Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (204905)	11/26/2001 11:32:11 PM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

and I am STILL glad you will not support the BSA, I count that as a victory over your ilk. keep your perversions in your own family.

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (204905)	11/26/2001 11:33:36 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Well your posts today and your dodging answers show all exactly the selective and petty way you decide what free speech is acceptable. Your petty ability to be negative on a group thousands of dedicated honorable Americans building character in youth is no surprise to me. you say #reply-16703816 I (j-f-) personally think a line should be drawn at obscentities and racial and ethnic slurs, but not political invective.... "obscenities"LOL spelling??? So I then asked if you believed lying about individuals and falsely suggesting the were making sexually harassing advances or they were engaged in criminal terrorist activities were over the line. But by your obtuse and dodging answer you are saying it's OK for someone to lie and slander another with false allegation but your get upset over word insult of a particular type. Yes my ability to pin you down and frame the petty nature of the way you think you find annoying. What a surprise! As I observed earlier today you show once again how little you know about so much. Honesty, character and common sense do not seem to be in your strong suits. Just another area or characteristic of humans where many here are 100 to a 1000 time ahead of you. tom watson tosiwmee

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (204905)	11/27/2001 4:46:27 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"What exactly are you trying to get across other than that your frightened to death of gays and pedophiles. Were you an abused child? By a gay?" This is a good example of my earlier assertion that all you can do is personalize and insult. I have seen nothing that suggests that this poster is afraid of gays. I do see you attacking the boyscouts and supporting NAMBLA though. Creepy imo. Not surprising, but creepy.

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (204905)	11/27/2001 8:17:41 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

res- You indicated to me earlier that Nambla was permeating every college campus Wrong, where did I indicate such a thing? Has this discussion gone so badly for you lying is the only thing you have left? What exactly are you trying to get across other than that your frightened to death of gays and pedophiles Wrong again, and another ridiculous assertion. As a father and a person who cares about children, pedophiles concern me. Further, the growth and acceptance of such groups also concerns me. As they should anyone who cares about children. If NAMBLA has 1000 members nationwide. That's 1000 child molesters running around free looking for their next child to prey on. You may not care, but I certainly do. The ACLU is putting its vast legal resources behind an effort to protect the members of such a vile group. They are giving them free legal help in order to defeat a father who had his child tortured, raped and killed by a member of that group. It appears you support the ACLU in their effort to defeat this deeply saddened father who has had his life ripped apart by these fanatically crazed sexual deviants. The rest of your post wreaks of hysteria. Please JF, try and articulate a reasoned debate instead of digging into the personal realm. Have I gotten personally insulting toward you during this debate? Or personal in regard to examining your motivation toward defending the ACLU and their support of a group of child molesters? Of course I haven't. I've simply articulated my position with studies, facts, and clear thinking. I've logically rebuffed your original assertion that the Boy Scouts must be a "homophobic" group in order to hold the position they do regarding Scout leaders.