Originally Posted By Elderp <a href="http://www.gocomics.com/pricklycity/" target="_blank">http://www.gocomics.com/pricklycity/</a> Today's (6/29)
Originally Posted By Inspector 57 ***PRICKLY CITY is a comic strip about the friendship between Winslow, a coyote pup, and Carmen, a straight and narrow kind of kid. PRICKLY CITY offers a conservative perspective on political and social events within an ongoing storyline. As Carmen might say, "We may not be correct but we will always be right.*** In the comic that you linked, a cartoon character makes an innocent comment and another cartoon character jumps all over it in a ridiculous display of political correctness. Ha, ha, ha. Are we to learn from this comic that there is no such thing as forcing one's religion upon another?
Originally Posted By dshyates I think Elderp is trying to say that the Mormons lobbing for gov't sanctioned discrimination to be written into the California Constitution isn't forcing anyone's religion on anyone. The gays are just wackos that are simply hypersensitive, and justifiably ignored and/or mocked. And if the gays would convert to Mormonism, disavow the sinful lifestyle and accept the "truth' as "restored" by the christian profit from Sharon, VT. They would just see how they aren't trying to force anything of the sort. They are just concerned for your soul and helping the gays avoid hell.
Originally Posted By jdub Not sure how you held in your espresso while you typed that; in my case it woulda been all over the laptop--and my own!
Originally Posted By dshyates It was supposed to sort of a paraphrase joke based on the cartoon, where one simple statement was made and someone took exception to something that was never said then takes the ball and runs into left field, out the gate and into the parking lot, then spiking the ball in victory. Not realizing the line they just crossed wasn't the goal line, but the line in the parking lot between space 192 & 193.
Originally Posted By X-san ElderP, was this cartoon in response to people complaining about recent actions by the LDS religion taking action against gay marriage? Just wondering, specifically, since some people have apparently assumed that was your intent. (I sort of figured it was, and wanted to talk to you about it, but at the same time didn't want to jump to any conclusions).
Originally Posted By jdub I'm a little lost, there; some of us homosexuals aren't exactly big on the sports metaphors. (Maybe trying tennis instead of baseball?)
Originally Posted By dshyates "(Maybe trying tennis instead of Baseball?)" I actually mixed my sports analogies in that there is no left field in Football and no goal line in Baseball.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>disavow the sinful lifestyle and accept the "truth' as "restored" by the christian profit from Sharon, VT.<<< In all fairness, we hardly ever think about it anymore.
Originally Posted By Elderp "since some people have apparently assumed that was your intent." I can admit when I am wrong. I have no problem with that. I might be slow sometimes but I would like to think I come arround eventually. I would really like to talk about this issue as I am sure there are those on the other side would like to as well, but I feel I am doomed on this issue. I say something I am going to be slammed, I don't and I will be slammed. I may be closed minded, but I am seeing the same thing on both sides. "but at the same time didn't want to jump to any conclusions" But you do, and what is worse is for some reason you seem to always have to flame the issue at hand. I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish with this, to me it seems like it either A) further encites the person you are debating with or B) turns them off completely to what you are saying. I want to talk, I want to express viewpoints but I am starting to think you don't really want to debate. I am thinking WE is just about a "one up" attitude. If this is the case please just tell me, I can deal with that. I just don't want to waste yours or mine fingers typing. You can hate my church if you want, heck you can hate me if you want. Just don't expect me to respond to it.
Originally Posted By X-san Excuse me? I didn't jump to any conclusions. That's the reason I asked you to clarify. Now who's putting words in who's mouth? And I'm not trying to "one up" you either, if you're referring to that other thread. You wrote some disturbing stuff though, and I certainly feel a reply is fair considering what you wrote. I'm really not trying to "one up" you on this stuff Elder...frankly what you've been writing lately really does concern me.
Originally Posted By Elderp "reply is fair considering what you wrote." Marriage is a core issue for our church, that is why the church has taken a position on it. That point has been stated multiple times. I am assuming (and I am sorry if this is an assumption) you have seen the same letter I have seen. That is all the information I have from the church at this point. My Bishop didn't read the letter (I don't think it got in his mail), so really I have gotten nothing officially. "I didn't jump to any conclusions. That's the reason I asked you to clarify." From another thread "ElderP is in favor of making homosexuality a crime." What is that?? An inference? "By the way, I don't hate anyone ElderP." Good because I don't hate you. OR ANYONE ELSE.
Originally Posted By X-san You said it yourself, you'd be in favor of making extra-marital sex illegal. That, coupled with your position in favor of disallowing any form of gay marriage, means that you want to criminalize gay sex entirely. Did you NOT say those things?
Originally Posted By dshyates X, I'm gay and offended by a lot of what has been said in these 2 threads, But you are connecting some dots and implying things that Elderp never said or intended to imply. I believe that what Elderp meant with his extramaritial affair comment was that if somehow you happen to find yourself in a marriage, then extramarital relations would possible be breaking a legal vow or verbal contract. But if you are not in a marriage then an extramarital affair would be impossible.
Originally Posted By X-san He didn't say "extramarital affair" though. If that's what he meant then it's a different story of course, but what he WROTE was "I will say this, if it were possible to write a bill to make it illegal to have sex outside of marriage I think I would be in favor of that too. Doubt it would ever pass, but I wouldn't mind such a bill." In other words, any sexual relations by anyone who is not having sex with their spouse should be illegal. That's how I read it, anyway. Did I somehow misread it?
Originally Posted By Elderp "You said it yourself, you'd be in favor of making extra-marital sex illegal." I said if it were possible yes. It isn't really possible though, you could of pointed that out, but you chose to attack me instead. How do you want me to handle that? Did you think saying things like "You write a post in favor of completely criminalizing homosexuality" or "Wow. What a pedestal you sit on!" was really going to invite a dialogue? If it is any condolence, your words were not the worst. Yours just affected me the most because even though I don't agree with you on everything I occasionally like to think your listening, but you weren't (I can be accused of this sometimes too). So I thought to myself "if X-san, one who regulary posts here in WE, can not hear what I am saying, or at least acknoweledge what I am saying, what's the point." So what do you do at that point? Do you continue to hash it out? What's the point of that, why talk if no one cares about what you have to say? Anyhow, point is moot now. I have been shown there is no dialogue on this issue, at least not here. I know I have offended people, I am sorry for that, I am going to have to find another venue in which to develop my conclusions. There has got to be somewhere, where I can talk about this issue without getting attacked.
