A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Chrysler
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! ___________mixqec



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #191  
Old November 14th 04, 12:41 AM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

linda wrote:

> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> linda wrote:
>>
>>> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> And this proves...what, now?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Daniel, i get fussed at by the rest of the guys for being OT,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We all do.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> don't think that this has anything to do with cars, does it?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>>
>>>
>>> TO ALL:
>>> Homosexuality is an accepted lifestyle nowadays with a proven
>>> biological causation.

>>
>>
>>
>> What proof?
>>
>> Matt
>>

> what proof do you have against it?


All of the homosexuals who are now happy heterosexuals. If it was
biological, they couldn't change their preference. If even one does
change, and many more than one have, then the biological argument goes
out the window.


Matt

Ads
  #192  
Old November 14th 04, 12:41 AM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

linda wrote:

> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> linda wrote:
>>
>>> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> And this proves...what, now?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Daniel, i get fussed at by the rest of the guys for being OT,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We all do.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> don't think that this has anything to do with cars, does it?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>>
>>>
>>> TO ALL:
>>> Homosexuality is an accepted lifestyle nowadays with a proven
>>> biological causation.

>>
>>
>>
>> What proof?
>>
>> Matt
>>

> what proof do you have against it?


All of the homosexuals who are now happy heterosexuals. If it was
biological, they couldn't change their preference. If even one does
change, and many more than one have, then the biological argument goes
out the window.


Matt

  #193  
Old November 14th 04, 01:30 AM
linda
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt Whiting wrote:
> linda wrote:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>> linda wrote:
>>>
>>>> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> And this proves...what, now?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Daniel, i get fussed at by the rest of the guys for being OT,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We all do.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> don't think that this has anything to do with cars, does it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> TO ALL:
>>>> Homosexuality is an accepted lifestyle nowadays with a proven
>>>> biological causation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What proof?
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>

>> what proof do you have against it?

>
>
> All of the homosexuals who are now happy heterosexuals. If it was
> biological, they couldn't change their preference. If even one does
> change, and many more than one have, then the biological argument goes
> out the window.
>
>
> Matt
>

Matt, Read your statistics and failures... also, read how many
homosexual men marry homosexual women. are they hiding something? or is
this just the perfect unions?

lw
  #194  
Old November 14th 04, 01:30 AM
linda
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt Whiting wrote:
> linda wrote:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>> linda wrote:
>>>
>>>> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> And this proves...what, now?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Daniel, i get fussed at by the rest of the guys for being OT,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We all do.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> don't think that this has anything to do with cars, does it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> TO ALL:
>>>> Homosexuality is an accepted lifestyle nowadays with a proven
>>>> biological causation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What proof?
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>

>> what proof do you have against it?

>
>
> All of the homosexuals who are now happy heterosexuals. If it was
> biological, they couldn't change their preference. If even one does
> change, and many more than one have, then the biological argument goes
> out the window.
>
>
> Matt
>

Matt, Read your statistics and failures... also, read how many
homosexual men marry homosexual women. are they hiding something? or is
this just the perfect unions?

lw
  #195  
Old November 14th 04, 01:31 AM
linda
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt Whiting wrote:
> linda wrote:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>> linda wrote:
>>>
>>>> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> And this proves...what, now?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Daniel, i get fussed at by the rest of the guys for being OT,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We all do.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> don't think that this has anything to do with cars, does it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> TO ALL:
>>>> Homosexuality is an accepted lifestyle nowadays with a proven
>>>> biological causation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What proof?
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>

>> what proof do you have against it?

>
>
> All of the homosexuals who are now happy heterosexuals. If it was
> biological, they couldn't change their preference. If even one does
> change, and many more than one have, then the biological argument goes
> out the window.
>
>
> Matt
>

you have watched too much Clockwork Orange, haven't you? are your
eyelids tired?????

lw
  #196  
Old November 14th 04, 01:31 AM
linda
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt Whiting wrote:
> linda wrote:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>> linda wrote:
>>>
>>>> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> And this proves...what, now?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Daniel, i get fussed at by the rest of the guys for being OT,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We all do.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> don't think that this has anything to do with cars, does it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> TO ALL:
>>>> Homosexuality is an accepted lifestyle nowadays with a proven
>>>> biological causation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What proof?
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>

>> what proof do you have against it?

>
>
> All of the homosexuals who are now happy heterosexuals. If it was
> biological, they couldn't change their preference. If even one does
> change, and many more than one have, then the biological argument goes
> out the window.
>
>
> Matt
>

you have watched too much Clockwork Orange, haven't you? are your
eyelids tired?????

lw
  #197  
Old November 14th 04, 02:00 AM
Big Bill
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:36:09 GMT, Sparky > wrote:

>Big Bill wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 00:30:32 -0500, "Daniel J. Stern"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>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

>>
>> There's a group that come in for much more derision than homosexuals
>> on TV - the white male.
>> All you need to do to see this is to watch sitcoms and advertisements.
>> The poor bumbling white guy is the butt of so many jokes it's obvious
>> to anyone who watches.
>> But it's OK, because, after all, they are just, well, there.

>
>Feeling sorry for yourself, BB?
>
>Adult white guys still seem to be running things across the USA.


So you don't think what I say is right?
Have you watched TV lately?

Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"
  #198  
Old November 14th 04, 02:00 AM
Big Bill
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:36:09 GMT, Sparky > wrote:

>Big Bill wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 00:30:32 -0500, "Daniel J. Stern"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>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

>>
>> There's a group that come in for much more derision than homosexuals
>> on TV - the white male.
>> All you need to do to see this is to watch sitcoms and advertisements.
>> The poor bumbling white guy is the butt of so many jokes it's obvious
>> to anyone who watches.
>> But it's OK, because, after all, they are just, well, there.

>
>Feeling sorry for yourself, BB?
>
>Adult white guys still seem to be running things across the USA.


So you don't think what I say is right?
Have you watched TV lately?

Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"
  #199  
Old November 14th 04, 02:23 AM
linda
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>
>
>>Matthew Whiting wrote:

>
>
>>>All of the homosexuals who are now happy heterosexuals. If it was
>>>biological, they couldn't change their preference. If even one does
>>>change, and many more than one have, then the biological argument goes
>>>out the window.
>>>Matt

>
>
>>Matt, Read your statistics and failures... also, read how many
>>homosexual men marry homosexual women. are they hiding something? or is
>>this just the perfect unions?

>
>
> It's no use, Linda; Matt places more trust in dogma than in science.

i guess you are right.. it is a shame, too..

good people are hard to find... whether gay or not...

lw
  #200  
Old November 14th 04, 02:23 AM
linda
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>
>
>>Matthew Whiting wrote:

>
>
>>>All of the homosexuals who are now happy heterosexuals. If it was
>>>biological, they couldn't change their preference. If even one does
>>>change, and many more than one have, then the biological argument goes
>>>out the window.
>>>Matt

>
>
>>Matt, Read your statistics and failures... also, read how many
>>homosexual men marry homosexual women. are they hiding something? or is
>>this just the perfect unions?

>
>
> It's no use, Linda; Matt places more trust in dogma than in science.

i guess you are right.. it is a shame, too..

good people are hard to find... whether gay or not...

lw
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! _____________---_gadkypy Michael Barnes Driving 4 January 4th 05 07:47 PM
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! ___________ mixqec [email protected] Chrysler 37 November 18th 04 05:18 PM
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! _____________---_ gadkypy Paul Antique cars 3 November 9th 04 07:54 PM
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!!___________ mixqec indago Chrysler 7 November 8th 04 06:05 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.