|
|
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! ___________mixqec
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial > hate. ....unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of Mairca). DS |
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial > hate. ....unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of Mairca). DS |
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > > >>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>hate. > > > ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of > Mairca). Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the target of hatred ;) > > DS |
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > > >>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>hate. > > > ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of > Mairca). Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the target of hatred ;) > > DS |
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>> hate. > > ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States > > of Mairca). > Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the > target of hatred ;) Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. |
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>> hate. > > ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States > > of Mairca). > Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the > target of hatred ;) Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. |
041108 2142 - Wound Up posted:
> Daniel J. Stern wrote: >> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >> >> >>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>> hate. >> >> >> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of >> Mairca). > > Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the > target of hatred ;) > Well, then, maybe derision??? |
041108 2142 - Wound Up posted:
> Daniel J. Stern wrote: >> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >> >> >>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>> hate. >> >> >> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of >> Mairca). > > Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the > target of hatred ;) > Well, then, maybe derision??? |
The fellow who started this thread also posted it on the rec.autos.vw
newsgroup, to which I subscribe because my wife drives a New Beetle. He (or she) posted it at the same time it was posted on this newsgroup, and there have been no replies. I wonder why? Are Ford owners more politically opinionated than Volkswagen drivers? I remember all the hippies who used to (some still do) drive VW microbuses. They had some interesting politics, which they could eloquently describe when they weren't high. Ah, those were the days.... "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message n.umich.edu... > On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > >>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>> hate. > >> > ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >> > of Mairca). > >> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >> target of hatred ;) > > Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. |
The fellow who started this thread also posted it on the rec.autos.vw
newsgroup, to which I subscribe because my wife drives a New Beetle. He (or she) posted it at the same time it was posted on this newsgroup, and there have been no replies. I wonder why? Are Ford owners more politically opinionated than Volkswagen drivers? I remember all the hippies who used to (some still do) drive VW microbuses. They had some interesting politics, which they could eloquently describe when they weren't high. Ah, those were the days.... "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message n.umich.edu... > On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > >>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>> hate. > >> > ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >> > of Mairca). > >> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >> target of hatred ;) > > Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. |
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > > >>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>hate. >>> > >>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>of Mairca). >> > >>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>target of hatred ;) > > > Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. I'm quite sure. However, most don't like activists on either end. |
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > > >>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>hate. >>> > >>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>of Mairca). >> > >>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>target of hatred ;) > > > Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. I'm quite sure. However, most don't like activists on either end. |
indago wrote:
> 041108 2142 - Wound Up posted: > > >>Daniel J. Stern wrote: >> >>>On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>hate. >>> >>> >>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of >>>Mairca). >> >>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>target of hatred ;) >> > > > Well, then, maybe derision??? That's up to you. I can write derisive hatred very well. I choose not to, because I don't think it's deserved, warranted, or appropriate. I will never understand it, but I know it's not a question of some "vile lifestyle choice". Believe me, the gay friends I've had all said "it would have been much easier to grow up, and know you were straight". Want to throw an insult at me? Well, I grew up (ironic term) in a more heterogeneous culture than a lot of people. I knew people from many different walks of life, and had friends from many of them. Derision of gays is like derision of blacks. I don't believe in either one. Anyone who believes otherwise, why, they're just plain IGNURNT, in my estimation. Be derisive if you will; it's not up to me... I don't really care. Getting in the way of that is not something I have time for. |
indago wrote:
> 041108 2142 - Wound Up posted: > > >>Daniel J. Stern wrote: >> >>>On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>hate. >>> >>> >>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of >>>Mairca). >> >>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>target of hatred ;) >> > > > Well, then, maybe derision??? That's up to you. I can write derisive hatred very well. I choose not to, because I don't think it's deserved, warranted, or appropriate. I will never understand it, but I know it's not a question of some "vile lifestyle choice". Believe me, the gay friends I've had all said "it would have been much easier to grow up, and know you were straight". Want to throw an insult at me? Well, I grew up (ironic term) in a more heterogeneous culture than a lot of people. I knew people from many different walks of life, and had friends from many of them. Derision of gays is like derision of blacks. I don't believe in either one. Anyone who believes otherwise, why, they're just plain IGNURNT, in my estimation. Be derisive if you will; it's not up to me... I don't really care. Getting in the way of that is not something I have time for. |
Maybe it's because you're making simplistic, broad-brushed attributions
based on half-assed conjecture instead of anything substantial. Or maybe you're right, those who drive "peopleskars" are just more erudite, intelligent, and naturally more tolerant of humanity. Those "people", by the way, didn't include gays. Or blacks, Jews, gypsys, etc. etc. They were to be gassed, burned or shot. Those "people" included nazis, their subjects, and their sympathizers, only. So what's your point again? You smoked too much pot back in the day to make any sense now? Kevin DeAngelis wrote: > The fellow who started this thread also posted it on the rec.autos.vw > newsgroup, to which I subscribe because my wife drives a New Beetle. He (or > she) posted it at the same time it was posted on this newsgroup, and there > have been no replies. > > I wonder why? Are Ford owners more politically opinionated than Volkswagen > drivers? I remember all the hippies who used to (some still do) drive VW > microbuses. They had some interesting politics, which they could eloquently > describe when they weren't high. Ah, those were the days.... > > > "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message > n.umich.edu... > >>On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >> >> >>>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>>hate. >>>> >>>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>>of Mairca). >>> >>>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>>target of hatred ;) >> >>Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. > > > |
Maybe it's because you're making simplistic, broad-brushed attributions
based on half-assed conjecture instead of anything substantial. Or maybe you're right, those who drive "peopleskars" are just more erudite, intelligent, and naturally more tolerant of humanity. Those "people", by the way, didn't include gays. Or blacks, Jews, gypsys, etc. etc. They were to be gassed, burned or shot. Those "people" included nazis, their subjects, and their sympathizers, only. So what's your point again? You smoked too much pot back in the day to make any sense now? Kevin DeAngelis wrote: > The fellow who started this thread also posted it on the rec.autos.vw > newsgroup, to which I subscribe because my wife drives a New Beetle. He (or > she) posted it at the same time it was posted on this newsgroup, and there > have been no replies. > > I wonder why? Are Ford owners more politically opinionated than Volkswagen > drivers? I remember all the hippies who used to (some still do) drive VW > microbuses. They had some interesting politics, which they could eloquently > describe when they weren't high. Ah, those were the days.... > > > "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message > n.umich.edu... > >>On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >> >> >>>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>>hate. >>>> >>>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>>of Mairca). >>> >>>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>>target of hatred ;) >> >>Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. > > > |
041108 2230 - Wound Up posted:
> indago wrote: >> 041108 2142 - Wound Up posted: >> >> >>> Daniel J. Stern wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>> hate. >>>> >>>> >>>> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of >>>> Mairca). >>> >>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>> target of hatred ;) >>> >> >> >> Well, then, maybe derision??? > > That's up to you. I can write derisive hatred very well. I choose not > to, because I don't think it's deserved, warranted, or appropriate. > > I will never understand it, but I know it's not a question of some "vile > lifestyle choice". Believe me, the gay friends I've had all said "it > would have been much easier to grow up, and know you were straight". > Want to throw an insult at me? Well, I grew up (ironic term) in a more > heterogeneous culture than a lot of people. I knew people from many > different walks of life, and had friends from many of them. > > Derision of gays is like derision of blacks. I don't believe in either > one. Anyone who believes otherwise, why, they're just plain IGNURNT, in > my estimation. Be derisive if you will; it's not up to me... I don't > really care. Getting in the way of that is not something I have time for. > I am recalling a program I saw on cable of a search into why an individual is gay. An individual, seeking to understand why someone is gay, asked a gay person: "Why are you gay?" The gay person looked him straight in the eye and asked: "Why are you straight?" |
041108 2230 - Wound Up posted:
> indago wrote: >> 041108 2142 - Wound Up posted: >> >> >>> Daniel J. Stern wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>> hate. >>>> >>>> >>>> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of >>>> Mairca). >>> >>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>> target of hatred ;) >>> >> >> >> Well, then, maybe derision??? > > That's up to you. I can write derisive hatred very well. I choose not > to, because I don't think it's deserved, warranted, or appropriate. > > I will never understand it, but I know it's not a question of some "vile > lifestyle choice". Believe me, the gay friends I've had all said "it > would have been much easier to grow up, and know you were straight". > Want to throw an insult at me? Well, I grew up (ironic term) in a more > heterogeneous culture than a lot of people. I knew people from many > different walks of life, and had friends from many of them. > > Derision of gays is like derision of blacks. I don't believe in either > one. Anyone who believes otherwise, why, they're just plain IGNURNT, in > my estimation. Be derisive if you will; it's not up to me... I don't > really care. Getting in the way of that is not something I have time for. > I am recalling a program I saw on cable of a search into why an individual is gay. An individual, seeking to understand why someone is gay, asked a gay person: "Why are you gay?" The gay person looked him straight in the eye and asked: "Why are you straight?" |
Well, you have the right handle, I'll say that! Some folks could sure stand
to smoke a little of the wacky tabacky.... "Wound Up" > wrote in message ... > Maybe it's because you're making simplistic, broad-brushed attributions > based on half-assed conjecture instead of anything substantial. Or maybe > you're right, those who drive "peopleskars" are just more erudite, > intelligent, and naturally more tolerant of humanity. > > Those "people", by the way, didn't include gays. Or blacks, Jews, gypsys, > etc. etc. They were to be gassed, burned or shot. Those "people" > included nazis, their subjects, and their sympathizers, only. > > So what's your point again? You smoked too much pot back in the day to > make any sense now? > > Kevin DeAngelis wrote: >> The fellow who started this thread also posted it on the rec.autos.vw >> newsgroup, to which I subscribe because my wife drives a New Beetle. He >> (or she) posted it at the same time it was posted on this newsgroup, and >> there have been no replies. >> >> I wonder why? Are Ford owners more politically opinionated than >> Volkswagen drivers? I remember all the hippies who used to (some still >> do) drive VW microbuses. They had some interesting politics, which they >> could eloquently describe when they weren't high. Ah, those were the >> days.... >> >> >> "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message >> n.umich.edu... >> >>>On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>>>hate. >>>>> >>>>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>>>of Mairca). >>>> >>>>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>>>target of hatred ;) >>> >>>Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. >> >> >> > |
Well, you have the right handle, I'll say that! Some folks could sure stand
to smoke a little of the wacky tabacky.... "Wound Up" > wrote in message ... > Maybe it's because you're making simplistic, broad-brushed attributions > based on half-assed conjecture instead of anything substantial. Or maybe > you're right, those who drive "peopleskars" are just more erudite, > intelligent, and naturally more tolerant of humanity. > > Those "people", by the way, didn't include gays. Or blacks, Jews, gypsys, > etc. etc. They were to be gassed, burned or shot. Those "people" > included nazis, their subjects, and their sympathizers, only. > > So what's your point again? You smoked too much pot back in the day to > make any sense now? > > Kevin DeAngelis wrote: >> The fellow who started this thread also posted it on the rec.autos.vw >> newsgroup, to which I subscribe because my wife drives a New Beetle. He >> (or she) posted it at the same time it was posted on this newsgroup, and >> there have been no replies. >> >> I wonder why? Are Ford owners more politically opinionated than >> Volkswagen drivers? I remember all the hippies who used to (some still >> do) drive VW microbuses. They had some interesting politics, which they >> could eloquently describe when they weren't high. Ah, those were the >> days.... >> >> >> "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message >> n.umich.edu... >> >>>On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>>>hate. >>>>> >>>>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>>>of Mairca). >>>> >>>>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>>>target of hatred ;) >>> >>>Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. >> >> >> > |
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, indago wrote:
> I am recalling a program I saw on cable of a search into why an > individual is gay. An individual, seeking to understand why someone is > gay, asked a gay person: "Why are you gay?" The gay person looked him > straight in the eye and asked: "Why are you straight?" A clever and apt rejoinder, to be sure, and it might make the light of understanding come on for some thinking people, but not for those self-proclaimed "Christians" for whom thinking is tantamount to blasphemy. For those individuals, the answer to "Why are you straight?" runs along the lines of "Because that is God's order for the world. Homosexuality is inherently disordered, an abomination before God, and it is a behavior and a lifestyle choice at best, and a sickness at worst. Come pray with us and Jesus will cure you of your homosexual urges." That's a longwinded way of saying what President Bush's Karl Rove said just the other day: "If we want to have a hopeful and decent(!) society, we ought to aim for the ideal, and the ideal is that marriage ought to be, and should be, a union of a man and a woman." Yep, that's the Bush administration..."spreading freedom and democracy around the globe" (the Brits called it "bringing them civilisation" a century ago...didn't work out too well back then, either). |
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, indago wrote:
> I am recalling a program I saw on cable of a search into why an > individual is gay. An individual, seeking to understand why someone is > gay, asked a gay person: "Why are you gay?" The gay person looked him > straight in the eye and asked: "Why are you straight?" A clever and apt rejoinder, to be sure, and it might make the light of understanding come on for some thinking people, but not for those self-proclaimed "Christians" for whom thinking is tantamount to blasphemy. For those individuals, the answer to "Why are you straight?" runs along the lines of "Because that is God's order for the world. Homosexuality is inherently disordered, an abomination before God, and it is a behavior and a lifestyle choice at best, and a sickness at worst. Come pray with us and Jesus will cure you of your homosexual urges." That's a longwinded way of saying what President Bush's Karl Rove said just the other day: "If we want to have a hopeful and decent(!) society, we ought to aim for the ideal, and the ideal is that marriage ought to be, and should be, a union of a man and a woman." Yep, that's the Bush administration..."spreading freedom and democracy around the globe" (the Brits called it "bringing them civilisation" a century ago...didn't work out too well back then, either). |
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, indago wrote:
> 041108 2142 - Wound Up posted: > > Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the > > target of hatred > Well, then, maybe derision??? "Maybe"...? Y'think? Turn on your TV set during primetime any night of the week. Scarcely a sitcom episode goes by without they don't make clunky, hamhanded innuendo or outright laughtrack-enhanced punchlines at the expense of cardigan-wearing, mincing, oh-so-coiffed fag-stereotypes, and entire series are built on same, e.g. "Will and Grace" or "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" or "Queer as Folk". One doesn't have to work very hard to imagine how black people felt when they saw such as "What's Happenin?" on television. Hollywood, for their part, is glibly contrite for years of making money off black stereotypes, but they evidently have zero problem doing the selfsame thing with gays right now, today. Gandhi said of social change: "First they ignore you, then they ridicule and denounce you, then they debate you, then you win." -DS |
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, indago wrote:
> 041108 2142 - Wound Up posted: > > Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the > > target of hatred > Well, then, maybe derision??? "Maybe"...? Y'think? Turn on your TV set during primetime any night of the week. Scarcely a sitcom episode goes by without they don't make clunky, hamhanded innuendo or outright laughtrack-enhanced punchlines at the expense of cardigan-wearing, mincing, oh-so-coiffed fag-stereotypes, and entire series are built on same, e.g. "Will and Grace" or "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" or "Queer as Folk". One doesn't have to work very hard to imagine how black people felt when they saw such as "What's Happenin?" on television. Hollywood, for their part, is glibly contrite for years of making money off black stereotypes, but they evidently have zero problem doing the selfsame thing with gays right now, today. Gandhi said of social change: "First they ignore you, then they ridicule and denounce you, then they debate you, then you win." -DS |
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > > >>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>hate. > > > ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of > Mairca). > > DS Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush. CTPB Bush is not a basher. -- YOU are the real piece of work in this post. I think you are a couple of drumsticks short of a picnic there bud. - SVTKate |
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > > >>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>hate. > > > ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of > Mairca). > > DS Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush. CTPB Bush is not a basher. -- YOU are the real piece of work in this post. I think you are a couple of drumsticks short of a picnic there bud. - SVTKate |
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > > >>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>hate. > > >>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>of Mairca). > > >>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>target of hatred ;) > > > Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. Well, let's be fair. There's lots of reasons to hate someone, like if they're not white, not Christian, or any number of other reasons. Hate: it's not just for fags anymore. nate -- replace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel |
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > > >>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>hate. > > >>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>of Mairca). > > >>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>target of hatred ;) > > > Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. Well, let's be fair. There's lots of reasons to hate someone, like if they're not white, not Christian, or any number of other reasons. Hate: it's not just for fags anymore. nate -- replace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel |
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > > >>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>hate. > > >>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>of Mairca). > > >>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>target of hatred ;) > > > Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. What is the evidence of this? Matt |
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: > > >>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>hate. > > >>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>of Mairca). > > >>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>target of hatred ;) > > > Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. What is the evidence of this? Matt |
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, WindsorFox[SS] wrote:
> Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush. And this proves...what, now? DS |
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, WindsorFox[SS] wrote:
> Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush. And this proves...what, now? DS |
You're damned right I do. And I would if I could.
Kevin DeAngelis wrote: > Well, you have the right handle, I'll say that! Some folks could sure stand > to smoke a little of the wacky tabacky.... > > > "Wound Up" > wrote in message > ... > >>Maybe it's because you're making simplistic, broad-brushed attributions >>based on half-assed conjecture instead of anything substantial. Or maybe >>you're right, those who drive "peopleskars" are just more erudite, >>intelligent, and naturally more tolerant of humanity. >> >>Those "people", by the way, didn't include gays. Or blacks, Jews, gypsys, >>etc. etc. They were to be gassed, burned or shot. Those "people" >>included nazis, their subjects, and their sympathizers, only. >> >>So what's your point again? You smoked too much pot back in the day to >>make any sense now? >> >>Kevin DeAngelis wrote: >> >>>The fellow who started this thread also posted it on the rec.autos.vw >>>newsgroup, to which I subscribe because my wife drives a New Beetle. He >>>(or she) posted it at the same time it was posted on this newsgroup, and >>>there have been no replies. >>> >>>I wonder why? Are Ford owners more politically opinionated than >>>Volkswagen drivers? I remember all the hippies who used to (some still >>>do) drive VW microbuses. They had some interesting politics, which they >>>could eloquently describe when they weren't high. Ah, those were the >>>days.... >>> >>> >>>"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message ngin.umich.edu... >>> >>> >>>>On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>>>>hate. >>>>>> >>>>>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>>>>of Mairca). >>>>> >>>>>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>>>>target of hatred ;) >>>> >>>>Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. >>> >>> >>> > > |
You're damned right I do. And I would if I could.
Kevin DeAngelis wrote: > Well, you have the right handle, I'll say that! Some folks could sure stand > to smoke a little of the wacky tabacky.... > > > "Wound Up" > wrote in message > ... > >>Maybe it's because you're making simplistic, broad-brushed attributions >>based on half-assed conjecture instead of anything substantial. Or maybe >>you're right, those who drive "peopleskars" are just more erudite, >>intelligent, and naturally more tolerant of humanity. >> >>Those "people", by the way, didn't include gays. Or blacks, Jews, gypsys, >>etc. etc. They were to be gassed, burned or shot. Those "people" >>included nazis, their subjects, and their sympathizers, only. >> >>So what's your point again? You smoked too much pot back in the day to >>make any sense now? >> >>Kevin DeAngelis wrote: >> >>>The fellow who started this thread also posted it on the rec.autos.vw >>>newsgroup, to which I subscribe because my wife drives a New Beetle. He >>>(or she) posted it at the same time it was posted on this newsgroup, and >>>there have been no replies. >>> >>>I wonder why? Are Ford owners more politically opinionated than >>>Volkswagen drivers? I remember all the hippies who used to (some still >>>do) drive VW microbuses. They had some interesting politics, which they >>>could eloquently describe when they weren't high. Ah, those were the >>>days.... >>> >>> >>>"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message ngin.umich.edu... >>> >>> >>>>On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>>>>hate. >>>>>> >>>>>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States >>>>>>of Mairca). >>>>> >>>>>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>>>>target of hatred ;) >>>> >>>>Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view. >>> >>> >>> > > |
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message n.umich.edu... > On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, WindsorFox[SS] wrote: > >> Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush. > > And this proves...what, now? > > DS That gays can be just as illogical as straights of course. Peter |
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message n.umich.edu... > On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, WindsorFox[SS] wrote: > >> Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush. > > And this proves...what, now? > > DS That gays can be just as illogical as straights of course. Peter |
Wound Up wrote:
> indago wrote: > >> 041108 2142 - Wound Up posted: >> >> >>> Daniel J. Stern wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >>>> >>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>> hate. >>>> >>>> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd >>>> States of >>>> Mairca). >>> >>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>> target of hatred ;) >> >> Well, then, maybe derision??? > > That's up to you. I can write derisive hatred very well. I choose not > to, because I don't think it's deserved, warranted, or appropriate. > > I will never understand it, but I know it's not a question of some "vile > lifestyle choice". Believe me, the gay friends I've had all said "it > would have been much easier to grow up, and know you were straight". > Want to throw an insult at me? Well, I grew up (ironic term) in a more > heterogeneous culture than a lot of people. I knew people from many > different walks of life, and had friends from many of them. I don't think "heterogeneous" means what you think it means. :) |
Wound Up wrote:
> indago wrote: > >> 041108 2142 - Wound Up posted: >> >> >>> Daniel J. Stern wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote: >>>> >>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial >>>>> hate. >>>> >>>> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd >>>> States of >>>> Mairca). >>> >>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the >>> target of hatred ;) >> >> Well, then, maybe derision??? > > That's up to you. I can write derisive hatred very well. I choose not > to, because I don't think it's deserved, warranted, or appropriate. > > I will never understand it, but I know it's not a question of some "vile > lifestyle choice". Believe me, the gay friends I've had all said "it > would have been much easier to grow up, and know you were straight". > Want to throw an insult at me? Well, I grew up (ironic term) in a more > heterogeneous culture than a lot of people. I knew people from many > different walks of life, and had friends from many of them. I don't think "heterogeneous" means what you think it means. :) |
>> That's up to you. I can write derisive hatred very well. I choose
>> not to, because I don't think it's deserved, warranted, or appropriate. >> >> I will never understand it, but I know it's not a question of some >> "vile lifestyle choice". Believe me, the gay friends I've had all >> said "it would have been much easier to grow up, and know you were >> straight". Want to throw an insult at me? Well, I grew up (ironic >> term) in a more heterogeneous culture than a lot of people. I knew >> people from many different walks of life, and had friends from many of >> them. > > > I don't think "heterogeneous" means what you think it means. :) I'm quite sure it does. Take a look- http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=heterogeneous |
>> That's up to you. I can write derisive hatred very well. I choose
>> not to, because I don't think it's deserved, warranted, or appropriate. >> >> I will never understand it, but I know it's not a question of some >> "vile lifestyle choice". Believe me, the gay friends I've had all >> said "it would have been much easier to grow up, and know you were >> straight". Want to throw an insult at me? Well, I grew up (ironic >> term) in a more heterogeneous culture than a lot of people. I knew >> people from many different walks of life, and had friends from many of >> them. > > > I don't think "heterogeneous" means what you think it means. :) I'm quite sure it does. Take a look- http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=heterogeneous |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
AutoBanter.com