NY activist judges allow same sex marriage

[Johnney]

Grasp ears firmly...pull sharply...Everyone duck and cover.

your a waste of foreskin, stop breathing my oxygen

 

[no1tovote4]

i said i dont provide links becasue they are my opinions fucktard. dont be crying to OCA because you got nailed for that. you try to pass everything you post as the gospel. i dont.
yes i am free to express my opinion. but i see you post "facts". well what you would like to think as facts anyway. not exactly sure where you get your info, or how you formulate your opinions, but you need to check both of them for sure.

No, OCA busts his ass for not providing links to Copyrighted material. In this way Bully not only is breaking the rules of the board but seems to attempt to take other's thoughts and make it seem like they come from himself.... Intellectual property theft is theft nonetheless.

This is why OCA requested posts because he believes that Bully is doing that in error rather than on purpose and he requests that Bully follow the rules and insure that whomever wrote an article he posts gets due credit for their thoughts.

Of course OCA is much more direct than I in stating so...

Therefore since your posts are your own opinion rather than copyrighted material from another site links would not be forthcoming.

 

[Johnney]

No, OCA busts his ass for not providing links to Copyrighted material. In this way Bully not only is breaking the rules of the board but seems to attempt to take other's thoughts and make it seem like they come from himself.... Intellectual property theft is theft nonetheless.

This is why OCA requested posts because he believes that Bully is doing that in error rather than on purpose and he requests that Bully follow the rules and insure that whomever wrote an article he posts gets due credit for their thoughts.

Of course OCA is much more direct than I in stating so...

Therefore since your posts are your own opinion rather than copyrighted material from another site links would not be forthcoming.

bullys been around here long enough to know the rules. he frequently "forgets" to post links, there for making OCA lay into him about violating copywrites. shithead knows full well whats he doing and does so to get under everyones skin.

 

[no1tovote4]

bullys been around here long enough to know the rules. he frequently "forgets" to post links, there for making OCA lay into him about violating copywrites. shithead knows full well whats he doing and does so to get under everyones skin.

Yes, but without him the board would be boring...

 

[Johnney]

Yes, but without him the board would be boring...

trolls like bully are a dime a dozen.

 

[Bullypulpit]

bullys been around here long enough to know the rules. he frequently "forgets" to post links, there for making OCA lay into him about violating copywrites. shithead knows full well whats he doing and does so to get under everyones skin.

You said yourself that you don't need links to post opinions, although what often passes for opinion around here comes straight from Hannity, O'Reilly and Limbaugh. And unless I'm mistaken, their material is coyrighted. Have a nice day woogums.

 

[no1tovote4]

You said yourself that you don't need links to post opinions, although what often passes for opinion around here comes straight from Hannity, O'Reilly and Limbaugh. And unless I'm mistaken, their material is coyrighted. Have a nice day woogums.

If you have the same opinion as another but write it in your own words you are not committing theft of intellectual property. If you take a whole article that was written by another and post it as your own then you are. There is a clear distinction and you are simply being disingenuous trying to say that there is not.

Several times you were found to be posting copyrighted articles from another site and did not provide the link, as listed in the rules. OCA simply gave you warning to provide links to copyrighted material. Admittedly using stronger language than necessary, but that is OCA.

The attempt to push off the same actions on others makes it appear that you were doing it purposely and are now trying to justify your actions by trying to accuse others of the same thing, though it is clear that they are not posting copyrighted material published by others as their own thought.

Stop trying to justify the action and simply always post links to another's intellectual property when used in your posts. We are getting tired of hearing you whine about this. Plus, if you have a problem with a Moderator you are not supposed to air it on the public board but are supposed to take it to PMs. This is also one of the rules that you agreed to when you created your login for the site.

I believe once you agree to something you should do what you agreed to do. Instead of whining on the board and giving us all a headache because you got caught start doing what you said you would and comply with the rules.

 

[Johnney]

You said yourself that you don't need links to post opinions, although what often passes for opinion around here comes straight from Hannity, O'Reilly and Limbaugh. And unless I'm mistaken, their material is coyrighted. Have a nice day woogums.

that almost flies, queer, but i dont take others work and try to pass it off as my own. of this you have been busted out before. and not jsut once. i dont try to pass others hard work as my own. mine are my original thought and opinions. or delusions and psychosis, depending on how you view it.

and what the fuck is woogums? i bet its some gay family name you and civilliberty call each others. well keep me out of it, fags

 

[nakedemperor]

Oh and btw anyone who is claiming that we are making up the stats, NE has just conceded that the stats are correct. quite denying whats in front of you.

Dude, I was going on stats that I saw mentioned in one of Music's posts; I didn't even see the original article or journal the data came from. I'm not "legitimizing" the data, I'm just going on what I read off-handedly.

Also, how the HELL do you get off saying the "majority" of "these pedophiles" are homosexual? The MAJORITY? As in 51+%? Heh. riiight.

 

[OCA]

You said yourself that you don't need links to post opinions, although what often passes for opinion around here comes straight from Hannity, O'Reilly and Limbaugh. And unless I'm mistaken, their material is coyrighted. Have a nice day woogums.

Bully if somebody posts a piece from Hannity or Limbaugh and does not post a link I will be on their ass too, this has nothing to do with ideology.

You try and post stuff from other people and pass it off as your own, this is commonly called plageurism(sp?) and will get you fired from a job and kicked out of school and in the case of this board get Jimmy a big fat lawsuit.

I'm sure you can agree that the rules on links are just and fair and thusly I apply them to everyone.

Johnny has posted nothing but his opinion(I think this is quite obvious from the wording) and therefore is not required to post a link. You may be prejudiced to think that Limbaugh and Hannity word their things and feel the same way as Johnny but you know that is not true. In fact you'd be hard pressed to get past the first 5 minutes in an intellectual debate with either of those two before getting knocked down for the 10 count.

 

[CivilLiberty]

"Study after nationwide study has yielded estimates of male homosexuality that range between 1% and 3%. Yet they account for between 20% and 40% of all molestations of children."
Dr. Paul Cameron, Ph.D., of the Family Research Institute

"Dr" Paul Cameron's hate-based research has been discredited. He is a Charlatan. And the so called "Family Research Institute" is nothing but yet another hate group.

Here's a bit more on the defrocked Dr Cameron:

<i>
On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that "Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists" by the APA Board of Directors.5 Cameron has posted an elaborate argument about his expulsion from APA on his website, claiming that he resigned from APA before he was dropped from membership. Like most organizations, however, APA does not allow a member to resign when they are being investigated. And even if Cameron's claims were accepted as true, it would be remarkable that the largest professional organization of psychologists in the United States (and other professional associations, as noted below) went to such lengths to disassociate itself from one individual.
*
At its membership meeting on October 19, 1984, the Nebraska Psychological Association adopted a resolution stating that it "formally disassociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality."6
*
In 1985, the American Sociological Association (ASA) adopted a resolution which asserted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism" and noted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research."7 The resolution formally charged an ASA committee with the task of "critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron."

At its August, 1986 meeting, the ASA officially accepted the committee's report and passed the following resolution:
The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research. Information on this action and a copy of the report by the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, "The Paul Cameron Case," is to be published in Footnotes, and be sent to the officers of all regional and state sociological associations and to the Canadian Sociological Association with a request that they alert their members to Cameron's frequent lecture and media appearances."8
*
Cameron's credibility was also questioned outside of academia. In his written opinion in Baker v. Wade (1985), Judge Buchmeyer of the U.S. District Court of Dallas referred to "Cameron's sworn statement that 'homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals,'" and concluded that "Dr. Paul Cameron...has himself made misrepresentations to this Court" and that "There has been no fraud or misrepresentations except by Dr. Cameron" (p.536).9
</i>*



So there you have it musicman. Once again, I show you valid facts, and real peer reviewed statistics. You show me lies from hate mongers.

Wake up.


Kindest Regards,


Andy

 

[musicman]

Civil liberty:

Dr. Cameron - or , as you, in a typical display of your dispassionate objectivity, refer to him - "Dr." Cameron, penned this letter to the American Psychological Association organ, the APA Monitor:

"Dear Editor:

On Nov. 7, 1982, I resigned from the APA after being affiliated for over 15 years. Dr. Bevans asked me to detail my reasons.

In my opinion the proper role for a professional orginization is to: 1) further the interests of that profession (i.e., be profession-seeking and profession-serving) and 2) provide the appropriate outlets for the accumulation of professional lore and findings (e.g., conventions and journals).

The APA has departed from these proper goals and has added a strong strand of advocacy for certain, generally liberal, social policy directions...to include, as an ETHICAL requirement, that psychologists 'not engage in or condone practices that are inhumane or that result in illegal or unjustifiable actions. Such practices include...those based on consideration of...sexual orientation'...I found myself, as a scholar, scientist, and concerned citizen, APPALLED...to require psychologists to advance the civilization-destroying 'gay rights' movement is simply an abomination.

I believe that the APA, by these and similar social policy actions, has lost any reasonable claim to 'objectivity' or 'fairness'. I regret the passage of the APA from a scientific/professional orginization to the equivalent of a liberal PAC, and I urge other APA members to withdraw until the association abandons its efforts in social policy and advocacy.

Paul Cameron
Lincoln, Neb."

The APA reacted in typical liberal "symbolism over substance" fashion. They dropped his membership in the APA - A FULL YEAR LATER, saying in effect, "Nyah - nyah nyah nyah - nyah. You can't quit - you're FIRED!"

Would that the APA were the only American institution to display its gutlessness before the PC, pro-homosexual, socialist juggernaut. Of course, Dr. Cameron has been savaged in - let's see - what did you call them? Oh, yeah - "real, peer-reviewed studies" Let's check out a few of them:

The New Republic (and its homosexual editor, Andrew Sullivan)

Log Cabin Republicans (notice how cleverly they managed to work the word "log" into their name?)

Matthew Sheppard Online Resources

The University of Colorado ( Oh, yeah - the ones who found it reasonable to employ Ward Churchill)

Boston Advocates for Human Rights (Can't even find anything on these folks, Andy. What - did they do just the one study and then wander back to the commune?)

And while you're twisting language and grinding numbers until they scream out something you need to hear, let me toss this thought into the mix. It might help simplify things:

If a molestation is male-on-male, it's a homosexual assault. Very simple, really.

 

[musicman]

Just a few more thoughts - to no one in particular, or whoever might be interested. First, my apologies to Dr. Cameron, wherever he may be tonight. The misspelling of the word, "organization" in my post is my fault, not his. The thing is, I know better - it's just one of those aggravating, persistent little "tics" I hope to be able to address as I become more comfortable on a keyboard.

Second, I am flabbergasted at the disingenuousness of Andy's - and the APA's - attacks on Dr. Cameron. How bloody unfair is it to tell a psychologist that he may not - AS A MATTER OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS - utter a negative word about homosexuality? And , how much sense does it make to then dismiss him from the APA for ethics violations - A YEAR AFTER HE RESIGNS IN DISGUST?

As for the remarks of the Texas judge, I have to say that the things I've seen in my lifetime have left me feeling less than awed by the judiciary. I don't know anything about the particular event in question, but I know that judges can abuse their powers in the name of their politics, too.

And that's all that's going on here - politics. Dr. Cameron has committed the unpardonable offense - he has uttered the unutterable. There IS something deeply wrong about homosexuality. And, we've seen how the left reacts when someone blurts out an unpleasant truth - he is savaged and discredited with distortions and half-truths.

 

[CivilLiberty]

"Dr" Cameron attempted to resign AFTER the APA launched an investigation into his ethics. Under the rules of the APA he cannot resign while under investigation.

He attempted to resign to get of the investigation for the near criminal misrepresentations and hate mongering under the guise of research he performed.

He's a bigoted creep.


Kindest regards,


Andy

 

[musicman]

"Dr" Cameron attempted to resign AFTER the APA launched an investigation into his ethics.


Kindest regards,


Andy

His "ethics" violation being that he dared to utter a disparaging word about homosexuality?

You're advocating tyranny, you know.

 

[Johnney]

His "ethics" violation being that he dared to utter a disparaging word about homosexuality?

You're advocating tyranny, you know.

there are all types of bigots inthe world. good and bad. seems civilliberty is the ones that gets to make up whose good and whose bad. too bad for the rest of us i guess. :soul:

 

[OCA]

"Dr" Cameron attempted to resign AFTER the APA launched an investigation into his ethics. Under the rules of the APA he cannot resign while under investigation.

He attempted to resign to get of the investigation for the near criminal misrepresentations and hate mongering under the guise of research he performed.

He's a bigoted creep.


Kindest regards,


Andy

The APA is in the pocket of homosexual groups and anyone who speaks out against homosexuality is expunged from their ranks and persecuted.

Way to go feeding the lie there Civil.

 

[OCA]

"Dr" Cameron attempted to resign AFTER the APA launched an investigation into his ethics. Under the rules of the APA he cannot resign while under investigation.

He attempted to resign to get of the investigation for the near criminal misrepresentations and hate mongering under the guise of research he performed.

He's a bigoted creep.


Kindest regards,


Andy

Again anybody who doesn't agree with Civil is a bigot, talk about your intellectual void.

 

[Johnney]

"Dr" Cameron attempted to resign AFTER the APA launched an investigation into his ethics. Under the rules of the APA he cannot resign while under investigation.

He attempted to resign to get of the investigation for the near criminal misrepresentations and hate mongering under the guise of research he performed.

He's a bigoted creep.


Kindest regards,


Andy

so why is this?

 

[mattskramer]

Still with the same innane analogies which have nothing to do with the topic at hand. I thought you would've improved by now.

Hey Matts did you check the vote on queers on Nov.2? 11-0 for the good guys.

Sigh. It seems as though you haven't changed. I answer your questions and you brush them off with no sound and logical rebuttal. What makes my analogy inane and have nothing to do with the topic. I not only answered your question but also provided a perfectly sound analogy.

I'll make the point again: The naturalness and normalcy of something is in the "eye of the beholder". What might be normal for one may not be normal for another. A loving and sexual attraction that a couple of men or women have for each other may seem to be the most natural thing for the individuals involved. On the other hand, some individuals may consider the very idea that they could be attracted people of the same sex to be very revolting.

Similarly, some think that it is natural and normal to smoke cigarettes. Some think that such behavior is abnormal and revolting.

As for your statistic, as I said before, popularity does not make something right. So you are the "good guys"?!?

It is not good to not allow homosexuals (people who are sexually attracted to people of the same sex) to get married to the the people that they want to wed while allowing heterosexuals (people who are sexually attracted to people of the opposite sex) to get married to the people that they want to wed. In general, under mutual informed consent, people should be free to do as they please as long as they don't interfere with the freedoms of others by force or fraud. With this in mind, homosexual marriage is an equal rights issue and not a special rights issue.

One might argue that homosexuality / homosexual behavior is a choice. If such is the case, heterosexuality / heterosexual behavior is a choice. If one chooses to love and have sex with a person of the same sex, isn't it logical that one chooses to love and have sex with a person of the opposite sex?

Finally, while I was gracious enough to give a "straight" answer to your question, I have yet to see your answer to my questions: (1.) Is smoking a "natural" behavior? (2.) Even if (and this is a big "If") we assume for the sake of argument, that such behavior [sodomy] is not natural, what difference does it make? (3.) Should there be a law declaring all unnatural activity illegal and never to be legalized?