Originally Posted By Dabob2 I wasn't at all! Both mawnck's "I apologize" and your "I actually will go and try to fill in some holes in my knowledge on this subject" are things we ought to see more around here.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I fill all the holes in my knowledge with KFC. Then thy spray paint their logo on me. Ripped-from-today's-headlines humor reference: <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-090317pothole-kfc-story,0,406116.story" target="_blank">http://www.chicagotribune.com/...16.story</a>
Originally Posted By DVC_dad I've been reading online all about the civil rights movement for the past half hour, and I am quite shocked at how little I actually DO know about Dr. King, to the point that I'm embarased.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I see you all too clearly, Doug, as #97 points out, and you can't refute. The rest of us do, too.> If, by the "rest of us", you mean left-wingers with ideological blinders on, then no, I can't refute it. However, if you mean anyone else reading this thread, then no refutation is needed.
Originally Posted By Sara Tonin You know Doug, it's really difficult to imagine how the rest of the world got so off track.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<I see you all too clearly, Doug, as #97 points out, and you can't refute. The rest of us do, too.>> <If, by the "rest of us", you mean left-wingers with ideological blinders on, then no, I can't refute it. However, if you mean anyone else reading this thread, then no refutation is needed.> I mean everyone who's weighed in on it, of all stripes. You and your nonsense have been exposed for a while now and it's not difficult to see. What's hilarious is you keep perpetuating it, as in 97/98, and then say "what? Me? Nahhhhhh."
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I've said it before. I think MOST of "us" (American's) are centrist. You can lean left or lean right but I think most of us are somewhere in the middle. So, when the two parties need to differentiate themselves they often do so by placating the "hot topics" of their extremes. That pits the far right against the far left and most of us are somewhere in the middle. Those of us in the middle want to be part of the process...and in our attempt to do so we are likely going to side with those that are MOST similar to us. Well, the far right is more similar thinking to me than the far left. So, while I don't really agree with the far right the conservative party tends to get my vote. Not this year. This year I said I would not vote for either candidate because I'm tired of settling. I MIGHT have settled if the Republicans didn't sell out by pushing an unqualifed person for Vice President running with a man who may not have made it four years. But, I just couldn't bring myself to do that. So, most of the nation is being overlooked by their party leaders in order to win elections. Typically, Presidential winners will slide to the middle and govern in that general area...which ticks off the extremes who helped them get elected. But, so goes the vicious circle of death that is politics.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I mean everyone who's weighed in on it, of all stripes.> Then you're wrong.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney ^^^Here's another example for you, DVC_Dad, of someone who might have voted for McCain if he hadn't chosen Palin.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> Then you're wrong. << Can you point to anyone who supports your positions and comments? Anyone?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <False alarm folks, move along, nothing to see here...> Have you read both of the reports? I just did, and there's no comparison between the two. The left-wing one narrowly defines who might be a threat, and gives the names of several groups. It also specifies what sort of attacks they might make, and who their targets are. The right wing one speculates that anyone espousing a conservative philosophy is a potential threat, but gives no examples.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<Plenty. As has been pointed out by Coretta Scott King, and other important associates from the time such as John Lewis and Julian Bond. You might want to check out their comments on the subject.>> What Martin Luther King said and did are two completely different things. <a href="http://www.thenewblackmagazine.com/view.aspx?index=477" target="_blank">http://www.thenewblackmagazine...ndex=477</a> <<Although, Liberals will point to the fact that one of King's top advisers and organizers for the March on Washington, Bayard Rustin, was an openly homosexual man as proof positive that King was in favor of homosexual marriage. The reality is, this example merely shows us that King was in favor of showing an attitude of love towards all people, regardless of their sexual orientation.>> Even within King's own family, there is division on the issue. King's late widow, Coretta Scott King had spoken publicly on more than one occasion about the need for justice for homosexuals, claiming that her husband would have been in favor for the rights of homosexuals to marry. Meanwhile, in opposition to her own mother, King's youngest daughter Bernice said the following at a conference in Auckland, New Zealand: "I know deep down in my sanctified soul that he did not take a bullet for same-sex unions." A few of those who "knew" King, including a friend of his from the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Rev. Joseph Lowery, said if King were alive today, he would view marriage as a "private affair". The reality is, King never spoke publicly about the issue of homosexuality and today, the frame of reference is quite different.>> <<In the ongoing quest to equate the plight of homosexuals with the civil rights movement, the rainbow brigade is once again up in arms due to a recent Atlanta march in favor of a ban on same-sex marriages. This particular march called "Reigniting the Legacy" from King memorial, also happened to include the late Dr. King's daughter Bernice King, a minister. >>
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom More information of Martin Luther King and Homosexuality: <a href="http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/293986.html" target="_blank">http://answers.google.com/answ...986.html</a> <<Martin Luther King Jr. never addressed issues of homosexuality in public. I searched through his writings (translated and original, online and off-line), and found no evidence that he ever addressed the issue in one of his books, sermons or speeches on the subject. The fact that King never left any conclusive indication of his opinion on homosexuals and homosexuality, left many wandering as to King's views on the issue.>> This is what another relative says Martin Luther King's views were: <<The controversy arouses every several years. In 1997, King's niece "denied that homosexuality is a "civil rights" issue. It is an issue left to the individual and God, she said. Homosexual "marriage" can never succeed, because God will not recognize it. When the leader of the African-American gay community told King that homosexuality was "bondage," she urged him to remain open to the possibility of finding a way out of it. (SOURCE: Mass. News <<a href="http://www.massnews.com/past_issues/2000/Culture/cult24.htm>" target="_blank">http://www.massnews.com/past_i....htm></a>). In another place, Alveda King said that "God hates homosexuals" (Source: MARTIN LUTHER KING'S NIECE LEADS AUGUSTA RALLY OF GAY-RIGHTS FOES <<a href="http://www.maine.com/paula/pph/pph-2.6a.98.html>" target="_blank">http://www.maine.com/paula/pph...html></a>), and that her uncle would agree with her positions on the subject.>>
