Republican Official Says Gays Should be purged from GOP, blames homosexuality on Satan

[calfoxwc]

And yes, you have said the "natural" thing. Shut the hell up and go back and read.

I never said you did. So take your Heckish straw man and go out on a date. Illogicheck

************************************************

My bad. Obviously, I meant "you have not said the "natural" thing.

Because my next statement "I never said you did" wouldn't make any kind of sense.

In the past, we've had guys like you two, so hostile to conservative opinions, get berserk and fowl

and extremely angry and demeaning, all because you don't share the same opinion.

They even admitted they did it to drive other guys with conservative opinions off the board.

And woodypeckerhead - you are just a little, ignorant, loudmouth online pile of hatred. Give it a rest.

I honestly think woody = mz the pussy the pussy.

So, that is what I'm referring to - this serious belligerence toward conservative opinions.

I never criticize atheists. I never criticize you for your gay opinions. And woodypeckerhead rarely has opinions,

he just bitches and bitches and bitches and bitches and bitches about other people's opinions he doesn't like.

So trying to intimidate other people into shutting up with opinions you whine and bitch about - is just

trying to intimidate conservatives to leave the board.

Stick a cork in it, you are stinking up this board with your liberal hatred. Just air your opinions, and stfu.

[LogicIsForSquares]

How is disagreeing considered intimidation? I didn't know that you were such a tender soul. Diehard outright calls people faggots and I don't think he is trying to "intimidate" anyone. He has opinions and doesn't give a shit how he expresses them. I feel the same way. Have an opinion I don't agree with? I will disagree.

[MLD Woody]

Fun, isn't it?

[LogicIsForSquares]

Fun, isn't it?

Like explaining the internet to someone in the 1850s.

[calfoxwc]

Constantly name calling, vicious replies, etc etc etc.

 

I said it's been done to others.

 

It just stinks up the forum to me.

 

But do go ahead and try to badger other people because

they have opinions that aren't yours.

 

You know what I mean, but woodypeckerhead needs it explained to him.

[MLD Woody]

I honestly think the best part is that he doesn't even recognize his own hypocrisy. It is damn near astounding.

[calfoxwc]

No, the best part is that you started all the personal crap. Then you whined and bitched

about it ever since that you got it in return.

 

It works like that for sniveling coward juveniles.

 

You never learn.

[MLD Woody]

YOU ARE A MORON

 

That is all there is to it Cal

 

YOU ARE A MORON

 

You are a hypocrite, an idiot, a gullible fool, a political patsy. Nothing exists outside of your black and white liberal and conservative world.

 

People like you slow the advancement of society as a whole

[calfoxwc]

More personals attack over opinions you don't have. I think advancing into a decadent, perverted little college woodpecker

world isn't advancement. You are just a selfish, nasty little old woman, woodpecker.

 

http://www.mainlesson.com/display.php?author=bailey&book=hour&story=woodpecker

 

 

THE LEGEND OF THE WOODPECKER C. S. B. Adapted from Phœbe Cary's poem.

THERE was once a little old woman who lived all alone at the top of a hill. She was the tiniest, neatest little old woman you ever saw, and she always wore a shiny black dress, and a gay little red bonnet on her head, and a big white apron with a floppy white bow tied behind.

But because she lived alone, and thought of no one but herself, this little old woman had grown very selfish. She never invited any one to drink a cup of tea with her, and she never gave presents to anybody.

One day, when the little old woman was baking round cakes with plums in them, a tired, hungry man came up the hill and rapped at her door.

"May I have a cake?" he asked. "I am hungry, and I have no money to pay you, but whatever you wish for, that shall you have."

The little old woman looked at her cakes, and she decided that they were too large and plump to give away. So she broke off a wee little bit of dough, and [178] put it in the oven to bake. It puffed and swelled; and when it was done she decided that this cake, also, was too nice and brown for the hungry man. She broke off a tinier bit of dough, and then one smaller still, but each came out of the oven as fat and brown a cake as the first, and she set them all on a high cupboard shelf, because she thought they were too good to be given away. Then, at last, she took a bit of dough as wee as the head of a pin, and put it in the oven to bake, but this, too, came out a fine, large, crisp cake; so the old woman hid it in the cupboard with the others, and brought out a dry crust of bread for the hungry man.

The poor man just looked at the crust, and then he was gone, before you could wink your eye. But the little old woman began to feel sorry to think how unkind and selfish she had been.

"I wish I were a bird!" she said. "Then I could fly to that hungry man with the largest cake on the shelf."

And, all at once, the little old woman began to grow smaller and smaller. Her nose changed to a beak, her arms stretched out until they were wings, and her feet became claws. She was really the bird she had wished to be, and the wind whisked her up the chimney and over the hill to the woods.

If you look, you may see her to-day. She still wears her shiny black dress, her white apron, and the gay little red bonnet upon her head; but all day long she must run up and down the trunks of the trees, pecking her food from the hard bark. Listen, and you will hear her tap, tap, tapping away; the selfish little old woman who was changed to the red-headed woodpecker.

[MLD Woody]

Complains about personal attacks

 

Personally attacks me the next line

 

 

 

 

You're fucking slow. Blinded by bias you gullible idiot.

[calfoxwc]

 

THE STORY OF THE FIRST WOODPECKER.

IN the days of long ago the Great Spirit came down from the sky and talked with men. Once as he went up and down the earth, he came to the wigwam of a woman. He went into the wigwam and sat down by the fire, but he looked like an old man, and the woman did not know who he was.

"I have fasted for many days," said the Great Spirit to the woman. "Will you give me some food?" The woman made a very little cake and put it on the fire. "You can have this cake," she said, "if you will wait for it to bake." "I will wait," he said.

When the cake was baked, the woman stood and looked at it. She thought, "It is very large. I thought it was small. I will not give him so large a cake as that." So she put it away and made a small one. "If you will wait, I will give you this when it is baked," she said, and the Great Spirit said, "I will wait."

When that cake was baked, it was larger than the first one. "It is so large that I will keep it for a feast," she thought. So she said to her guest, "I will not give you this cake, but if you will wait, I will make you another one." "I will wait," said the Great Spirit again.

Then the woman made another cake. It was still smaller than the others had been at first, but when she went to the fire for it, she found it the largest of all. She did not know that the Great Spirit's magic had made each cake larger, and she thought, "This is a marvel, but I will not give away the largest cake of all." So she said to her guest, "I have no food for you. Go to the forest and look there for your food. You can find it in the bark of the trees, if you will."

The Great Spirit was angry when he heard the words of the woman. He rose up from where he sat and threw back his cloak. "A woman must be good and gentle," he said, "and you are cruel. You shall no longer be a woman and live in a wigwam. You shall go out into the forest and hunt for your food in the bark of trees."

The Great Spirit stamped his foot on the earth, and the woman grew smaller and smaller. Wings started from her body and feathers grew upon her. With a loud cry she rose from the earth and flew away to the forest.

And to this day all woodpeckers live in the forest and hunt for their food in the bark of trees.

 

[Westside Steve]

Actually Cal doesn't bring up the gay thing and I don't think his comments are very inflammatory. I've met him and he seems like a very nice person. But I am disappointed that he feels the way he does about homosexuals. I'm not attacking him and I'm not saying that he is wrong, just that he and I differ in that area if not 180 but probably 170 degrees. The 10 percent on my part is the fact but I understand that most straight males would be completely repulsed by the idea of homosexual contact. That's just a fact, even the most gay friendly member of this board would really really creeped out at the thought of rubbing up against a naked man covered with vegetable oil. That's why homosexuality freaks some people out just the natural aversion. They don't bother me and I appreciate many of the things they seem to excel at in what we might call gay culture. But I still couldn't have sex with one of them. I also realize however that the aversion is a natural thing and very strong in some man. Oh well.

WSS

[MLD Woody]

If this is a matter of being repulsed then I vote really, really ugly people can't get married.

[gftChris]

If this is a matter of being repulsed then I vote really, really ugly people can't get married.

Fat people too.

[Osiris]

If this is a matter of being repulsed then I vote really, really ugly people can't get married.

Research into attraction has shown that people tend to be attracted to those of the same level of attractiveness as each other. So "ugly" people who get married probably don't think of each other as ugly. Besides that, there is a lot more to attraction than physical appearance.

 

As for gays, they should be treated with equality. They do not choose to be gay and science has shown that it is a naturally occurring phenomenon. The only thing I've seen from the liberal side of the whole gay conversation that bugs me is the notion that a straight man who doesn't want to shower with a gay man is somehow homophobic. Nobody would criticize a woman for not wanting to shower with a man who isn't her significant other, or a woman who didn't want to shower with a lesbian. In my mind this goes to the same extremes on the liberal side that I find repulsive on the conservative side.

[Westside Steve]

So I am to assume that Woody and Chris would prefer to suck somebody's dick then fuck a fat woman? Just checking.

 

I know woody has a tough time understanding much but I'm saying that's why people flip out about homosexuality.

WSS

[MLD Woody]

Did you not get the humor being poked at what you said there? "Being repulsed" is not a pass to believe the things Cal does. It is easy to say you are repulsed by something, but that doesn't mean it should be regulated.

 

I understand what side you are on. We pretty much agree. I do not like the thought of another dude doing stuff to me. I was making a joke about the idea that being repulsed is good reasoning. Ok?

 

 

Stop attacking me Steve! I can't take the personal attacks!

 

 

Oh, I would fuck a fat chick too, obviously.

[calfoxwc]

No, woody probably couldn't. Woodpeckers parts are very, very small.

Which would explain woody's hostility on this board.

 

Steve made a great point - but you need to understand what I said...

gays are people, and deserve to be treated as such.

But socially, I abhor the lifestyle, which is a choice. To me, a perverted choice,

and I do not and will not condone it.

 

IOW's, if I learned that someone on this board was gay, I'd converse with them like

I would anyone else. They are people.

It's the lifestyle choices that are offensive. Liberals tend to not have principles nor convictions about much,

so they are more accepting.

 

BTW, there is no Christian initiative to think that fat or ugly people are choosing a perverted lifestyle.

 

Note: I have never, ever intended to be inflammatory. I did consider that someone might be gay on this board, but my stances are my stances. And I really was only joking again about the back bumper.

 

You know, I keep saying that I worked with them, and they never knew I knew they were gay.

Read into that before going ballistic with labels.

 

Think of it this way - if I learned that, say, somebody like Steve was gay...(eh. sorry Steve, but I'm making a point here..lol),

I'd still buy his CD. And I'd still welcome him to my tomato stand again at the farmer's market. And, if he stopped by

when he took a freakin break from being a rock star, I'd show him our farm, we'd cook him some burgers over

the fire. But I wouldn't go out socially with him to get a rootbeer. Socially, I refuse to condone a lifestyle, which btw,

if Steve ever had been (he isn't), he wouldn't choose that lifestyle anyways, I think.

 

There, that's mostly a non-funny reply, but it's more fun being funny.

[MLD Woody]

Except it is not a choice. There is plenty of scientific research that agrees. You don't choose to be gay any more than you choose your height.

 

What did you mean by the "Christian initiative" comment? Are your morals on the subject created from your religious beliefs?

 

 

You said enough very ignorant things that saying "I would tolerate working with them" doesn't give you a pass on the subject. You are free to believe what you want, but I am free to tell you how ignorant your beliefs are.

[calfoxwc]

Woodypeckerhead:

 

1. I was talking about BEHAVIOR. Acting out. It's one thing to be "gay", and another

to decide to go the perverted route. The latter is a choice. Please try to have someone

type for you. You are so quick to smart off, you miss the point. You don't understand English well.

 

2. No, my morals are not created from my religious beliefs. I am not religious. Spiritually, I know

God is there, and that means Jesus died for our sins. My spiritual understanding on the subject

is only part of the analysis of it all, that my beliefs are based upon.

 

3. I never said "I would tolerate working with them" once. Ever. is there something wrong with you?

Stoned, maybe? Stupid, probably ?

[gftChris]

So it's ok for people to be gay as long as they repress every sexual urge they have? Fake being straight for their entire life, maybe, or just live alone forever? You're starting to make less sense now, cal. I used to understand where you stood, I thought it was pretty clear cut, but then saying things like (paraphrasing): "I'd happily have dinner with gay Steve at my place, but not in the outside world" is really confusing. How is having gay Steve over for dinner any less condoning of his lifestyle than having a beer at a bar? Or is it the being seen in public with a gay guy that's putting you off?

 

Not trying to criticise, just understand. I'm done with the criticising, you're clearly very set in your ways for whatever reason and nothing we say here is going to change that.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

If this is a matter of being repulsed then I vote really, really ugly people can't get married.

This is a statement of a 12 year old. How old are you really?

[Westside Steve]

Just as a devil's advocate, would anyone be okay with someone being a pedofile if he's never acted on those urges?

Feel free to insert what ever socially unacceptable urge that bothers you..

WSS

[Westside Steve]

And back to Osiris point, if a woman is uncomfortable showering with men is she a hater?

Are separate bathrooms for men and women the product of bigotry?

WSS

[gftChris]

Just as a devil's advocate, would anyone be okay with someone being a pedofile if he's never acted on those urges?

Feel free to insert what ever socially unacceptable urge that bothers you..

WSS

Difficult to say. I mean, can any guy here honestly say he hasn't, perhaps in his younger years, given a second look to an early developing 15 year-old?

 

Less understandable for me is the animal business. Can't get my head around that one, and animals generally can't consent, so I'm against it. If a guy never acted on it? Then yeah, he's understanding that his actions would be inappropriate. What was the question again?!

[Osiris]

And back to Osiris point, if a woman is uncomfortable showering with men is she a hater?

Are separate bathrooms for men and women the product of bigotry?

WSS

Everyone in the Michael Sam thread dodged those questions, good luck getting anyone to answer it here.

[Westside Steve]

Actually Chris, as someone pointed out before, 15 year old girl wouldn't be considered pedophilia. (there is some other scientific term for that) I think true pedophilia is the attraction to prepubescent children. As a matter of fact I think wanting to have sex with a 15 year old girl would probably be perfectly natural. The human desire for sex is no different than in any mammal, that is for reproduction. For that reason any to mammals past puberty will naturally want to have sex. Those who say that a 14 or 15 yr old can't consent I think are just full of shit because it pisses us off. But 14 and 15 year olds certainly begin to masturbate and fantasize about any manner of sexual situation. We just get mad when we think about a 40 yr old man screwing a 14 year old girl but it is not unnatural.

And were it not for the social stigma and the legal problems I'd imagine it was much more prevalent.

 

On the light :side of that I was chatting with a friend of mine, a policeman, and ask him what the age of consent in Ohio is he told me 16. Then he said the age of consent isn't really your problem, your problem is finding a 16 yr old who wants to fuck somebody as old as her grandfather....

WSS

[Westside Steve]

Oh by the way Chris, your gripe with bestiality is that an animal can't handcent??? I assume you are a vegan. Saturday night I had a great hamburger and I sincerely doubt that the cow consented to any part of its production.

WSS

[calfoxwc]

Chris - come on, man. It isn't easy to explain all this crap, you know?

I would treat people as people. But I will not condone behavior. IOW,s...

"don't ask, don't tell" works. "I"M GAY AND YOU WILL ACCEPT ME" doesn't.

 

One....more.....time............................................ I would always treat gays, whoever,

professionally and decently as I would anybody else.

I prefer to not know. But knowing, I will not socially condone it. If that's too complicated, sorry.

It is what it is.

 

Now this whole subject is starting to make me unable to eat a snack here at the computer.

[gftChris]

Chris - come on, man. It isn't easy to explain all this crap, you know?

I would treat people as people. But I will not condone behavior. IOW,s...

"don't ask, don't tell" works. "I"M GAY AND YOU WILL ACCEPT ME" doesn't.

 

One....more.....time............................................ I would always treat gays, whoever,

professionally and decently as I would anybody else.

I prefer to not know. But knowing, I will not socially condone it. If that's too complicated, sorry.

It is what it is.

 

Now this whole subject is starting to make me unable to eat a snack here at the computer.

Then I guess my gripe would be that you're perfectly happy being friends with gay Steve (that's going to stick for a while!) in private, but in a social context, you wouldn't want to be seen condoning it. What's the difference? Is it just that other might see you being friends with a gay guy and either assume you're gay or ostracise you for doing so? Because if either of those are the case then either you have a big misconception or there's something wrong with people where you live. Not in Arizona, right?