"J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote innews:37vs5r.1q6.19.1 at (no spam) news.alt.net:

Although there are probably some individuals who do harbor a hatred
for gays, the majority of people who oppose the homo lifestyle and
'same-sex marriage' legislation base their opposition on grounds of
morality and decency; not hatred.

    And your proof of that is.......?

To oppose a lifestyle that leads one
to an early death complicated by illness, depression, and isolation is
not the same as casting someone as evil and deserving of violent
assault. This bill should be relegated to the trash bin of history.

     Why should anyones lifestyle be opposed?

     Gays do not "oppose" YOUR lifestyle, why do you oppose theirs?

Although there are probably some individuals who do harbor a hatred
for gays,

the majority of people who oppose the homo lifestyle and 'same-sex
marriage' legislation base their opposition on grounds of morality and
decency; not hatred. To oppose a lifestyle that leads one to an early
death complicated by illness, depression, and isolation is not the
same as casting someone as evil and deserving of violent assault.
This bill should be relegated to the trash bin of history.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17470

Bill on 'hate crimes' ignores hatred towards traditional marriage backers,
Tony Perkins says

Although there are probably some individuals who do harbor a hatred
for gays, the majority of people who oppose the homo lifestyle and
'same-sex marriage' legislation base their opposition on grounds of
morality and decency; not hatred.

To oppose a lifestyle that leads one
to an early death complicated by illness, depression, and isolation is
not the same as casting someone as evil and deserving of violent
assault. This bill should be relegated to the trash bin of history.

Although there are probably some individuals who do harbor a hatred for
gays, the majority of people who oppose the homo lifestyle and 'same-sex
marriage' legislation base their opposition on grounds of morality and
decency; not hatred. To oppose a lifestyle that leads one to an early
death complicated by illness, depression, and isolation is not the same as
casting someone as evil and deserving of violent assault. This bill should
be relegated to the trash bin of history.
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17470
"catholicnewsagency", The finest lies from the dark ages!

Well, "J"?

The Chief Instigator <patrick at (no spam) io.com> wrote in
news:slrnhec934.292h.patrick at (no spam) eris.io.com:

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 06:55:40 -0700 (PDT), Osprey
Osprey65 at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 26, 8:08?am, Mitchell Holman <noem... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
Osprey <Ospre... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in news:53494f82-b84e-4305-bbb7-
1dd8d25a6... at (no spam) m11g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:

On Oct 26, 12:12?am, Mitchell Holman <noem... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
"J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote
innews:37vs5r.1q6.19.1 at (no spam) news.alt.net:

Although there are probably some individuals who do harbor a
hatred for gays, the majority of people who oppose the homo
lifestyle and 'same-sex marriage' legislation base their
opposition on grounds of morality and decency; not hatred.

? ? And your proof of that is.......?

To oppose a lifestyle that leads one
to an early death complicated by illness, depression, and
isolation is not the same as casting someone as evil and
deserving of violent assault. This bill should be relegated to
the trash bin of history.

? ? ?Why should anyones lifestyle be opposed?

? ? ?Gays do not "oppose" YOUR lifestyle, why do you oppose
theirs?

Of course they oppose other people's lifestyles. ?They choose NOT
to be in heterosexual relationships, therefore they oppose them.

? ? ? Show us where gays have lobbied against or tried
to limit ANY right reversed for heteros.

You don't understand do you?
This is going right over your head.

...which is pretty damned funny when it comes from a professional
canker sore of Usenet, like you.

And "Osprey" (Robert Heishman) has the gall
to accuse others of dodging issues and abandoning
notestreams......

On Oct 26, 12:12 am, Mitchell Holman <noem... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
"J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote innews:37vs5r.1q6.19.1 at (no spam) news.alt.net:

Although there are probably some individuals who do harbor a hatred
for gays, the majority of people who oppose the homo lifestyle and
'same-sex marriage' legislation base their opposition on grounds of
morality and decency; not hatred.
And your proof of that is.......?

To oppose a lifestyle that leads one
to an early death complicated by illness, depression, and isolation is
not the same as casting someone as evil and deserving of violent
assault. This bill should be relegated to the trash bin of history.
Why should anyones lifestyle be opposed?

Gays do not "oppose" YOUR lifestyle, why do you oppose theirs?

Of course they oppose other people's lifestyles. They choose NOT to
be in heterosexual relationships, therefore they oppose them. I choose
not to be in a homosexual relationship, I oppose that lifestyle.

Now, I could ask you why do you oppose peoples rights to have
different opinions than yours.

On Oct 26, 8:08 am, Mitchell Holman <noem... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
Osprey <Ospre... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in news:53494f82-b84e-4305-bbb7-
Of course they oppose other people's lifestyles.  They choose NOT to
be in heterosexual relationships, therefore they oppose them.

      Show us where gays have lobbied against or tried
to limit ANY right reversed for heteros.

You don't understand do you?

This is going right over your head.

My e-mail box is still empty.

On Oct 26, 12:12 am, Mitchell Holman <noem... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
"J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote innews:37vs5r.1q6.19.1 at (no spam) news.alt.net:

Although there are probably some individuals who do harbor a hatred
for gays, the majority of people who oppose the homo lifestyle and
'same-sex marriage' legislation base their opposition on grounds of
morality and decency;

The reasonable Judeo-Christian opponents of same-sex marriage

[and
that includes almost all the pastors, columists, etc.

whose writings
I've read on the subject) oppose it because it is one more (and very
significant) step in the devaluation of marriage.

The Judeo-Christian

To paraphrase what Jesus said,

Osprey wrote:
On Oct 26, 12:12 am, Mitchell Holman <noem... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
"J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote innews:37vs5r.1q6.19.1 at (no spam) news.alt.net:

Although there are probably some individuals who do harbor a hatred
for gays, the majority of people who oppose the homo lifestyle and
'same-sex marriage' legislation base their opposition on grounds of
morality and decency; not hatred.
And your proof of that is.......?

To oppose a lifestyle that leads one
to an early death complicated by illness, depression, and isolation
is not the same as casting someone as evil and deserving of violent
assault. This bill should be relegated to the trash bin of history.
Why should anyones lifestyle be opposed?

Gays do not "oppose" YOUR lifestyle, why do you oppose theirs?

Of course they oppose other people's lifestyles. They choose NOT to
be in heterosexual relationships, therefore they oppose them. I
choose not to be in a homosexual relationship, I oppose that
lifestyle.


"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it
means."

op⋅pose  [uh-pohz] -posed, -pos⋅ing.

–verb (used with object)
1. to act against or provide resistance to; combat.
2. to stand in the way of; hinder; obstruct.
3. to set as an opponent or adversary.
4. to be hostile or adverse to, as in opinion: to oppose a
resolution in a debate.
5. to set as an obstacle or hindrance.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/oppose

Hmm, I don't see "not participate in" as one of the meanings. How
about you?

Now, I could ask you why do you oppose peoples rights to have
different opinions than yours.

You're free to hold whatever stupid, insane opinion you want. The
opposition comes when you try to use that stupid, insane opinion to
dictate the actions of other people.

On 10/27/09 8:53 PM, * Osprey wrote:

On Oct 27, 8:25 pm, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 8:20 PM, * Osprey wrote:

On Oct 27, 8:18 pm, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 8:16 PM, * Osprey wrote:
On Oct 27, 5:24 pm, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 5:20 PM, * Osprey wrote:
On Oct 27, 3:54 pm, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 3:38 PM, * Osprey wrote:
On Oct 27, 2:49 pm, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 2:42 PM, * Osprey wrote:
On Oct 27, 2:33 pm, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 2:30 PM, * Osprey wrote:
On Oct 27, 2:12 pm, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 1:59 PM, * Osprey wrote:
On Oct 27, 1:52 pm, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 1:49 PM, * Osprey wrote:
On Oct 27, 1:40 pm, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 1:35 PM, * Osprey wrote:
On Oct 27, 1:30 pm, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 1:18 PM, * Osprey wrote:
On Oct 27, 1:15 pm, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 1:11 PM, * Osprey wrote:
On Oct 27, 11:15 am, IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist> wrote:
On 10/27/09 8:00 AM, * Osprey wrote:
On Oct 27, 7:11 am, Mitchell Holman <noem... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
Osprey <Ospre... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote innews:0983a0f4-4061-4136-b90a-b32128cbaba0 at (no spam) m25g2000vbi.googlegroups.com:
On Oct 26, 5:51 pm, Mitchell Holman <noem... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
Osprey <Ospre... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote
innews:1112c57d-d019-47ae-b3d8-7a8026
ee1... at (no spam) b18g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:
On Oct 26, 8:08 am, Mitchell Holman <noem.... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
Osprey <Ospre... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in
news:53494f82-b84e-4305-bbb7-
1dd8d25a6... at (no spam) m11g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:
On Oct 26, 12:12 am, Mitchell Holman <noem... at (no spam) comcast.net
wrote:
"J" <Jvisi... at (no spam) live.com> wrote
innews:37vs5r.1q6.19.1 at (no spam) news.alt.net:
Although there are probably some individuals who do harbor a
hatred for gays, the majority of people who oppose the homo
lifestyle and 'same-sex marriage' legislation base their
opposition on grounds of morality and decency; not hatred.
    And your proof of that is.......?
To oppose a lifestyle that leads one
to an early death complicated by illness, depression, and
isolation
is
not the same as casting someone as evil and deserving of
violent assault. This bill should be relegated to the trash
bin of history.
     Why should anyones lifestyle be opposed?
     Gays do not "oppose" YOUR lifestyle, why do you oppose t
hei
rs?
Of course they oppose other people's lifestyles.  They choose
NOT to be in heterosexual relationships, therefore they oppose
them.
      Show us where gays have lobbied against or tried
to limit ANY right reversed for heteros.
You don't understand do you?
This is going right over your head.
     Just answer the question.
My response has absolutely nothing to do with any organization from
either side lobbying against or tried to limit any right for anyone.
My response is about people opposing lifestyles because it's not a
normal lifestyle for them.
INCLUDING GAYS.  Gays are going to oppose the heterosexual lifestyle
because it's not their lifestyle.
    So if you are not married you are opposed to other
people getting married?
Some people are, not everyone.
Just because someone opposes something doesn't mean they will oppose
others from doing that same thing.
A homosexual opposes a heterosexual lifestyle, that doesn't mean he or
she opposes someone else from having a homosexual lifestyle.
Any way, I know how you argue and you will take this to an extreme of
stupidity.  So I'll end it now.  If you are a homosexual, who cares.
Do your thing, or what ever it is you do.  Only you have to answer for
your own choices.
Homosexuals aren't *allowed* to "do their own
thing",
Of course they are.  Who is going to stop them. Hell, even you..if you
want to hump a tree..hump a tree. I don't care.  Just leave the trees
in my backyard alone.  Enjoy yourself, enjoy life.
Bipolar Bob, YOU support the laws that ensure that
homosexuals can't receive equal treatment.
Adam,
There's no Adam here,
If you say so Adam.
Bipolar Bob.
There's no Bipolar Bob here.
Oh, there really is.
Only in your fantasies and imagination.
Only another
ill-fated attempt of yours to obfuscate your bigotry..
Hmm, really?  Weren't you just telling me to keep my beliefs in God to
myself and keep them at home?
That isn't bigotry?  You're not trying to dictate to me when, where,
and how I can talk about my beliefs in God?
Are you ceding that sort of control to me now? How
exciting.
What laws am I now supporting that would affect
your religious beliefs and practices?
Did you not tell me to keep my beliefs in God at home?
What LAWS, Bipolar Bob?
What are you screaming about now Adam?
Did you not tell me to keep my beliefs in God at home?
Okay, so it was just a cheap attempt to invoke an
"Oh, I'm so persecuted because I say I'm
Christian" whine.-
How many times have you dodge that question?
Did you not tell me to keep my beliefs in God at home?
Nope. I didn't say that.
From: IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:28:31 -0400
Message-ID: <hc7ajv$qd... at (no spam) news.eternal-september.org
"God" has nothing to do with this. He/She/It isn't
invited. Keep your red herrings and your fictional
sky-fairies at home.
Hmmm. Where's "belief" mentioned there, Bipolar Bob?
If you can't show it, don't answer it. Let's keep
your Usenet pollution to a local minimum.-
Ah, you're going to play that game. O.k., no problem.
Where did I say I would reward companies who provide assistance to
rapist?
If you can't show it, don't answr it. Let's keep your Usenet pollution
to a local minimum.
(The reason I didn't answer that is that it's not
a claim I made).-
Alright then, then lets go with your exact quote.
From: IAAH <n... at (no spam) email.exist
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion,talk.politics.misc,soc.women
Subject: Re: Here are the 30 Republican Senators, 3/4 of Their
Representation,
  Who Voted to Enable Rape
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:06:11 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 159
Message-ID: <hbi9ql$rc... at (no spam) news.eternal-september.org
(take a note: Osprey, aka Bipolar Bob, believes in
REWARDING companies that try to remove from rape
victims the right to take that crime to court with
more government contracts, instead of refusing to
hire them until company policy changes).
Now, can you show where I ever said I believe in rewarding companies
that try to remove from rape victims the right to take that crime to
court with more government contracts, instead of refusing to hire them
until company policy changes?
...
Just snip right there and lets play the game you played.  Enough with
the silly games.
Where is the quote that you claim says I said companies should be
rewarded?
Come on, cough it up or do as you said.
If you can't show it, don't answr it. Let's keep your Usenet pollution
 to a local minimum.
Ah, you had to cut the evidence.
What evidence?
The evidence I posted.

Post it again and lets see if I use the words "reward companies that
try to remove from rape victims the right to take that crime to court
with more government contracts, instead of refusing to hire them until
company policy changes?"

Go on, post it.  I checked your last few postings and nowhere have I
seen you provide a quote yet.

I already explained that I am not playing your
stupid games.

Where did I ever say companies should be rewarded?
This is where you fail, Bipolar Bob.
You see, YOU are being held to one of the
stupidest of YOUR OWN standards - that if the
exact words aren't in the evidence, it's not evidence.

Ah, but when I said you told me to hold my beliefs in God and keep
them at home you had a fit because I didn't show where you said the
word beliefs.

For once you get something right!
Those are YOUR OWN STANDARDS that you are being
held to.

This wouldn't happen if you were not consistently
an enormous tool.
But you are, and you will continue to be, and so
your own stupid and unreasonable standards will be
used on you when I interact with you.

Since you have a long history of demanding exact
quotes, you will provide *exact* quotes.

Since *I* didn't use quote marks when I explained
what you had done, there is obviously no direct
quoting going on.

If only you had ever demonstrated the capacity to
be reasonable, you wouldn't be treated like this.
C'est la vie, Bipolar Bob.

Now, you're not a hypocrite are you?  You are going to hold yourself
to the same standards you expect others to be held to, right?

No, I hold you to your own special, stupid and
unreasonable standards, because you insist that
those standards apply to everybody else. If you
hadn't been such a dick about it, you could have
been held to lesser standards, but there you are.

On Oct 27, 8:18 pm, Osprey <Ospre... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:





On Oct 27, 7:03 pm, Jimbo <ckdbig... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 27, 1:13 pm, Osprey <Ospre... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 27, 11:35 am, martin <use... at (no spam) etiqa.co.uk> wrote:

Osprey wrote:
Any way, I know how you argue and you will take this to an extreme of
stupidity.  So I'll end it now.  If you are a homosexual, who cares.
Do your thing, or what ever it is you do.

I take it from that you have no objections to gays getting married them?

I'm a happily married man. I will have to answer to God for my
decisions, not yours.

Why is it that you can't simply answer the question, straight forward
and honestly?

What's not straight forward and honest about my answer?

You danced around actually answering the question.  That much was
pretty obvious.-