GENMSC-L ArchivesArchiver > GENMSC > 1996-09 > 0843848637
From: Charles Herbert Crookston <>
Subject: Re: Same sex "marriage,"
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 18:23:57 GMT
Roger the problem is probably that he has already tried all thoise
types of groups and exhausted his repetory of hate mongering and
no one any longer pays any attention to him, so he has strayed afield
to groups such as this.
If the people in this group would ignore him, these trolls hate that,
he would go away from here also.
Roger Horgan <> wrote:
> (David Olson) wrote:
>> >>>Oh, boy. I'd suggest you do some reading here.
>> If you thing AIDS is a gay disease in any way,
>> you'd better check yourself. Dead dog wrong.
>> everybody, everybody, that is to say everbody
>> on this planet knows, repeat, everybody knows
>> that AIDS is 95% specific to homosexuals and
>> intravenous drug users. A quarrantine of
>> these groups in a camp in Nevada would
>> wipe out the disease in America.
>> There is a Socialist concept having to do with
>> the greatest good for the greatest number that
>> deserves some careful consideration in this
>> >> Considering
>> >> the curious 'sexual' behavior of homosexuals,
>> >>>Interesting comment - are you suggesting that
>> homosexuals don't have sex?
>> Actually, I don't know what all they do, (sodomy comes
>> immediately to mind, but no one confuses sodomy with
>> 'having sex'), but no, they don't 'have sex'.
>> 'Having sex' is a behavior on the part of two people
>> of the opposite gender.
>> My gawd, are you suggesting that homosexuals 'have sex'??????
>> > Perhaps the reason is that social approbation kept
>> > homosexual behaviors from getting out of hand in the past,
>> >>>It really wasn't an issue before the Victorian period in the West.
>> >>>Perhaps it is past time for you to read a book. Why not
>> start with the Bible. Note that the ancient Hebrews loathed
>> and despised homosexuals. Their attitudes did not start with
>> them and did not end with them. Get a real education Tarch.
>> You are adrift in a world of delusions. Were you aware that
>> virtually all heterosexuals develop upset stomachs and
>> breathing difficulties from merely being in the presence
>> of a homosexual of the same apparent gender? Many people
>> realize that it is never a personal choice and are therefore
>> sympathetic, and simply try not to breath too deeply.
>> Unfortunately, others are able find cause for malice
>> towards those with whom they are not comfortable.
>> >>>What is a 'specialized homosexual disease'? Please
>> cite reference. You certaily coundn't mean AIDS... which
>> is primarily a *heterosexual* disease globally. The virus
>> makes no distinction.
>> Why do you have to pretend to be stupid? You know that
>> monogamous heterosexuals who are non-intravenous drug-users
>> are virtually invulnerable to the disease. You know that
>> dispersal of the disease is almost entirely a function of
>> ignorant and/or unsanitary behaviors. Unsanitary behavior
>> is probably the best or the kindest description available
>> for what is sometimes known among homosexuals as 'having
>> > 3% is the upper lid.
>> > I'd like to know if AIDS casualties have been sufficient to
>> > lower that lid.
>> >>>Not really. Homosexuals have heterosexual parents... and the
>> children of homosexuals have the same chance that they did of
>> being gay.
>> I wouldn't imagine that AIDS has changed the birth rate of
>> homosexuals any, but I was wondering if AIDS has been severe
>> enough to reduce the actual percentage of homosexuals in
>> the population at large, and to what degree. I remember
>> my amazment at reading in the San Francisco Chronicle in
>> 1966 that there were some 90,000 homosexuals living in
>> the city. I am wondering what that figure might be today.
>> After 15 years of AIDS.
>> >> > I was only pointing out that the particular groups you have
>> >> cited are highly politicized and susceptible to bending with
>> >> the political wind.
>> >>>And that is irrelevant
>> pretending to be stupid again. An organization that assumes
>> its positions as a function of politics rather that science
>> has sacrificed its relevance and credibility upon the altar
>> of political correctness. Their positions are not to be
>> >>>(being gay positive is a political advantage - please!).
>> Did you mean 'gay positive' or 'positive political advantage'?
>> whichever, I'd like to hear more.
>> >> pedophiles since their little predilection actually
>> >> leads to imprisonment.
>> >>><<gasp>> That stops criminals in their tracks! Gee maybe
>> we should let someone know! Lame, David, really lame.
>> You've got something there. Threatening criminals
>> with imprisonment is kind of lame isn't it? But as
>> for pedophiliacs, they are not normally classified
>> as common criminals, though their crimes may carry
>> criminal penalties.
>> >>>Talk to the APA - pedophilia is a psychological disorder...
>> We seem to have a situation analogous to a loony bin in which
>> the whackos point at each other and say "now, that guy is
>> fuuuuuxxxxxxxxxed up".
>> The homosexuals and the pedophiliacs are not finding common
>> cause. Too bad, their conditions are nothing but slightly
>> different manifestations of the SAME THING.
>> Sexual misprogramming. APA is not credible.
>>|Fidonet: David Olson 1:343/108
>>| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
>Is this a windup, or merely the lunatic right at work? Either way, is it
>really too much to hope that the "user" might care to take himself and his
>bigoted and ignorant "views" to a more appropriate newsgroup ...
>alt.faggot.die.die.die is one forum that springs to mind.
>"Live and let live" has not only always struck me as an intelligent maxim
>for everyday life, but as an absolute prerequisite for family history.
|Re: Same sex "marriage," by Charles Herbert Crookston <>|