Laugh at Liberals

44 Responses to “AMERICA DIVIDED? NO,”

1. Andrew Says: August 6th, 2004 at 6:22 pm

   Well said.

2. zoot potatoe Says: August 7th, 2004 at 6:23 pm

   So, when George W. Bush promises to unite all people and parties, and then, a few years later, he has pro-life and pro-choice grous feuding together, he’s done his job? Years after George W. Bush promises to be a uniter, not a divider, he splits the country in half between war protesters and citizens that believe the war was for a good cause. A bit after Bush promises to unite, not divide, american’s are just as seperated as ever. Yes, America is diverse, but Bush has broken his promise by bringing up very contriversial laws, such as gay marriage and anti-abortion laws.

   Bush has hardly united anyone except for democrats and Middle Eastern rage.

3. Suzanne Says: August 8th, 2004 at 3:59 am

   Hi Andrew
   Thanks for your comment

   Now
   Hi Zoot Potatoe,
   It could be that your idea of a COUNTRY DIVIDED and my idea of a COUNTRY DIVIDED are very different,
   It does not matter if I do or do not agree with what you wrote. What does matter is the true meaning of A COUNTRY DIVIDED.
   Just because some of us are for gay marriage and some are not, and some believe in abortion and some do not, because the President has broken almost every promise he made, and because some of us still believe in the cause of this war and some do not.
   All of the above, and much more, is what, a COUNTRY DIVIDED? No, it is a country that has the right to agree to disagree. A Divided Country, is a Country Divided and each Division is at war with the other. WAR, not political writings, not verbal disageements. These things are our right as American Citizens.
   Now, if I wake tomorrow morning and find out that the Deomcratic states have gone to war with the Republican States, then, OK we then are a COUNTRY DIVIDED.
   So I stick to my original posting, we are not A Country Divided, we are a Country of Diversity, but will add one more item we are also, A Country of People who Agree that they can and will Disagree, A country of people who believe with all their hearts is specific things, while other believe just the opposite,
   This is not the fault of the President, it is the very inborn nature of being an American,
   Try writing some of the stuff we write on this site in countries I will not name. Just for this reason, and this reason only, the freedom to express our thoughts as we do, Does anyone think this country is Divided on this issue.
   No, American is not Divided, America is confused.
   Suzanne

4. zoot potatoe Says: August 8th, 2004 at 6:32 pm

   Well, then, will someone tell me how bush is a uniter, and why John Edwards is a divider and Bush isn’t. And pretty much the best answer that anyone can say, while being honest, is “it’s my blind party obedience”.

   And, Suzanne, i’m sure Al Gore and John Kerry can prevent democrat and republican states from splitting and going to war if in office, so why is Bush special? If Bush’s major campain promise is “I wont let Democratic and Republican states go to war”, while there isn’t a real danger of that, he really had nothing to run on

5. Suzanne Says: August 8th, 2004 at 11:01 pm

   Hi Zoot,
   can I call you Zoot instead of Zoot Potatoe?
   My comment about an America Divided, as to being an American of Diversity, was not based nor meant to be based on who is the best man for the office of President, nor was it based on who did what and when and where and why.
   I wrote it for one reason and one reason only;
   The words that both myself and Karen wrote in our comments AN AMERICA DIVIDED.
   These words bring to mind, (to my mind at least) a country at war within its self.
   My comment was not aimed at being pro Republican, nor being pro Democrat.
   My comment was aimed at the very structure of this country.
   The point I was then, and are now trying to get across, is the following;
   America, no matter how much we as a people disagree, how different our political views are, no matter our religion, our race, our place of birth, our sex. We are all AMERICANS, and when push comes to shove, we the people of America can in an instant, stand together, rock solid; Not Divided, but United.
   Just because there is to be a new President soon, or the same president soon, has little to do with this subject,
   As a matter of fact this subject is non political, it is a subject of being an American and living in America.
   Remember 911? Were we a Country Divided then?
   I don’t think so. Look back through the years of time, when this country had to face terrible events. The Killing of President Kennedy, of Bobby Kennedy, of Martin Luther King, were we A Country Divided during those terrible days? No, we were a Country Together United in our grief, it did not matter if one was a Democrat or a Republican, it did not matter if one was for or against Civil Rights. We, as the people of this great country, took each others hands and we shed tears together.
   On a smaller event, but not of less importance.
   I live in Utah, where, about two years ago, a little 13 year old girl was kidnapped from her bedroom in the middle of the night, you will remember her name Elizebeth Smart.
   I knew the girl, I know the family, my parents live just a few houses away from the Smart’s home.
   The entire country as a whole pulled together to find this child.
   Much to my amazement, the day she was found and found alive, I was in Australia, and guess what was on the Australian news, a Breaking Story, of the finding of Elizebeth Smart.
   So, what does this tell us, It tells us, that as long as we as a country stand Together, not a Country Divided, then the other Nations of this world, will respect this fact and in that respect we are and will always be the Strong United American that I for one, believe in.
   Just because we are in the middle of an upcoming election, emotions are running high. Along with the problems of the last election. But non of that, nor anything else can or should ever again Divide this country, for if it ever does, and if we as a people allow it to happen, then all of us better be ready to loose the freedom of our Country. Once a Country becomes divided it is an open invitation to other who wish us harm to come in and destroy everything we stand for.
   Again, you are speaking of individual opinions, be they right or be they wrong, I am not the person to say.
   But all that you wrote are just that, your thoughts and opinions, and also may be the same thoughts of others.
   Though, I did not see you at my door this morning ready to start a war. Nor did I hear on this mornings news that the Democrats and the Republicans had gone to war.
   So, as of Sunday, this beautiful Summer day in Utah, I still belive, and will stand up for that belief;
   AMERICA IS NOT A COUNTRY DIVIDED, IT IS A COUNTRY OF DIVERISTY
   Thank you for your comment, actually I am learning a lot about politics I had not know, guess this growing up thing has its advantages, just took me over 45 years plus to do so
   Suzanne

6. zoot potatoe Says: August 9th, 2004 at 1:16 am

   I understand that you were not being pro one way or another. It’s just that everyone’s image is different on what a “divided America” is. The way I see America as being united is not having a leader that uses religion to steer his choices, as there are several other religions out there. Bush’s defense on as to why we should ban gay marriages was because “almost all religions find it morally wrong”. A united america wouldn’t have a leader that splits groups of people against eachother, like pro-life and pro-choice.

   A divided america has larger seperation between two parties. Where the leader has lead a controversial, stuck, war that almost no one world wide likes, and with no way out.

   It is impossible to lead the USA and not have those things happen. However, since bush promised to be a uniter, i want to see some action

7. zoot potatoe Says: August 9th, 2004 at 1:37 am

   oh yea, and you can call me zoot

8. Andrew Says: August 9th, 2004 at 6:22 pm

   Suzanne, your comments about a united America are well argued except for when you used the Elizabeth Smart kidnapping. This example shows a very divided and racist America. Always remember the only reason Smart received so much press was because she was a pretty little white girl. During the time she was missing many other children were kidnapped and they received mush less media and police attention. Doesn’t it bother you that one missing girl on the opposite side of the planet was actually news in Australia?
   There is a significant and easily identifiable racial hierarchy when it comes to media. This hierarchy places white (especially blond and blue eyed) people at the top well above any others. In fact most other races are often used in media only to prop up this hierarchy while attempting to appear as racially inclusive. This marginalizes all other races and works to divide both America and the world.
   At a time when our media reaches the entire world it is especially important that this racial hierarchy be destroyed. When the search for pretty white girls supersedes other much more important news even in Australia we can see how much work is ahead.
   I am very glad that Smart was found and that she is relatively ok but the reporting of this incident did more than spread awareness of a single missing girl across the globe it also presented the kidnapping of a white as the ultimate evil, deserving of global attention. This is in fact a greater crime than any kidnapping can ever be because it’s effect are not on one little girl they are felt through out the world.

9. Suzanne Says: August 9th, 2004 at 9:24 pm

   Andrew
   Actually, I was not going to even bother with answering this comment. As that you are speaking about is one of the things that is creating a very bad misunderstanding in this country. Have you not heard of the Amber aleart?
   I am very involved in missing children and it does not matter what color they are, the only thing that is important is they are missing. Yes, the Smart case had very large coverage, as the parents paid for that coverage. Now, let me tell you another story, ever sinse Elizebeth was found, the Smart Family, is funding large amounts of money for any child that is missing, does not matter if this child is rich or poor, black or white,
   So, you can say that during the time Elizebeth was missing, there were other children missing that were not getting the same attention, but from this event came the entire state of Utah, almost every adult and child, donating money to help find each and every missing child. Do not be so quick to put down those who have money. As some do good with this money.
   Being rich is not a sin, being uncaring is a sin, Look at your facts, especially the facts after Elizebeth was found.
   Next if that were your child, and you had the means, would you have done the same thing, or would you have said, Oh, gee, I should not use every means I have to get my child back, because some idiot, might think that the other missing children are not getting the attention my child is getting.
   THINK ABOUT THAT ANDREW.
   No one has forgotton about the many of missing children in this country. Now, instead of writting these stupid comments why don’t you go instead and help out some of the organizations that are trying to find these children. You would be surprised what you could do in the same time it took you to write that comment.
   I say, Great for the Smarts, and if it were my child I would have done exactly the same thing,
   I pray you never loose a child.
   You may not be so close minded in your thoughts
   Suzanne

10. Andrew Says: August 10th, 2004 at 9:19 pm

    I wasn’t critisizing the Smarts at all. I have no problem with parents. My problem is with the Media who turned a Kidnaping into a world news event. This would not have happend had the child been of color. That is my point. We may not have divided America when it come to being an American but we deffinatly have a divided America when it come to the color of that American and the Smart Media Circus was proof of that. Kidnapping is obviously wrong. I’m happy that the Smarts found their child. I just wish I could know that if my child was kidnaped it would get equal media and police attention as a cute white girl like Elizabeth does. That is my point.

11. E.P. Unum Says: August 10th, 2004 at 9:22 pm

    Suzanne. Our political views differ, but on this kidnapping issue I have to agree.

    Andrew. Go to http://www.amberalertnow.org, or http://www.CNN.com if your not getting coverage. There you can find about a hundred links aiding missing children. As a parent, I couldn’t imagine anyone’s precious child not being priority #1 and I believe I’m not alone.

12. Suzanne Says: August 11th, 2004 at 1:22 am

    I am glad we are at a discussion that is close to my heart.
    Missing Children: Though I myself, have never lost a child, I have very close friends who have.
    Some of these children have been found; some alive, some not. Some of these children have not been found.
    If more people were aware of the sites listed above, and visited them often as I do -
    http://www.amberalertnow.org, and or http://www.CNN.com- More missing children would be found.

    If your child is missing and you have not contacted either or both of these sites, DO IT NOW.

    As Americans, our government has asked that we be on the lookout for the “Bad Guys”, why not at the same time we are looking for the “Bad Guys” let all Americans be on the lookout for some of these missing children.
    How? you ask; Their images can be found at amberalertnow.org .
    You will find all the photos of missing children, print them off, memorize the faces, keep the prints of these missing children in your car, in your heart and in your mind.
    You just never know, where you may be when you spot one of those missing children. And to know the missing child, you must have the photos.
    Of course, if you do find one of these children, please do not try to get the child by yourself, contact the local police ASAP.
    Elizebeth Smart’s photo’s were plaster on every pole every store window, every car window, gas pumps, bus stops, stop signs, inside and outside every business in the entire state of Utah, Idaho, Nevada, WY, Arziona and New Mexico. There were even some in California, Organ, Washington, Montana, and many other states.
    The reason she was found was due to someone who had seen these posters, and knew Elizebeth, when she saw her.

    Since that day, there have been other children missing here in Utah, and again, everywhere you will see Posters, and it seems as if all of a sudden here in this state, the children are being found in a very quite time frame, as compared to before Elizebeth.
    The problem with missing children is the time element.
    If the child can be found withing the first 24 hours, great, 48 hours OK, but as time drags on, and on, as it did with Elizebeth Smart, almost a year, one can assume either the child will never be found or assume the worst.
    But, for those who have missing children, who have been missing for over a year, let this case rise your hopes, as if this girl was found alive after being missing for almost one year, then your child may also be found.
    Never forgert, never stop keeping the public aware, this is the job of the parents and friends, as they are the ones who plaster the posters. Never, Never, Never stop keeping that little face you love so much before the public. As you never know who might see it and that person is the person who knows where your child is.
    Do not give up hope. not till there is no reason to hope.
    But unless you have proof the child is not alive, keep working keep the face before the public, because, as I have stated in my above comments,
    WHEN IT COMES TO MISSING CHILDREN THIS ENTIRE COUNTRY IS UNITED AS ONE but they must know the face.
    Each child that is missing has the same priority, NUMBER ONE, no child is worth less than another child, all children are NUMBER ONE,.
    One additional comment to the comment to my comment about Elizebeth Smart, you mentioned about her being a blond blue eyed girl, well hey, I have blond hair and blue eyes, so if I were to come up missing would you forget about me because of the color of my hair and eyes?

    Last comment, as to the News in Australia. CNN is almost world wide in it broadcasting. I was in Australia the day we went to war, I was in Australia, the day there beloved TV nightly news anchor man was blown up over there while covering the war.
    Just a quick comment, even though Australia, seems in a way like being in American, as they speak English, and are fairly close to our culture, Still there is something about being 10,000 miles away from your country when your country is at war. First time I have experienced this. And to be honest, I was a bit frighten.
    (not frighten enough to shorten my trip)
    So again, when it comes to a United America, A Country of Diversity, America is not Divided, just watch the people of this country come together when it is necessary. This is the strength of America, This is the foundation of everything we are, this is why we are the greatest country on this Earth. When it is needed, We as Americans, become ONE STONG UNITED PEOPLE. This power is stronger than any weapon, any terror threat, any anti America Country.
    So still sticking to my non political but firm opinion:
    AMERICAN IS NOT A COUNTRY DIVIDIED, WE ARE A COUNTRY UNITED WITH IT IS NECESSARY, AND THEN WE ARE ABOVE ALL, A COUNTRY OF DIVERSITY.
    What a wonderful place to call home.
    Suzanne
    Very Much enjoying this site.

13. Suzanne Says: August 12th, 2004 at 12:58 pm

    Let us put this comment about the Smart Kidnapping to rest.
    First, The media circus as you so stated, and the coverage was paid for by the Smarts.
    Now, you are comparing this little pretty blond, blue eyed girl to a beautiful black haired brown eyed little black girl. And what you are stating is that just because Elizebeth was white and blond, and not black with dark hair, that is why she was found.
    If the Smart Family were black, and still the same family nothing would have been any different,
    It is the family behind the child, and the coummunity behind the family, We have black children missing in Utah, and they get the same responce as Elizebeth had.
    I don’t know where you live, but in this state, a missing child is just that, a missing child.
    If your child was missing, and if you had the financial means, would you spend every penny you had to find your child. Of course you would, so actually your problem is not that Elizebeth is white, your problem is that the Smarts had the ,means to pay for all that media, which in return brought their daughter home.
    Let me tell you a little story about the Smart Family, the person who kidnapped Elizebeth, was at one time hired by the Smart Family to do some repairs, as he was homeless. They have a habit of helping those who need help. It was this goodness that resulted in the kidnapping of their daughter.
    Now, I am real sorry that Elizebeth is not black, but if she were, I think you would still be complaining because as a black family they had the means to pay for all the media and such. So really your problem is not with color, it is with the money.
    There are a lot of wealthy black families, and their children get kidnapped also, they also spend just as the smarts did to get their child back.
    If you are really concerned for the missing black children, why don’t you take your next four paychecks, and put the money where your mouth is.
    As, my dear, Money Speaks, and Money gets children back home.
    it did not matter that she was white or black the exact same events would have taken place.
    It is the poor black and white children who suffer, so why don’t you just donate your pay for a month a get a child back and stop writting dumb things about a family who spent almost everything they had to get their daughter back home again.
    SUBJECT ON MY PART CLOSED.
    AS TO COMMENTS BY WHATS HIS FACE, I COULD NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT HIS GRIP WAS.
    Suzanne
    Actually Andrew, I bet our political views are closer together than you think.
    I have not stated my political views in my comments.

14. Andrew Says: August 13th, 2004 at 6:39 pm

    My critisizum had never been witht he Samrt family. It is with the media that reported the story. If the Smart family did pay for all of the media attention (which I doupt they did) than you are right and the that explains the amayzing media event that Elizabeth Smart was but I’m more inclined to think that she was such a big storry becouse of her pretty white face. I think the reason the media pick up the story nationaly was becouse they knew white people would identify with Elizabeth. They would never do the same with a girl of color. I love the Amber alert system and all of the other resources avilable to find children but I hate the unequel attention between minority and white missing children. That’s it. End of topic.

15. Greg Says: September 17th, 2004 at 9:41 pm

    I dont beleive we are a country divided (yet). We are not divided on a clean enviornment, better pay, better education, strong economy, strong defense. Its how we get to those goals causes much of the diversity. Ultimatly the non-dominate party feels like they have no voice and are powerless to do anything for or abouth their country. Either apathy sets in, our rage,or both. I see lots of apathy, but I also seeing lots of rage forming. We can debate the issues, but calling Democrats/Liberals the Anti-Christ, communist party that condones inmorality or as this web site says (laugh at liberals) probably contributes to division. I dont think we have to agree on everything, but our political system is in the gutter and both political parties are to blame for it.

16. Maverick Says: September 27th, 2004 at 3:58 pm

    WE dont ave 2 agree 2 disagree. We should agree with what is morally right. Some people say there is no such thing as an truth/right for everybody, yet how do we know that?? Because we have a version of wrong therfore there is a version of right, whether you want 2 admit that or not is up 2 you.

    Suzanne you have some great points but i have 2 disagree, i will not agree 2 disagree with Libs on the issue of Abortion and many others.

17. Maverick Says: September 27th, 2004 at 3:59 pm

    sorry for all the typos

18. Suzanne Katz Says: September 29th, 2004 at 3:30 am

    TO MAVERICK
    I AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE AVERAGE AM I TO AGREE OR DISAGREE, SO THIS IS WHAT I AM GOING TO DO, YOU MENTIONED ABORTION, I AGREE BUT ON SPECIFIC CONDITIONS, VERY SPECIFIC. EXTREAMLY SPECIFIC. IS THE SPECIFIC CLEAR?
    OTHER MORAL ISSUES, LETS GO WITH GAY RIGHTS, NOT GAY, DON’T WISH TO BE. BUT, AS I HAVE OR DID A RESEARCH PAPER FOR MY MASTERS ON THIS THIS IS WHAT I REALLY BELIEVE TO BE TRUE, A GAY PERSON IS BORN GAY, IT IS EITHER SOMETHING THE MOTHER ATE, TOOK AS A DRUG, SOMETHING ALONG THAT LINE BUT DURING A SPECIFIC GROWTH PERIOD OF THE FETUS, SO, A GAY PERSON IS NOT GAY BECAUSE ONE MORNING HE OR SHE WOKE UP AND SAID, HEY IT MIGHT BE FUN TO BE GAY. NO, I DOUBT THAT
    HAVE YOU EVER KNOW A GAY PERSON WHO HAS NEVER COME OUT BECAUE OF THE SHAME. I LIVE IN UTAH, THE LAND OF THE MORMANS, NOT ME BUT 60%, NOT BEING GAY AND BEING MORMAN DO NOT MATCH THIS IS CAUSE FOR BEING THROWN OUT OF THE CHURCH WITH SUCH DISGRACE. MANY MORMANS ARE GAY AND NEVER COME OUT, GET MARRIED, AND LIVE TERRIBLE LIVES, END UP IN DIVORCE, LEAVING CHILDREN WITHOUT A FATHER, A EXWIFE WHO DOES NOT UNDERSTAND WHY HER HUSBAND OR A HUSBAND NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY HIS WIFE PERFERED TO HAVE A LOVER OF THE SAME SEX,
    WELL, THEY DID NOT WAKE UP ONE MORNING AND SAY, HEY THIS MARRIAGE SHIT IS NOT FOR ME I THINK I WILL BECOME GAY, LEAVE MY SPOUCE, LEAVE MY CHILDREN LEAVE MY HOME LEAVE WITH DISGRACE EVEN THOUGH MY FAMILY MAY NEVER SPEAK TO ME MY FRIEND WILL NEVER SPEAK TO ME, MY CHURCH WILL ACT AS IF I DO NOT EXIST.
    SOUNDS LIKE A REAL KOOL THING TO DO TODAY,
    NO, MAVERICK I DOUBT THIS IS WHAT TAKES PLACE,
    THE GAY POPULATION, THOUGHT NEED TO PUT SOME MORALS BEHIND SOME OF THEIR MULTI PARTNER PRACTICES, ARE NOT GAY BECAUSE THEY DECIDED THIS WAS THE IN THING TO DO, THEY WERE BORN WITH AN INBALANCE IN THE MALE FEMALE HORMORNS AND OTHER BRAIN CHEMICALS.
    SO, WHEN YOU SEE TWO GAY MEN WALKING HAND IN HAD, AND THEY LOOK AS IF THEY HAVE BEEN TOGETHER FOR A LONG TIME, SMILE, ALTHOUGH, I BELIEVE AND STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT GAYS LIVE BY THE SAME RULES OF CONDUCT IN A RELATIONSHIP AND A MARRIAGE AND NON GAY PEOPLE, ALL MULTI PARTNER PEOPLE EITHER GAY, OR NON GAY ARE IN MY MIND TAKING A BIG CHANCE IN THIS DAY AND AGE. I DON;T MEAN THAT IF SINGEL NOT TO PLAY AROUND A BIT, BUT I KNOW A MAN, NEVER WOULD AND NEVER WILL GO OUT WITH HIM HE GOES OUT ALMOST EVERY NIGHT PICKS UP ONE AT A TIME THREE GIRLS , TAKES THEM TO HIS HOME AND DOES THE HOME SEX THING, TAKES THEM BACK TO BAR PICKS UP ANOTHER DOES THE SAME, AND SAME ON THIRD,
    NOW THIS TO ME IS NOT WHAT MAN AND WOMAN WERE MADE FOR, I AM NOT AGAINST PRE MARTIAL SEX, NOT AT ALL, I AM ALSO NOT AGAINST OUTSIDE RELATIONSHIPS DURING A MARRIAGE BUT ONLY IN THE EVENT OF SPECIFIC REASONS, WHICH I WILL NOT LIST.
    BUT MANY TIMES IT IS VERY UNDERSTANDABLE. SO DO NOT KNOW YOUR AGREE OR DISAGREE ON THESE TWO ITEMS, BUT LET ME KNOW WHERE WE STAND I AM SURE WE CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING
    I AM VERY OPEN MINDED BUT ALSO HAVE A STRONG VALUE SYSTEM, THEY ARE MINE, NOT BASED ON RELIGION AS THAT IS PERSONAL AND DOES NOT BELONG IS A PUBLIC CHURCH. SO SEND ME SOME MORE OF YOU AGREES AND DISAGREES, I LIKE DOING THIS
    SUZANNE

19. Maverick Says: September 29th, 2004 at 3:40 pm

    For Suzanne,
    great to hear back from you. I also like doing this(debating) so here is my reply.

    First off i under stand that this site was created to be about certain peoples opnions whis is great but when it comes 2 discussing such issues as abortion/gay marriage and other issues i believe our personal opinion should be left out as much as possible. Assertions/opnions/ and theroies dont mean much 2 me when it comes 2 debating. Now granted i understand there will be some but lets try and keep it 2 a minimum.

    Ok as far as the abortion thing goes iam going 2 Law School at the University Of Texas for that sole reason. To fight abortion and 2 make it illegal again. will i win, will it work? i dont know probally not but i have the facts that have been agreed on by pro-choice scientists and if the justice system dosent take me seriously ill raise hell. I am a conservative but i am not a blind Conservative i realize that we are not perfect and that the Liberals are not all wrong. Now i do belive that we have a lot more things figured out than the Libs but iam open minded 2 new ideas and i dont hate Liberals. So thats a little bit about me.

    OK THIS IS LONG BUT PLEASE READ ITS GOOD STUFF!
    If homosexuality is neither a normal nor a healthy lifestyle – as I believe this article demonstrates – then the most loving thing we can do is to help homosexuals realize this and offer them our help and encouragement. But millions of people in our society believe that homosexuality is a healthy and acceptable alternative lifestyle. This debate over the acceptance of homosexuality in our culture is one that has been clouded with many misrepresentations and inaccuracies. These misrepresentations include the assertion that ten percent of all Americans are gay (the figure is actually closer to one or two percent), that all competent psychiatrists and psychologists believe homosexuality is a healthy lifestyle (the majority do not), that homosexuals are born that way (most therapists disagree) and cannot change their sexual preference (disproven by numerous accounts where gays have converted to heterosexuality). It is the Christian’s task to point out that while homosexuality is a sin, we are all sinners and there is forgiveness and deliverance for all who turn to Jesus Christ.

    “People should live and let live!” “To each his own, let them live as they wish.” “Let the gays have their freedom.” “Whatever makes you happy, live with it.”[1]

    Comments like these are commonly heard when the topic of homosexuality comes up for discussion. The debate over homosexuality and homosexual rights has steadily grown over the past two decades and will only continue to do so.

    In the course of this debate, however, numerous inaccuracies, half-truths, fallacies, and overt propaganda have been disseminated to the public as uncontested truth. It is the purpose of this article to examine these claims and separate fact from fiction. Before anyone can give intelligent and compassionate answers, the questions must be clarified and brought into focus. I believe that when this is done the impartial reader will be able to agree with the analogy made by Dr. James D. Mallory, a psychiatrist and the director of the Atlanta Counseling Center: “A physician would be guilty of malpractice if he didn’t warn a diabetic of his condition because he didn’t want to hurt his feelings. Simply letting the person continue eating excessive carbohydrates without proper treatment condemns him to a worsening physical condition. The most loving act one can do is point out that an abnormality exists, and offer help. This needs to be done – but not in a spirit of condemnation – with homosexuality.”

    Is Homosexuality an Illness? Is it “Normal”?
    An even more important question, though, is if homosexuality constitutes pathological behavior. Is it an illness? Gay rights groups continually assert that homosexuals are as “normal” as heterosexuals, that homosexuality is not an illness or psychological disorder. For example, Peri Jude Radecic, a member of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF), asserted on the ABC news show Nightline: “Homosexuality is not an illness, it is not something that needs to be cured. We are normal, natural and healthy people.”[14]

    Moreover, these groups universally contend that all competent psychiatrists and psychologists are in agreement on this. As proof of this, the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) 1973 declassification of homosexuality as a mental disorder is always cited.

    Before examining the contention that all competent psychiatrists and psychologists agree that homosexuality is normal and healthy, we need to look at the APA’s 1973 decision for a moment. For 23 years homosexuality had been listed as a mental disorder by the APA. Why was it decided, at that particular point in time, that it was not pathological?

    I do not have the space to go into a detailed analysis of the history leading up to the APA’s decision. [15] Nonetheless, it is a misconception to think that this came about only after dispassionate and scholarly discussion, and only after listening equally to all sides of the issue. Also, it is important to note that the APA’s vote was anything but unanimous.

    In the three years leading up to the 1973 APA meeting, the previous national meetings had been repeatedly disrupted by gay activists. At the 1970 meeting in San Francisco certain sessions were broken up with shouts and jeers, prohibiting any rational discussion or debate.

    At the APA’s 1971 meeting in Washington, threats and intimidation accomplished what discussion could not. Ronald Bayer, in a work sympathetic toward homosexuality and the gay rights movement, recounts: “Using forged credentials, gay activists gained access to the exhibit area and, coming across a display marketing aversive conditioning [i.e., punishing an organism whenever it makes a particular response] techniques for the treatment of homosexuals, demanded its removal. Threats were made against the exhibitor, who was told that unless his booth was dismantled, it would be torn down. After frantic behind-the-scenes consultations, and in an effort to avoid violence, the convention leadership agreed to have the booth removed.”[16]

    These tactics continued in the same manner at the APA’s 1972 national meeting. It was against this backdrop that the association’s trustees finally made its controversial 1973 decision. When a referendum on this was sent out to all 25,000 APA members, only a quarter of them returned their ballots. The final tally was 58 percent favoring the removal of homosexuality from their list of disorders.

    Four years later, Dr. Charles Socarides – who was at the meetings and was an expert in the area of homosexuality, having treated homosexuals for more than twenty years – described the political atmosphere leading up to the 1973 vote. He writes that during this time, “militant homosexual groups continued to attack any psychiatrist or psychoanalyst who dared to present his findings as to the psychopathology [i.e., the study of mental disorders from all aspects] of homosexuality before national or local meetings of psychiatrists or in public forums.”[17] Elsewhere Socarides stated that the decision of the APA trustees was “the medical hoax of the century.”[18]

    Was this the end of the debate? Did the vast majority of “competent” psychiatrists agree with the APA’s decision? In 1977 ten thousand members of the APA were polled at random, asking them their opinion on this. In an article entitled “Sick Again?” Time magazine summarized the results of the poll: “Of those answering, 69% said they believed ‘homosexuality is usually a pathological adaptation, as opposed to a normal variation,’ 18% disagreed and 13% were uncertain. Similarly, sizable majorities said that homosexuals are generally less happy than heterosexuals (73%) and less capable of mature, loving relationships (60%). A total of 70% said that homosexuals’ problems have more to do with their own inner conflicts than with stigmatization by society at large.”[19]

    But what about today? Has this issue been resolved in current medical opinion and research? Concerning this, Dr. Stanton L. Jones, professor of psychology at Wheaton College, states that there is a “mixed scorecard” among professionals on this. He writes: “I would not regard homosexuality to be a psychopathology in the same sense as schizophrenia or phobic disorders. But neither can it be viewed as a normal ‘lifestyle variation’ on a par with being introverted versus extroverted.”[20]

    One may debate whether or not homosexuality is a pathological disorder, but it is clear that the APA’s 1973 decision cannot be cited as medical consensus that homosexuality is a “normal” condition. Later in this article I will examine in some detail the assertion that homosexuality is a healthy lifestyle.

    Born Gay?
    Perhaps the most dangerous myth disseminated today by the pro-homosexuality movement is that modern science has proven that homosexuality is innate and immutable. That is, homosexuals are born gay, much like being born left-handed or with blue eyes. The inference, of course, is that if they are born that way, then homosexuality cannot be considered immoral or unnatural; the homosexual is just following his or her genes. However, as Congressman William Dennemeyer put it, “if homosexuality is a perversion of what is natural, then homosexuals must look at their own conduct in an entirely different light and explain it in less satisfying terms.”[21]

    It is well beyond the scope of this article to summarize all the findings concerning the genesis of homosexuality. However, the scientific evidences for its origins are usually classified in terms of either biological causes (i.e., genetic/hormonal) or environmental factors (e.g., psychological causes, volitional, and so forth).

    (1) Biological Causes. The most recent research suggesting that homosexuality may be caused by biological factors came out in 1991 with the publication of some preliminary findings of Dr. Simon LeVay, a neuroscientist at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in San Diego. His research consisted of studying the brains of 41 cadavers, including 19 homosexual males. He found that “a tiny area believed to control sexual activity [the hypothalamus] was less than half the size in the gay men than in the heterosexuals.”[22]

    This study was seized upon by many as “irrefutable evidence” that homosexuals are born gay, something the homosexual community has been proclaiming for many years. However, “instead of resolving the debate,” a Newsweek article suggests, “the studies may well have intensified it. Some scientists profess not to be surprised at all by LeVay’s finding of brain differences. ‘Of course it [sexual orientation] is in the brain,’ says Johns Hopkins University psychologist John Money, sometimes called the dean of American sexologists. ‘The real question is, when did it get there? Was it prenatal, neonatal, during childhood, puberty? That we do not know.’”[23]

    Other problems with his findings include: (1) all 19 of the homosexual men had died of AIDS, something that many researchers believe could very well account for or contribute to the differences; (2) there was no way to know the sexual history of the “heterosexual” men; (3) there is no way to determine if the smaller hypothalamuses were the cause or the result of homosexuality; and (4) Dr. LeVay, a homosexual himself, admitted that his study was not entirely a dispassionate scientific endeavor.[24]

    (2) Environmental Factors. There are probably just as many, if not more, psychiatrists and psychologists who believe that homosexuality arises from various environmental factors. The majority of these say that homosexuality’s root causes are psychological, not biological. But these people are not cited nearly as often by the media as the others – perhaps a pro-homosexual bias by the media? And they are virtually never even acknowledged by the homosexual community, because most homosexuals want to believe that they were born that way and had no choice (conscious or subliminal) in the matter.

    In any case, some of the most noteworthy and respected researchers and therapists in the world deny that homosexuality is determined by biological factors. For example, therapists helping homosexuals who are unhappy with their condition can cite one case history after another showing that negative early childhood experiences are the one common factor found in almost all their patients. The vital factor here is that these people were raised in a very unloving home environment, never knowing love or acceptance from their mother or their father, or in some cases both. According to these studies, the child’s reaction to this rejection and lack of nurturing is formulated at a very early age, usually before five years old. The following references illustrate these findings.

    William H. Masters (codirector of the Masters and Johnson Institute), Virginia E. Brown, and Robert C. Kolodny stated categorically in their 1982 work Human Sexuality: “The genetic theory of homosexuality has been generally discarded today.”[25]

    Robert Kronemeyer, in his work Overcoming Homosexuality, writes: “With rare exceptions, homosexuality is neither inherited nor the result of some glandular disturbance or the scrambling of genes or chromosomes. Homosexuals are made, not born ‘that way.’ I firmly believe that homosexuality is a learned response to early painful experiences and that it can be unlearned. For those homosexuals who are unhappy with their life and find effective therapy, it is ‘curable.’”[26]

    John DeCecco, professor of psychology at San Francisco State University and the editor of the 25-volume Journal of Homosexuality, expressed the same view in a 1989 USA Today article: “‘The idea that people are born into one type of sexual behavior is entirely foolish,’ says John DeCecco… Homosexuality, he says, is ‘a behavior, not a condition,’ and something that some people can and do change, just like they sometimes change other tastes and personality traits.”[27]

    One thing is clear: it is hardly an established scientific fact accepted by the entire medical field that homosexuality is solely or even primarily caused by biological factors.

20. Maverick Says: September 29th, 2004 at 3:47 pm

    OK i know that was long but i thought it was good stuff. If you want teh site where i got that info. from just let me know. AND REMBER SUZANNE………………………………….

    “Tolerance is the Virtue of a man without convictions”

    That is what came 2 my mind when you said that you have a strong Value system yet you beleive in sex befor, during, and after marriage!!!

    Anyways i look forward 2 hearing back from you, make sure 2 read the WHOLE story up above with an open mind please.

    Long live Bill O’Reilly!!!!

21. Maverick Says: September 29th, 2004 at 4:06 pm

    On 1 final note i would like 2 clarify myself a bit. I understand that people that are gay dont just wake up one marining and say hmmm ok from here on out iam gay! I realize it dosent happen that way. What happens is the are abused/neglected/rejected at an early age and that sets the stage for homosexuality. A person dosent become gay overnight and they cant go back overnight but both are possible. I hope you can see the facts i presented and i tryed 2 keep my opnion out of it as much as possible.

    I have 2 question for yuo Suzanne. Are you religous? if so what denomanation do you consider yourself? And what did yuo get your master in???

    Thanks so much!

22. Maverick Says: September 29th, 2004 at 4:07 pm

    typos everywhere!!! OMG i have 2 work on that! LOL

23. Maverick Says: September 29th, 2004 at 4:17 pm

    nice website Suzanne that sheds some light on who iam talking 2. =)

24. Suzanne Katz Says: September 29th, 2004 at 7:57 pm

    Hi my Friend Maverick
    Well, you have given me some very good information on the Gay thing, and thank you, so on that one I must agree with you all all points.
    Do not disagree on any of your comments on that issue,
    I am thrilled we both agree on the abortion.
    And I am also thrilled that you are so determinded to protect a womans rights that this is your Life’s Goal.
    Next, Yes, I believe in God, have a strong religion, but not one with a common name, I am an Eckest, I believe in God, I believe in right and wrong, now my comments on the premarital stuff, did not mean I participate, but I understand, though any thing can be over done.
    I do not in anyway agree with this day in age open minded thing on that subject. Now, I think this conservation should as you stated, leave this site and go to private email. use this one
    suzdktz@comcast.net as this is a subject that does not relate to this site, so again we agree so what is the score now?
    I really enjoy your questions and comments, and yes I would love to know where you aquired that information. It is excellent detailed, and looks very much to be accurate.
    Next my education, well which degree do you wish I begin with
    First from Cal State Long Beach, I receive my first Degree in Business and Fine Art.
    Second, University Of Utah Law, I received my Law Degree, though do not practice. Third Degree, I love teaching, so actually only needed a few classes to receive that one, all in all I add up to a Masters in a multi functional titled degree. I am always taking classes, degrees are not my goal, learning is my life long project. This world changes so fast if one does not keep themselves educated they fall behind so fast.
    I look at what I learn from my first degree so many years ago, and actually nothing with the exception of some business ethics I do not use much of what I learned, although the fine art, that is always the same.
    I also have my Realtors Licence, but do not sell real estate, boring. I teach computer science, I run three business from an office I built in my huge back yard. It is impossible for me to work for someone else, to head strong, to educated, and have my way of doing things,
    Now I have a question for you
    lets compare two moral issues,
    Ethics in Business and everyday life
    Sex without marriage
    Which of the two in your mind is the most important as to
    A- being extreamly ethical – or not ethical
    B- Sex before marriage – sex only in marriage
    I would be very interested to see on a scale of 1 – 10 how you would rate the importance of these issues, I can give you mine right now
    1- Complete honest and Ethical practices in Business and on any type of lever
    never unethical
    5- Sex before or without marriage
    2- multi partners
    rest we can discuss through email
    again sometimes my spelling is also sick,
    my mind goes faster than my fingers
    Again Thanks Maverick for making this brain of mine think
    Oh, there is one line in your comment
    “Tolerance is the Virtue of a man without convictions”

    I do not know where you got it, but it is excellant and would like to put it on my web site, would that be ok,
    Suzanne
    Glad you like the site, just getting ready to do a new guest exhibit, it is really a mixture, but it is a labor of love, and can not believe it but i get over 5000 vistors a month, it is on my emails and on this site, and that is the only why people can find it I think it does show up in specific search words, I accept stuff from other people their thoughs and anything, and it does not need to be something I agree with, it is a site for all thoughts not just mine.

25. Suzanne Katz Says: September 29th, 2004 at 8:28 pm

    Greg, almost lost your comment, sorry
    THIS WAS YOUR COMMENT, SO FAR UP THE PAGE I AM PASTING IT HERE
    FROM GREG—————
    I dont beleive we are a country divided (yet). We are not divided on a clean enviornment, better pay, better education, strong economy, strong defense. Its how we get to those goals causes much of the diversity. Ultimatly the non-dominate party feels like they have no voice and are powerless to do anything for or abouth their country. Either apathy sets in, our rage,or both. I see lots of apathy, but I also seeing lots of rage forming. We can debate the issues, but calling Democrats/Liberals the Anti-Christ, communist party that condones inmorality or as this web site says (laugh at liberals) probably contributes to division. I dont think we have to agree on everything, but our political system is in the gutter and both political parties are to blame for it.
    ______________________________________________
    COMMENT BY SUZANNE TO GREG
    First thanks for agreeing we are as of today not a Country Divided. But let me tell you something.
    If we don’t start getting better people running for President, I do not know where this country will end up being.
    I am not , and again specify NOT bashing either Bush or whoever the other is, (guess that shows who I am voting for)
    But, I really would love to see a man or woman with some substance, some idea of the extream challange and demands and knowledge and ability to deal with other countries. A person with the ability to see all sides of issues, to relate to the general population of this country. A person with ethics, values, morals, and above and beyond all, put this country FIRST AND FORMOST BEFORE HIS OR HER PERSONAL INTERST OR FINANCIAL GAIN.
    The President of The United States is not taken as serious as it should be, now this is my thinking, so all go ahead and disagree with me.
    To be honest, I know only one man who I feel would make an excellent President, My Daddy, no, it is not because he is my Father, it is because he is ethical, he taught me to be honest, ethical in all dealing with people, he is capable of seeing all sides He does not consider anyone below him or look down on any status of living. He believe each and every human should have equal rights, rich or poor, That one person is not better than another, just because one drives a fancy car and the other does not.
    He is the most Honest Man on this earth, never once in my entire life has he ever told a lie, never in the marriage of my parents did I ever hear one single fight, bad word, or any kind of abuse which is so comman today, I know, yes girls think their Fathers are perfect, well, this girl is telling the truth, I grew up with a wonderful father, knew nothing different. Boy, was I shocked when I realized all men are not like my Daddy. Sad.
    But enought of that,
    Greg, I really agree, with most all your wrote, each day my thoughts change, as the events of this world change, I think it is impossible to keep the exact same thoughts on the issues at hand as the issues keep getting new information.
    One day I might be infavor of something then find new information and change my mind.
    So, today I aqree with you, tomorow I may not
    Suzanne

26. Maverick Says: September 29th, 2004 at 9:15 pm

    Dear Suzann it was great to hear from you again. Wow you have an impressive resume! I love 2 learn 2 and am looking forward 2 contuing our conversation. I will e-mail you as soon as i can but my email is acting up, i can only check my messages but i cant erase or send them! LOL very frustrating. So as soon as i can i will answer you questions i have 2 go 2 work right now but i will drop some more comments/info here later tonight. Once again i really like your site, you have done a fine job on it.

    Iam glad you liked the matireal i presented and iam glad you read it with your heart and didnt try to nit pick it. I cant stand when people do that. Iam glad we are havign these talks and i will contact you later. oh and the site where i got that info. is http://www.Summit.org its a camp that teaches worldviews in Colorado. I have been there twice but i will elaborate later.

    Take care! =)

27. Maverick Says: September 29th, 2004 at 9:18 pm

    by the way go to essays when you go 2 summit.org and the rest is self explanatory and if you do want 2 e-mail me something my e-mail is Standingaloneplus1@yahoo.com ok talk 2 ya laters

28. Patrick Says: October 18th, 2004 at 4:47 am

    If more candidates were in the debate I might agree that we are diverse.

    I think there are groups like the NRA, Pro-Life groups, and others that have vested interest in keeping us divided, when in reality we are much more alike than the presidential polls indicate.

29. Suzanne Katz Says: October 30th, 2004 at 8:40 am

    Well, this is to all my new friends I have come across on this Web Site.
    Now, You, Patrick, you hit it right where it needed to be said.
    I have been very upset at the choices or the lack of choice I have in this election. So, guess what, I am not voting. If I do not like either one or neither is the better of the two. What other choice do I have?
    I strongly think that something must be changed as to how the people we vote for and there to vote for!
    I would not have picked either one.
    It is even beyond who is the worst, it is both or the worst.
    So for the first time since I was of age to vote, I am not voting.
    I have had it with the comments between both candidates, I am sick of all the lies, the half truths, the misleading statements, and now today I find that one doctored the people who were listening to him by adding extra people using a computer. I do this all the time in my graphic business, and must say they did a very poor job
    I receive email from the UK and let me give you all a quote from a very educated and wonderful man
    “Dear Suzanne,
    Well, it is almost voting day, I am sure you will have fun!!
    I will have fun knowing you’re so pissed with everything!
    HA!
    Happy Voting
    Love
    Patrick”
    Not an exact quote, but close enough.
    Is this what the entire world thinks of this election, and does anyone out there have any idea of what will take place after this election?
    Attorneys and jets all waiting to contest to vote count.
    Well, I am really tired, been on the road a lot lately, and have made a point not to watch the news.
    So, Flowers, has made up her mind, no one gets my vote,
    I would love to hear for all of you about your feelings on this elections thing,
    What happened to the joy of voting, guess it went with 911.
    Just a girl with the name of Flowers

30. elise Says: October 30th, 2004 at 8:55 pm

    Well, this may sound cold – but I don’t care if gays are made that way, turn that way or whatever. They are not like me, but then that is not my problem.Ihave had gay friends, a roommatewho was gay, my daughter went to college with gays and I have had them in my house as guest. I am not to judge and thank goodness for that! However, I do not like to see gay marriages. Not that I will get on the street and protest them. Abortion! should the occassion arise with my granddaughter or some other loved one, I can’t say how I would feel. These points should not divide us as a nation. I consider myself to be Independent – & usually vote for the person I have most in common with. As I have said before there are too many issues to just get stuck on one. I do not think we should let other countries influence the way we vote. Or anyone else as far as that goes.Just think for yourself. The country is not divided regardless of what some would like for us to believe.

31. x Says: November 4th, 2004 at 8:33 pm

    That is now scientifically proved and irrefutable: about 50% of Americans are absolute morons (and you are one of them). Stupid beyond any hope of redemption.

    You can lie to them, you can mislead them, you can send their children to the slaughterhouse, for fighting a useless war started for flawed reasons. You can send them spill their blood for the twisted fantasms of insane Dr StrangeLoves. You can extort them, then fatten private companies, like Halliburton. You can severely restrict their liberties using fallacious pretexts. You can outsource their jobs. You can bully them to no end just by spitting the word unpatriotic every two sentences. You can bankrupt them. You can make them detestable to the eyes of 80% of humankind. You can encourage soldiers to torture prisonners as far as they are not caught doing so. You can shit on major international treaties, or insult old allies.

    All of that, my friends, won’t ignite a spark of doubt in their minds. Anyway, they will cast their vote according to so called “moral choices”, on gay mariage, on stem cell research, or gun control policy, rather than on these other “minor” issues. They will always prefer someone lying about weapons of mass destruction, rather than someone lying about the strange use he has for his cigars.

    For all those morons, here is my message: you have got what you deserve for the next four years. Enjoy. For the other 50%, belonging to the America I love, I cannot tell you how much I feel sorry for you.

32. Suzanne Katz Says: November 5th, 2004 at 1:37 am

    To Mr or Mrs X

    I usually do not get such an odd feeling when reading comments on this site.
    But after reading what you wrote, I became, not angry but very aware of something.
    This election was a battle between the Bible belt, and the logical correct choice of who should lead this country for the next four years.
    It is not important if one likes or dislikes President Bush, what is important is American, our men and women who are fighting a war and the future of all of us.
    Our future is not going to be altered if Gays are allowed to marry or if Gays are not allowed to marry. It is not relevant. The safety of our homeland, and the safety of our Men and Women fighting in Iraq, this is what is important.
    In all honesty, dig deep into your logical mind.
    Do you truly, and without using the unimportant issues, do you really believe had the election turned the other way, that America would be a safer place to live, that our Men and Women fighting a war would be safer.
    When in the middle of such a situation as this country is in, how could someone else step into the shoes of the President, and continue with the knowledge needed. It is impossible.
    This would take months of learning and months of mistakes would be deadly.
    I wonder who wanted Bush to loose. I know from many emails that those who do not support us in this conflict did not want Bush. I know that those who wish us harm did not want Bush.
    But the countries who support us, who still believe in America, they wanted Bush,
    Our service men and women most wanted Bush, Why? A new commander in Chief, is not what they need right now, an inexperienced, Vietnam vet with PTSD, (oh yes, that he has) who when he came home protested against his fellow fighting young men still in that terrible war. He abandoned the fighting men at war then, so would not he do the same again.
    When confronted with such a decision as this election was, it is important to put aside the issues that are minor, and focusing on those that will affect the future of America either for the better, or the ruin.
    There was only one choice for President on this moment, and that is who this country voted for and that is our President for the next four years, and even though I stated I was not going to vote, I did and proudly state I voted for President Bush, and the state I live in Utah, gave Bush all of our votes.
    I have almost always gone republican with a couple or one exception.
    I do not agree with many of the ideas of the republican thinking, but it is the entire picture I must look at. This country is in the process of major change, and one has the choice to change with it, or to remain behind.
    If outsourcing is to be, then learn to live with it, and to profit from it.
    Just as the home PC changed how we all live, there are those who have not accepted it.
    so they lag behind.
    Life is a process of never ending learning. One can not use all that they believed in when they were at age 20 or 30 or 40 (age depends upon your age today)
    If I were the same person I was at 20, this world would be so confusing; I might have written the words you wrote.
    But as this country has changed and grown so have I.
    My favorite saying is –
    “Live as if you are going to die tomorrow, Keep learning as if you will live forever”.
    This is how I live my life, along with my personal principals, and beliefs.
    This is what has give me the strength to do all that I have as a woman accomplish,
    and also to survive the dark days along with the Sunny days
    But, most of all and for this comment it is this belief along with the Libra logic, That my vote went to the President, President Bush.
    You do not change airplanes in mid air, just as you do not change Presidents in mid war.
    Real dumb, extremely stupid. Sorry, but that is a fact.
    If this comment seems a bit over bearing, well, it needs to be.
    as your comment was real dumb, sorry but also true, it actually pissed me off.
    Suzanne

    And you do not have the guts to sign by your name you only use X I on the other hand give my name as I am not ashamed of anything I say.

33. Suzanne Katz Says: November 27th, 2004 at 5:53 am

    WOW, I FOUND SOME COMMENTS I HAD NOT READ,
    FIRST TO GOOD OLD “Bill O’Reilly!!!!” COMMENT # 20 ” AND REMBER SUZANNE………………………………….

    “Tolerance is the Virtue of a man without convictions” a quote from comment #20
    Thought we had settled these Gay things, actually it is no one’s business.
    Just as it is no body’s business when and whom I have sex with, the same goes for men, women, and gays.
    Tolerance is the Virtue of a person with an educated mind, a strong sense of worth. With a good dash of empathy, not sympathy, EMPATHY. Along with the understanding that each and every person living on this earth is different that you and believes his or her own beliefs. And it is none of your business what they believe unless it directly affects you in a harmful way.
    So there is the correct description of a person with TOLERANCE and I don’t think you fit the ticket.

    Now, I know why you wrote that it was in reference to my statement about liking the words well I must have been either having sex, or very tired, as what I though I had read is

    Tolerance is the Virtue of a man WITH convictions”
    besides, I am a women and have the right to change my mind. RIGHT?

34. Anonymous Says: November 28th, 2004 at 12:54 am

    On top of all that, it isn’t the government’s place to limit freedoms, it’s the government’s place to make sure the freedoms we have are held sacred by all.

35. Serb Militant Says: November 28th, 2004 at 12:54 am

    Above was me.. I don’t know why it won’t sign in automatically.

36. Suzanne Katz Says: November 28th, 2004 at 1:50 am

    Hi anonymous NOW SOMEONE WROTE SOMETHING THAT IS ENTIRE IDEA BEHIND AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    THANK YOU
    all caps to make a point.
    comment 34

37. Dynazka - A non-speller Says: January 7th, 2005 at 3:08 am

    I’m actually writing a reportish thing for my AP Government class, and I knew where I was going with it. I tried to explain on my paper that the country isn’t divided. Just diverse.

    In this country, we are allowed to form our own oppinions without fear of prosecution. That’s one of the things that makes this country great. Look at Iraq for example. For years, they held ‘elections’… You got a peice of paper and it read something to the effect of “I want Saddam to be president, Yes. No.” And you were surrounded by guards. How intimidating would that be? You could see why under 1% of people voted NO. Anyway…

    I agree with Suzanne. We have a right to agree to disagree, and we’re taking full advantage of that. Anyway. Gotta run.

    Ciao.

38. Serb Says: January 7th, 2005 at 4:30 am

    Problem is that people are, more than ever, divided on partisan lines about some of the hotter issues that its questionable the government can actually (legally) effect – hot issues such as gay marriage, stem cell research, and abortion. People’s opinions are steadfast and untouchable on these positions, and that’s the reason the country is divided – not simply diverse. Though we are a diverse nation, which helps us in many cases, in this case we are handicapped by it. Vive le Freedom all the way, but sometimes all the exercising of the First Amendment annoys me a bit too much.

39. Sean Says: January 7th, 2005 at 7:17 am

    I’d like to change the focus real quickly on to the Left wing fringe (also known as the Democrat party ) who is now trying to futilly contest the Ohio presidential election, and it’s 20 electoral votes.
    They are trying to claim that there was wide spread voter irregularity that there was voter dis-enfranchisement (a little 2000 and Jesse Jackson esk there, good work libs), they’re trying to say that Bush stole the election again.

    I CAN’T believe that they are going to shoot themselves in the foot like this. There was no irregularities there was no dis-enfranchising of voters. Ohio, like the rest of the country, had record turn-out. After the recount Bush still has won by OVER 118,000 votes, and they still think this is election night and they can salvage this election.
    The only voter irregularity that there was in Ohio was in largely dominant democrat districts in which some of these districts reported more registered voters than eligible voters in their district. CAN ANYONE SAY VOTER FRAUD. This was also found in Philadelphia.
    They are also making a huge self-contradiction here with this objection (or hail mary pass if you prefer). Let me explain. Remember back to the much debated election of 2000 when Al Gore won the popular vote, and many democrats suggested that we scrap the electoral college and only elect presidents with the popular vote (this is a terrible idea by the way but that’s another discussion). Now, in 2004 Bush won the popular vote by over 3 MILLION votes! I don’t here any democrats saying, “Yep, Bush won, he got the popular vote.” NO, now they are reverting back to the electoral college system and saying that Bush didn’t win Ohio’s 20 electoral votes so he shouldn’t be re-elected even though he won the popular vote!
    They are showing their TRUE COLORS here people; pay attention. They are appealing to their wacko, kook base with this objection. They are still trying to declare Bush illegitamate. They can’t handle loosing, and they don’t know how to win.

40. Serb Says: January 7th, 2005 at 8:09 pm

    Of course, it wouldn’t make a cent of difference either way considering Kerry called the dogs off BEFORE the count in Ohio had actually been finished.

41. Sean Says: January 7th, 2005 at 11:36 pm

    To Serb,
    It may not make a difference, but what you may or may not know is that after John Kerry publically distanced himself from this objection endorsed by Barbara Boxer; he then promptly went back to his quarters (or whatever you want to call them) and sent out a Bulk e-mail and mass phone calls to registered Democrat voters in Ohio to call their Congressmen to report voter irregularities or dis-enfranchisement. However, that’s not what I was even trying to get across in my last e-mail.
    My point was summarized in the final paragraph, and that is: their objection may not make a difference, BUT it is exposing them for who they are and what they believe. It’s exposing them for the kooks that they are. It’s exposing the fact that they can accept defeat, and still think the election was stolen. They TALK about bi-partisanship and working with Bush and the Republicans, and then they try to undermine him.
    My point was simply they are showing their true colors with this move, and their blaring contradictions with election policy.
    They are also showing what they believe and who they side with with their defense of Al Qaeda terrorists, and fighting for Geneva Convention rights and protections for them when they clearly are not covered by the Geneva Convention. I’m going to get into this more in my next comment.

42. Danny Says: August 18th, 2005 at 12:14 am

    To Suzanne: No one was ever born homosexual. It is nurture, not nature. What about the 45-50 year old women who were mistreated and dumped by their husbands and become manhating cohabitors with another woman all of a sudden? What about the thousands of ex-homosexuals? The two researchers who claimed genetic origins have both seen their work totally debunked. Think about it.

43. Mr. Jack Says: August 18th, 2005 at 8:09 pm

    Danny, then how do you explain Homosexuality in the animal kingdom? It’s been shown that there is Homosexuality in animals like dogs, which cannot make an informed decision to be Gay or straight.

    I think it’s safe to say that Homosexuality is both a product of Nature and Nurture.

44. Plinio Says: June 12th, 2007 at 12:40 pm

    America is not a Country, it’s a continent like Europa, Asia, Oceania, Africa.

Leave a Reply