THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: E who wrote (10331)	4/22/2002 9:42:47 PM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (1) of 21057

Your last paragraph confuses me somewhat. However, the subject is gays. I can only speak my own feelings on that, which do not speak for "people." I don't mind men loving men, or women loving women. I don't mind same-sex partners living together. The two things I object most about with gay males are (1) the default sex act of rectal penetration, and (2) promiscuity in sexual partners. Behavior number (1) falls within the "abomination of nature" category for me, and by extension causes number (2) to fall with the same category. What more can I say?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next