Anti-gay activist took ten-day holiday with male prostitute

valkyrie said:
An enduring pattern isn't necessary. It's what he desires and only he would know that for sure. I don't see the harm in feeling sorry for someone that lives a lie.
Click to expand...

An enduring pattern would be necessary as people's desires can be fickle.
 
valkyrie said:
It depends. Some exposure might be good, say... corruption or anything else that might victimize people.
Click to expand...

well, yeah.
wrong doers was my focused group.
Problem is, what's right or wrong, good or bad is trying to be changed by some.

I still think there are some principles that all Sane people can agree on though.
PC has thrown a wrench into things in that area so bad though, it's going to be slow recovering.
 
Gotholic said:
An enduring pattern would be necessary as people's desires can be fickle.
Click to expand...
I think I see where you're going with this, Goth. If someone was curious and experimenting just one time they may afterward decide that wasn't their thing. So I agree with you there. One homosexual encounter does not prove Rekers is bi-sexual (or gay). I suppose it's what he desires and we'll really not know what's in his heart unless he voluntarily reveals that, or if this is not his only homosexual encounter. (We already assume that he has had a pattern of heterosexual sex with his wife to create the children they have together.)
 
catocom said:
well, yeah.
wrong doers was my focused group.
Problem is, what's right or wrong, good or bad is trying to be changed by some.
Click to expand...
I am a live and let live kinda person, and I would hope that others would be the same (thought that is not reality).

I still think there are some principles that all Sane people can agree on though.
PC has thrown a wrench into things in that area so bad though, it's going to be slow recovering.
Click to expand...
Yep, the newest: Erase the "R" word!
Man, that's so retarded.
 
cool.
That is the basis for a great starting point right there.
On Any problem.
The next step is how to help the indecisive people without trampling the independent people.

IMO all laws should be reevaluated in that manner at the fed level.
 
catocom said:
cool.
That is the basis for a great starting point right there.
On Any problem.
The next step is how to help the indecisive people without trampling the independent people.

IMO all laws should be reevaluated in that manner at the fed level.
Click to expand...
Some laws need to be local, some laws need to be federal. Not all laws need to be federal. Laws that are universal affecting all citizens and their rights as citizens (such as voting rights) should remain with the federal government. Laws that regulate interstate commerce and potential environmental hazards should also be federal.

You are right about this being the basis for a great starting point. We often run into problems when one group lobbies government to limit the freedoms and rights of other, minority, groups on the basis of vote size. ("I will keep you a slave because we can vote and we are many and you are few." Or... "We will prevent you from voting because we can vote and you can not, therefore our voice is heard and yours is not.") That can not be the basis of law making for a free country. Freedoms and rights need to be universal to all citizens until that citizen proves otherwise (i.e., felons and voting).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top