...]
___--------------------------------------------------------------------
* OLX 2.1 TD * Satanic: Anything a fundie Christian doesn't like
___ Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rod "...I leave you to ponder your errors, Jimson, and how to
stop making such wild, unproven claims of yours" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * I ain't broke, but I'm badly bent
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ed Mills
|Sub: 1 The List
|Date: 03 Apr 97 02:56:32
EID:bcdb 22831700
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3342abe0
* On 29-03-97 at 18:18, ED MILLS wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "1 The List" in echo Holysmoke:
EM> EM> I'm seeing more and more of these little reminders that geezerhood
EM> EM> is now on the visible horizon for us baby-boomers. Sometimes twice
a
EM> EM> fucking day, lately. :-O
EM> RS> But edweird, isn't it comforting that the freethought and
EM> RS> atheistic ideals and philosophies is generational and doesn't
EM> RS> require passage between generations by *indoctrination*.
EM> I just hope the next generation and the one after that aren't lost
EM> in a war of attrition. Your youthful articulateness and perception
EM> isn't the norm - at least in this neck of the woods - I fear.
Be afraid for the generation now in the schools. The religious
right are targetting schools with many methods -- taking over
school boards, encouraging student activism and conversion
attempts to convert to Christianity (legal), encouraging students
to become active in bashing non-Christian students (illegal) --
etc, etc.
This is the real problem. About 1/4 of all reported gay bashings
now occur on high school and university campuses, the majority of
bashers are now male and average an age of 22.
Most gay bashers are known to the victims -- college or school
attendees that they know.
EM> RS> Yes! Atheism and free thinking comes from within! It's the
EM> RS> natural thing for humans! :) :)
EM> I wonder what single aberration started all this shit. A caveman
EM> with advanced syphilis, maybe?
I wonder if he got the clap from that slut Mary, who got it from
some guy in the middle of the night who said he was the Holy
Spirit, but it was so dark she couldn't tell the difference
between mortal penis, and supernatural penis...
Rod "...ho ho ho!" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * Land rights for gay whales!
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ed Mills
|Sub: Fundy Frolics 1/3
|Date: 03 Apr 97 02:57:34
EID:2424 22831720
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3342ac1e
* On 29-03-97 at 18:23, ED MILLS wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Fundy Frolics 1/3" in echo Holysmoke:
EM> RS> Oh yes! I love performing abortions too. If you partially birth
EM> RS> them, the foetuses scream as you pierce the backs of their neck.
EM> RS> I even suck out the brains by siphoning it out with my mouth.
EM> RS> It allows one to blow it back in and hence scramble the brains
EM> RS> before finally removing them!
EM> Apparently I'm going to have to work a little harder to keep
EM> the title of "most disgusting motherfucker on the echo." :-)
Yes! :) :)
Rod "...the kid gloves are off with Jimson. He's about to feel
the nasty lashings I can give with my fingers only! :)" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * Train stations are where trains stop, so workstations...
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ed Mills
|Sub: The IRCops are comin
|Date: 03 Apr 97 02:58:36
EID:b3e7 22831740
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3342ac5c
* On 29-03-97 at 22:28, ED MILLS wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "The IRCops are comin" in echo Holysmoke:
EM> What was your URL again..?
The FUCK THE SKULL OF JESUS pics will be uploaded sometime soon
and put online at http://www.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/~rod/ftsoj.html
Rod "...and remember, fuck skull early, fuck skull often!" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * Famous graffitti: Schroedinger may have been here
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Exemplifying examples
|Date: 03 Apr 97 03:01:38
EID:f07c 22831820
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3342ad12
* On 29-03-97 at 00:19, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Exemplifying examples" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> kw> part of it.
KY> RS> RichS> Why shouldn't gays want to be treated like
KY> RS> RichS> everyone else?
KY> RodS> Because, Richard, Ken wants to give heterosexuals
KY> RodS> special rights -- the special rights to beat gays,
KY> RodS> kill gays, discriminate against gays.
KY> I do? Please, show me where I said that gays should be beaten?
You said that local communities should be allowed to pass
majoritarian based laws. This would, presumably, include
amendments to assault laws to allow assaults against gays, no?
KY> No one should commit violence against another just because
KY> they do not approve of the other person's beliefs.
I'm sorry, but you subscribed to the system of government in
where minorities could be clearly abused. Gay bashing could be
legalised. Heck, if you want, we could legalise the murdering of
gays, if it makes you happy -- after all, you believe the
majority should be given the right to change any non-Federal law
they like!!!
Do you see how silly you were to subscribe to that moronic
notion?
KY> I am not for discrimination, I am for equality. Ever hear of it?
Not from your lips. You preach discrimination. You clearly
claimed that the majority should have the right to pass and amend
any law it deems fit to do so -- this would naturally include any
law which harms the person or life of a minority too, right?
Rod "...didn't you learn from Hitler's regime?" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Easter is cancelled this year. They've found the body.
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Jim Staal
|Sub: Around the World in.. 2/
|Date: 04 Apr 97 18:04:00
EID:e88e 22849080
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344d210
* On 01-04-97 at 23:14, JIM STAAL wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Around the World in.. 2/" in echo Holysmoke:
JS> JS> JS> You can't fire someone for being gay.
JS> JS> KS> You are a fucking liar.
JS> JS> JS> What country do you live in? There _are_ laws against
JS> JS> JS> discrimination, you know.
JS> JS> KS> You are a moron.
JS> JS> And you? How would you describe yourself?
JS> RS> You fail to understand that Karl called you a moron because you
JS> RS> failed to understand that in 41 states in the United States, it
JS> RS> is QUITE legal to fire someone due to their sexual orientation,
JS> RS> and the person has no right nor claim of job discrimination.
JS> and would you list some evidence/examples of where and when it actually
JS> happens?
Oh, sure!
Shahar v Bowers
Englund v Dallas
That should be a start. Want more? How about the Cracker Barrel
chain of restaurants and their official "sack gays" policy? The
Louisville, KY, KFC managerial firing?
Rod "...oh, yes, I can cite more.
* OLX 2.1 TD * When talking nonsense try not to be serious
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Debunked Again!
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:41:02
EID:227f 22855520
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bbbe
* On 31-03-97 at 13:30, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Debunked Again!" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> KY> And since some have switched to being heterosexual, it has
KY> KY> indeed been "repaired."
KY> RS> Evidence?
KY> Find a former gay, and you will have your evidence. There
KY> are a lot of them out there.
So far, the religious right seems to only be able to parade
around Michael Johnston. Surely if there were so many, they
could at least find a number of them to parade around.
Of course, we all know that the ex-gays eventually return to
their innate homosexuality -- like the founders of Exodus
Ministries, eh?
KY> KY> You made yourself who you are,
KY> RS> Evidence?
KY> You deny this?
No, I asked you for the evidence of your claims. I made no claim
whatsoever to the validity of the statement.
KY> RS> ...it seems on further questioning on these individuals, they
KY> RS> do express that their sexual orientation has always been innate
KY> RS> (as they confuse the initial question to be "sexual activity"
KY> RS> not "orientation").
KY> RS> I do wish you'd read what I write. On *closer clinical
KY> RS> examination and questioning they say they CHOOSE SEXUAL ACTIVITY
KY> RS> and NOT their ORIENTATION*.
KY> I feel the same way. I get tired of having to explain that what
KY> people say I said, wasn't what I said.
You said gays choose. When proven wrong you said that some gays may
choose consciously, the rest subconsciously. Then when proved
wrong you claimed that they mostly chose, but they didn't even
know it. Then when you were proved wrong, you claimed that it
was because they were insecure. Then when THAT was proven wrong,
you trotted out the claim that gays are "confused".
The only confused person around here, Ken, is you -- not gays.
We're quite happy, open, accepting, and comfortable about our
sexual orientation. The only reason why you percieve that gays
would be confused is because *you* being gay, although straight
yourself, would be confusing to *you*.
KY> As far as what you just wrote, their sexual orientation has
KY> always been inate, that they know of. As I have said, one
KY> does not always realize why they do things or why they make
KY> the choices they do.
If it were a choice, it would be mutable by treatment. It has
never been the case. You are wrong.
Sexual orientation is innate and immutable. You are the one in
error and contradiction to the factual nature of sexual
orientation.
KY> Whenever I question gays on sexual preference, I usually
KY> can eventually get to a reason for them being gay.
Really? Maybe you should start questioning them about sexual
orientation, not preference.
KY> KY> Perhaps it was due to some trauma
KY> RS> Yet *ANOTHER* theory everyone. Now gays are gay because of traumas.
KY> RS> THEORY 1: Gays actively choose.
KY> RS> THEORY 2: Gays consciously choose.
KY> RS> THEORY 3: Gays subconsciously choose.
KY> RS> THEORY 4: Trauma causes gays to choose.
KY> RS> Evidence, Ken?
KY> Try all of the above is correct including what I say about many
KY> gays being that way because of insecurities. Some conasciously
KY> choose, some subconsciously choose. And almost all gays appear
KY> to have turned to it because of trauma, insecurities, or some
KY> event that triggered this in their life.
This is not evidence, this is a restatement of your claims.
Do you have ANY evidence for any of the above crap? If so, cite
your references. If not, I suggest you leave the echo, and
apologise on the way out for the horrendous defamation and
personal hurt that you cause by stating such bold lies in front
of at least two gay people who *KNOW* different to you.
Of course, being a fucking gutless cunt, I expect you won't do
it, asswipe.
KY> RS> Why, groups like Exodus International, Ken. Why aren't you out
KY> RS> condemning them for killing young gay youths?
KY> I would, if I knew of this happening.
I provided quotes from the leader of one of the ministries that
claims to "cure" gays, urging a participant to kill himself
rather than leave their cult.
But typically, you fucking-well ignored it. Like all the
evidence that disproves your pile-of-shit lies, Ken. You claim
you don't know of this happening, then quote the actual quotation!
KY> RS> How about these words from one of these murderous cults of your
God?
KY> RS> "I would rather you commit suicide than have you leave
KY> RS> Love In Action wanting to return to the gay lifestyle. In
KY> RS> a physical death you could still have a spiritual
KY> RS> resurrection; whereas, returning to homosexuality you are
KY> RS> yielding yourself to a spiritual death from which there is
KY> RS> no recovery"
KY> RS> -- The Final Indoctrination from John Smid, Director,
KY> RS> Love In Action (LIA), San Rafael's "ex-gay" clan.
KY> I actually feel sorry for anyone that would say such a thing.
No you fucking do not. You would like to see as many gay people
gotten rid of so that your belief system can never be questioned
by people who would accuse you of the hostile atrocities you'd
commit. Of course, you would show no compassion to the victims
of such heinous Christian liars, because you yourself are
peddling the same sorts of lies.
No more fucking respect from me, you cretinous, lying, deceptive,
hateful, moronic, idiotic Christian. I was willing to offer you
the chance to provide your evidence, so we could gently correct
your erred beliefs on this issue, but since you refuse to show
any respect for me, my partner, or anyone else with divergent
views, you will get no more respect from me.
Bad fucking day to you, asshole.
Rod "...until you recant your lies, you can expect your stay here
on this echo to be made as unpleasant as possible." Swift
* OLX 2.1 TD * A man without religion is like a fish without a bicycle
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: All
|Sub: Debunked Again!
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:41:04
EID:5079 22855520
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bbc0
* On 31-03-97 at 13:30, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Debunked Again!" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> KY> And since some have switched to being heterosexual, it has
KY> KY> indeed been "repaired."
KY> RS> Evidence?
KY> Find a former gay, and you will have your evidence. There
KY> are a lot of them out there.
So far, the religious right seems to only be able to parade
around Michael Johnston. Surely if there were so many, they
could at least find a number of them to parade around.
Of course, we all know that the ex-gays eventually return to
their innate homosexuality -- like the founders of Exodus
Ministries, eh?
KY> KY> You made yourself who you are,
KY> RS> Evidence?
KY> You deny this?
No, I asked you for the evidence of your claims. I made no claim
whatsoever to the validity of the statement.
KY> RS> ...it seems on further questioning on these individuals, they
KY> RS> do express that their sexual orientation has always been innate
KY> RS> (as they confuse the initial question to be "sexual activity"
KY> RS> not "orientation").
KY> RS> I do wish you'd read what I write. On *closer clinical
KY> RS> examination and questioning they say they CHOOSE SEXUAL ACTIVITY
KY> RS> and NOT their ORIENTATION*.
KY> I feel the same way. I get tired of having to explain that what
KY> people say I said, wasn't what I said.
You said gays choose. When proven wrong you said that some gays may
choose consciously, the rest subconsciously. Then when proved
wrong you claimed that they mostly chose, but they didn't even
know it. Then when you were proved wrong, you claimed that it
was because they were insecure. Then when THAT was proven wrong,
you trotted out the claim that gays are "confused".
The only confused person around here, Ken, is you -- not gays.
We're quite happy, open, accepting, and comfortable about our
sexual orientation. The only reason why you percieve that gays
would be confused is because *you* being gay, although straight
yourself, would be confusing to *you*.
KY> As far as what you just wrote, their sexual orientation has
KY> always been inate, that they know of. As I have said, one
KY> does not always realize why they do things or why they make
KY> the choices they do.
If it were a choice, it would be mutable by treatment. It has
never been the case. You are wrong.
Sexual orientation is innate and immutable. You are the one in
error and contradiction to the factual nature of sexual
orientation.
KY> Whenever I question gays on sexual preference, I usually
KY> can eventually get to a reason for them being gay.
Really? Maybe you should start questioning them about sexual
orientation, not preference.
KY> KY> Perhaps it was due to some trauma
KY> RS> Yet *ANOTHER* theory everyone. Now gays are gay because of traumas.
KY> RS> THEORY 1: Gays actively choose.
KY> RS> THEORY 2: Gays consciously choose.
KY> RS> THEORY 3: Gays subconsciously choose.
KY> RS> THEORY 4: Trauma causes gays to choose.
KY> RS> Evidence, Ken?
KY> Try all of the above is correct including what I say about many
KY> gays being that way because of insecurities. Some conasciously
KY> choose, some subconsciously choose. And almost all gays appear
KY> to have turned to it because of trauma, insecurities, or some
KY> event that triggered this in their life.
This is not evidence, this is a restatement of your claims.
Do you have ANY evidence for any of the above crap? If so, cite
your references. If not, I suggest you leave the echo, and
apologise on the way out for the horrendous defamation and
personal hurt that you cause by stating such bold lies in front
of at least two gay people who *KNOW* different to you.
Of course, being a fucking gutless cunt, I expect you won't do
it, asswipe.
KY> RS> Why, groups like Exodus International, Ken. Why aren't you out
KY> RS> condemning them for killing young gay youths?
KY> I would, if I knew of this happening.
I provided quotes from the leader of one of the ministries that
claims to "cure" gays, urging a participant to kill himself
rather than leave their cult.
But typically, you fucking-well ignored it. Like all the
evidence that disproves your pile-of-shit lies, Ken. You claim
you don't know of this happening, then quote the actual quotation!
KY> RS> How about these words from one of these murderous cults of your
God?
KY> RS> "I would rather you commit suicide than have you leave
KY> RS> Love In Action wanting to return to the gay lifestyle. In
KY> RS> a physical death you could still have a spiritual
KY> RS> resurrection; whereas, returning to homosexuality you are
KY> RS> yielding yourself to a spiritual death from which there is
KY> RS> no recovery"
KY> RS> -- The Final Indoctrination from John Smid, Director,
KY> RS> Love In Action (LIA), San Rafael's "ex-gay" clan.
KY> I actually feel sorry for anyone that would say such a thing.
No you fucking do not. You would like to see as many gay people
gotten rid of so that your belief system can never be questioned
by people who would accuse you of the hostile atrocities you'd
commit. Of course, you would show no compassion to the victims
of such heinous Christian liars, because you yourself are
peddling the same sorts of lies.
No more fucking respect from me, you cretinous, lying, deceptive,
hateful, moronic, idiotic Christian. I was willing to offer you
the chance to provide your evidence, so we could gently correct
your erred beliefs on this issue, but since you refuse to show
any respect for me, my partner, or anyone else with divergent
views, you will get no more respect from me.
Bad fucking day to you, asshole.
Rod "...until you recant your lies, you can expect your stay here
on this echo to be made as unpleasant as possible." Swift
* OLX 2.1 TD * A man without religion is like a fish without a bicycle
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Debunked Again! 2/
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:47:06
EID:f9c5 228555e0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bd2a
* On 31-03-97 at 13:49, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Debunked Again!" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> Now, why do you suppose so many of the homeless and of the
KY> suicidal are gay or bisexual? Could it be out of
KY> desperation?
No, actually. The studies by the US government clearly show that
the majority of homeless people are homeless due to intolerant
parents like you throwing your children out on the streets rather
than accepting them for who they are.
Every time you spread your lies that it's a choice, someone,
somewhere, is going to believe it. And when they do, and it
happens in their life that their child is gay, they will throw
them out on the streets.
When children (yes, some are as young as 14 or 15) are thrown out
of home, destitute, onto the streets, many because of their
sexual orientation -- it's not their sexual orientation that is
the cause of depression but the hate of their family.
The fact that they are unloved, shunned, thrown out, told that
they are hated by any number of deities, and left to rot on the
street is what makes them kill themselves.
Then again, they don't need to be on the street to do that. It's
conservatively estimated that more than 2500 gay youths per year
commit suicide in the US because their lives are made miserable
inside the home, inside schools, etc.
That's 7 a day. Just under 50 a week.
Do you see the blood on your hands yet?
Aren't you accountable for your lies yet?
Since when is ostracising gay youths "family values"?
Oh, that's right. Gays don't belong in families. They belong in
hell. Who cares if they commit suicide, eh?
Rod "...that's the whole fucking Christian attitude, and secular
people with decency aren't going to stand back and let you
cretins say that lives of gays, atheists, people of other faiths,
etc, etc are *worthless* anymore and not worthy of compassion" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * The *Constitution* is the Contract with America!
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: All
|Sub: Debunked Again! 2/
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:47:08
EID:a468 228555e0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bd2c
* On 31-03-97 at 13:49, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Debunked Again!" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> Now, why do you suppose so many of the homeless and of the
KY> suicidal are gay or bisexual? Could it be out of
KY> desperation?
No, actually. The studies by the US government clearly show that
the majority of homeless people are homeless due to intolerant
parents like you throwing your children out on the streets rather
than accepting them for who they are.
Every time you spread your lies that it's a choice, someone,
somewhere, is going to believe it. And when they do, and it
happens in their life that their child is gay, they will throw
them out on the streets.
When children (yes, some are as young as 14 or 15) are thrown out
of home, destitute, onto the streets, many because of their
sexual orientation -- it's not their sexual orientation that is
the cause of depression but the hate of their family.
The fact that they are unloved, shunned, thrown out, told that
they are hated by any number of deities, and left to rot on the
street is what makes them kill themselves.
Then again, they don't need to be on the street to do that. It's
conservatively estimated that more than 2500 gay youths per year
commit suicide in the US because their lives are made miserable
inside the home, inside schools, etc.
That's 7 a day. Just under 50 a week.
Do you see the blood on your hands yet?
Aren't you accountable for your lies yet?
Since when is ostracising gay youths "family values"?
Oh, that's right. Gays don't belong in families. They belong in
hell. Who cares if they commit suicide, eh?
Rod "...that's the whole fucking Christian attitude, and secular
people with decency aren't going to stand back and let you
cretins say that lives of gays, atheists, people of other faiths,
etc, etc are *worthless* anymore and not worthy of compassion" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * The *Constitution* is the Contract with America!
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Re: Freedom of choice
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:46:10
EID:b86b 228555c0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bcf2
* On 31-03-97 at 13:54, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Re: Freedom of choice" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> KY> No, because that is forcing it.
KY> RS> So you admit that "cured gays" are still not heterosexual? I
KY> RS> thought you admitted that they are *COMPLETELY* cured, including
KY> RS> their UNDERLYING ATTRACTIONS AND DESIRES -- something that
KY> RS> science says CANNOT BE CHANGED.
KY> No, I admit that a gay marrying a heterosexual is not going
KY> to cure him.
I never said that. And how fucking typical of your disingenuous
lies, Ken Young, you filthy and disgusting cunt. The quotes that
you left in even tell that, although you tried to remove your
statement about not allowing your children to marry a "cured"
gay. Note -- MARRYING a CURED GAY, not marrying to CURE a gay
person.
I clearly pointed out that you wouldn't allow one of your
children to marry a person who had been "cured" by one of those
sick Christian-based brain butchers. This statement reveals your
own disbelief in their efficacy.
Care to explain why you believe gay "curing" doesn't actually
happen, or why you fear your child marrying a "cured" gay?
KY> But gays can be cured.
Evidence for this claim? Or are you just going to repeat this
lie over and over and over again and expect the decent people
around here to believe it.
If you expect that, you have lost. They will no longer believe
your lies, as they have been exposed.
KY> A marriage just isn't going to do it, however.
I never said that. You made the claim you would not allow a son
or daughter, if you had the choice, of marrying a "cured gay".
KY> RS> So, when it comes to a "cured gay" marrying your daughter, you
KY> RS> still fear them still holding gay feelings. Even YOU know that
KY> RS> they aren't cured.
KY> They can be cured, but my daughter could not do it for
KY> them. It is up to them.
It's nice to know you don't even believe your own rhetoric on
"curing gays". I clearly asked you if you would allow your
daughter to marry a person that had already been "cured", not
required "curing".
You are a filthy liar, Ken Young. You are misquoting,
misrepresenting piece of slime, and I want everyone to know it.
Rod "...I expect an apology, now, for your reprehensible and
immoral lies" Swift.
* OLX 2.1 TD * Dyslexic agnostics don't know whether there is a dog!
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: All
|Sub: Re: Freedom of choice
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:46:12
EID:3de8 228555c0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bcf4
* On 31-03-97 at 13:54, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Re: Freedom of choice" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> KY> No, because that is forcing it.
KY> RS> So you admit that "cured gays" are still not heterosexual? I
KY> RS> thought you admitted that they are *COMPLETELY* cured, including
KY> RS> their UNDERLYING ATTRACTIONS AND DESIRES -- something that
KY> RS> science says CANNOT BE CHANGED.
KY> No, I admit that a gay marrying a heterosexual is not going
KY> to cure him.
I never said that. And how fucking typical of your disingenuous
lies, Ken Young, you filthy and disgusting cunt. The quotes that
you left in even tell that, although you tried to remove your
statement about not allowing your children to marry a "cured"
gay. Note -- MARRYING a CURED GAY, not marrying to CURE a gay
person.
I clearly pointed out that you wouldn't allow one of your
children to marry a person who had been "cured" by one of those
sick Christian-based brain butchers. This statement reveals your
own disbelief in their efficacy.
Care to explain why you believe gay "curing" doesn't actually
happen, or why you fear your child marrying a "cured" gay?
KY> But gays can be cured.
Evidence for this claim? Or are you just going to repeat this
lie over and over and over again and expect the decent people
around here to believe it.
If you expect that, you have lost. They will no longer believe
your lies, as they have been exposed.
KY> A marriage just isn't going to do it, however.
I never said that. You made the claim you would not allow a son
or daughter, if you had the choice, of marrying a "cured gay".
KY> RS> So, when it comes to a "cured gay" marrying your daughter, you
KY> RS> still fear them still holding gay feelings. Even YOU know that
KY> RS> they aren't cured.
KY> They can be cured, but my daughter could not do it for
KY> them. It is up to them.
It's nice to know you don't even believe your own rhetoric on
"curing gays". I clearly asked you if you would allow your
daughter to marry a person that had already been "cured", not
required "curing".
You are a filthy liar, Ken Young. You are misquoting,
misrepresenting piece of slime, and I want everyone to know it.
Rod "...I expect an apology, now, for your reprehensible and
immoral lies" Swift.
* OLX 2.1 TD * Dyslexic agnostics don't know whether there is a dog!
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Driving Mr. Daisy
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:46:14
EID:74fa 228555c0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bcf6
* On 31-03-97 at 17:35, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Driving Mr. Daisy" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> KY> Ah, but I never said that gays are inferior.
KY> RS> No. You just believe they should have INFERIOR CITIZENSHIP and
KY> RS> RIGHTS -- as opposed to, say, EQUALITY.
KY> Nope.. I said that is for the people to decide.
KY> And BTW, that would include gays.
Sorry, Ken, but you clearly stated that you are all for removing
the rights of gays by plebiscite. Your claim that it is for "the
people to decide" does not contradict my claim as to the ends you
seek to achieve by giving the issue to "the people to decide".
KY> KY> Plus, what does the color of one's skin have to do
KY> KY> with their morality?
KY> RS> What does one's sexual orientation have to do with their
KY> RS> morality, either?
KY> Must you really ask?
Yes, you lying, cretinous shit. Now, answer the fucking question.
KY> Any sexual orientation except for heterosexuality is
KY> immoral. Why? One reason is because those homosexual or
KY> bisexual feelings lead to the actions that go along with
KY> them.
This is not a reason why sexual orientations may be immoral.
Please describe *how* they are immoral. Simply claiming that
gays will be gay is not a reason why.
If you claim it is because the acts are immoral, please explain
how the *ACTS* are immoral, with specific evidence.
KY> And if those feelings are never acted on, then that
KY> would mean the person is suppressing is feelings, which
KY> also wouldn't be good.
Ken admits gays being celibate, and ignoring their innate
feelings, are also immoral.
Nice one Ken. The above paragraph clearly admits that gays have
unchangeable, immute feelings. You are a lying fuckwit, exposed
for all to see.
KY> RS> You've yet to provide one scrap of evidence to show how gays
KY> RS> "hurt" families. I've shown heaps that show how families hurt gays.
KY> Well, I have to see that one either. But as far as gays hurting
KY> families, it is more gay rights activists, than gays themselves.
Really? How?
KY> One good example would be the promotion of homosexuality in the
KY> American public schools.
Promotion? Where? How? How is it a promotion? Is it a case of
homosexuals being accurately portrayed as humans, of full civil
rights, and equality?
There is much evidence to support the notion that homosexuality
is specifically denigrated in schools!
KY> RS> If it wasn't for the opposition within the gay community to
KY> RS> NAMBLA, you would have a lot of problems. NAMBLA is attempting
KY> RS> very hard to be seen as part of the mainstream. They attempt to
KY> RS> do this by attaching their pedophilia agenda to the equal rights
KY> RS> claims of gay people.
KY> NAMBLA part of the mainstream?!? You must be kidding.. :)
KY> They definitely do have problems, if they believe that be
KY> achieved any time soon.
KY> But homosexuals aren't considered part of the mainstream,
KY> are they? So, how can they be used to make NAMBLA appear
KY> as such?
No, you are a moronic idiot. Nice removal of quote from context.
NAMBLA has been trying to attach to the mainstream gay civil
rights movement, you moron.
KY> But yes, I will agree that NAMBLA does use the gays quite a
KY> bit. Most wouldn't have anything to do with NAMBLA's
KY> agenda.
No, dear Ken. VIRTUALLY ALL. Not "most".
KY> But that isn't to say that homosexuality couldn't
KY> be used to get what they want.
Actually, we can say that they cannot use gay civil rights as a
way to get what they want. The evidence was provided to you.
KY> RS> NAMBLA has consistently been banned by both organisers and court
KY> RS> order from marching in gay and lesbian demonstrations.
KY> If this is true, that is great, and does help me have a
KY> little respect for the gay rights activists.
Maybe if you met some gay people, you might understand them more.
Too bad that in this lifetime, you never will.
I feel so sad for you, Ken, because I've seen the product of your
agenda of hate. If you ever opened your ears to the testimony I
could present, you would scream with the amount of painful
memories I could provide to prove to you that your agenda is not
Christlike -- and in fact -- Christ would be ashamed of your
clear intolerance.
Did you want to hear some of my testimony? My testament to your
faith? I've seen more than you will ever see on the issue you
claim to be an expert about. For every "cured" gay you have, I
have 20 more suicides from the lies that you are perpetuating.
For every "we don't support the bashing of gays", I have
countless cases of bashings and killings.
Have you ever been present at a gay bashing? I have.
Have you ever seen someone beaten to near death? I have.
Have you ever seen the young thugs screaming out how their God
sanctifies their actions? I have.
How dare you claim your agenda is innocent. I've seen the
consequences. Maybe you should see the consequences too.
Rod "... Oh that's right, that would require you to close your
Bible and open your mind. That would require you to remove the
hands from your eyes and see the truth. We can't have that now,
can we?" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Clean mind, clean body. Take your pick.
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: All
|Sub: Driving Mr. Daisy
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:46:16
EID:f179 228555c0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bcf8
* On 31-03-97 at 17:35, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Driving Mr. Daisy" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> KY> Ah, but I never said that gays are inferior.
KY> RS> No. You just believe they should have INFERIOR CITIZENSHIP and
KY> RS> RIGHTS -- as opposed to, say, EQUALITY.
KY> Nope.. I said that is for the people to decide.
KY> And BTW, that would include gays.
Sorry, Ken, but you clearly stated that you are all for removing
the rights of gays by plebiscite. Your claim that it is for "the
people to decide" does not contradict my claim as to the ends you
seek to achieve by giving the issue to "the people to decide".
KY> KY> Plus, what does the color of one's skin have to do
KY> KY> with their morality?
KY> RS> What does one's sexual orientation have to do with their
KY> RS> morality, either?
KY> Must you really ask?
Yes, you lying, cretinous shit. Now, answer the fucking question.
KY> Any sexual orientation except for heterosexuality is
KY> immoral. Why? One reason is because those homosexual or
KY> bisexual feelings lead to the actions that go along with
KY> them.
This is not a reason why sexual orientations may be immoral.
Please describe *how* they are immoral. Simply claiming that
gays will be gay is not a reason why.
If you claim it is because the acts are immoral, please explain
how the *ACTS* are immoral, with specific evidence.
KY> And if those feelings are never acted on, then that
KY> would mean the person is suppressing is feelings, which
KY> also wouldn't be good.
Ken admits gays being celibate, and ignoring their innate
feelings, are also immoral.
Nice one Ken. The above paragraph clearly admits that gays have
unchangeable, immute feelings. You are a lying fuckwit, exposed
for all to see.
KY> RS> You've yet to provide one scrap of evidence to show how gays
KY> RS> "hurt" families. I've shown heaps that show how families hurt gays.
KY> Well, I have to see that one either. But as far as gays hurting
KY> families, it is more gay rights activists, than gays themselves.
Really? How?
KY> One good example would be the promotion of homosexuality in the
KY> American public schools.
Promotion? Where? How? How is it a promotion? Is it a case of
homosexuals being accurately portrayed as humans, of full civil
rights, and equality?
There is much evidence to support the notion that homosexuality
is specifically denigrated in schools!
KY> RS> If it wasn't for the opposition within the gay community to
KY> RS> NAMBLA, you would have a lot of problems. NAMBLA is attempting
KY> RS> very hard to be seen as part of the mainstream. They attempt to
KY> RS> do this by attaching their pedophilia agenda to the equal rights
KY> RS> claims of gay people.
KY> NAMBLA part of the mainstream?!? You must be kidding.. :)
KY> They definitely do have problems, if they believe that be
KY> achieved any time soon.
KY> But homosexuals aren't considered part of the mainstream,
KY> are they? So, how can they be used to make NAMBLA appear
KY> as such?
No, you are a moronic idiot. Nice removal of quote from context.
NAMBLA has been trying to attach to the mainstream gay civil
rights movement, you moron.
KY> But yes, I will agree that NAMBLA does use the gays quite a
KY> bit. Most wouldn't have anything to do with NAMBLA's
KY> agenda.
No, dear Ken. VIRTUALLY ALL. Not "most".
KY> But that isn't to say that homosexuality couldn't
KY> be used to get what they want.
Actually, we can say that they cannot use gay civil rights as a
way to get what they want. The evidence was provided to you.
KY> RS> NAMBLA has consistently been banned by both organisers and court
KY> RS> order from marching in gay and lesbian demonstrations.
KY> If this is true, that is great, and does help me have a
KY> little respect for the gay rights activists.
Maybe if you met some gay people, you might understand them more.
Too bad that in this lifetime, you never will.
I feel so sad for you, Ken, because I've seen the product of your
agenda of hate. If you ever opened your ears to the testimony I
could present, you would scream with the amount of painful
memories I could provide to prove to you that your agenda is not
Christlike -- and in fact -- Christ would be ashamed of your
clear intolerance.
Did you want to hear some of my testimony? My testament to your
faith? I've seen more than you will ever see on the issue you
claim to be an expert about. For every "cured" gay you have, I
have 20 more suicides from the lies that you are perpetuating.
For every "we don't support the bashing of gays", I have
countless cases of bashings and killings.
Have you ever been present at a gay bashing? I have.
Have you ever seen someone beaten to near death? I have.
Have you ever seen the young thugs screaming out how their God
sanctifies their actions? I have.
How dare you claim your agenda is innocent. I've seen the
consequences. Maybe you should see the consequences too.
Rod "... Oh that's right, that would require you to close your
Bible and open your mind. That would require you to remove the
hands from your eyes and see the truth. We can't have that now,
can we?" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Clean mind, clean body. Take your pick.
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Re: Cracker Barrel boyco
|Date: 04 Apr 97 18:46:18
EID:4c4d 228495c0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344dbfa
* On 31-03-97 at 17:49, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Re: Cracker Barrel boyco" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> RS> Strange. There's nothing in the bible about homosexuality, only
KY> RS> same-sex genital sexual acts.
KY> Ah, but why would someone have those homosexual feelings
KY> and not ever act on them? SHould feelings be suppressed
KY> like that?
That's not my concern. That's your bible. You live by the
rules. I do not demand celibacy of gay people -- you do.
KY> RS> Rod "...why would they not be Christian?" Swift :)
KY> Because the feelings that go with both would contradict
KY> with each other too much.
This is not an answer. This is a claim. Please provide an
explained and evidenced answer, next time.
Rod "... are you ready to hear the truth about your lies, and the
gay bashings they cause, yet?" Swift
* OLX 2.1 TD * If Jesus is Jewish, why does he have a Spanish name?
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Freedom of choice
|Date: 04 Apr 97 18:47:20
EID:b86b 228495e0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344dc38
* On 31-03-97 at 17:52, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Freedom of choice" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> KY> That changed a long time ago, and the left is getting more
KY> KY> and more control over America all the time.
KY> RS> Oh, and we're *SOOOO* scaaaaaaared! :)
KY> Why should you be? You're not even in America, are you?
And I bet you gloat at night about how you can punish the
thousands of gays who live worlds apart from their loved ones
because your bible states they cannot have the freedom to love
each other and live together, no?
Rod "...how do you sleep at night with your unconscionable human
rights abuses, Ken?" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * If Jesus loves me, why does he never send flowers?
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Re: Freedom Of Choice
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:44:22
EID:b86b 22855580
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bc86
* On 31-03-97 at 17:55, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Re: Freedom Of Choice" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> RS> So you are going to join gay people in the next demonstration in
KY> RS> your nearby states about there being sodomy laws, and how they
KY> RS> should be removed?
KY> I wouldn't, but mainly because there are a lot more
KY> important issues as far as I am concerned.
Like?
KY> I am in the process of getting to be an actual activist of sorts,
KY> but homosexuality would not be an issue, one way or another,
KY> that I plan on focusing on.
Why not? Are you too afraid that if you associated with gay
people who have been the subjects of the bashings, murders,
rhetoric and hate of the agenda to which you have subscribed and
repeat the lies of -- that you might get some conscience to go
with your guilt?
KY> BTW, don't think only gay people are into that. There are
KY> a lot of heterosexual people that fight strongly for "gay rights."
Yes. Why are you not one of them? Afraid that you might have a
run-in with reality?
KY> RS> Maybe you might meet some gay people??? Have a chance to ask if
KY> RS> they chose????
KY> RS> Rod "...oh, damn, I bet you'll say no now :(" Swift :)
KY> Hehe.. Now, how did you know? :)
KY> Well, I have asked gays about that, but whether they say
KY> they chose or not says nothing. What matters is their
KY> answer when asked about when they first realized they were
KY> gay.
No. What you mean to say is that no matter how they answer, you
will ignore their heartfelt personal testimony and edit it to
claim to other people, down the track, that they claimed to have
"chose to be gay".
Will you defame me, and Christopher, and make the same claims
about our life, our testimony, our humanity, too?
I guess so.
You are a deceitful liar, Ken. I want you to know that. I want
you to know that every time you ignore the lives and words of gay
people, and instead repeat the rhetoric your religion sold you,
you are single-handedly perpetuating the greatest human rights
abuses in history...
...solely because you cannot understand that people love and care
for each other in the same way as you do, just of different
genders.
Rod "...I pity you, because if you cannot understand love, what
hope do I have of helping you understand your hate?" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Rutabaga: Lord of the vegies
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: All
|Sub: Re: Freedom Of Choice
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:44:24
EID:3de8 22855580
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bc88
* On 31-03-97 at 17:55, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Re: Freedom Of Choice" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> RS> So you are going to join gay people in the next demonstration in
KY> RS> your nearby states about there being sodomy laws, and how they
KY> RS> should be removed?
KY> I wouldn't, but mainly because there are a lot more
KY> important issues as far as I am concerned.
Like?
KY> I am in the process of getting to be an actual activist of sorts,
KY> but homosexuality would not be an issue, one way or another,
KY> that I plan on focusing on.
Why not? Are you too afraid that if you associated with gay
people who have been the subjects of the bashings, murders,
rhetoric and hate of the agenda to which you have subscribed and
repeat the lies of -- that you might get some conscience to go
with your guilt?
KY> BTW, don't think only gay people are into that. There are
KY> a lot of heterosexual people that fight strongly for "gay rights."
Yes. Why are you not one of them? Afraid that you might have a
run-in with reality?
KY> RS> Maybe you might meet some gay people??? Have a chance to ask if
KY> RS> they chose????
KY> RS> Rod "...oh, damn, I bet you'll say no now :(" Swift :)
KY> Hehe.. Now, how did you know? :)
KY> Well, I have asked gays about that, but whether they say
KY> they chose or not says nothing. What matters is their
KY> answer when asked about when they first realized they were
KY> gay.
No. What you mean to say is that no matter how they answer, you
will ignore their heartfelt personal testimony and edit it to
claim to other people, down the track, that they claimed to have
"chose to be gay".
Will you defame me, and Christopher, and make the same claims
about our life, our testimony, our humanity, too?
I guess so.
You are a deceitful liar, Ken. I want you to know that. I want
you to know that every time you ignore the lives and words of gay
people, and instead repeat the rhetoric your religion sold you,
you are single-handedly perpetuating the greatest human rights
abuses in history...
...solely because you cannot understand that people love and care
for each other in the same way as you do, just of different
genders.
Rod "...I pity you, because if you cannot understand love, what
hope do I have of helping you understand your hate?" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Rutabaga: Lord of the vegies
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Freedom of choice
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:45:26
EID:b86b 228555a0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bcc6
* On 31-03-97 at 18:25, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Freedom of choice" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> KY> If they don't choose that way, then that tells me they are
KY> KY> trapped in that sexual preference.
KY> RS> Trapped? No. We were granted it by the grace of your God!
KY> RS> Praise your God for homosexuality, Ken! :) That's what you
KY> RS> fear!
KY> But you obviously do not believe in the Christian God.
Why did you ever make that assumption?
KY> So therefore, do you see yourself as being trapped in that
KY> sexual preference?
I never made such a claim. Do not be a disingenuous, deceitful
liar, Ken. You made the claim that gays were "trapped" in
homosexuality.
Pray tell, how do you plan to set them free? Oh, that's right.
You can't. That's because they can't be changed.
KY> I am not hateful of consenting adults. What I hate is what
KY> some give consent to do.
That's right. You support an agenda that kills gay youths by
suicide and gays by bashings. You support an agenda based on
lies. You repeat those lies, and hence provide the very ideology
of the basher who will believe that when he wields his baseball
bat, or pulls the trigger that he's doing it in the name of God.
What would your God say to this mass-genocide in his name, Ken?
Rod "...indeed, they say "God save me!", because nothing can save
you if you subscribe to an agenda of hate, Ken." Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Give Christians Prozac, not Government Office!
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: All
|Sub: Freedom of choice
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:45:28
EID:3de8 228555a0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bcc8
* On 31-03-97 at 18:25, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Freedom of choice" in echo R Holysmoke:
KY> KY> If they don't choose that way, then that tells me they are
KY> KY> trapped in that sexual preference.
KY> RS> Trapped? No. We were granted it by the grace of your God!
KY> RS> Praise your God for homosexuality, Ken! :) That's what you
KY> RS> fear!
KY> But you obviously do not believe in the Christian God.
Why did you ever make that assumption?
KY> So therefore, do you see yourself as being trapped in that
KY> sexual preference?
I never made such a claim. Do not be a disingenuous, deceitful
liar, Ken. You made the claim that gays were "trapped" in
homosexuality.
Pray tell, how do you plan to set them free? Oh, that's right.
You can't. That's because they can't be changed.
KY> I am not hateful of consenting adults. What I hate is what
KY> some give consent to do.
That's right. You support an agenda that kills gay youths by
suicide and gays by bashings. You support an agenda based on
lies. You repeat those lies, and hence provide the very ideology
of the basher who will believe that when he wields his baseball
bat, or pulls the trigger that he's doing it in the name of God.
What would your God say to this mass-genocide in his name, Ken?
Rod "...indeed, they say "God save me!", because nothing can save
you if you subscribe to an agenda of hate, Ken." Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Give Christians Prozac, not Government Office!
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Exemplifying examples 1/
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:00:30
EID:5ed0 22849800
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344df4e
* On 31-03-97 at 18:30, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Exemplifying examples 1/" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> KY> No, rather, I have some decency, and it isn't exactly right
KY> KY> to talk about that, using names, on a net for everyone to see.
KY> RS> Ok, so be honest enough to explain why you have ignored my
KY> RS> testimony, and Christopher's testimony, as "us not knowing we
KY> RS> actually chose".
KY> Ah, but your testimony that I have seen as of this post,
KY> has not been complete. When did you first realize you
KY> were gay?
My testimony is complete. I never chose to be gay. I have
always felt attraction towards my own gender from the first
points of memory in my life, at about age 3.
Does this answer your question? I hope so. Christopher will
give you the same testimony.
The feelings have always been there, we may not have had a name
for them at first, but they were strong, definite, immutable, and
biologically-driven. We've always been attracted to our own gender.
KY> RS> Either be honest and admit you are dispensing with the testimony
KY> RS> of REAL gay people who KNOW they never made any active choice
KY> RS> whatsoever and ADMIT your bias -- or remain a proven liar.
KY> Most gays do think they they were born gay, but they are just wrong,
KY> is all.
So you claim to know gay people better than they do? On what
rational, scientific basis do you claim that your unevidenced,
unpersonal, unknowledgeable testimony of one man weighs up
against the testimony of thousands of people who have no reason
to lie for any hidden agenda?
KY> Now, give me the testimony of gays saying how they
KY> discovered their homosexuality, and I would accept that.
You are ignorant to the citations I have been quoting. Have you
read them? Most clinical studies don't just contain a question
about sexual orientation, but also the development thereof.
Why don't you read some of them?
Rod "... or would you rather me tell you about the fractured
skulls of the victims of the religious conservative's agenda
against gays?" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Fundamentalist: (n) Ape-like creature with a Bible
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Exemplifying examples 1/
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:17:32
EID:5ed0 22849a20
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344e34c
* On 31-03-97 at 18:35, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Exemplifying examples 1/" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> RS> Doesn't change the fact you are a LYING FUCK. You have
KY> RS> CONSISTENTLY lied about gay people, their lives, their loves,
KY> RS> their relationships, and their morality.
KY> Evidence on any of that?
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
Most gays do think they they were born gay, but they are
just wrong, is all.
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
RS> Maybe you might meet some gay people??? Have a chance to ask if
RS> they chose????
Well, I have asked gays about that, but whether they say
they chose or not says nothing. What matters is their answer
when asked about when they first realized they were gay.
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
You admit your bias above. No matter what the people who you
make claims about say, virtually identical in all cases, you
still won't accept evidence. Further, your candid admissions
above that you won't accept any personal testimony, and in fact
you would be willing to misrepresent gay people proves that you
consistently lie about gay people, their lives, their loves,
their relationships, and their morality.
My claim stands. Further, it is now proven beyond a shadow of a
doubt that you are not willing to accept ANYTHING from ANY SOURCE
which contradicts your viewpoint.
KY> RS> I was prepared to offer you the chance to provide evidence, and
KY> RS> remain within the rules of debate on this issue, but it is clear
KY> RS> you fail to provide any evidence.
KY> RS> Since you will not, it means I can play hard and fast.
KY> In other words you cannot debate this logically and intelligently?
No, it's as I clearly stated. Provide evidence, or I start
making unevidenced claims about you.
"You were raped as a child by a heterosexual church official, and
you enjoyed every minute of it."
BTW, I'll quote your text to remind you of the rules you chose to
play by...
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
Most rape victims do think they they didn't ask for it, but they are
just wrong, is all.
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
KY> Maybe you might meet some rape victims??? Have a chance to ask if
KY> they asked for it????
Well, I have asked rapees about that, but whether they say
they asked for it or not says nothing. What matters is their
answer when asked about when they first realized they were raped.
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
See how silly your claims are when you aren't willing to listen
to the other side, Ken?
KY> We both know you wouldn't accept evidence on this.
No, you are incorrect. I am willing to accept any and all
evidence on this issue. I am also willing to verify it, present
counter-evidence to disprove evidence, and have a rational,
scientific debate on the issue based on evidence.
KY> Come on, it is what you are. You don't want to be
KY> proved wrong on it.
I don't care if you *attempt* to prove me wrong. The fact is
that you fail to present evidence because YOU HAVE NONE.
If you did, you'd PRESENT IT.
I presented MY REFERENCES AND CITATIONS.
This is proof positive that you are unwilling to prove what you
claim. Hence, we must assume that since the evidence presented
in the whole debate contradicts your view, you are a liar.
KY> Yeah, like if I did retract anything, your tone would ever
KY> change. Nice try, though.
Try it. You may be surprised. Of course, being a lying
Christian subscribing to a hate agenda, I expect you not to be
man enough to take such a challenge at tolerance.
Remember, you started it, with your intolerance. Maybe if you
are just willing to admit your mistakes, your lies, your
innuendo, your claims, and everything else you've presented in
your hateful anti-gay agenda, we'd probably forgive you for your
errors.
You started the fire. You flamed it with ignorance. You get
back the hate you spread out in the first place.
Next time, Ken, don't be an ignorant shithead by presenting your
spoon-fed anti-gay right-wing agenda that you were indoctrinated
with into an echo of free-thinking people who demand evidence.
KY> I never lie, I may be wrong on some things, but never lie.
You have lied consistently here. Present your evidence to
validate your claims, or be branded the liar that you are.
KY> Now, would you do the same if it was ever proven
KY> that you were the one that was wrong?
Yes, I would readily admit that I was wrong. However, I'm not
the one making wild, outlandish, unevidenced claims.
Rod "...maybe you should stop writing cheques your credibility
and evidence cannot cash." Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * When talking nonsense try not to be serious
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: All
|Sub: Exemplifying examples 1/
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:17:34
EID:037d 22849a20
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344e34e
* On 31-03-97 at 18:35, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Exemplifying examples 1/" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> RS> Doesn't change the fact you are a LYING FUCK. You have
KY> RS> CONSISTENTLY lied about gay people, their lives, their loves,
KY> RS> their relationships, and their morality.
KY> Evidence on any of that?
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
Most gays do think they they were born gay, but they are
just wrong, is all.
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
RS> Maybe you might meet some gay people??? Have a chance to ask if
RS> they chose????
Well, I have asked gays about that, but whether they say
they chose or not says nothing. What matters is their answer
when asked about when they first realized they were gay.
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
You admit your bias above. No matter what the people who you
make claims about say, virtually identical in all cases, you
still won't accept evidence. Further, your candid admissions
above that you won't accept any personal testimony, and in fact
you would be willing to misrepresent gay people proves that you
consistently lie about gay people, their lives, their loves,
their relationships, and their morality.
My claim stands. Further, it is now proven beyond a shadow of a
doubt that you are not willing to accept ANYTHING from ANY SOURCE
which contradicts your viewpoint.
KY> RS> I was prepared to offer you the chance to provide evidence, and
KY> RS> remain within the rules of debate on this issue, but it is clear
KY> RS> you fail to provide any evidence.
KY> RS> Since you will not, it means I can play hard and fast.
KY> In other words you cannot debate this logically and intelligently?
No, it's as I clearly stated. Provide evidence, or I start
making unevidenced claims about you.
"You were raped as a child by a heterosexual church official, and
you enjoyed every minute of it."
BTW, I'll quote your text to remind you of the rules you chose to
play by...
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
Most rape victims do think they they didn't ask for it, but they are
just wrong, is all.
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
KY> Maybe you might meet some rape victims??? Have a chance to ask if
KY> they asked for it????
Well, I have asked rapees about that, but whether they say
they asked for it or not says nothing. What matters is their
answer when asked about when they first realized they were raped.
___---------------------------------------------------------------------
See how silly your claims are when you aren't willing to listen
to the other side, Ken?
KY> We both know you wouldn't accept evidence on this.
No, you are incorrect. I am willing to accept any and all
evidence on this issue. I am also willing to verify it, present
counter-evidence to disprove evidence, and have a rational,
scientific debate on the issue based on evidence.
KY> Come on, it is what you are. You don't want to be
KY> proved wrong on it.
I don't care if you *attempt* to prove me wrong. The fact is
that you fail to present evidence because YOU HAVE NONE.
If you did, you'd PRESENT IT.
I presented MY REFERENCES AND CITATIONS.
This is proof positive that you are unwilling to prove what you
claim. Hence, we must assume that since the evidence presented
in the whole debate contradicts your view, you are a liar.
KY> Yeah, like if I did retract anything, your tone would ever
KY> change. Nice try, though.
Try it. You may be surprised. Of course, being a lying
Christian subscribing to a hate agenda, I expect you not to be
man enough to take such a challenge at tolerance.
Remember, you started it, with your intolerance. Maybe if you
are just willing to admit your mistakes, your lies, your
innuendo, your claims, and everything else you've presented in
your hateful anti-gay agenda, we'd probably forgive you for your
errors.
You started the fire. You flamed it with ignorance. You get
back the hate you spread out in the first place.
Next time, Ken, don't be an ignorant shithead by presenting your
spoon-fed anti-gay right-wing agenda that you were indoctrinated
with into an echo of free-thinking people who demand evidence.
KY> I never lie, I may be wrong on some things, but never lie.
You have lied consistently here. Present your evidence to
validate your claims, or be branded the liar that you are.
KY> Now, would you do the same if it was ever proven
KY> that you were the one that was wrong?
Yes, I would readily admit that I was wrong. However, I'm not
the one making wild, outlandish, unevidenced claims.
Rod "...maybe you should stop writing cheques your credibility
and evidence cannot cash." Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * When talking nonsense try not to be serious
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Doug Schwandt
|Sub: Freedom Of Choice
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:18:36
EID:c36d 22849a40
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344e38c
* On 30-03-97 at 23:24, DOUG SCHWANDT wrote to JUDITH BANDSMA,
on the topic of "FREEDOM OF CHOICE" in echo Holysmoke:
DS> JB>Rod Swift has posted the peer-reviewed journal articles on this subject
DS> JB>quite recently. (Since you have been blathering here) Go find them
and
DS> JB>read them.
DS> JB>Since sexual orientation is a choice, when did YOU choose which way
you
DS> JB>would go...and why?
DS> It's the RIGHT thing to do!
Well, we all know following our innate sexual orientation is the
right thing to do, but Judith was asking when you claimed to have
chose -- i.e. ignore sexual innate feelings and make a conscious
choice.
Rod "...please, do tell us, what date?" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * Diplomacy: Saying "nice doggy" until you can find a rock
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Re: Cracker Barrel boyco
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:20:38
EID:4c4d 22849a80
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344e406
* On 01-04-97 at 01:35, KEN YOUNG wrote to CHRISTOPHER HUGHES,
on the topic of "Re: Cracker Barrel boycot" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> CH> More important. Ok, now you're including a value call. More important
KY> CH> to whom? Based on what criteria? In what value system?
KY> Not based on a value system, but based on survival.
I'm sorry, but the human race's viability and survival is in no
way threatened by the presence of other functions of sex that are
both naturally occuring and quite normal.
KY> As I just said, because of survival. Pleasure is a great
KY> thing, but first we must be around to enjoy it.
You have failed to provide any evidence as to why homosexual sex
between two people is a threat to the survival of the human race.
Rod "...care to provide any evidence of this claim?" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * The best prophet of the future is the past
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Jim Staal
|Sub: Oops, Caught Again
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:22:40
EID:c45c 22849ac0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344e480
* On 01-04-97 at 23:22, JIM STAAL wrote to CHRISTOPHER HUGHES,
on the topic of "Oops, Caught Again" in echo Holysmoke:
JS> CH> Even if my husband,
JS> Show me the legal certificate.
I'm sorry, you'll have to remember that husband and wife a
religious terms. Spouse is the legal term, moron.
JS> CH> who is a journalist and used to subedit for a
JS> CH> living,
JS> Hahahahahahahahaha! No evidence of that here.
I'm sorry, my degree is online if you wanted to check.
JS> I think he lives off the state for a living...just like you!
So I don't do HTML coding, editing and print publications for a living??
Rod "...such a naughty boy you are, Jim!" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * Could crop circles be the work of a cereal killer?
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Re: FREEDOM OF CHOICE
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:23:42
EID:b86b 22849ae0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344e4be
* On 01-04-97 at 00:03, KEN YOUNG wrote to CHRISTOPHER HUGHES,
on the topic of "Re: FREEDOM OF CHOICE" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> But look at it this way.. You have no desire to have sex
KY> with a woman. The mere idea repulses you, right? Well,
KY> pretty much how I personally feel about anal sex.
I note, however, that we are not claiming that you can be cured
of your "non-anal sex practices" and orientation.
Maybe you should learn tolerance, no?
Rod "...huh? Well? Are you going to?" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Jesus saves? Not on my salary he doesn't.
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Re: Exemplifying example
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:25:44
EID:7d13 22849b20
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344e538
* On 01-04-97 at 01:25, KEN YOUNG wrote to CHRISTOPHER HUGHES,
on the topic of "Re: Exemplifying examples" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> Sort of like the old "can God make a rock He can't lift" scenario?
:)
KY> Sure.. If there was a purpose to it, God could do it. But
KY> anything God does do has a reason for it, so not likely
KY> that He will be doing that.
What is the reason that god made gays?
Please, be honest with your answer. I am basing my question on
the undeniable biological co-factors in homosexuality as
presented in the abstract in an earlier post about the prevalence
of homosexuality in siblings and your faith in God.
Rod "...now, your answer please?" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Today's topic: Death, are you for it or against it?
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Re: Driving Mr. Daisy
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:47:46
EID:74fa 228555e0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bd52
* On 01-04-97 at 01:42, KEN YOUNG wrote to CHRISTOPHER HUGHES,
on the topic of "Re: Driving Mr. Daisy" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> CH> "But part of our rights, is the right to take away the rights
KY> CH> of others, if it does not go against the Constitution, and if
KY> CH> enough want it." Ken Young
KY> CH> I'm not even going to dignify that piece of crap with a reply.
KY> America is supposed to be for and by the people. That, how
KY> people want things to be, should be, even if some may not
KY> like it. America is all about freedom, but that includes
KY> the freedom to restrict others, provided it is what the
KY> public wants, and not the govt.
I'm sorry. The Declaration of Independence clearly states that
"all people are ... equal". Which part of the word *ALL* do you
not understand, Ken?
America is supposed to be for and by ALL the people, not a
MAJORITY. The mandate of constitutional government in the US
clearly states that the people CANNOT have what they want if it
harms a minority.
Where is the freedom for the minority in the oppression of it by
the majority? Is freedom for all, or only some?
America is not about freedom. America is about equality. That's
why you don't like the fact that gay people will keep winning
their rights, because they are not only deserved, but are
supposedly guaranteed under the constitution.
Rod "...maybe you should look at your constitution more. Then
maybe you should learn to live in your community more and
tolerate those who have rights not because they are granted by
the majority, but because the majority cannot deny them!" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Jesus died for our sins, so let's not disappoint him
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: All
|Sub: Re: Driving Mr. Daisy
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:47:48
EID:f179 228555e0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bd54
* On 01-04-97 at 01:42, KEN YOUNG wrote to CHRISTOPHER HUGHES,
on the topic of "Re: Driving Mr. Daisy" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> CH> "But part of our rights, is the right to take away the rights
KY> CH> of others, if it does not go against the Constitution, and if
KY> CH> enough want it." Ken Young
KY> CH> I'm not even going to dignify that piece of crap with a reply.
KY> America is supposed to be for and by the people. That, how
KY> people want things to be, should be, even if some may not
KY> like it. America is all about freedom, but that includes
KY> the freedom to restrict others, provided it is what the
KY> public wants, and not the govt.
I'm sorry. The Declaration of Independence clearly states that
"all people are ... equal". Which part of the word *ALL* do you
not understand, Ken?
America is supposed to be for and by ALL the people, not a
MAJORITY. The mandate of constitutional government in the US
clearly states that the people CANNOT have what they want if it
harms a minority.
Where is the freedom for the minority in the oppression of it by
the majority? Is freedom for all, or only some?
America is not about freedom. America is about equality. That's
why you don't like the fact that gay people will keep winning
their rights, because they are not only deserved, but are
supposedly guaranteed under the constitution.
Rod "...maybe you should look at your constitution more. Then
maybe you should learn to live in your community more and
tolerate those who have rights not because they are granted by
the majority, but because the majority cannot deny them!" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Jesus died for our sins, so let's not disappoint him
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Re: Exemplifying example
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:48:50
EID:7d13 22855600
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bd92
* On 31-03-97 at 03:36, KEN YOUNG wrote to CHRISTOPHER HUGHES,
on the topic of "Re: Exemplifying examples" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> > I hate to tell you this, but the Framers were deists, not Christians.
KY> First, do you really hate to tell people that?
No. It is fact. We can accept fact. The only person not
accepting fact in this echo are people like you.
KY> Some of the American founding fathers were Deists, but not the majority.
KY> Most were indeed born again Christians.
Evidence?
KY> THat amendment should never have been passed, as that is the state's
KY> responsibility. That is what the Constitution was all about,
KY> restricting the federal government, not the state ones.
No. The Constitution of a nation is a governance document. It can
restrict whatever and whomever it wants in a nation.
The amendment to the constitution was legally passed and willed
of the required number of legislatures. You forgot how the
US Constitution is amended, didn't you?
Remember? 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment? You say
that the states should not be encumbered by the constitution.
They wanted it. They had a right to pass an amendment to apply
the whole good-governance of the US Constitution to all levels of
government.
KY> America was to be free from laws forcing one religion or the
KY> other, but that does not mean that Christianity wasn't to be
KY> the main religion.
For god's sake, Ken, read fucking AMENDMENT 1, it is CLEAR that
congress shall make no laws establishing a national religion.
KY> Church and State? The only thing you could ever find on that,
KY> would be a letter by Jefferson. Nothing else states they were
KY> for seperation of church and state.
Please contact the organisation known as the Institute for First
Amendment Studies. http://www.ifas.org/
They can correct your errors here better than I can.
Rod "...because you are in error. Since you have been advised of
this fact, you must either prove your claims, or be subjected to
the claim of deception." Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Don't get stuck in a closet. Wear yourself out.
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: All
|Sub: Re: Exemplifying example
|Date: 05 Apr 97 10:48:52
EID:0580 22855600
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3345bd94
* On 31-03-97 at 03:36, KEN YOUNG wrote to CHRISTOPHER HUGHES,
on the topic of "Re: Exemplifying examples" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> > I hate to tell you this, but the Framers were deists, not Christians.
KY> First, do you really hate to tell people that?
No. It is fact. We can accept fact. The only person not
accepting fact in this echo are people like you.
KY> Some of the American founding fathers were Deists, but not the majority.
KY> Most were indeed born again Christians.
Evidence?
KY> THat amendment should never have been passed, as that is the state's
KY> responsibility. That is what the Constitution was all about,
KY> restricting the federal government, not the state ones.
No. The Constitution of a nation is a governance document. It can
restrict whatever and whomever it wants in a nation.
The amendment to the constitution was legally passed and willed
of the required number of legislatures. You forgot how the
US Constitution is amended, didn't you?
Remember? 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment? You say
that the states should not be encumbered by the constitution.
They wanted it. They had a right to pass an amendment to apply
the whole good-governance of the US Constitution to all levels of
government.
KY> America was to be free from laws forcing one religion or the
KY> other, but that does not mean that Christianity wasn't to be
KY> the main religion.
For god's sake, Ken, read fucking AMENDMENT 1, it is CLEAR that
congress shall make no laws establishing a national religion.
KY> Church and State? The only thing you could ever find on that,
KY> would be a letter by Jefferson. Nothing else states they were
KY> for seperation of church and state.
Please contact the organisation known as the Institute for First
Amendment Studies. http://www.ifas.org/
They can correct your errors here better than I can.
Rod "...because you are in error. Since you have been advised of
this fact, you must either prove your claims, or be subjected to
the claim of deception." Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Don't get stuck in a closet. Wear yourself out.
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Shelby Sherman
|Sub: Brain-washed grovelers
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:40:58
EID:ea79 22849d00
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344e8ca
* On 01-04-97 at 12:37, SHELBY SHERMAN wrote to KEN YOUNG,
on the topic of "Brain-washed grovelers" in echo Holysmoke:
SS> Oh, but homos can't be saved, can they? Let's see, god creates these
SS> individuals with all these feelings, feelings that the unanimous consensus
SS> of medical professionals state cannot be changed, but if they continue
SS> to act out these natural (for them) inclinations, they cannot be saved?
SS> You're quite confused little virgin boy.
Whatsmore, he now claims that to live celibate with such feelings (i.e.
he
admits that it is innate and immutable) is also immoral.
Rod "...how typical of the liar we know as Ken" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * That was Zen... This is Tao!
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: All
|Sub: Gays *DON'T* Choose!
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:42:00
EID:eb4a 22849d40
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344e908
* On 31-03-97 at 18:35, KEN YOUNG wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Exemplifying examples 1/" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> We both know you wouldn't accept evidence on this. Come
KY> on, it is what you are. You don't want to be proved wrong
^^^^^^^^^^^^
KY> on it.
Ken admits gays don't choose. Gays are, in fact, born that way.
It's who they are.
Rod "...just thought you all might like to know" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * Famous graffitti: I used to be indecisive; am I sure?
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Karen Davis
|Sub: Freedom of choice
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:46:02
EID:f3e8 22849dc0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344e9fa
* On 30-03-97 at 07:40, KAREN DAVIS wrote to KEN YOUNG,
on the topic of "Freedom of choice" in echo Holysmoke:
KD> KY> Well, not like it is anything to be ashamed of, so yes, I am a
virgin.
KD> I'm not asking you to be ashamed, but maybe you should recognize that
KD> experience does change how one sees sex.
I find it ironic that homohater Ken Young finds virginity
something that shouldn't be stimatised, but sexual orientation
should.
What a hangup, no?
Rod "...*sigh* When will he learn?" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Diplomacy: The patriotic art of lying for one's country
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Jim Staal
|Sub: Around the World in.. 2/
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:48:04
EID:e88e 22849e00
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344ea74
* On 01-04-97 at 23:14, JIM STAAL wrote to ROD SWIFT,
on the topic of "Around the World in.. 2/" in echo Holysmoke:
JS> RS> You fail to understand that Karl called you a moron because you
JS> RS> failed to understand that in 41 states in the United States, it
JS> RS> is QUITE legal to fire someone due to their sexual orientation,
JS> RS> and the person has no right nor claim of job discrimination.
JS> and would you list some evidence/examples of where and when it actually
JS> happens?
Certainly. Check out:
Shahar v Bowers
Englund v City of Dallas
your local Cracker Barrel Restaurants
KFC stores in Louisville, KY
Oh, and the biggest employer of them all -- the US Military! :)
Even civilians employed in ancillary services are not allowed to
be gay.
Would you like more cases? I have many more available.
Rod "...you forgot about that big one, eh?" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * The foolish and dead alone never change their opinion
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Sean Coldren
|Sub: Court Records
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:53:06
EID:f629 22849ea0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344eba2
* On 01-04-97 at 03:41, SEAN COLDREN wrote to KEN YOUNG,
on the topic of "Court Records" in echo Holysmoke:
SC> A very..... stubborn, thick headed, person, but not a pig. :)
Actually, I'd have described it as stubborn, *ignorant* person.
I'm sure he's able to understand things easily. It's his
ignorance to evidence that means none of it sinks in.
SC> I do have to agree with you on one thing, Ken. When someone
SC> can't come up with an intelligent reply, it does come down to
SC> name calling, unfortunitly.
Would you agree that Ken only makes claims, not evidenced
statements? Maybe he gets the scorn he does because he makes
blindingly ignorant, incorrect statements?
SC> For all you people that have no idea of who I am, I will just
SC> say that I am one of Ken's long time rivials on the gay issue,
SC> and some politics. Not all though.
Welcome. For your information, Ken has presented a number of
claims here he refuses to evidence. He claims that all gay
people who he has met have *actually* chosen to be gay, no matter
how many of them claim that they did not.
In fact, when someone claims they never chose to be gay, he
claims they did anyway.
This is blatantly dishonest.
Rod "...maybe that's why I called him a lying cunt, for example,
because it was demonstrably true" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * Anti-women, anti-gay -- born again bigot, go away!
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Karen Davis
|Sub: Ken Young: Poster child
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:55:08
EID:7236 22849ee0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344ec1c
* On 30-03-97 at 07:35, KAREN DAVIS wrote to KEN YOUNG,
on the topic of "Ken Young: Poster child" in echo Holysmoke:
KD> KY> It is easy to open the eyes of the decieved? HArdly.. When one
is
KD> KY> convinced of something, it takes a lot to convince them otherwise.
KD> Huh? Gay teenagers kill themselves because they know people like you
are
KD> out there.
Gay teens out there kill themselves because their family listens
to the agenda of the religious political and social extremists
that Ken so readily repeats.
Then again, if they won't kill themselves, there's always the
generally young people who go out and kill a few queers for
Christ, based on the same agenda.
Rod "...Ken still doesn't see the blood on his hands though,
because this agenda of hate can easily claim that they have
nothing to do with the *actual* acts, and hence ignore claims
that they precipitated the environment that led to the acts." Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * God is watching me? What is he, a pervert?
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Karen Davis
|Sub: Exemplifying examples 1/
|Date: 04 Apr 97 19:56:10
EID:2d6d 22849f00
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344ec5a
* On 01-04-97 at 19:27, KAREN DAVIS wrote to KEN YOUNG,
on the topic of "Exemplifying examples 1/" in echo Holysmoke:
KD> KY> The majority of cases of child rape are examples of sodomy, which
KD> KY> tells me that most are likely gay.
KD> Nope - the perpetrators are straight. They just like little boys as
well
KD> as grown women.
Actually, mostly little girls.
Rod "...but that's really irrelevant, as pedophilia doesn't
follow sexual orientations by gender, but by age." Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Live sex in a Toyota nixes evil
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Dave Hamilton
|Sub: Cheese Whiz
|Date: 04 Apr 97 20:04:12
EID:f3b3 2284a080
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344ee3c
* On 02-04-97 at 01:30, DAVE HAMILTON wrote to GEORGE HARPER,
on the topic of "Cheese Whiz" in echo Holysmoke:
DH> GH> As for Ron Fitzsimmons' statements: When they were made, there
was
DH> GH> such an uproar that research was done...and evidence found to
DH> GH> support the claim.
DH> Excellent. What evidence? Many of us have been searching
DH> but unable to find it. Please direct us to verifiable sources.
Further, the claims were released March 2. It is now April 2.
You claim the "research was done".
I find that any research devised, conducted, and reported in
under one month -- let alone a year -- to be highly questionable
in practice.
Rod "...I think you are lying, George!" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * Diplomacy: The patriotic art of lying for one's country
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Doug Schwandt
|Sub: ACLU News 01-30-97: C
|Date: 04 Apr 97 20:07:14
EID:1e6d 2284a0e0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344eef2
* On 31-03-97 at 18:15, DOUG SCHWANDT wrote to KAREN DAVIS,
on the topic of "ACLU News 01-30-97: C 2/2" in echo Holysmoke:
DS> Consider this: If the freedoms of CHRISTIANS can be
DS> taken away, nobody is safe.
Consider this: If the freedoms of ANYONE can be taken away, the
Christians are in power!
Rod "...makes sense, no?" Swift
* OLX 2.1 TD * Today's topic: Death, are you for it or against it?
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: George Harper
|Sub: Re: Book Theft
|Date: 04 Apr 97 20:14:16
EID:8808 2284a1c0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344f098
* On 01-04-97 at 08:18, GEORGE HARPER wrote to KAREN DAVIS,
on the topic of "Re: Book Theft" in echo Holysmoke:
GH> KD> JS> determine a husband and wife differentiation for definition's
GH> KD> JS> sake...you call cubby your husband and he, you. that is a bit
GH> KD> JS> confusing.
GH> KD>
GH> KD> Why? Husband is a word for "male partner."
GH> Actually, it all evolves down to who sleeps on his stomach being
GH> the "wife" of the moment.
I'm sorry, but you are just plain ignorant.
GH> But, then, with oceans between them, perhaps neither Chris
GH> NOR Rod sleep thus, so that THEIR claim, while pointless,
GH> may be accurate: they could both be buggering others, as proxy
GH> for the absent partner.....
I'm sorry, but Christopher and I are monogamous. That includes
while we are apart. Anyway, it's more fun that way. In a way,
it's nice to spend months apart. Means that every minute
together is special. Mostly, we like to hug when we get back
together because we've missed holding each other for so long.
It has now been nearly 10 months since I was last there. This is
the longest amount of time we've ever spent apart. Nearly double
the normal amount of time (about 5.5 months).
GH> No, that would defeat the concept of monogamous marriage which
GH> is "forsaking all others" (or did the faggots do away with
GH> THAT part too?).
It's nice to know Christians would rather peddle lies than truth,
and would rather peddle hatred than love.
I love you George. May your bitter heart be fixed by whatever
god you believe in, because it's clear that you cannot fix it
yourself.
Rod "...I pity you!" Swift :(
* OLX 2.1 TD * Jesus saves! Krishna invests! Cthulhu forcloses!
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: J.C. Kibler
|Sub: Repent NOW!
|Date: 04 Apr 97 20:19:18
EID:db47 2284a260
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344f1c6
* On 01-04-97 at 23:18, J.C. KIBLER wrote to ALL,
on the topic of "Repent NOW!" in echo Holysmoke:
JK> TAKE THAT, YOU GODLES HEATHERN SCUM! CRIST WILL HAVE YOUO
JK> ALL ON A BARBEQUET SPIT IN HELL FOR BLASFEMY!
I'm sorry, is that pain from the impaling your last opponents
gave you, or the one you anticipate to get from us?
Rod "...ho ho ho!" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * If this is reality I want a refund!
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Jim Staal
|Sub: You lose.
|Date: 04 Apr 97 20:21:20
EID:7284 2284a2a0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344f240
* On 01-04-97 at 23:27, JIM STAAL wrote to JUDITH BANDSMA,
on the topic of "You lose." in echo Holysmoke:
JS> JB> You'd love it here then. You can't even get into the emergency
room
JS> JB> unless you $110 to give them upfront. They couldn't refuse you
if you
JS> JB> were bleeding to death or having a heart attack, but they can and
will
JS> JB> if you have a broken limb and no cash or plastic to cover it. (If
you
JS> JB> have insurance, that's fine...the insurance has to reimburse YOU)
JS> I think you live in the land of Neanderthals. It doesn't sound like
much
JS> fun. I pay $10 to go to the doctor, and the hospital charges the
JS> insurance company first and then what they don't pay comes to me.
No. You both live in the Neandertal lands :) I pay nothing, and
instead, forgo 1.4% in dedicated taxation should I earn more than
$12K per annum.
Rod "...ho ho ho!" Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * Nuke a godless homeless commie gay baby whale for Christ
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Karen Davis
|Sub: Baby burning in Hell
|Date: 04 Apr 97 20:23:22
EID:d194 2284a2e0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344f2ba
* On 01-04-97 at 17:05, KAREN DAVIS wrote to JIM STAAL,
on the topic of "Baby burning in Hell" in echo Holysmoke:
KD> LB> How does Roe v Wade outlaw birth?
KD> JS> No, it outlaws God-given life.
KD> How?
Exactly. I thought it outlawed rape-given "life"! :) Among a
number of other "life" that is perpetrated against unwilling
women.
Rod "...Jim is such a simpleton." Swift :)
* OLX 2.1 TD * If Jesus is Jewish, why does he have a Spanish name?
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Evidence for Ken! 1/
|Date: 04 Apr 97 20:31:24
EID:25be 2284a3e0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344f49c
* On 01-04-97 at 00:15, KEN YOUNG wrote to SHELBY SHERMAN,
on the topic of "Ken Young: Poster child" in echo Holysmoke:
KY> KY> Because they feel trapped in a lifestyle that they think they don't
KY> KY> have a choice about. They have been told there is no choice, so
they
KY> KY> believe that.
KY> SS> I repeat, on what do you base your conclusion that sexual preference
is
KY> SS> a choice?
KY> One of the things I base that on, is that many change their
KY> minds, later in life.
Many? All the evidence from studies shows that virtually *NIL*
change their sexual behaviours when it is attempted to be
changed.
Here's an annotated bibliography:
___------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annotated Bibliography
Pastoral Theology & Care
Iliff School of Theology
Sharyl Bender Peterson
Fall, 1993
In the past few years, as the United Methodist Church has
struggled to decide upon appropriate forms of pastoral and
congregational responses to lesbian women, gay men, and bisexual
people, a number of alternatives have been suggested. One of those is
the development of so-called "Transforming Congregations." While
characterizing themselves as "a response of love," the basic premise of
these groups is that "homosexual practice is a sin" and that for a
homosexual person to "become a full and responsible member of a local
church" that person must "experience restoration to a healthy
heterosexuality" (see "Transforming congregations" reference below).
On the other hand, the clinical literature in psychology suggests
that rather than being a loving response to a person's sexuality, so-
called "transformations" of this type -- referred to in the
psychological literature as "conversion therapy" or "reorientation"
therapy -- are in fact questionable at best, and profoundly harmful at
worst. Drawing upon that literature, recent social scientific data,
and contemporary theological scholarship, many theologians and
ethicists have questioned how and whether "transforming" or "ex-gay"
movements in the churches are consistent or inconsistent with Christian
teaching and practice. This bibliography is a compilation of current
work in psychology, theology, and ethics, which addresses those
questions, and which suggests some alternative, person-affirming forms
of pastoral response and care.
Blair, Ralph. (1984). Ex-gay. New York: HCCC.
Blair begins with a brief review of ways in which Scripture has
been used to support the oppression of Jewish people, of Catholics, and
of people of color. He then notes the importance of recognizing how
our understanding and perception of many groups of people have changed
historically. Finally, he turns to a consideration of the oppression
of homosexuals, and of the "ex-gay" literature, which he feels
comprises "just a recent chapter in the recidivist wrong turnings in
church history" (p. 2).
Blair's central thesis is that "there is still no documented
empirical verification of any permanent change from homosexual
orientation to heterosexual orientation through the 'ex-gay' processes"
(p. 2). He supports this by describing dozens of claims and
publications proffered by allegedly "ex-gay" persons and organizations.
And, he asserts that most persons who have claimed to have become "ex-
gay" have in fact returned to their original orientation. He also
notes that the organizations that published the original "ex-gay"
claims have not retracted those claims, in spite of their subsequent
falsification. In fact, those organizations continue to publish
information falsely alleging that these persons have become permanently
"ex-gay."
The primary usefulness of Blair's article is in raising readers'
awareness that the claims offered by "ex-gay" groups appear to be
misleading at best, and patently false at worst. The weakness of this
article is Blair's use of nearly as anecdotal an approach to "research"
and criticism as the approaches espoused by those he criticizes. He
makes many excellent points, but also tends to perseverate in some of
his arguments (e.g., going on for 10 long pages about a single study).
He also mixes, somewhat randomly, sound criticisms based on research
methodology and on theological scholarship, with criticisms based on
his own apparent personal dislikes for some of the organizations
described. In summary, this article provides an enlightening look at
many of the spurious/inaccurate claims made by "ex-gay" groups, but
would have been stronger and more convincing if it had been done in a
somewhat more concise and scholarly way.
Cameron, Paul. (1992). What causes homosexual desire and can it
be changed? Washington, D.C.: Family Research Institute, Inc.
This piece is the basic position paper used by Focus on the
Family; it has been and continues to be widely distributed to
interested (presumably, conservative) Christians who want to know more
about homosexual orientation and behavior. Using a simple question-
and-answer format, it purports to provide data regarding the "etiology"
of homosexual orientation, recruitment of children by homosexuals, the
effect of religious convictions on sexual conduct, and "transformation"
of homosexual orientation through psychotherapy, or through religious
or spiritual conversion.
The author (who has been ejected from the American Psychological
Association for his consistently unethical misreporting of scientific
data) asserts that homosexual orientation can "certainly (be changed
and that) many people have turned away from homosexuality -- almost as
many people as call themselves 'gay'" (p. 7). Not surprisingly, the
data cited is outdated and inconsistent with more recent findings, as
well as re-interpreted and misrepresented to fit the conservative, gay-
and lesbian-hating agenda of the author. I include the piece only
because it is now quite widely-distributed, and may be the only thing
people have read about this subject, and therefore potentially very
influential, as well as harmful in presenting deliberately false
information about gay men and lesbian women. It is also a strong
example of how research findings may be deliberately twisted and/or
misreported to support a person's or organization's particular
ideological ends.
Comstock, Gary D. (1993). Gay Theology Without Apology.
Cleveland: The Pilgrim Press.
This is an outstanding book, written primarily for readers who
have already given some thought to relevant theological and social
scientific work in this area. Comstock uses the Exodus story and the
Jesus story to frame his theology, and to argue for appropriate forms
of pastoral/church responsiveness to gay men and lesbian women. The
common threads (between the two stories) he explicates are "the
unacceptability of pain and suffering inflicted upon one person or
people by another" and the significance of both as "stor(ies) of
liberation and change from slavery to freedom" (p. 10).
He raises several issues that I found particularly exciting,
interesting, and useful in thinking about pastoral care. The first is
his insistence that we do not just accept the fact that the Bible
contains biases (he addresses these biases most particularly in the
Levitical codes), but that we engage and challenge them. The second is
his analysis of parallels between Israelite culture around the time of
the exile to Babylonia, and U.S. culture over the past three decades,
and how in both cases relative economic strength or weakness led to
relative acceptance or rejection of marginal members of communities.
The third is his notion that the meaning of Jesus' story is not about
looking to Jesus for answers to our human quandaries, or as "the
answer" to our dilemmas, but is about finding our own answers,
specifically through working out our relationships with others. And
fourth, his notion that God is not outside us, but between us -- that
God exists in our mutuality and reciprocity in relationships.
Comstock's last chapter, "Credo," addresses issues of God's identity,
sin, salvation, grace, the meaning of Jesus, sacraments of Baptism and
Communion, and especially, the essentialness of "creat(ing) and be(ing)
in community in which (all) people can give, contribute, and feel
valuable" (p. 20).
While this book doesn't consider the issue of reorientation
specifically, Comstock makes it abundantly clear why changing one's
>>> Continued to next message
* OLX 2.1 TD * Why fantasize when there are hamsters and duct tape?
--- Maximus 2.02
* Origin: The Perth Omen (3:690/660)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 24/888 102/2 943 106/2000 109/7 112/101 114/262 271 124/1
SEEN-BY: 124/1208 2342 5125 8001 9000 9005 130/1 1008 133/2 143/1 147/34
SEEN-BY: 147/2021 167/166 170/400 202/777 1207 213/213 218/890 907 270/101
SEEN-BY: 275/429 280/1 169 282/1 62 283/120 284/29 290/14 300/603 310/666
SEEN-BY: 322/739 323/107 324/278 343/600 346/250 352/3 356/18 371/42 377/86
SEEN-BY: 380/64 381/900 382/92 388/1 396/1 2 690/660 730/2 732/10 2401/0
SEEN-BY: 2442/0 3603/420 3606/10 3612/41 3615/50 3619/25 3632/21 3651/9
SEEN-BY: 3652/1 3667/1
PATH: 690/660 396/1 124/1 9005
|From: Rod Swift
|To: Ken Young
|Sub: Evidence for Ken! 2/
|Date: 04 Apr 97 20:31:26
EID:d5be 2284a3e0
MSGID: 3:690/660.0 3344f49e
>>> Continued from previous message
orientation is not a possibility that any truly Christian person would
consider advocating for another. I liked this book tremendously, and
found that his proposed theology (particularly the idea of God existing
in our relationships) powerful and helpful. The only shortcoming I
found in this book was his general emphasis on gay men, with
considerably less
attention to lesbian women, although they are implicitly included in
much of his discourse. Overall, however, this is a terrific book, and
would be one of the two "must-reads" I would suggest from this
bibliography.
Hilton, Bruce. (1993). Can Homophobia Be Cured? Nashville:
Abingdon Press.
This book, written from a United Methodist perspective, begins
with a chapter that briefly defines and describes homophobia. In
setting the tone for the remainder of the book, the author notes that
"we of the Church have forgotten that the primary issue is not the
causes of homosexuality, or whether it can be 'cured,' or whether its
practice is a sin, but do we love our neighbors, whoever they are?" (p.
21).
Hilton uses a simple question-and-answer format to address a
variety of issues, including people's feelings and attitudes toward
many issues related to sexuality, and some of what we know about gay
people (including a debunking of many of the common myths about gay men
and lesbians). He also lays out (at a fairly basic level) some of
the current scholarship on Biblical statements about homosexuality and
homosexual acts, and describes parallels between the contemporary use
of Scripture to support the oppression of gay people and historical
uses of Scripture to support other forms of oppression. He also
describes what the United Methodist Church has had to say, and
currently says about some of these issues, and most importantly,
describes what our ministry should be to each other. And, he speaks
specifically to the "ex-gay" movement, and