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: Steve Dietrich who wrote (423651)	7/7/2003 8:34:13 AM
From: jim-thompson	Respond to of 769670

Being a homosexual is not a sin. However, when you start butt banging each other, it is a sin. Read the Bible.

To: Steve Dietrich who wrote (423651)	7/7/2003 8:35:35 AM
From: jim-thompson	Respond to of 769670

At Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington DC recently the Sergeant > Major of the Army, Jack Tilley, was with a group of people visiting the > wounded soldiers. He saw a Special Forces soldier who had lost his right > hand and suffered severe wounds of his face and side of his body. The SMA > wanted to honor him and show him respect without offending, but what can > you say or do in such a situation that will encourage and uplift? How do > you shake the right hand of a soldier who has none? He decided to act as > though the hand was not missing and gripped the soldier's wrist while > speaking words of comfort and encouragement to him. But there was > another man in that group of visitors who had even brought his wife with > him to visit the wounded who knew exactly what to do. This man reverently > took the soldiers stump of a hand in both of his hands, bowed at the > bedside and! prayed for him. When he finished the prayer he stood up, bent > over the soldier and kissed him on the head and told him that he loved > him. What a powerful expression of love for one of our wounded heroes! > What kind of a man would kneel in such humility and submission? It was > the wounded man's Commander-in-Chief, George W. Bush; a true leader. > This story was told by the SMA at a Soldiers Breakfast held at Red > Arsenal, AL, and recorded by Chaplain James Henderson, stationed there. > > Pass it on...the press won't.

To: Steve Dietrich who wrote (423651)	7/7/2003 8:48:56 AM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

But nature has produced homosexuality, so it's certainly not contrary to nature. Nature has produced murder, alcoholism, suicide, unfaithfulness and a host of other things contrary to human character and existence. We must leave such productions to nature. We have neither reason nor right to celebrate and use the might of law to force their affirmation upon anyone. Tolerance is seemingly an essential human quality for society to thrive in all its complex social manifestations. “Tolerance” is just an empty-headed leftist term now commonly used to give empty-headed leftists warm fuzzy feelings about that which is intuitively contrary to nature. No natural basis exists to force this “tolerance,” especially not tolerance of that which is contrary to human identity. And with specialization, it may well benefit us to have a certain percentage of non-procreators built in to the gene pool. This is not a matter of “specialization.” It is a matter of speculation – pure speculation. By such vapid criteria we may as well giddily claim a benefit from having a certain percentage of murderers in the gene pool. (dear me, playa...) Evolution is about the survival of the species which in our case may well involve (snip)… Pure religion. “May well”, “probably”, “could be.” I'm Sorry. I simply am not interested in such shaman mumbo jumbo. Your psuedo-scientific case against homosexuality is merely your own opinion with no basis in science. It is no mere opinion. The evidence is in your own body. Without sexual heterogeneity, you literally cannot exist. That is what you are and no atheist religion can militate against this objective fact. All subsequent definitions flow from there. It is no different than creationism in that you're trying to pitch your religious views as science, trying to cast a wider net as it were. No religion here at all. I refer to your own, most fundamental existence. The nature of that existence logically compels the conclusion.