green

Fairy Facade, I recognise where you are coming from and I respect this. As you have said, you are Christian, one who admittedly does not care overmuch for the politics of church, but at the same time you derive great comfort in your belief. I have no problem with this but you are surely aware that there are fellow believers who do believe that one of the requirements of truly engaging in a relationship with Christ is to engage in a fellowship with other believers, in brief, to commit to a congregation.... I mention this only in order to show you that even to those of you who share a Christian belief there will inevitably be points of conflict. As for this biz of jollies, well, I have to admit that you are right. The individuals who choose to frequent Rant&Raves do get their jollies through engaging in engaging in debate. Rants&Raves has been specifically created for those of us who find the notion of digging up and pawing over all those contentious issues to be both exciting and of intellectual value. Many of the discussions in which we have engaged have been entirely politically incorrect. This is why I felt that I must challenge Rose Wolf's opening post. Christians, the ultra-dominant belief group in the United States, has not been unfairly picked upon here in R&R. The truth is that just about every group has had a smack-down here on R&R. Maybe you, Rose, should spend some time reading the archival material in this section of LBT. Rant and Raves exists for those of us who are anxious to engage in debating ideas. We enjoy doing this. We enjoy swapping information and we enjoy the intellectual exercise involved when attempting to defend our own positions. You are welcome to introduce your beliefs into an argument. It is only fair, however, that your beliefs will be challenged and that you will be expected to defend your beliefs in these discussions. This is the way debate works, and if you choose to view this as a sign of Christian persecution, as something akin to what the early Christians did experience, then I say that you are making a thoughtless and possibly wicked mistake. Certainly your early martyrs were subjected to much more than the trials of open discussion of beliefs, were they? Get a grip, grrl.

I can only wear sensible round-toed flats. This is because I have great big boney feet which are shaped like a duck's flippers. I tell people who try to get me into grrly shoes that I have Lesbian feet - well, I tell everyone this except for my best GF who is a Lesbian and who wears men's shoes. Heels hurt my feet. Cheap shoes hurt my feet and I do a lot of walking. I need spongey soles and the uppers have be made out of very soft leather or they will rip the skin in my feet. I hate my feet.

I don't think that you should even think about joint counselling at this time. You did offer him the option and he refused. Now you should do this for your own well-being. Trust me, counselling can be a useful tool when you are in a situation like this. You have all my thoughts and sympathy, girl.

I was both shocked and saddened when I heard the news. Another young and very talented actor lost to us. The death of any young individual is always a tragedy.

A guy I used to know liked to say that a politician is "a whore with the heart of a whore." He was an alcoholic and a speech writer. He also liked to listen to opera. He was prone to announcing this while he was plastered on scotch and listening to opera blasting on his sound system. Of course all politicians sell out. They must do this in order to be elected. This is all about advertising, this is all about spin. And the more disparate your electoral base the more shadowy and vague your candidate will become if you are actually looking for content, not form. Up here in Canuckistan we have a broader range of political platforms from which to chose than you do but what inevitably holds true is that once a party finds itself in power it does begin to drift towards the more workable centre. The right wing becomes a little less rightish and the left becomes a little less idealistically left. This is not to say that it doesn't matter who we vote for, that we will end up with the same party in the end: this is most certainly not the case. What it does mean is that the problems of actually applying these political theories does kick in once the party achieves power and often these ideals will of necessity be modified, become watered down....be made workable.

Firefly, thanks for treating this place as V's safe haven. It is, as you have remarked, your safe haven, too. This is a special place and a wonderful community for so many of us. I am now at goal but I don't think that I could have done it without the help of LBT and I figure that my continuing attachment to LBT is helping me maintain - especially now while I am defilled! Typing with my own two paws sure does stop me from being able to eat. :wink2: How is your weight loss going?

Well, folks, I have spent the past couple of days thinking long and hard about this discussion and it strikes me that apart from the utterly abusive post which Draz posted there have been few instances where Christians have been assaulted simply because they are Christian. As you well know, there are two threads dedicated to Christians and these are never, ever broken in upon by marauding atheists, Muslims, Jews, or others. And I don't believe that any of you who make reference to your beliefs in your taglines have ever been called up on this by a sneering member of the anti-Christian jihad. But this is Rants&Raves and this is the zone where ideas and beliefs will be debated, will be challenged. Republicans and Demos are busily bashing each other. The pro-choice/pro-life debate has been raging on for ages now. Islam, and Muslims, have been bashed here. Homosexuals (and the issues concerning their civil rights) have been bashed here in past debates. The invasion of Iraq has prompted heated discussions. Baby Bush is routinely bashed, as is Clinton. Hell, even women and feminists have received a number of smack-downs during the discussions of Hillary's suitability as a Presidential candidate! We have even engaged in discussions as to who may call themselves Christians: it seems that some Protestant groups do not recognise Catholics or Mormons, eh, even though these are folks who worship God the Father and Christ the Son. Now, when a Christian choses to use their beliefs in order to reinforce their argument whilst engaging in one of these debates, then the nature of this belief system does become open to be challenged for the purposes of the argument. You cannot simply opt to take a side in a debate, then buttress your argument by simply announcing that you are a Christian, and expect that this will suffice. You yourself have opened that door, and your belief system will be challenged. You will be challenged for these discussions pivot on facts and logic and not on your faith. While your opening post, Rose Wolf, is prettily and glibly expressed, you have made egregious factual errors. Feminists/women, homosexuals, Muslims, and even folks of colour have been slammed here in past posts. I don't really believe that we will be able to all love each other and get along until we are prepared to get down to this business of honest debate. We are all inclined to indulge in a little hypocrisy, but we will never truly come to understand our brothers and our sisters without undergoing this sometimes painful intellectual and emotional exercise. Rant&Raves serves a valuable role and there are many of us who greatly value it.

What is said on LBT must be left here in the virtual world. It would be very, very cruel of you to air material which Voondahbah has mentioned here believing that she was speaking under terms of complete anonymity. And what would be your reasons for doing so? Only to hurt and humiliate her. And to get your revenge.... Of course once you out her, her life will be a living hell! Is all this spite really worth it? Please allow this woman to keep her privacy intact. Please do not do this to her or to yourself.

I agree with Wheetsin. Trolls can be kinda fun.

You should go to counselling in order to figure out whether you want to save the marriage or leave. Whatever your choice may be counselling will help you handle your decision wisely. Good luck to you.

You should stay. You have decided to take another route to weight loss but the reason we are all here is because of our weight issues.

For whom the bell trolls.......

Welcome back, Lisah! It is nice to see you again.

Thanks for those very kind words. The truth is that I am often not at all diplomatic when it comes to dealing with folks in reality land, especially when I am related to them. :rolleyes2:

I believe that Hillary would make a fine President. She is an old-timer, is used to the ways of politics and power both through her own election as Senator and through observing her mate's experiences during his time in office, and she is very intelligent. She is also tough in the same way that Margaret Thatcher, Britain's former Prime Minister, was tough. This is a good quality in my opinion. Americans certainly don't need a soccer mom as President, do you? As for why women are so often mistrustful and unsupportive of each other, well, I think I may have found a partial explanation for this. I suspect that some of our behaviour boils down to our genetic hardwiring. It is the females of the species who are at a competitive disadvantage while they are pregnant and throughout that period when they are rearing their young. In primitive times this meant that they were thrown into competition against each other for often rare resources including the genetically superior mates. In modern times this still holds true; we all want rich good-looking healthy men for our mates, eh. And some of us have had the dismal experience of having had our boyfriends stolen by our girlfriends or have done the stealing......

Your post, Draz, most certainly does not present you or your cause in an attractive light. This would be because you have salted your extremely simplistic argument with vulgarities, insults, and grammatical mistakes. (Neither Nazis, a plural noun, nor the possessive pronoun, its, should be apostrophized; and Nazi should be capitalized as this is a proper noun.) I am also an atheist. If you want to make a point, this ain't the way to do it.

I think I might have blown it, eh. You see, I thought that the F-word referred to the FU word and this is one of my faves. I use this as a noun, verb, adjective, and ad-fu..ing verb. But now I suspect that we are talking about the F as in Fatty word. I use 'em both but I really am inclined to abuse the FU word.

Abortion is one answer to an unwanted and unexpected pregnancy. It is certainly not the only answer and I would hope that no one who is pro choice believes otherwise. The truth is that the modern North American woman does have many options which were not available to her ancesters. She can opt to abort, or to have her child and keep it, or she can follow through with her pregnancy and then offer that child up to another family for adoption. All women are now free to follow any of these paths and they can do so without suffering the disrespect of society. This is a good thing, eh?

Thanks, girlfriend. When it comes to this business of third term abortions there I must admit that I would like to see access to this option blocked except from those who fall in those special situations, the ones which I have described in a previous post. The trouble with this is that the state will, by blocking all those careless women, the ones who wish to claim the right to a last minute change of mind, also produce a hedge of legal obstacles when it concerns those women who do a) find themselves facing the birth of a child/soul/creature - call it what you want - a baby which demands deep pockets and promises little in return or find themselves in the medical situation, a rare one in the medically proficient western countries, where there is the ugly choice between saving the life of the ma or the kiddy. Though I find the idea of third trimester abortions to be deeply repellent, I am afraid that if we enact stringent rules regarding this we may well find that those women who really do need last minute abortions will inevitably find themselves sliding between the beaurocratic cracks. I also suspect that statistically speaking there will be very, very few women who will opt to seek abortions during that final trimester, women who will employ the argument of oops my bad, I have changed my mind, eh. This is why I have voted for option A, eh. I am not comfortable with this. Any and all issues which have to do with these questions of parenting, sexual activities and parental attitudes, the fertilization of an egg, all of these issues are awfully complicated.

Yep, wait until the last minute before you order the dress. You will have some sense of your weight loss pattern by then. Do not, however, order the dress in a super mini-size. It is better to have a dress-maker rework the dress. I figure that your bride should be prepared to either a) pay for the dress or pay for the alterations. Even normos can gain or lose weight between March and October. I suggest that you speak frankly or, well, semi-frankly to this bride. Tell her that you are determined to lose weight and that you have embarked on a new weight loss plan. Explain to her that this leaves you feeling awful apprehensive about the lengthy time gap between committing to da dress and when the wedding will actually take place. Tell her that you are oh so thrilled to be invited to take an active role in her Big Day but at the same time emphasize to her that you do not have real deep pockets. Explain to her that you your weight loss project, something to which you figure that you are really committed, and this biz of how the bridesmaid dress is actually gonna fit you come October 2008. This is the point where you ask her whether she might be able to underwrite the cost of the reconstruction of your dress, eh. You know, the tailor's tab........

Oh, grrl, I am certainly in agreement with you! I sure hope that all is fine for these folks and for their families.

Yes, it sure is disturbing when those among us who always spoke with strong voices suddenly drop off a corner of the virtual planet. I remember an old timer creating a thread in order to announce her departure shortly after I joined LBT. At the time I was surprised by this and thought that she was being a little arrogant. Now my views are completely changed. I think that she did the community a true kindness. For the truth is that we are left wondering about the reasons for the absences of such folk as TOM and Carlene, aren't we?

Tom Cruise certainly is deep in loony land. But it might be interesting to speculate what brought him there. It is my understanding that it was one of his very first Hollywood GFs, the beautiful Mimi Rogers, who hooked him up with Scientology. Now, what kind of person falls for the horseshit handed out by a cult? What kind of person opts to drydock their critical faculties in order to believe in Thetans, to hand over their cash in return for a promise of spiritual clarity and, I guess, a sense of happiness? What kind of person publically turns his back on modern medicine in order to claim that his cult has techniques which can cure medical trauma in the case of accident victims, psychiatric disorders, and addiction issues? This is what the actor and Scientologist, Tom Cruise, is now claiming, and this is why he is looking like a raving nutbar to most of us. But why would he believe in all this shit and act like a total arse? Well, I believe that individuals like him suffer from a gross sense of insecurity and feel a deep sense of fear. They want firm answers, they want promises, rules to abide by, and they also want to belong. Membership in a cult does provide each lonely and fearful individual with a family and a neighbourhood. He will receive love, direction, support, companionship, and he will live inside the comfort of the framework of an entirely supportive myth, one which removes him from the existential panic of being forced to examine his own frights more closely. I think that Cruise became a Scientologist because he was frightened and bewildered and is likely not the most intellectual of kitty-cats. And now we see the poor barstid making an utter hash out of his street cred. I have never found Cruise all that attractive but I do find myself feeling kind of sorry for him now that he is lurching outside of his spin doctors' control. Seems like he is on self-destructo, eh?

Yes, the ability to lie convincingly is the basic tool of all actors. It is part of the toolkit of politicians, salesmen, corporate business big shots, etc. Actors are quite special, however, for they are able to slide into the skins of characters and make these imaginary creatures live and breathe for us. This is a real gift. A gift which they have. And a gift which they give to us, the audience who wants to be entertained. From what I have read Tom Cruise suffers from dyslexia. This means that he is handicapped when it comes to dealing with the printed word. His brain has problems processing it. The printed word looks, to a dyslexic, like gobbledygook. It is difficult for those of us who read as easily as we walk and talk to imagine that this could be so but my husband suffers from dyslexia and so does my greatniece. Dyslexics can be very, very bright but they will not prosper in academics and many of them will drop out of school. Indeed the school experience is likely to leave these people feeling humiliated, stupid, and depressed. My own wonderful and very bright husband was trapped by his virtual illiteracy from going on with his education. The two arenas of his academic interest, economics and psychology, remain blocked to him. Nevertheless, he has done well for himself. And Tom Cruise had done well for himself. He is a fine actor. He is also drifting deeper and deeper into loony land.

I voted for the first option but only with the greatest reluctance and only after thinking long and hard about this issue. You see, I do feel that women who find themselves pregnant and don't wish to be should take action long before the third trimester. And I also believe that once the foetus can live outside the uterus, the ethics of termination are entirely changed. The woman who has permitted her pregnancy to progress to this point has already made her decision to go ahead and have the child by reason of her inaction. She should not be permitted to casually trash what is by now a viable human life. The sole situation under which I can imagine a third trimester abortion taking place would be when the foetus is so horribly damaged by birth defects that its birth would only result in dreadful financial and emotional strains on the family. Naturally I have always maintained that the rights of the mother trump that of the foetus; should there ever be a question at any point during the pregnancy of saving the life of only the mum or the foetus/baby, I believe that the right to keep on living must go to the mother. I guess this means that there are two extremely particular circumstances under which I would support a final trimester abortion.