Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Science Fiction » alt.startrek » Homosexuality in Battlestar Galactica -- some of the case #3
Re: Homosexuality in Battlestar Galactica -- some of the case #3 [message #102816 ] Sa, 06 August 2005 23:50
phyphor  
On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 18:53:51 GMT, "BYTE ME!" <donotreply [at] nowhere.com>
wrote:

>John Shocked wrote:
>> "BYTE ME!" <donotreply [at] nowhere.com> wrote in message news:Fn6Je.889918$pI6.537995 [at] fe06.news.easynews.com...
>>
>>>John Shocked wrote:
>>>
>>>>"maf1029 (©2001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousaxophone> wrote in message
>>>>news:qka8f1ld0sujm2bur320v2ejfrf0gml809 [at] 4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 5 Aug 2005 18:22:24 -0700, "John Shocked"
>>>>><jshocked [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"maf1029 (©2001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousaxophone> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:3ve0f1l8t7u1l16c578f3baople9f4o41l [at] 4ax.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 17:12:42 -0700, "John Shocked"
>>>>>>><jshocked [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"maf1029 (©2001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousaxophone> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>news:5psve1havs6k69e4vaf30re35tk2eptfga [at] 4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There are no studies that indicate that any more than a handful of heterosexual couples
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>engage in this behavior anymore than once in their life.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>25% is "a handful"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Are you insane? <rhetorical>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>1 in 4 ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>1 in 4 ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Yes, one in 4. 25%. One-quarter.
>>>>>>>>>Got it now? Good.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Most of which likely committed the act by accident in the dark, once in their whole life.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>No, John, 25% of all HETEROsexuals engage <drum roll> REGULARLY in anal intercourse.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>False, there is no such statistic.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Johnny -- in the future, please try not to LIE so obviously. Thank you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>These are all true and accurate statements I have made.
>>>>>
>>>>>Except that they're falsehoods and inaccuracies.
>>>>>================================
>>>>>Pineapple Percussion
>>>>
>>>>Moral values are defined by Nature and its interaction with one's community.
>>>>For the most part, morality is universal.
>>>>For instance, some places where there is overpopulation, they have instituted laws
>>>>to limit childbirth. That certainly would be on the surface anti-nature, but is really
>>>>consistent with nature when all issues and the ecology are factored in.
>>>
>>>Moral values are not defined in any way at all by Nature. Moral values are a creation of Man.
>>>If you were right about Moral values and Nature, then your example of a limit to childbirth being consistent with nature is not in
>>>your favor. Sodomy would then fit as consistent with Nature as it would also assist in limiting childbirth.
>>
>>
>> That is equivalent to stating that in areas of overpopulation, men ought to be castrated.
>> This is of course nonsense.
>> Do you find yourself checking out the public bathroom stalls, hoping that the toilet was
>> not flushed, so you could touch another man's faeces excrement ?
>> How deep is your love of another man's faeces excrement ?
>
>Uh, No it is no more nonsense than the bullshit you propose of Morals
>being based on Nature.

Come to think of it, saying Morals are based on Nature, then it's
perfectly fine to:

1 - Steal food from someone else (dogs, monkeys, etc do this all the
time, )
2 - Fight/injure/kill someone for their mate
3 - Rape/attempted rape is fine, due to certain animals doing it (or
acts like it, )

While I don't really believe this, his argument could lead to stuff
like that.


> I see you have no defense of that position so
>result to a personal attack. So here in kind: Do you find yourself
>licking bathroom stalls to see if you can taste another man's shit? How
>deep is your love of the taste of shit? Do you rub another man's shit
>all over yourself?
>

Methinks he doth protest too much.

>
>>
>>
>>>>Seriously, again it is wishful thinking amongst homosexuals to think that all people who
>>>>believe Sodomy is disgusting believe it because the bible says so.
>>>>Frankly, I question the morality of anyone who would have to look into the fine print of
>>>>the various bibles of various religions out there, to come to he conclusion that
>>>>Sodomy is disgusting.
>>>>No one should assume the morality of people who start out a moral statement by saying
>>>>"well the bible says...". Moral people come to such conclusions without the assistance
>>>>of any textbook.
>>>>Politics
>>>
>>>No one should presume to push their version of morality off on anyone else. You are not the judge of what is moral or not.
>>
>>
>> Behavior, such as Sodomy, Drugs, Gambling, Prostitution, are all behaviors that the public has
>> a right to set limitations upon.
>
>No they clearly are not behavior that in all cases the public has any
>right to set limitations on. It is none of the publics business what
>adults do in private that does not violate the rights of others.

Exactly. If the govt. continues to regulate more and more what we do
in private, then where does the line stop?

Also, how does Bill and Ted buggering each other affect me?

If they're doing it in the privacy of their own home, why should I
care?
>
>Got it, assclown?

$5 says he says "moral values are definied by Nature" again.

-LMB
Re: Homosexuality in Battlestar Galactica -- some of the case #3 [message #102818 ] So, 07 August 2005 00:35
donotreply  
Louis M. Brown wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 18:53:51 GMT, "BYTE ME!" <donotreply [at] nowhere.com>
> wrote:
>=20
>=20
>>John Shocked wrote:
>>
>>>"BYTE ME!" <donotreply [at] nowhere.com> wrote in message news:Fn6Je.889918=
$pI6.537995 [at] fe06.news.easynews.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>John Shocked wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"maf1029 (=A92001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousaxoph=
one> wrote in message=20
>>>>>news:qka8f1ld0sujm2bur320v2ejfrf0gml809 [at] 4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Fri, 5 Aug 2005 18:22:24 -0700, "John Shocked"
>>>>>><jshocked [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"maf1029 (=A92001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousaxo=
phone> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:3ve0f1l8t7u1l16c578f3baople9f4o41l [at] 4ax.com...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 17:12:42 -0700, "John Shocked"
>>>>>>>><jshocked [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"maf1029 (=A92001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousa=
xophone> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>news:5psve1havs6k69e4vaf30re35tk2eptfga [at] 4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There are no studies that indicate that any more than a ha=
ndful of heterosexual couples
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>engage in this behavior anymore than once in their life.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>25% is "a handful"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Are you insane? <rhetorical>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>1 in 4 ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>1 in 4 ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Yes, one in 4. 25%. One-quarter.
>>>>>>>>>>Got it now? Good.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Most of which likely committed the act by accident in the dark=
, once in their whole life.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>No, John, 25% of all HETEROsexuals engage <drum roll> REGULARLY=
in anal intercourse.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>False, there is no such statistic.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Johnny -- in the future, please try not to LIE so obviously. Than=
k you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>These are all true and accurate statements I have made.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Except that they're falsehoods and inaccuracies.
>>>>>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>>>>>>Pineapple Percussion
>>>>>
>>>>>Moral values are defined by Nature and its interaction with one's co=
mmunity.
>>>>>For the most part, morality is universal.
>>>>>For instance, some places where there is overpopulation, they have i=
nstituted laws
>>>>>to limit childbirth. That certainly would be on the surface anti-na=
ture, but is really
>>>>>consistent with nature when all issues and the ecology are factored =
in.
>>>>
>>>>Moral values are not defined in any way at all by Nature. Moral valu=
es are a creation of Man.
>>>>If you were right about Moral values and Nature, then your example of=
a limit to childbirth being consistent with nature is not in=20
>>>>your favor. Sodomy would then fit as consistent with Nature as it wou=
ld also assist in limiting childbirth.
>>>
>>>
>>>That is equivalent to stating that in areas of overpopulation, men oug=
ht to be castrated.
>>>This is of course nonsense.
>>>Do you find yourself checking out the public bathroom stalls, hoping t=
hat the toilet was
>>>not flushed, so you could touch another man's faeces excrement ?
>>>How deep is your love of another man's faeces excrement ?
>>
>>Uh, No it is no more nonsense than the bullshit you propose of Morals=20
>>being based on Nature.
>=20
>=20
> Come to think of it, saying Morals are based on Nature, then it's
> perfectly fine to:
>=20
> 1 - Steal food from someone else (dogs, monkeys, etc do this all the
> time, )
> 2 - Fight/injure/kill someone for their mate=20
> 3 - Rape/attempted rape is fine, due to certain animals doing it (or
> acts like it, )=20
>=20
> While I don't really believe this, his argument could lead to stuff
> like that.
>=20

Well of course his argument that morals are based on nature would allow=20
all of this an more while remaining moral. He will however, just post=20
another long tirade about sci-fi and sodomy. He will need to change the =

subject soon.


>=20
>=20
>> I see you have no defense of that position so=20
>>result to a personal attack. So here in kind: Do you find yourself=20
>>licking bathroom stalls to see if you can taste another man's shit? Ho=
w=20
>>deep is your love of the taste of shit? Do you rub another man's shit =

>>all over yourself?
>>
>=20
>=20
> Methinks he doth protest too much.
>

Or at least that he does show far too much interest.


>=20
>>>
>>>>>Seriously, again it is wishful thinking amongst homosexuals to think=
that all people who
>>>>>believe Sodomy is disgusting believe it because the bible says so.
>>>>>Frankly, I question the morality of anyone who would have to look in=
to the fine print of
>>>>>the various bibles of various religions out there, to come to he con=
clusion that
>>>>>Sodomy is disgusting.
>>>>>No one should assume the morality of people who start out a moral st=
atement by saying
>>>>>"well the bible says...". Moral people come to such conclusions wit=
hout the assistance
>>>>>of any textbook.
>>>>>Politics
>>>>
>>>>No one should presume to push their version of morality off on anyone=
else. You are not the judge of what is moral or not.
>>>
>>>
>>>Behavior, such as Sodomy, Drugs, Gambling, Prostitution, are all behav=
iors that the public has
>>>a right to set limitations upon.
>>
>>No they clearly are not behavior that in all cases the public has any=20
>>right to set limitations on. It is none of the publics business what=20
>>adults do in private that does not violate the rights of others.
>=20
>=20
> Exactly. If the govt. continues to regulate more and more what we do
> in private, then where does the line stop?
>=20
> Also, how does Bill and Ted buggering each other affect me?
>=20
> If they're doing it in the privacy of their own home, why should I
> care?
>=20
>>Got it, assclown?
>=20
>=20
> $5 says he says "moral values are definied by Nature" again.
>=20

He may very well, I would not risk $5 on him not. I think that at the=20
very least he will repost his sci-fi sodomy fantasies.

Agree completely, the government has absolutely no business minding the=20
private conduct of adults that is not a hurting anyone. He is all for=20
control apparently. Let's hope that he never get's the control he=20
seeks as even he would live to regret it.


> -LMB
>=20


--=20
Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is none=20
more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifying to man, more repugnant=20
to reason, and more contradictory in itself, than this thing called=20
Christianity. Too absurd for belief, too impossible to convince, and too =

inconsistent for practice, it renders the heart torpid, or produces only =

atheists and fanatics. As an engine of power, it serves the purpose of=20
despotism; and as a means of wealth, the avarice of priests; but so far=20
as respects the good of man in general, it leads to nothing here or=20
hereafter. =96Thomas Paine
Re: Homosexuality in Battlestar Galactica -- some of the case #3 [message #102831 ] So, 07 August 2005 08:26
saxophone  
On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 11:36:26 -0700, FRED CHERRY posing as "John
Shocked" <jshocked [at] hotmail.com> wrote:

>"maf1029 (©2001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousaxophone> wrote in message
>news:k4c9f11dvnb8qglojlih42eabht194g5js [at] 4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 03:59:07 -0700, "John Shocked"
>> <jshocked [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>"maf1029 (©2001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousaxophone> wrote in message
>>>news:qka8f1ld0sujm2bur320v2ejfrf0gml809 [at] 4ax.com...
>>>> On Fri, 5 Aug 2005 18:22:24 -0700, "John Shocked"
>>>> <jshocked [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>"maf1029 (©2001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousaxophone> wrote in message
>>>>>news:3ve0f1l8t7u1l16c578f3baople9f4o41l [at] 4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 17:12:42 -0700, "John Shocked"
>>>>>> <jshocked [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>"maf1029 (©2001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousaxophone> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:5psve1havs6k69e4vaf30re35tk2eptfga [at] 4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>There are no studies that indicate that any more than a handful of heterosexual couples
>>>>>>>>>>>>>engage in this behavior anymore than once in their life.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 25% is "a handful"?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you insane? <rhetorical>
>>>>>>>>>>>1 in 4 ?
>>>>>>>>>1 in 4 ?
>>>>>>>> Yes, one in 4. 25%. One-quarter.
>>>>>>>> Got it now? Good.
>>>>>>>>> Most of which likely committed the act by accident in the dark, once in their whole life.
>>>>>>>> No, John, 25% of all HETEROsexuals engage <drum roll> REGULARLY in anal intercourse.
>>>>>>>False, there is no such statistic.
>>>>>> Johnny -- in the future, please try not to LIE so obviously. Thank you.
>>>>>These are all true and accurate statements I have made.
>>>> Except that they're falsehoods and inaccuracies.
>>>> ================================
>>>> Pineapple Percussion
>>>Moral values are defined
>> ... subjectively, relative to culture.
>> ================================
>> Bogus Behemoth
>
>Wrong,

..... except for the part that morality is subjective, relative to
culture.
The ancient Aztecs used to rip the still-beating hearts out of virgins
and then sacrifice the bodies to the local volcano god. That was very
moral, relative to their culture.
We don't do that, because we think it's immoral.

QED, Freddy.

========================================

Blanketing Barium




given a community, morality is universal. There is not a single
homosexual who
>does not know that bringing their procreative organ in contact with another man's faeces excrement
>is wrong.
>
>
>==========================================================
>This promiscuous behavior is much more common in homosexuals.
>
>=====================================================
>http://www.cprmd.org/Myths/Myth_Fact_002.htm
>
>Few "gay" relationships last longer than two years, with many homosexual men reporting hundreds of lifetime partners. Source:
>Pollack, M. " Male Homosexuality," in Western Sexuality: Practice and Precept in Past and Present Times, ed. P. Aries and A.Bejin,
>pp. 40-61, cited by Joseph Nicolosi in Reparative Therapy of Male Homosexuality (Northvale, N.J., Jason Aronsons Inc., 1991),
>pp.124-25.
>
> 50% of homosexual men over the age of 30, and 75% of homosexual men over the age of forty, experienced no relationships that lasted
>more than one year. Source: M. T. Saghir and E. Robins, Male and Female Homosexuality: A Comprehensive Investigation (Baltimore:
>Williams Wilkins, 1973), pp. 56-57.
>
> In 1978, a study done by two homosexual doctors revealed staggering statistics. Of 685 homosexual men, 589 (83%) had 50+ partners
>in their lifetime, 497 (73%) had 100+, 394 (58%) had 250+, 284 (41%) had 500+, 182 exceeded 1000 partners, an astonishing 26%. And
>79% noted that over half their sexual contacts were total strangers. Source: Bell, A.P. and Wienberg, M.S. " Homosexualities: A
>Study of Diversity Among Men and Women " (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1978.)
>======================================================
>
>Here is the truth (eight partners a year outside their main partnership) :
>
>==========================================================
>http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/jul/03071405.html
>
>Monday July 14, 2003 Printer friendly version Email to a friend
>Homosexual Unions Last Only 1.5 Years, Says New Study AMSTERDAM, July 14, 2003
>(LifeSiteNews.com) - As Canada and several U.S. states move toward the legalization of so-
>called homosexual "marriage," a new study has found that homosexual partnerships last, on
>average, only one-and-a-half years.
>
>The study is based on the health records of young Dutch homosexuals by Dr. Maria Xiridou of
>the Amsterdam Municipal Health Service and published in the May issue of the journal AIDS.
>It also found that men in homosexual relationships have an average of eight partners a year
>outside their main partnership, adding more evidence to the "stereotype" that homosexuals
>tend to be promiscuous.
>
>The findings are "proof positive that these relationships ... will never be as stable as a
>normal heterosexual relationship regardless of what institutions or laws are changed," said
>Pete LaBarbara, senior policy analyst at Concerned Women for America's Culture and Family
>Institute, who predicts that homosexual promiscuity will remain "rampant."
>==========================================================
>
>Politics
>
Re: Homosexuality in Battlestar Galactica -- some of the case #3 [message #102832 ] So, 07 August 2005 08:27
saxophone  
On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 11:44:19 -0700, FRED CHERRY, posing as "John
Shocked" <jshocked [at] hotmail.com> wrote:

>"maf1029 (©2001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousaxophone> wrote in message
>news:pqg0f1529gutgsff9cuvq1sv9piig73bov [at] 4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 18:32:19 -0700, "John Shocked"
>> <jshocked [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>"maf1029 (©2001-2008)" <saxophone [at] saxophone.whereforeartthousaxophone> wrote in message
>>>news:5avne1lctfakrs9a03if5rn490riuh72qr [at] 4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>1) This Battlestar Galactica series seems to have a continuing Homosexual agenda
>>>>>>>> Yeah, especially with Tigh and his WIFE, FEMALE Starbuck and Apollo
>>>>>>>> having had sex, Starbuck having sex with Apollo's brother, Starbuck
>>>>>>>> having sex with Dr. Gaius, Dr. Gaius fucking FEMALE Cylon #6, Boomer
>>>>>>>> and whatsHISface.....
>>>>>>>> Yeah. all those male/female couples = HOMOSEXUALS everywhere!
>>>>>>>1) "6" and Boomer are Cylons and thus sex with them is
>>>>>> HETEROsexuality, because they are HUMAN females. And in HUMAN form,
>>>>>> with HUMAN physiology too.
>>>>>That is the standard
>>>> Yup. thanks for agreeing.
>>>1) "6" and Boomer are Cylons and thus sex with them is
>> ...... HETEROsexuality, because they are HUMAN females. And in HUMAN
>> form, with HUMAN physiology too.
>> <snip previously refuted fantasy from the "mind" of John Shocked>
>> ==========================================
>> Abdicationitis
>
>
>========================================================
>This promiscuous behavior is much more common in

....HETEROsexuals, as already explained, Freddy.


=======================
An Apple
Vorheriges Thema:Re: Tasha Yar
Nächstes Thema:Re: [K/S] ST2: Woo! Subtle
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Sa Mai 19 17:17:17 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,10619 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered