Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 04:29 PM) Why do I care? Time called Hitler the man of the year, and Stalin too. Why do you keep saying that? I don't care if you care. I don't care if you don't care that I care. That's not adding anything to this discussion. Obviously people DO care, so that's what we're debating.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 04:26 PM) Keynote of what? AMC's greatest hits? If by 2016 the Republican party hasnt accepted gay rights, they are doa. They need to accept that, because otherwise democrats are going to go out of control and there wont be a balance. For the sake of the US, please get it together, please remember that you are the party of "SMALL GOVT" and small govt includes not regulating who I have sex with or what drugs I take. They're probably DOA anyway. I'd imagine they'll accept gay marriage. But you'll still have to play the "I think it's a sin based on my religious beliefs but no one should be denied rights" card like Obama.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 04:03 PM) The Pope is getting lauded by some for changing the church's direction and message. It was a notable change, and people generally like to encourage positive movement even if it's not the full measure they want. That said, not everyone in the LGBT community or people who support LGBT rights is embracing the Pope. Phil Robertson didn't do anything like that. He followed the long line of explicit, anti-gay bigotry of lumping it in with bestiality. That's not quibbling, that's just recognizing very common anti-gay bigotry. Pope Francis would not have been lauded by The Advocate had he mentioned bestiality along with homosexuality. At the end of the day, the words people actually use and the history behind them actually matter. Yes, "by some" you mean the oldest gay magazine in existence. And Time magazine. You know, that barely known publication.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 03:58 PM) LOL, keep pretending that s*** like Twitchy doesn't exist and that conservatives don't b**** and whine and try to get people fired for saying things. Damn liberals!!! eta: also I could have sworn I've said multiple times that I don't necessarily agree with his suspension. I honestly had never heard of Twitchy before your post earlier today, but remind me of a time when a celebrity or TV personality has been suspended/fired from a show for making a remark that can be considered negative towards a conservative or conservative minded person.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 03:19 PM) Are you saying that being gay is a choice and those people chose to sin? Not sure if it's a choice. I tend to think it's not. That's why I don't judge people or treat them differently for it. It's up to God to do that eventually, if he chooses to.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 03:07 PM) Well I just accept that to certain people I am a bigot, because well its just easier to believe that Im a monster than try and prove that Im not. But the point is, what does it matter if Im a monster if Im right? Isnt that what this is really all about, what is right, versus what is wrong. I think that what is right is that all humans deserve to be treated equal, regardless of sex, rage, religion whatever. I think that I am right that there is no god and that none of this matters, and that the only point may be to have fun/joy and try for our millisecond brief existence to make a better millisecond existence for the next human. But I dont care if someone else disagrees. I just am going to keep doing my thing and trying to improve that millisecond for everyone. I agree with you, but the problem is people like SS and organizations like GLAAD b**** and whine and call people pretty awful things and then eventually get them fired or in trouble for it. All in the name of tolerance and acceptance mind you.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 02:54 PM) There are a certain group of LGBT who strive for acceptance from the Church and mainstream. So they pander to the Pope in hopes that it will curry favor and hopefully carry the day. Its stupidity. But most people want to be in the club that rejects them, not the one who wants them. Go figure. Well that's a whole other animal. Why do people get pissy about what Christians believe when they don't care to be Christian? That's why I don't understand why I'm a bigot and hateful person for believing homosexuals are sinners (just like me for the various sins i've committed) according to MY RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, but don't think they should be treated as second class citizens, denied rights, etc.?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 02:08 PM) What? No, looking at it in a vacuum as you are is taking it out of context. Looking at it with the background of bigots frequently equating LGBT and bestiality is keeping it in context. When has Pope Francis equated LGBT to bestiality? I'm still waiting for you to substantiate your claims that they're saying the exact same things. I can't help it if you don't read what I posted with regard to the Pope. The Pope and Church still consider homosexuality a sin and yet he's being praised for his "modern" view of "acceptance" instead of condemnation. You're quibbling over the fact that Robertson gave examples of certain sins in discussing sinful behavior (of which you keep keying in on bestiality despite the fact he gave several other examples). What difference does it make if the Pope says homosexuality is a sin or that homosexuality is a sin just like X, Y and Z? There is none. At the end of the day they're both saying homosexuality is a sin but we should still love sinners, teach them about Jesus and let God judge them later. It's not "our" job to do that.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:54 PM) I haven't seen anyone calling the Pope an advocate for LGBT, though. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/prominent-gay-...n-his-birthday/

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:58 PM) This only works as an excuse in a vacuum that ignores how LGBT is always linked to bestiality by bigots. Oh ok, you can take things out of context and focus on only a few words but I can't. Got it.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:54 PM) Because "I'm not a [racist/homophobe/sexist/etc.] but..." statements don't actually change what you've said. The Pope has been praised for his general move away from the ultra-conservative positions the church has been taking. People are happy to see movement in a positive direction, and that movement should be seen as good. I haven't seen anyone calling the Pope an advocate for LGBT, though. And again, no, they aren't saying the exact same things. Show me the quote where Pope Francis links LGBT to bestiality. By still maintaining a position that homosexuality is a sin, he's linking it to bestiality and ever other "sin" he and the Church believe in. He doesn't need to expressly say it for it to be true. edit: and I think Phil is doing the same thing - not being the ultra-conservative "you're all burning in hell and shouldn't be allowed to be Christian" Christian, and more "we're all sinners and we should love one another and follow God."

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:49 PM) Who are these liberals that you speak of? I have to imagine that Im (by the historical definition) the most liberal and I dont care what this guy says. I always attribute the quote to Voltaire (there is some historical debate), but I think he said it best: I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it. I'm clearly speaking in general terms here, but you really disagree with me that conservative/religious groups that have dominated western culture for centuries have wanted a certain level of decorum with society whereas liberals/progressives have wanted to break free from those constraints? We still fight over that crap with nipples at the Superbowl.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:48 PM) You're ignoring most of what he said and the context of it so that you can pretend people are upset that he said the words "vagina" and "anus." QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:33 PM) No, I think it was vulgar as hell. There's no need to talk about vaginas and anuses to the general public unless you are a gynecologist or proctologist, and I would hope that's only if you are announcing some sort of break through medicinally.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:45 PM) I don't know why you're only looking at one or two sentences of what he said. If he had only said "I prefer vaginas to anuses," it'd be weird and probably get some attention on pop media websites, but nobody would really care. You've also evaded the point that people wanting other people fired from their jobs over something they said is hardly limited to liberals/progressives. I don't know why you keep ignoring the other half of what he said which was everyone is a sinner, we don't judge, we love and respect everyone and let God judge later on. I still want to know why the Pope is an advocate for gay people and Phil is some awful, hateful human being. They believe and say the exact same things. Neither one is the extreme anti-gay groups that tell people they'll be burning in hell.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:44 PM) You know what else he did? He compared it to bestiliaty. No, it's really not. I'm not going back over this with you, which is why i'm responding to wite's argument which was limited to just those words.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:39 PM) lolwut edit: you should familiarize yourself with the perpetual outrage machine that is Twitchy before trying to say it's a "liberals/progressives" thing. I can think of no good reason why adults can't use the worlds vagina and anus other than a fear of offending someone's sensibilities, which was a "conservative" issues for centuries that "liberals/progressives" always argued against.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:32 PM) How do you feel about what Riley Cooper said? He didn't do anything illegal, and frankly, he said a lot less, but he was still scrutinized to holy hell. There's no need to talk about the physiological aspects of sex, nor to suggest one is superior to the other. I'm straight, I love women and vaginas and boobs and whatever, but I don't believe gay people are sinners and I don't believe they are wrong. Well that's another conversation, as I think a lot of that was overblown too. But if Phil had started calling people f**gots I'd probably agree with you guys when you say it was all hateful speech. But he didn't. He was telling a reporter in his home that he didn't understand why a man would like another man's butt when he could have a vagina, which he likes. It's literally saying I'd like to bang that weather girl in the other thread which multiple did (btw, how horrible of all of you, you're hateful towards straight women and gay men).

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:33 PM) Having your sexual orientation once again compared to f***ing animals isn't just "vulgar." It was pretty explicitly hateful. That wasn't wite's argument. It was saying "vagina" and "anus" because we're apparently all 12 and don't have those body parts.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:33 PM) No, I think it was vulgar as hell. There's no need to talk about vaginas and anuses to the general public unless you are a gynecologist or proctologist, and I would hope that's only if you are announcing some sort of break through medicinally. Now we've come full circle when liberals/progressives want our speech to be curbed for the sake of what, manners? Should women start covering up too?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:30 PM) From the accounts I've read including the one presented by him in that article, this TV show made a really big deal out of "staying out of the politics". They wanted to be able to market to as wide of an audience as possible by building a show around a conservative family in that arena, but they wanted to keep the anti-gay, quasi-racist stuff completely out of the show because otherwise they'd wind up with criticism and backlash that would completely undermine their marketing. This interview was the exact opposite of what they wanted for the show. Even by his own account during that interview, they don't want political talk of the sort that would cause controversy. Which is frankly a lot of bulls***. I watch the show and they've had at least one episode where they introduce Phil to a flaming homosexual pet photographer for the sole purpose of Phil's reaction. Back country, caked in mud redneck meets flamboyant, color coordinated "yuppie" from the city (yuppie being a phrase he uses all the time to describe anyone who doesn't live off the land) was the entire gag. A&E knew what they were dealing with and knew this would eventually happen. And frankly they're making a horrendous business mistake here. These guys are going to go to another network and A&E will be back to airing biographies from the 90's.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 01:26 PM) You can say "I'm not attracted to men sexually" without the description. It's really not hard. Here's an example..."I'm heterosexual. I'm attracted to women and I'm not attracted to men." Being vulger and being hateful are two different things. The argument wite appears to be making isn't that it was vulger, it was hateful, which is ludicrous.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 12:08 PM) I think this article is loaded as all hell and tries to connect very, very loose ends. Phil Robertson is an idiot. He is also incredibly naive or he is a great actor. Frankly, I could not care less. He probably did see nothing but happy blacks in Louisiana and he thought no different. He's not a senator or a mayor or anyone that holds any sort of public position. Let him believe what he wants to believe, and if you are smart, you will ignore it and allow the village idiot to believe what he wants to believe. My problem is not with Phil Robertson. My problem is when actual, intelligent people agree with him. I do not believe he should have been suspended, but everything he's said is incredibly ignorant on a deeper level. I shared my thoughts with someone close and they said "frankly, I agree with him." Yes, I personally find a woman's vagina more appealing as well - I'm guessing all straight males agree -but I don't go talking about it. First and foremost, you don't talk about any of that stuff publicly because it's simply not politically correct - frankly, it's disgusting. Of greater note, you don't talk about that stuff because it is highly offensive to the LBGT community. Trying to even come up with a comparison for what he said is impossible for me. To imitate his speaking style, it's like "Hey Phil - shut up. Just go shoot stuff. Dinner will be ready when you're back." Why the f*** not? Seriously, is that how far we've come now? We can't even express to people what we like and don't like at the risk of offending someone? Jesus Christ.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 11:26 AM) Yeah, I threw it in the recruiting thread, but it should help. I don't know if your tone is joking or not, but it absolutely should help. It sucks we have to rely on JUCO's right now, but it's better to try to fill those gaps and help win games, and hopefully turn that into better 4 year recruits. That's what has to be done for the 2015 class. Also getting Paul James back on board can help down the road. Obviously, we need all the d-line help we can get at the moment. Stopgap is better than nothing. No i'm being sincere. Sounds like the guy is going to be raw - started as a WR and then grew like a giant and he's now 6-7, 285.

So Beckman was able to pull in 2 of the top 30 JUCO guys, including the #6 rated guy, a d-lineman. That should help next year.

http://espn.go.com/chicago/nba/story/_/id/...trade-luol-deng I sincerely hope this is the FO posturing for a better draft pick/player.