marjon9

You are making the argument here that pedophilia is so heinous that we are somehow encouraging it or endangering children by simply mentioning it. I don't understand that argument. All of us are in favor of "drawing the line" against pedophilia, and all of us care about "all the children being molested, abused, manipulated or 'loved.'" But why is talking about it "crossing the line" or endangering "all the children." Can you explain that? I'd really like to know. If anything, silence is more likely to endanger children. If all those Bishops had been willing to talk about what pedophile priests were doing, untold hundreds of children could have avoided being victims. It seems to me that you want to remove the thread because you don't like the topic and it makes you uncomfortable. That's fair enough, but it is not a good enough reason to justify censorship. There is simply no rationale argument to support the proposition that censoring this thread will somehow protect children. And if there is such an argument, will you please explain it?

I certainly agree that there is no "pro and con" debate about the topic of the boy love forum. But for me the debate here is about a different topic. For me the debate is about whether one group of people with certain moral sensibilities has the right to decide for everyone else what they can read, or how they should live. After all these months of reading these religious-themed posts and listening to people declare that they have a right to tell me and everyone else how we must live, I just got a bit worn out from it. To me one of the prime examples is prayer in school. The concept of prayer in school is just about as offensive to me as pedophilia. Yet those who advocate it believe that they have a right to force that on me and everyone else. The abortion debate, the gay marriage debate, etc., etc., are similar to me. A certain group of people feels like it has the right to legislate in these areas and force everyone else to live by their determination of what is morally correct. That is simply unbearably offensive to me. So that is the debate here for me. It's not about whether anyone advocates sex with children, which of course no one does. So, yes, I did begin a sort of a troll post. I knew that the usual crew of "religious" conservatives would stand up and demand that the post be removed. I enjoyed participating in the demonstration that the moral sensibilities of this particular group does not always get to determine what is best for everyone else. And besides, it was interesting to me lifting up this rock of the boy love forum and finding the vermin underneath. It's interesting, weird, funny. It really is hard for me to understand what the big deal is.

I see your point, there are a lot of child lap-banders here who need protection. (And I mean that in a jocular, friendly way). And by the way, I fully and completely support your right to ask for censorship.

That is just so typical. I think you are a very bright lady mousecrazy and I agree with a good portion of what you say. But censorship is not the answer. How can the moderators be in a position of deciding which content is unacceptable? The fact is, so much of what has been said on various threads here is highly offensive to me. So, should those threads be removed? If you don't like this thread, don't read it. This is the rants and raves section. If you don't like it, don't read it. You conservative religious folks simply do not get to dictate to others what they can read, or, more significantly, how they live. This precise confrontation is the exact reason I posted this thread. Thank you for helping. And by the way, I want to reiterate, I have nothing personal against you at all and, indeed, even find myself agreeing with you from time to time.

Here's part of what Wikipedia has to say about Rocky Mountain Oysters. Rocky Mountain oysters, mountain oysters, prairie oysters, Montana tendergroin or swinging sirloin are culinary names given to boar or bull testicles. They are usually peeled, coated in flour, pepper and salt, sometimes pounded flat, then deep-fried. Boar (hog) "Mountain oysters" or "Rocky Mountain oysters" are served in some Mid-west areas such as in Illinois, and Iowa. So, this proves that "Rocky Mountain Oysters" are not ONLY Bull's Balls. I like to think of them more as "Swinging Sirloin." It's the "pounded flat" part that gets me, if you see what I mean.

This thread seems to have really pushed some buttons with some people so I just want to say a couple things about it. The first thing is, obviously no one is advocating, defending or supporting pedophilia in any way. No one is looking forward to some time in the future when this type of behavior is "acceptable." There is not a single word in any post that suggests anything like that, so I don't know where that thought would come from. Upstanding Christians are not the only ones disgusted by pedophelia. Lauraj, as for what I was looking for when I found it, you may recall yesterday that there was a brief discussion of a "Christian Sex Toys" web site on the "Large Penis Posts" thread. I was looking up "Christian Sex Education" and I ran across this Boylove site. I thought it was bizarre, thought provoking, and a bit funny, so I posted it. And I will also confess to a mildly sinister motivation. I find it amusing to raise issues of Christian hypocricy. Fundamentalist Christians spend quite a bit of time trumpeting their moral superiority and attempting to pass constitutional amendments and otherwise legislate the way others should live their lives. Yet frequently it is the members of this group who are shown to be the most outrageous hypocrites. And while I certainly do not think that this "Boylove" site represents anything that is legitimately "Christian," or that pedophilia is, in any sense, a "Christian" thing, you will have to admit that 95% of news items relating to pedophilia over the last ten years have been about these monster priests. So, yes, there was a bit of a sinister motivation on my part in posting it. I did intend to push some buttons and stimulate debate. I did not intend to "offend" people, and frankly, I don't understand why this thread is any more offensive than quite a few others we've seen around here lately. But aside from that, I do admit that I intended to push some buttons.

I know, isn't that creepy? Very weird. It's hard to know how they would have voted. It seems to me a lot of Christians are Republicans. But are these really Christians? They seem to think so. It reminds me of that Woody Allen joke, that he would never join a club that would have him as a member. Would these "Christians" vote for a ban on gay marriage? Very weird.

You know, MsDad, you may be right. Sorry about that. I don't see any connection between being gay and being a pedophile, so that had not occurred to me. But now that you mention it, you may be right.

Can anyone tell me where I can get one of those "Large Penis Posts"? And do you know how you attach it? Do you strap it on?

What you describe could be good. I was just put off by the fact that I found a bunch of nasty personal comments on my profile page from people who disagreed with the political views I expressed in a rants and raves column. These people appeared to by trying to damage my "reputation" on the forum because they disagreed with my political views. My thought was "gee, I sure need this." But the way you describe could be good. I would probably not be inclined to leave a lot of private messages for people but I would not object if people like the idea. I'm obviously just one vote but as far as I'm concerned if people want that system it would be fine with me.

I used the Atkins Protein shakes, chocolate and vanilla not bad. I did not like the strawbery. For powders I have used unjury brand, they are good. I've used chocolate, vanilla, and unflavored. There are a lot of other brands. You can get them at your neighborhood health food store. If you buy some there you can try them before you buy a larger quantity. If you are ready to purchase a larger supply, I like to order on line. Prices are good, and they deliver it. If you search a bit you'll find a lot of options. One thing you might want to try is to run some searches in this forum. The topic has come up quite a bit, since protein intake seems to be quite an important thing for us bandsters.

Actually, I grew up in Southern California. My camp counsellor's name was Hugh Jass. He taught us that "Kumbaya" meant "First one's free, I'll teach you how." We sat around the campfire also. The game we played was to see how many of us could inhale the same bong hit. This was during the sixties, before any negative consequences were associated with the exchange of bodily fluids.

Don't get me started on bar-b-que. All I can say is, if you like pork, you really do need to take a bar-b-que tour of the United States. Get a list of the 1500 or 2000 best bar-b-que places in the U.S. and hit the road. No, I mean right now.

Exactly. Well said. Consider these comments to be an enhancement to your reputation.

I have to say, I agree with this. I can't think of a single positive effect this function is likely to have. The rationale that it will help people on the forum know who to believe is not very persuasive. And besides, the people here don't have any special knowledge about "who to believe." It's best if all ideas are given equal footing in the "marketplace," and let the best ones rise to the top naturally. A forum like this is for people to express themselves and ask questions. We can police the forum any way we want by not reading posts from people that annoy us. And anyone who believes medical advice from people on this forum without confirming it with a medical professional deserves whatever happens to them. I bet if we took a poll most people would be against having this function. But I may be wrong. In any event, I'm certainly not in favor of it. It's just another way for people to be mean to each other privately. And if someone has something nice to say, it can be done publicly. That's how I see it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumbaya Here is a link to the Wikipedia entry. If you don't have time to look, it means "intolerant religious conservatives and homophobes will fail to impose their legislative agenda on the virtuous and morally superior liberals."

I've always wanted to go to South America, but being the typical self-absorbed American, I had not yet differentiated in my mind among the various countries. Chile would work, though.

I spent enough time hiding behind trees watching Boy Scouts to know that it's spelled "Kumbaya."

Thanks, BJean, for your kind thoughts. This thread has brought out some thoughtful comments all around.

Thanks for the comments. And no, I did not know all those. Just found a recipe book on line and started typing away. :biggrin1:

No, I'm not from Chile, just trying to stir up trouble. Slow news day, I guess. :biggrin1:

I'm from Chile and I'm proud of our sewers. Your radio show should be cancelled immediately. :heh:

ghettofarm24, you have a compelling story to tell. Your story is definitely something that a woman should consider when she is deciding whether or not to have an abortion. But as compelling as your story is, in my view it does not provide justification for forcing a woman, through legislation and potential criminal penalties, to carry the child to term. I have no doubt that the overwhelming majority of women who have abortions take the matter seriously and struggle with the types of questions raised by your story. I also have no doubt that that the overwhelming majority of women who have abortions do not do so for any sort of feminist "rite of passage" or other frivolous reason that does not reflect the gravity of the situation. But once a woman decides, all things considered, that she needs to take this step for her own personal reasons, she absolutely must have the freedom to do so. I realize that in your view it is simply a matter of a minor "inconvenience" to the woman to have the child, but many women consider it to be much more than that. And in any event, one way or another, it must be their choice, not the choice of others who would impose their will on her by law.

If I were you I'd search around a bit on the forum. These topics have come up before. In this thread, for example, people talked about Protein shakes: http://www.lapbandtalk.com/showthread.php?=33663&highlight=carnation I know that some people have said that the Carnation breakfasts are high on sugar, but I have not checked. Also, it seems to me that they would be likely to have whey protein instead of soy, but again, I have not checked. As for soy protein, I've heard some people say that plant-based Proteins like soy can be harder to digest, but I've seen other people say they like them a lot. As for me, I know I prefer the taste of soy protein over whey. But again, I would search the forum with keywords like whey, soy, carnation, protein, etc. I think you'll find a lot of info.

If your mom has insurance then my comments are not relevant. But if she does not then she might want to consider Dr. Kirshenbaum in Denver (see web site in my signature). He does the surgery for $9950, with fills forever for $15. I know Denver is not exactly walking distance, it's not too far, and if mom is paying herself it might be something to consider. Good luck