Why the hell can't some of you accept a differing opinion on homosexuality?

I don’t think she is a troll. I think she is a person who has decided that being homosexual is the worst thing a person can possibly be and the worst sin a human being can commit, worse, even then sins specifically and explicitly condemned by Christ, Himself.

Frankly, picturing pretty much all of my married friends having sex doesn’t do a thing for me. That does not mean I’m glad of their marriages and the love they share. Then again, I also don’t think Laurie gets the idea that there is more to homosexuality than sex.

CJ

Cite?

I don’t know about religion, but she definitely seems like one who has staunchly cemented her feet to the idea that homosexuality is explained by several differnet distasteful, disgusting, unbelievable, mutually conflicting stereotypes, which are impossible to support with any amount of open-minded reasoning.

I don’t know if she thinks her posting style betrays just how consumed she is by passion and stubbornness for these ideas, or if she just can’t figure out that this is text, and not her own, personal, right-wing radio show.

And I can’t explain the pass she made at Guinastasia at all.

“Stop!”?

:slight_smile:

Laurie has so brutally sodomized my English language comprehension centers that I have been instantly transformed into a gay homosexual, and now have the AIDS real bad all up in my brain.

But I did manage to stop my hycocampus from giving toothless oral sex to my amygdala long enough to pick out this little gem:

The injustice! Together, you and I shall battle the forces of injustice so that heterosexuals can someday have the same right!

Why not? Am I THAT undesirable?

Well, humph!

:stuck_out_tongue:

That’s IT! How could I have missed it before?

Laurie’s been struggling for years with the spectre of homosexuality, but developing a crush on her ‘dearest’ Guinastasia with her ‘many thousands of posts’ has finally forced her to realise that she really is lesbian after all.

All of this Phelpish rhetoric is just a symptom of denial! It’s so clear to me now.

It’s okay, Laurie. I’m sorry I said all those mean things… but you’ll just have to come to accept that Guin is straight. But I’m sure she’ll still respect you for who you are, and treat you as a human being rather than a sinful pedophilic freak of nature. (Which is better than some people around here, but don’t worry yourself over them).

Come join the club, Laurie! Give me your email adress, and I’ll send you a copy of the Agenda[sup]TM[/sup]. On Monday, we’re meeting for lunch at this Vegan place, and then going to feed the ducks. I’m sure you’ll see just how much fun it is, after all.

I think you’re right!

Wait…does this mean that Guin gets the toaster even though she herself is straight? I seem to have mislaid my copy of The Agenda[sup]TM[/sup], and I never did memorize the Rules of Indoctrination (you know how flighty we bisexuals are, after all).

Cool-I didn’t know us straights could convert people! Wicked!

:smiley:

The implied subject of the sentence it “you.” Were we to diagram the sentence it would look a little something like this:

(You)| Stop

But the vertical would pierce the horizontal (I ain’t about to try to play with the spacing to get it to work out).

Oh, and for what it’s worth:

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2003/11/24/267241-cp.html

*Not that I think this would be a deal-breaker…

:dubious:

The subject (you) is implied. But you knew that already.

Because I diagrammed it, hello!

Well, see, your vertical didn’t pierce your horizontal (and does THAT sound like a personal problem or what?) so nobody paid any attention since it didn’t look like a proper sentence diagram.

:smiley:

It does on my screen.

Yes, I responded without reading to the end of the thread. Sorry, Otto.

Or maybe I’m still bitter about your QaF threads getting responses while mine languish so I just subconsciously skip your posts now. :wink:

Texas and other states repeal the laws?

Nice of the SDMB to allow all this homosexual chat only after Lawrence vs Texas, isn’t it?

Hm.

Don’t recall that the law was federal, AK, so you’ll need to cite that it was illegal in Chicago (where the boards are based) before your arguement holds water.

No, dumbass, but the Supreme Court of the United States declared that the law in Texas and the other states were unconstitutional, null, void and of no effect. The states don’t have to repeal the laws because they are enjoined from enforcing them. Nitwit.

If you have a complaint about a post that you believe violates board rules in discussing illegal activity, click the “report this post to a moderator” link. Otherwise, fuck off, jackass.

Besides, some (if not most) illegalities are allowed to be discussed, but there are limits on some illegalities.

You’re still a dumbass, though.

Esprix