TommyO

I am in favour of smoking bans, I like Green, live in Canada and we have a smoking ban in all public places. As well I did not smoke in my house or in my vehicle because of the kids. What this meant for me was that I was unable to enjoy any cigarete that I smoked for the last few years I smoked. I quit four years ago and because I no longer was able to sit and relax and enjoy a smoke I only had to overcome the physical addiction not the phsycological addiction. I would never lecture anyone on smoking simply because I know they know all about the evils of smoking and I also know that for the most part smokers would prefer not to smoke. They don't quit because it is very difficult. Smoking bans, in my opinion make it easier for smokers to quit and for that reason I am all for them.

The truth is that some people that believe the bible have not studied much of anything!!!

I didn't know that James Dobson was against this, In that case I think I should re-think my opinion. Leatha, can you not find a credible source, I doubt very much that you do any research outside of the Christian right because you may be required to read information that challenges your view. I know how hard that can be on you. Once agian the Christian right remains firmly planted beside the Nazis and the KKK . You must be very proud.

The legal system works on a simple premise, Innocent until proven guilty. There is no burdon of proof on the accused, the burden of proof is on the state to prove guilt. You must understand the legal system before you argue the law. If someone were stupid enough to argue "I hit you on the head and stole your car because I wanted the car, not because I this and you were that" That would be an admission of guilt so if Hate Crime laws create those sorts of defences I bet every cop, crown attorney and judge would be more than happy that they existed. Probably not the right wing Christians though, they would be to busy thinking of poorly thought out reasons that Hate Crime laws are bad.

Hate Crime laws are created for a number of reasons and one of those reasons is to send a message to society that certain atitudes will not be tolerated. It is no less wrong to drag a person behind a car because you don't like them as it is to drag them behind a car because they are Gay. The reason society creates hate crime laws is to send a message to any would be perpatrators. The statements regarding the ADL are irelevant, what the ADL does or does not want to do, has no imapct on whether or not Gays should be protected under Hate Crime laws. The ADL might want to make sure no one ever uses the word purple again that has nothing to do with the legislation. The Virginia Tech tragedy however terrible is also a red herring. That young man was mentally unstable and he did a terrible thing but because his actions do not constitute a hate crime is no reason for the removal of hate crimes. I will never understand how people come to some of their conclusions, this thread is a great example. If, because I am fat, people have treated me with prejudice I can't imagine how that experience would lead me to conclude it is then okay to treat others the same way. I would hope that my experience would teach me that treating people poorly is wrong. I am happy that protection is being given to others who need it. I may be upset that there is no protection for me but glad that things are moving in the right direction.. To say Hate crime laws don't protect me so why should Gay people be protected just seems so short sited.

Hate crime laws prevent people who preach hatred from hiding behind freedom of speech laws. If you are not preaching hate you have nothing to fear from hate crime laws. If you are preaching hatred you should be punished. I can not help but think that anyone who is apposed to laws that protect us from hate do so because they spew hatred and want to continue to stand at the pulpit and spew a message of hate. IMHO If you are against hate crime laws then you are for hate. I know that Nazi's, Skin Heads, the KKK and right wing Christians will disagree with me but it's just my opinion.

Carlene, this topic is one that bothers me quite a bit, as a parent I take great offence to any abuse of children. I have a very liberal attitude about most things but any activity between individuals were one individual is able to take advantage someone who is weaker disgusts me. Because I feel so strongly about this I may have been overly sensitive to your post.

Asking me what team I am on in a thread that references Man/Boy Love feels like an insult to me.

Just curious but what do you mean when you ask "which team are YOU on" The question seems to not fit with the rest of your post as there is no mention of teams although if you were hoping to insult me you succeeded

I would, hopefully, never use an analogy that equates forced prayer in school with any form of child abuse. I have been reading this thread and I have avoided putting my 2cents forward because although I do believe strongly with freedom of speech I find the whole Boy/Man love thing to be offensive. I have had discusions with a lesbian acqaintance about this topic so I did not go to the site via the link provided because of how offensive I find the topic. I understand that Marjon is trying to make a point and I understand his position but I think there may have been a better analogy. A good example may have been a link to a site that advocates that we enforce a prayer to the tree God in school. I would find something like that to be equally offensive as forced Christian prayer in school. As much as I don't think that the state should be legislating what goes on in the bedroom, I also feel strongly that the sex act is something that takes place between two consenting adults. So if one of the participants does not consent or is unable to consent due to impaired mentall capacity or if they are not an adult then it's important that we have laws that protect them. I also believe that these laws should be harsh. TommyO

Carlene, what are you inferring when you say "(All Men, by the way)" before I become offended by your inference that men somehow are not as repulsed as women by child molestation I ask for clarification. Sincerely TommyO

I have just begun to read this thread and I admit that I made it to about page 8 before I had to post a reply. If I should merely be repeating something that was already posted I apologize. I have a hard time with this debate because people's opinions are based on their personality type. I believe in a Women's right to control their bodies. I also do not like abortion so you could say that I am Pro-Choice but Anti-Abortion. It seems kind of odd but I do not think the two camps are mutually exclusive. I also believe that in the great majority of cases the individuals involved (In this case the pregnant female in conjunction with other's involved) will make the right decision. The issue is not black and white and because of this we cannot make hard and fast rules. For every example given as to why we need hard and fast rules there is a counter example that proves that course to be a foolish direction to choose indeed. Gadget you are a very black and white person so for you answers need to be black and white, the problem is that the world is not always a black and white place and every time you describe a scenario that involves evil people killing babies I imagine a scenario where the life of a healthy adult female is saved at the expense of a fetus with no chance of survival. Because you are black and white you have a hard time with the grey and I doubt you will ever concede that there will ever be a legitimate reason to perform this or any type of abortion. You say that you do not approve of one individual deciding for another whether they should live or die but you are willing to make that decision for another. You somehow beliive that if there are hard and fast rules the problem will be solved but they will be your rules and they will create a whole new set of problems. I prefer that these decisions be made individually by those involved at the time. Each case is different so a wide variety of solutions should be considered and I hope that those involved will make the best decision. Your black and white approach does not allow for the exceptions and as such is far less kind a solution. Absolutism does not work, it may seem to provide simple solutions but I think in the long run it proves to be an absolute disaster.

MsDad, sorry but I play on the hetero squad. Cheers TommyO

I have size 16 feet and I tell people that, the truth is that the size of a man's feet is in direct proprtion to the size of his shoes.

Lets not have strict gun laws because someone can make a bomb? Now that makes sense!!! Here we go another issue in the US that the rest of the world shakes their head at in disbelief.

Is it just me or does anyone else think it's funny that at the top of the page there is a link titled "Are you Stupid" and another titled "US War in Iraq". I don't know if those links are specific to the reader or if they appear based on the content in the thread but it seems funny to me. I think I'm going to find out if I'm stupid first just in case.

Yes, and there are many examples of that! All the crazy evolutionists getting out of control, mind you in your post you referred to them as environmentalists. I think I'm beginning to understand, it's not that you disagree with them because they are trying to protect the environment, you dislike them because you equate environmentalist with evolutionist. Those Godless environmentalists!!!

Are you standing?

The idiocy, seems to me, is that you would use that story to justify your position on Global warming.

Lets take a poll and see if Gailannr is able to grasp satire. Quick stand up things seem to be going over your head.

OK Leatha you can be the queen of this thread, I'm wrong your right, wah, wah, wah, etc. etc. etc. Gets a little bit predictable along with incredibly childish. Maybe you should pass someone a note in gym class.

Laurend, HMMM, the sort of investigation done to prove that Clinton is responsible for these death's seems eerily simmilar to the proof that the universe is less than a few thousand years old or that the Noah's flood happened or that evolution is a myth and finally that global warming is a not caused by mankind. You know what they say in Texas or maybe Tennesse fool me once.......

Sorry I forgot the quote and once agian your welcome, (Deleting post can be confusing) I count you as someone I would have to come to for forgiveness thank you!

Your Welcome

It's great to hear that although you are fine with the Valdez oil spill or the Kuwait oli field fires you agree we shouldn't liter or kill all the ducks. Next time you take the kids on a field trip make sure you teach them about ignorance, that way when people start to laugh at them every time they speak they will understand why.