cwsox

I didn't read far enough, question answered. Wonder what Frank said on his way to first...

did Frank get tossed after you posted that, a delayed throw out? Why is Daubach in now?

You really think so? Given the chocie of being popped in the head because you were, say, a gangster... and being beaten and and tortured and tied to a fence and left to die, suffering for hours, just because of hatred, which fate would you choose? And when you define yourself as anti-gay, do you not understand that you are defining yourself as against people? Instead of labeling yourself as anti-people, and you are better than that my friend, why not just say that as a human being you find the taking of human life abhorent?

welcome to soxtalk.com and nice avatar!

i usually check whitesox.mlb.com before I log on to get the score because you can read these game threads forever sometimes with getting one. Four doubles to open the first, 3 runs, and then Colon has given up several homers, 1 run, 1 run, 3 run. I do not drink. I am all natural. Which proves everything 100% natural is not good.

when you need the score, we will give it to you! right now the scorte is nothing to be posting! (the above is feeble humor. So is the score, except trailing 5-3 after leading 3-0 is not funny.)

Hey batta batta - swing! Come on King, take the bat off your shoulder! and now we will have swinging misses. Oh oh, did someone attack PK? Oh my!

do you really want to know? This was color coded for the sake of those who really, really need color coding.

oh my Someday let us all get a book on irony, sarcasm, and other sly references.

cw.. I did a yahoo search and found no such law on the books in any of the 50 states...?? depends on the search terms used and the wording of the statutes most states - all of them i believe - have statutes that define illegal activity such as sodomy (which in a legal definition is oral sex too), two unmarried people living together, a man seducing any woman, etc., unmarried people doing it, teens doing it, on and on and on. All remnants of another era - but then again, Texas has not been alone in prosecuting two men for having sex which is why that is before the Supreme Court. For some reason, two women getting it it on is not illegal most places, mostly because the legislatures never thought about it. If you check the sex offenders registry and what statutes in each state define a crime by statute worthy of internet placement, it is far more than the usual suspects such as child porn, child molestation, etc. Most guys do not realize that if they are a minor by law they can and will be prosecuted in the right circumstances. All you need is a bunch of drunk teens, a keg, and someone's parent who gets pissed and a prosecutor who wants to get elected judge or state rep. Michigan has had a number of prosecutions for that this past year. Don't matter he is 16 and she is 15... And every prom/graduation/open house season is a new occasion for some prosecutions somewhere. I never knew how my son avoided prosecution for that other than that his father had friends in the prosecutors office... any prosecutor (in illinois, states attorney) who wants to score some points has merely to check the birth certificates in their county and do the math.

totally

no not every human action is meant for public display although in the right situations nothing wrong with beating off with others

I never heard this word before - ????

tonight, yes. ship his ass to St Louis...

back to back homers given up by Colon? what is up with that

Of course Jesus feels that way. Just that you have either created or revealed another personality that leaves Jesus alone in that opinion no matter how much people try to share it. Why so hostile when someone says give me something positive here...

If you were sheep, avoid lonely shepherds. I know you mean the Bible when you refer to a "book of fictional stories" and sometimes that gets to me. The Scriptures are central to my life. What the "bible belters" say the Bible is, is not what I confess that it is. It should not surprise you that I reject far more vehemently than you the interpretations put out by some who purport to have all truth about the Scriptures. I am everything opposite a fundamentalist as can be and I don't accept hardly anything about what they claim the Bible says. But I also suggest kindly that you are reacting to people who hate who clothe themselves in the Bible with what the Scriptures actually say. The Bible does not teach that being gay is a sin. The Bible does not teach that one should a narrow minded anti-evolutionist. The Bible does not say 90% of what I hear Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell says it says. The Bible does say a lot of - indeed all of - what Martin Luther King said it says. And it says a lot of what the Confessing Church in Nazi Germany said it says, the sole voice of public oipposition to the Nazis, says it says. To denounce the Bible as totally as you do is to accept the definitions of what it is givcen by people that you most disagree with. And bashing the Bible, bashing people who believe in the Bible is like bashing gays, or African Americans, or Moslems, or any other whole group of people. The Scriptures are actually very silent on a lot of things that people yell about whiel they are very concerned with justice issues. I have no problems with people of other faith or no faith because that is just the way it is. I'd be uncomfortable with anyone stomping on that which is central to Hinduism, or Buddhism, or Islam, or atheism, or any set of relgious/non religious beliefs. God has as little problem with orientation issues as you do, even less. God is very concerned that people treat each other with justice. That is what the Scriptures are about.

I dont care if someone throws a label at me. I just dont like when people are hypocrites. my own thought recognizing my own inherent flaws - as I said elsewhere, politcal correctness is a phrase that I hear used to justify a lot of things that are hateful at worst and negative/not helpful at best - and I agree with you that when certain wording is used just to be what you call politically correct that that don't mean s*** either. You are, if I may observe and I am going and you can blast me if you want - a very contentious and defensive person who would be a hell of a lot more likable if you were not telling us always what you don't like about others. I think you have a lot to offer that is not seen because you have too often defensive. I can tell you a lot about how much you have done warfare with mods at WSI and posters you have fought with on boards across the internet and yet I know very little about the rest of you - so being contentious is the only way you have given me to know you.

What a question to toss at a minister - I could be typing here all day! Short answer - judgment is really to be avoided. The moral dimensions of whatever goes on inside a person is something that no one knows. But acts and thoughts are not that far apart. The act of killing Jews in gas chambers could only be acceptable in a society where antiSemitism reigned, and polite antiSemitism is just as much guilty as overt. The moral difference between loading people in the umschlagplatz for the trip to Auschwitz and saying nothing as the trains roll by is not discerned by the victims of Holocaust. It really is not ours to judge - but important to lift up a voice against judging. Even the same action can have totally different meanings when done by different people. Of course we make judgments every moment. But separating the ones that must be made - for example in a court of law - what else - it is tough. And how does one do that - I have no solutions that will change the world, but not judging people by groups - not even judging individuals any more than we have to - and that includes judging ourselves... and see now this sounds like so much bulls***. It really gets very Christ-centered for me and I don't eman that in a way to get all religious or even to be Christian-centric because I don't claima n exclsuive truth for Christianity - it is the way that I know God but may not be the way that another knows God so who is to judge faith (or lack of faith) one over the other? - but in every person I am compelled to see by the words that I believe to see the fullness of the God I confess in others. So I teach my grandson as I taught my children - we do not avoid saying derogatory words about others - such as n***** for example, or f*****, or s***, or chink or whatever - because that is politcally incorrect. That is the worst of reasons (and I am with bmr on this...). We don't say it because we reject the implications that any one person or group is less human than any other person or group. We don't say it because we embrace the belief that all people (individuals and groups) are inherently equal and as Jesus said - even to insult another is the same as an act of violence against that person. And that means that whenever sides are taken our place is on the side of the one(s) threatened, put down, insulted, debased, attacked. Passivity is not an option either for that just allows s*** to happen. I tried hard not to sound too hokey with this. But in the Sermion on the Mount (Matthew 5-8) Jesus makes very clear that word and thought and action are intimately related for good or for that which is harmful.

what don;t you want to see - two guys f***ing each other - two guys holding hands - two guys kiss - a guy acknowledging he is gay - a marriage annoucnemnt for two same sex people in the paper - and what about any of that would bother someone else? I suppose that I don't want to see cubs fans at the Cell but they exist - and their right to do whatever does not depend on whether you, or I, want to see them do their thing. Really, why does it bother anyone? Folks have a right to be what they are and do their thing without being stopped by others who would deny free expression to what they don't want to see. But really, if you don't want to see gay sex, don't do it, or keep your eyes closed when you do it. Otherwise, what is there to see other than people just being themselves and wanting the same right to self expression that everyone say they want for themselves?

Whenever I hear the phrase "politically correct" there is always a but that follows that, and some defensive language trying to justify something. You don't want labels and value judgments tossed at you - very fair - don't toss them at others, especially a group of people.

tex, very true - and bmr, I walk far more than you could every realize word games can be played all day what is, is

Olivo

and damn that whole board needs it...

damn you are f***ing up - that is the same damned club!