"Caesar Romano" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:03:05 -0700, "John D99"
wrote Re Looking at Cable TV options:


"desgnr" wrote in message
...
What is best ?
Comcast Cable TV or Satellite TV
If Satellite which provider is best deal ?

The best choice is none.

The (entertainment) "news" they put on is propagandized disinformation
that
will lower your knowledge of the world.

The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?

The advertising is even stupider and more offensove than what's on
broadcast.


Get a library card and save $50 a month.

Well said.

And join NetFlix if you really want to watch movies. The selection is
astounding.

Thanks - apparently I've ruffled a few feathers.

As for netflix, you're absolutley right, except I've been using BB.

On Nov 11, 3:27*pm, "John D99" wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 2:15 pm, "John D99" wrote:





"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 1:35 pm, "John D99" wrote:

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

....
On Nov 11, 11:03 am, "John D99" wrote:

"desgnr" wrote in message

...

What is best ?
Comcast Cable TV or Satellite TV
If Satellite which provider is best deal ?

The best choice is none.

The (entertainment) "news" they put on is propagandized disinformation
that
will lower your knowledge of the world.

Only if you allow it to. I choose to laugh at it instead. The same
goes for the financial-entertainment stations.

The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?

==
Don't care if they do or not. Why would it matter? Are they going to
catch something?
==

Truly stupid. If you don't know that people and especially kids are
influenced by what they see and hear, then you're clueless.

Communists and nazis both understood how easy it is to shape and
influence
people's minds.

==
OK, so what if they were "influenced"? I'll ask one more time:

Why would it matter?
===

In other words, you don't care if your kids are influenced toward
homosexual
activities?
They're your kids so I guess that's your call.

==
That's the first halfway intelligent thing you've said in this thread,
and you did it without calling me any names.

Frankly, I'm surprised!
==


What you're saying is that you don't care *if your kids are influenced
toward homosexual
activities.

That says volumes.

Yep...it says volumes about my ability to be tolerant.


==
BTW...you didn't answer my question about the library card.
==

Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?

===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.

In what way? You asked if my kids were going to search them out and I
simply answered that they might. A pretty uninteresting response if
you ask me.


==
Did you follow your's into the library every time?
==

I din't have to, they had no interest in it.

....not like they would have discussed it with you if they had.

Of course, if they had no interest in it, then there was no need to
worry about what they saw on TV.

Oh, wait.

Do you mean that if they saw it on TV they might be interested and
then go search out the books?

Then it's a good thing you kept them away from the TV. Good Job!


Do you have to search out TV programming that does the same, or is it more
and more commonly just stuck into story lines?

===
I better stop the newspaper delivery and turn off the radio too. I
better block internet access to every news network, TV station and
radio station website too. There just might be a story about Gay
Rights that might influence my kids.
===

You're confused.
We're not talking about "gay rights". We're talking about people beiong
propagandised into thinking homosexual activity is normal.-

What? How can you possibly separate the 2?

If a municipality decides to legalized gay marriage or a HMO grants
health care coverage to a same-sex partner, then we're discussing both
gay rights *and* the normalization of those types of partnerships.

If a municipality decides to legalized gay marriage or a HMO grants
health care coverage to a same-sex partner then how could that *not*
cause our easily influenced offspring to think that homosexual
activity is normal?

And you said *I* was confused? Wow!

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Nov 11, 3:27 pm, "John D99" wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 2:15 pm, "John D99" wrote:





"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 1:35 pm, "John D99" wrote:

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 11:03 am, "John D99" wrote:

"desgnr" wrote in message

...

What is best ?
Comcast Cable TV or Satellite TV
If Satellite which provider is best deal ?

The best choice is none.

The (entertainment) "news" they put on is propagandized
disinformation
that
will lower your knowledge of the world.

Only if you allow it to. I choose to laugh at it instead. The same
goes for the financial-entertainment stations.

The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?

==
Don't care if they do or not. Why would it matter? Are they going to
catch something?
==

Truly stupid. If you don't know that people and especially kids are
influenced by what they see and hear, then you're clueless.

Communists and nazis both understood how easy it is to shape and
influence
people's minds.

==
OK, so what if they were "influenced"? I'll ask one more time:

Why would it matter?
===

In other words, you don't care if your kids are influenced toward
homosexual
activities?
They're your kids so I guess that's your call.

==
That's the first halfway intelligent thing you've said in this thread,
and you did it without calling me any names.

Frankly, I'm surprised!
==


What you're saying is that you don't care if your kids are influenced
toward homosexual
activities.

That says volumes.

Yep...it says volumes about my ability to be tolerant.


==
BTW...you didn't answer my question about the library card.
==

Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?

===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.

==
In what way? You asked if my kids were going to search them out and I
simply answered that they might. A pretty uninteresting response if
you ask me.
===

It was "interesting" becasue you said your kids "might very well search
them out", refering to books that promote homosexuality.

That is not a response that an average father would give in reference to his
children.




==
Did you follow your's into the library every time?
==

I din't have to, they had no interest in it.

==
....not like they would have discussed it with you if they had.

Of course, if they had no interest in it, then there was no need to
worry about what they saw on TV.

Oh, wait.

Do you mean that if they saw it on TV they might be interested and
then go search out the books?

Then it's a good thing you kept them away from the TV. Good Job!
===

Like most normal people, I want my kids, and others, to be intersted in
pursuing a healthy normal life.

From what you have written here, you see things otherwise.



Do you have to search out TV programming that does the same, or is it
more
and more commonly just stuck into story lines?

===
I better stop the newspaper delivery and turn off the radio too. I
better block internet access to every news network, TV station and
radio station website too. There just might be a story about Gay
Rights that might influence my kids.
===

You're confused.
We're not talking about "gay rights". We're talking about people beiong
propagandised into thinking homosexual activity is normal.-

==
What? How can you possibly separate the 2?
==

OK, now you're saying it's ok to propagandize people into thinking
homosexuality is normal.

I don;t think that is, and I think people can respect the human rights of
hmosexuals, without regarding the activity as being normal, or desireable,
particularly for their children.

Do you actually have kids, or you pretending to in order to argue soemthing
that is a personal agenda to you?





If a municipality decides to legalized gay marriage or a HMO grants
health care coverage to a same-sex partner, then we're discussing both
gay rights *and* the normalization of those types of partnerships.

If a municipality decides to legalized gay marriage or a HMO grants
health care coverage to a same-sex partner then how could that *not*
cause our easily influenced offspring to think that homosexual
activity is normal?

And you said *I* was confused? Wow!

On Nov 11, 4:10*pm, "John D99" wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 3:42 pm, "John D99" wrote:



"DGDevin" wrote in message

om...

John D99 wrote:

The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?

Are you under the impression that your kids can somehow be recruited
to become homosexual by seeing these supposed "pro-gay messages"? Did
you really do such a bad job raising your children that you
think their sexual orientation can be changed by a movie?

A better question is what your kids are like, idiot.

As you're the one with paranoid delusions about your kids being at risk
of
somehow being infected with homosexuality via the television it would
seem
*your* parenting skills are the ones in question.

Only a total fool doesn't care what their kids are exposed to.

Of course kids get influenced by the crap they see on TV - is that a big
revelation to you?

Do you think kids getting exposed to pedophile priest is also ok?

There are a lot of things

to worry about in relation to one's children, but them being turned gay
by
the television is not something anyone rational is concerned about. Also
notice there was no need for me to call you an idiot, you having
established that all on your own.

Do you think the effectiveness of propaganda and advertising is a
myth?
I notice you didn't answer the question: Are you under the impression
that
your kids can somehow be recruited

It's caled a "rhetorical question" fool. You're supposed to be able to
understand that advertising and propaganda are done becasue they are
effective.

With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions should be
about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have any and are
not
simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I have said.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

===
"With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions
should be about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have
any and are not simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I
have said"

That's perfect...it just about proves that you live in your own little
world...

"assuming you actually have any and are not simply a gay who is
posting in oposition to what I have said"



You are aware that a person can be gay *and* have kids right? The 2
are not mutually exclusive - well, at least not in the real world
where the rest of us live.
===


Are you being honest and admitting that you are homosexual?

Are you and I participating in the same discussion?

How does my pointing out to you that there are gay people who are
raising children lead you to ask me if I'm a homosexual?

If you mistakenly implied that a person couldn't be a plumber and a
woman, and I pointed out that there are lots of female plumbers, would
you ask me if I was a female?

That was a strange place to ask that question.

Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in a discussion where one party
might have a vested interest.

Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in *any* discussion. Are you
implying that it's OK to lie if you aren't interested in the subject
being discussed?

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Nov 11, 4:10 pm, "John D99" wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 3:42 pm, "John D99" wrote:



"DGDevin" wrote in message

om...

John D99 wrote:

The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?

Are you under the impression that your kids can somehow be recruited
to become homosexual by seeing these supposed "pro-gay messages"?
Did
you really do such a bad job raising your children that you
think their sexual orientation can be changed by a movie?

A better question is what your kids are like, idiot.

As you're the one with paranoid delusions about your kids being at
risk
of
somehow being infected with homosexuality via the television it would
seem
*your* parenting skills are the ones in question.

Only a total fool doesn't care what their kids are exposed to.

Of course kids get influenced by the crap they see on TV - is that a big
revelation to you?

Do you think kids getting exposed to pedophile priest is also ok?

There are a lot of things

to worry about in relation to one's children, but them being turned
gay
by
the television is not something anyone rational is concerned about.
Also
notice there was no need for me to call you an idiot, you having
established that all on your own.

Do you think the effectiveness of propaganda and advertising is a
myth?
I notice you didn't answer the question: Are you under the impression
that
your kids can somehow be recruited

It's caled a "rhetorical question" fool. You're supposed to be able to
understand that advertising and propaganda are done becasue they are
effective.

With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions should
be
about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have any and are
not
simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I have said.- Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

===
"With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions
should be about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have
any and are not simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I
have said"

That's perfect...it just about proves that you live in your own little
world...

"assuming you actually have any and are not simply a gay who is
posting in oposition to what I have said"



You are aware that a person can be gay *and* have kids right? The 2
are not mutually exclusive - well, at least not in the real world
where the rest of us live.
===


Are you being honest and admitting that you are homosexual?

Are you and I participating in the same discussion?

How does my pointing out to you that there are gay people who are
raising children lead you to ask me if I'm a homosexual?

If you mistakenly implied that a person couldn't be a plumber and a
woman, and I pointed out that there are lots of female plumbers, would
you ask me if I was a female?

That was a strange place to ask that question.

Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in a discussion where one party
might have a vested interest.

Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in *any* discussion. Are you
implying that it's OK to lie if you aren't interested in the subject
being discussed?
====
please don't feed the trolls.

John D99 wrote:
"DGDevin" wrote in message
m...
John D99 wrote:

The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?

Are you under the impression that your kids can somehow be recruited to
become homosexual by seeing these supposed "pro-gay messages"? Did you
really do such a bad job raising your children that you think their sexual
orientation can be changed by a movie?

A better question is what your kids are like, idiot.

Do you think the effectiveness of propaganda and advertising is a myth?



Is there really propaganda trying to make children homosexual?
Seriously? I really can't imagine trying to change anyone's sexual
orientation.....and why would anyone want to?

John D99 wrote:

You're confused.
We're not talking about "gay rights". We're talking about people
beiong propagandised into thinking homosexual activity is normal.

Actually, it is totally normal for those attuned to that sexual preference,
has been for 1000s of years. And in numerous societies it is not only
normal for the participants but condoned by the society in general. It
often becomes normal - or accepted, at least - in societies where access to
females is limited. Prison, for example.

Ditto with animals. Most all practice homosexuality to some degree or
another. I happen to have eight Muscovy ducks living around the place.
Seven are males, one is female; the males would just as soon bugger each
other as jump the lady duck.

Just because you think it isn't normal doesn't mean it isn't for others.
Not for me though

--

dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Nov 11, 4:10 pm, "John D99" wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 3:42 pm, "John D99" wrote:



"DGDevin" wrote in message

om...

John D99 wrote:

The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?

Are you under the impression that your kids can somehow be recruited
to become homosexual by seeing these supposed "pro-gay messages"?
Did
you really do such a bad job raising your children that you
think their sexual orientation can be changed by a movie?

A better question is what your kids are like, idiot.

As you're the one with paranoid delusions about your kids being at
risk
of
somehow being infected with homosexuality via the television it would
seem
*your* parenting skills are the ones in question.

Only a total fool doesn't care what their kids are exposed to.

Of course kids get influenced by the crap they see on TV - is that a big
revelation to you?

Do you think kids getting exposed to pedophile priest is also ok?

There are a lot of things

to worry about in relation to one's children, but them being turned
gay
by
the television is not something anyone rational is concerned about.
Also
notice there was no need for me to call you an idiot, you having
established that all on your own.

Do you think the effectiveness of propaganda and advertising is a
myth?
I notice you didn't answer the question: Are you under the impression
that
your kids can somehow be recruited

It's caled a "rhetorical question" fool. You're supposed to be able to
understand that advertising and propaganda are done becasue they are
effective.

With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions should
be
about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have any and are
not
simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I have said.- Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

===
"With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions
should be about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have
any and are not simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I
have said"

That's perfect...it just about proves that you live in your own little
world...

"assuming you actually have any and are not simply a gay who is
posting in oposition to what I have said"



You are aware that a person can be gay *and* have kids right? The 2
are not mutually exclusive - well, at least not in the real world
where the rest of us live.
===





Are you being honest and admitting that you are homosexual?

==
Are you and I participating in the same discussion?

How does my pointing out to you that there are gay people who are
raising children lead you to ask me if I'm a homosexual?

If you mistakenly implied that a person couldn't be a plumber and a
woman, and I pointed out that there are lots of female plumbers, would
you ask me if I was a female?

That was a strange place to ask that question.
==

I'm responding to the things you've said.

Most people *are* concerned about what their kids are exposed to and prefer
them to be heterosexual in orientation.

There's a gay activist "community" that feels no restraint in
misrepresenting themselves and claiming to be people with normal sexual
orientation, and then argue for their agenda without revealing their obvious
bias and agenda.


Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in a discussion where one party
might have a vested interest.

==
Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in *any* discussion. Are you
implying that it's OK to lie if you aren't interested in the subject
being discussed?
==

See above.

wrote in message
news
John D99 wrote:
"DGDevin" wrote in message
m...
John D99 wrote:

The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?

Are you under the impression that your kids can somehow be recruited to
become homosexual by seeing these supposed "pro-gay messages"? Did you
really do such a bad job raising your children that you think their
sexual orientation can be changed by a movie?

A better question is what your kids are like, idiot.

Do you think the effectiveness of propaganda and advertising is a myth?




Is there really propaganda trying to make children homosexual? Seriously?
I really can't imagine trying to change anyone's sexual
orientation.....and why would anyone want to?

That's a bit naive.

On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:27:22 -0700, "John D99"
wrote:



Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?

===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.


==
Did you follow your's into the library every time?
==

I din't have to, they had no interest in it.




Do you have to search out TV programming that does the same, or is it more
and more commonly just stuck into story lines?

===
I better stop the newspaper delivery and turn off the radio too. I
better block internet access to every news network, TV station and
radio station website too. There just might be a story about Gay
Rights that might influence my kids.
===

You're confused.
We're not talking about "gay rights". We're talking about people beiong
propagandised into thinking homosexual activity is normal.


Accepting homosexuality as "normal" or "acceptable" is a bit
different than promoting homosexuality.
It might get someone out of the closet a bit sooner, but it will not
"make" a homosexual.

It might cause someone with homosexual tendancies to act on their
impulses - and make a celibate homosexual into a practicing homosexual
- BUT

The same is true of Hetrosexual activity, and the influence of TV and
movies on normal hetrosexual teens to become sexually active before
and outside of marriage is a MUCH MORE SERIOUS problem.

Today's media makes casual, premarital sexual activity, and
extramarital activity, appear to be normal, acceptable, and expected
behaviour.
Doesn't have to convert sexual preference.

On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:14:21 -0700, "charlie"
wrote:

please don't feed the trolls.

Thank You.

"dadiOH" wrote in message
...
John D99 wrote:

You're confused.
We're not talking about "gay rights". We're talking about people
beiong propagandised into thinking homosexual activity is normal.

Actually, it is totally normal for those attuned to that sexual
preference, has been for 1000s of years. And in numerous societies it is
not only normal for the participants but condoned by the society in
general. It often becomes normal - or accepted, at least - in societies
where access to females is limited. Prison, for example.

Well, it was also "normal" in Sparta as part of pedophilic relationships for
boys being trianed into the army.

But using the anus for sexual activity is not biologically normal.



Ditto with animals. Most all practice homosexuality to some degree or
another. I happen to have eight Muscovy ducks living around the place.
Seven are males, one is female; the males would just as soon bugger each
other as jump the lady duck.

Really. I wonder why that might be.

I could mention that domesticated animals are kept in un-natural situations.

A long time ago, experiments in with rats in over crowded environments
resulted in cannibalism and homosexuality among them- is that the normality
you're refering to?

However, despite the bathhouse legends of how common homosexuality is in the
animal world, I just wonder how many of us have seen animals commonly around
us, having anal sex. I've never seen male dogs, cats, horses or cattle
having anal sex - despite being in an un-natural (domesticated) environemnt.

Why don't you put up a you-tube of your homosexual ducks?



Just because you think it isn't normal doesn't mean it isn't for others.
Not for me though

On Nov 11, 4:34*pm, "John D99" wrote:
....snip...

Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?

===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.

==
In what way? You asked if my kids were going to search them out and I
simply answered that they might. A pretty uninteresting response if
you ask me.
===


It was "interesting" becasue you said *your kids "might very well search
them out", refering to books that promote homosexuality.

Yep, that's what I said and I still claim it's a pretty uninteresting
response. You asked if my kids might search them out and I said they
might. If you asked me if they might search out books on car repair,
I'd say they might. The Pursuit of Allah...they might. Chiropractic
treatment of cancer in invertebrates...they might. They might search
out books on any and all subject matters and that, my friend, is their
God given right.

Let's see...

- I've searched out books on space travel...that didn't turn me into
an astronaut.
- I've searched out books on life in the Arctic... that didn't turn me
into an Eskimo.
- I've search out books on woodworking and God knows that didn't turn
me into a cabinetmaker.

You read way too much into the simplest statements.

That is not a response that an average father would give in reference to his
children.

Got any data to back that up?


....snip...


Like most normal people, I want my kids, and others, to be intersted in
pursuing a healthy normal life.

From what you have written here, you see things otherwise.

How does anything I've said here lead you to that conclusion? Point
out one instance where I said, or even implied, that I want anything
other than "a healthy normal life" for my children - or others?

Do you have to search out TV programming that does the same, or is it
more
and more commonly just stuck into story lines?

===
I better stop the newspaper delivery and turn off the radio too. I
better block internet access to every news network, TV station and
radio station website too. There just might be a story about Gay
Rights that might influence my kids.
===
You're confused.
We're not talking about "gay rights". We're talking about people beiong
propagandised into thinking homosexual activity is normal.-

==
What? How can you possibly separate the 2?
==

OK, now you're saying it's ok to propagandize people into thinking
homosexuality is normal.

There you go again, putting words in my mouth. I'm not going to bother
defending myself against something I didn't say.

I don;t think that is, and I think people can respect the human rights of
hmosexuals, without regarding the activity as being normal, or desireable,
particularly for their children.

Let me try your technique...

Then it's OK for me to regard the activity differently for others than
I would for my own children. Now wouldn't that be just a tad
hypocritical? What would my children think of me then?


Do you actually have kids, or you pretending to in order to argue soemthing
that is a personal agenda to you?

Look, since you're so good at twisting words and coming to conclusions
that have no basis in what was actually said, you should be able to
answer that question on your own. Besides, it wouldn't matter how I
answered; it appears you've already made up your mind.

You know, it could be that I just like to argue. I once searched out a
book on our court system and I think it turned me into a lawyer.

....snip...

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:27:22 -0700, "John D99"
wrote:



Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?

===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.


==
Did you follow your's into the library every time?
==

I din't have to, they had no interest in it.




Do you have to search out TV programming that does the same, or is it
more
and more commonly just stuck into story lines?

===
I better stop the newspaper delivery and turn off the radio too. I
better block internet access to every news network, TV station and
radio station website too. There just might be a story about Gay
Rights that might influence my kids.
===

You're confused.
We're not talking about "gay rights". We're talking about people beiong
propagandised into thinking homosexual activity is normal.


Accepting homosexuality as "normal" or "acceptable" is a bit
different than promoting homosexuality.
It might get someone out of the closet a bit sooner, but it will not
"make" a homosexual.

How do you know all this?

Do you have scientific studies to back the premise?

There was a lot more homosexual activity in the ancient Greek and Roman
world, back when it was lagely accepted. Much of it was pedophilc in nature.

Nowadays, in places like Afghanistan, it apparently is not uncommon fpor
older men to take young boys off into the hills for "love days".

I think what we expose children to has a large effect on them in later life,
and to pretend otherwise is foolish or dishonest.

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Nov 11, 4:34 pm, "John D99" wrote:
....snip...

Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?

===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.

==
In what way? You asked if my kids were going to search them out and I
simply answered that they might. A pretty uninteresting response if
you ask me.
===





It was "interesting" becasue you said your kids "might very well search
them out", refering to books that promote homosexuality.

==
Yep, that's what I said and I still claim it's a pretty uninteresting
response.
==

Yeah, I see you *say* that.

I think most of us are concerned about what our kids are exposed to, and
taught or coached into thinking is normal.

Kids who grow up in alcoholic familes are much more at risk of beoming
alcoholics themselves. Same for drugs.

Many pedophiles were themselves victims of pedophilia.

It's best to keep kids aware that alcoholism, drug addicition, pedophilia
and homosexuality are not natural things, but nevertheless behavior that
people fall into.

Some catholic priest once said: "give me the boy when he is seven and I will
give you the man".

The hitler youth and the soviet kommsomols recognized the same.


snip some routine rationalizations

On Nov 11, 6:02*pm, "John D99" wrote:

How do you know all this?

Do you have scientific studies to back the premise?

There was a lot more homosexual activity in the ancient Greek and Roman
world, back when it was lagely accepted. Much of it was pedophilc in nature.

Nowadays, in places like Afghanistan, it apparently is not uncommon fpor
older men to take young boys off into the hills for "love days".

I think what we expose children to has a large effect on them in later life,
and to pretend otherwise is foolish or dishonest.

Dumbass,
Okay, you've made your point. You're terrified that one of your kids
will be gay and then you won't love them anymore because they're not
normal and it's just wrong.
Got it. You win. Happy?

This is a home repair newsgroup. When someone asks a question about
cable TV, it's not acceptable for you to go off some homophobic, the
world is going to hell in a handbasket rant. You have your issues,
deal with them - don't foist them on other people. If someone asks a
question about cable TV, answer the question or shut the **** up.
Thanks.

R

"RicodJour" wrote in message
...
On Nov 11, 6:02 pm, "John D99" wrote:

How do you know all this?

Do you have scientific studies to back the premise?

There was a lot more homosexual activity in the ancient Greek and Roman
world, back when it was lagely accepted. Much of it was pedophilc in
nature.

Nowadays, in places like Afghanistan, it apparently is not uncommon fpor
older men to take young boys off into the hills for "love days".

I think what we expose children to has a large effect on them in later
life,
and to pretend otherwise is foolish or dishonest.

==
Dumbass,
Okay, you've made your point. You're terrified that one of your kids
will be gay and then you won't love them anymore because they're not
normal and it's just wrong.
Got it. You win. Happy?
==

If you don't like the topic then ignore it, **** head.

And from what you worte, it's your kids that need worrying about.

So **** off.

John D99 wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:27:22 -0700, "John D99"
wrote:


Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?
===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.


==
Did you follow your's into the library every time?
==

I din't have to, they had no interest in it.




Do you have to search out TV programming that does the same, or is it
more
and more commonly just stuck into story lines?
===
I better stop the newspaper delivery and turn off the radio too. I
better block internet access to every news network, TV station and
radio station website too. There just might be a story about Gay
Rights that might influence my kids.
===

You're confused.
We're not talking about "gay rights". We're talking about people beiong
propagandised into thinking homosexual activity is normal.

Accepting homosexuality as "normal" or "acceptable" is a bit
different than promoting homosexuality.
It might get someone out of the closet a bit sooner, but it will not
"make" a homosexual.

How do you know all this?

Do you have scientific studies to back the premise?

There was a lot more homosexual activity in the ancient Greek and Roman
world, back when it was lagely accepted. Much of it was pedophilc in nature.

What was acceptable to the ruling classes was not practiced by the
enslaved. And they had eunuchs, too. They fed slaves to the lions. So?

Nowadays, in places like Afghanistan, it apparently is not uncommon fpor
older men to take young boys off into the hills for "love days".

WTF does that have to do with "promoting homosexuality"? Nowadays, in
places like Florida, it is not uncommon for older men to kidnap
children, rape them and bury them alive or dump them into dumpsters. Do
you see that as "promoting" a certain lifestyle? There is such a huge
difference between abuse and learning about other lifestyles....why do
you try to compare vastly different events?

I think what we expose children to has a large effect on them in later life,
and to pretend otherwise is foolish or dishonest.

I and my husband had a large effect on our children. My children had
gay friends. My daughter stood up to other classmates who bullied gay
kids. She isn't gay....just knows the difference between right and
wrong and has the guts to do something about it.

On Nov 11, 7:48*am, "desgnr" wrote:
What is best ?
Comcast Cable TV or Satellite TV
If Satellite which provider is best deal ?

--
Dell Inspiron
Pentium dual-core 2.2 GHz
2 GB DDR2 SDRAM
Windows Vista Home Premium SP1

If you need internet access, Comcast is blazingly fast, the satellite
companies all partner with the local telco and provide DSL.

If it were not for the excellent Internet access I get, I would
probably opt for satellite, but I need a real fast Internet and I
added phone to get the triple play bundle.

Comcast recently went all digital with all channels except those you
can get locally with an antenna, what that means is you can use your
CATV tuners to get local channels with no converter box. All other
channels require some kind of Comcast converter box (2 are free, the
rest you rent).

No matter who you get, it will be a love/hate relationship.

On Nov 11, 10:55*am, RicodJour wrote:
On Nov 11, 8:48*am, "desgnr" wrote:

What is best ?
Comcast Cable TV or Satellite TV
If Satellite which provider is best deal ?

I think it all depends on where you are. *I have cable and routinely
hit 11 or 12 Mb/sec download speeds. *It's been as high as 15. *Upload
is usually in the 2 to 3 Mb/sec. *This is on Optimum Online with the
basic cable - no premium paid for.

I have limited experience with satellite, but what I have had has been
frustrating. *Dishes knocked out of alignment by weather (huh?) and
weather interfering with reception. *When you call customer service,
the first thing they ask is if there is bad weather in your area.

R

I get 12 to 15 routinely with Comcast, and it will burst to over 18.

They switched me to business class Internet after I complained about
their recent digital conversion, trouble getting activated, billing
for premium channels, etc. You get mad enough and Comcast will make
deals to ameliorate you.

On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:31:21 -0700, "John D99"
wrote:


"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Nov 11, 4:10 pm, "John D99" wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 3:42 pm, "John D99" wrote:



"DGDevin" wrote in message

om...

John D99 wrote:

The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?

Are you under the impression that your kids can somehow be recruited
to become homosexual by seeing these supposed "pro-gay messages"?
Did
you really do such a bad job raising your children that you
think their sexual orientation can be changed by a movie?

A better question is what your kids are like, idiot.

As you're the one with paranoid delusions about your kids being at
risk
of
somehow being infected with homosexuality via the television it would
seem
*your* parenting skills are the ones in question.

Only a total fool doesn't care what their kids are exposed to.

Of course kids get influenced by the crap they see on TV - is that a big
revelation to you?

Do you think kids getting exposed to pedophile priest is also ok?

There are a lot of things

to worry about in relation to one's children, but them being turned
gay
by
the television is not something anyone rational is concerned about.
Also
notice there was no need for me to call you an idiot, you having
established that all on your own.

Do you think the effectiveness of propaganda and advertising is a
myth?
I notice you didn't answer the question: Are you under the impression
that
your kids can somehow be recruited

It's caled a "rhetorical question" fool. You're supposed to be able to
understand that advertising and propaganda are done becasue they are
effective.

With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions should
be
about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have any and are
not
simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I have said.- Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

===
"With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions
should be about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have
any and are not simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I
have said"

That's perfect...it just about proves that you live in your own little
world...

"assuming you actually have any and are not simply a gay who is
posting in oposition to what I have said"



You are aware that a person can be gay *and* have kids right? The 2
are not mutually exclusive - well, at least not in the real world
where the rest of us live.
===





Are you being honest and admitting that you are homosexual?

==
Are you and I participating in the same discussion?

How does my pointing out to you that there are gay people who are
raising children lead you to ask me if I'm a homosexual?

If you mistakenly implied that a person couldn't be a plumber and a
woman, and I pointed out that there are lots of female plumbers, would
you ask me if I was a female?

That was a strange place to ask that question.
==

I'm responding to the things you've said.

Most people *are* concerned about what their kids are exposed to and prefer
them to be heterosexual in orientation.

There's a gay activist "community" that feels no restraint in
misrepresenting themselves and claiming to be people with normal sexual
orientation, and then argue for their agenda without revealing their obvious
bias and agenda.


Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in a discussion where one party
might have a vested interest.

==
Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in *any* discussion. Are you
implying that it's OK to lie if you aren't interested in the subject
being discussed?
==

See above.

It has been postulated elsewhere that a large percent of vocal,
virulent homophobes are themselves latent homosexuals who feel
threatened by open homosexuality.
In particular in regards to police officers.
No, I will not look for or provide cites. Do your own homework.

wrote in message
m...
John D99 wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:27:22 -0700, "John D99"
wrote:


Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?
===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.


==
Did you follow your's into the library every time?
==

I din't have to, they had no interest in it.




Do you have to search out TV programming that does the same, or is it
more
and more commonly just stuck into story lines?
===
I better stop the newspaper delivery and turn off the radio too. I
better block internet access to every news network, TV station and
radio station website too. There just might be a story about Gay
Rights that might influence my kids.
===

You're confused.
We're not talking about "gay rights". We're talking about people beiong
propagandised into thinking homosexual activity is normal.

Accepting homosexuality as "normal" or "acceptable" is a bit
different than promoting homosexuality.
It might get someone out of the closet a bit sooner, but it will not
"make" a homosexual.

How do you know all this?

Do you have scientific studies to back the premise?

There was a lot more homosexual activity in the ancient Greek and Roman
world, back when it was lagely accepted. Much of it was pedophilc in
nature.

What was acceptable to the ruling classes was not practiced by the
enslaved. And they had eunuchs, too. They fed slaves to the lions. So?

Nowadays, in places like Afghanistan, it apparently is not uncommon fpor
older men to take young boys off into the hills for "love days".


WTF does that have to do with "promoting homosexuality"? Nowadays, in
places like Florida, it is not uncommon for older men to kidnap

Quit cutting and rearranging the dialog in the posts and maybe you'll be
able folow what's being said.

snip

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:31:21 -0700, "John D99"
wrote:


"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Nov 11, 4:10 pm, "John D99" wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 3:42 pm, "John D99" wrote:



"DGDevin" wrote in message

om...

John D99 wrote:

The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with
pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?

Are you under the impression that your kids can somehow be
recruited
to become homosexual by seeing these supposed "pro-gay messages"?
Did
you really do such a bad job raising your children that you
think their sexual orientation can be changed by a movie?

A better question is what your kids are like, idiot.

As you're the one with paranoid delusions about your kids being at
risk
of
somehow being infected with homosexuality via the television it
would
seem
*your* parenting skills are the ones in question.

Only a total fool doesn't care what their kids are exposed to.

Of course kids get influenced by the crap they see on TV - is that a
big
revelation to you?

Do you think kids getting exposed to pedophile priest is also ok?

There are a lot of things

to worry about in relation to one's children, but them being turned
gay
by
the television is not something anyone rational is concerned about.
Also
notice there was no need for me to call you an idiot, you having
established that all on your own.

Do you think the effectiveness of propaganda and advertising is a
myth?
I notice you didn't answer the question: Are you under the
impression
that
your kids can somehow be recruited

It's caled a "rhetorical question" fool. You're supposed to be able to
understand that advertising and propaganda are done becasue they are
effective.

With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions
should
be
about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have any and
are
not
simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I have said.- Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

===
"With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions
should be about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have
any and are not simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I
have said"

That's perfect...it just about proves that you live in your own little
world...

"assuming you actually have any and are not simply a gay who is
posting in oposition to what I have said"



You are aware that a person can be gay *and* have kids right? The 2
are not mutually exclusive - well, at least not in the real world
where the rest of us live.
===





Are you being honest and admitting that you are homosexual?

==
Are you and I participating in the same discussion?

How does my pointing out to you that there are gay people who are
raising children lead you to ask me if I'm a homosexual?

If you mistakenly implied that a person couldn't be a plumber and a
woman, and I pointed out that there are lots of female plumbers, would
you ask me if I was a female?

That was a strange place to ask that question.
==

I'm responding to the things you've said.

Most people *are* concerned about what their kids are exposed to and
prefer
them to be heterosexual in orientation.

There's a gay activist "community" that feels no restraint in
misrepresenting themselves and claiming to be people with normal sexual
orientation, and then argue for their agenda without revealing their
obvious
bias and agenda.


Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in a discussion where one party
might have a vested interest.

==
Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in *any* discussion. Are you
implying that it's OK to lie if you aren't interested in the subject
being discussed?
==

See above.


It has been postulated elsewhere that a large percent of vocal,
virulent homophobes are themselves latent homosexuals who feel
threatened by open homosexuality.

lol
Likewise, people who object to corruption, lying, pedophilia probably just
want to be thieves and liars and child molestors, themselves, right?


In particular in regards to police officers.
No, I will not look for or provide cites. Do your own homework.

You won't provide any backup becasue you're a liar and don't have any.

It's been postulated that people like you post the rubbish you do out of
fear and defensivness.

DerbyDad03 wrote:

OK, so what if they were "influenced"? I'll ask one more time:

Why would it matter?

BTW...you didn't answer my question about the library card.

I'll answer it. No, I don't have a library card. Most libraries should be
burnt to the ground and the ashes scattered. On another continent. Take no
chances.

Just for grins, I went to my local branch library a few years ago. "May I
help you," asked the library matron.

"Yes," I said. "Do you have Encyclopedia Judaica?"

"Er, no," she replied.

"How about Cumulative Books In Print?"

"You can access that at the Rice Library," was her reasoned reply.

"Okay, do you have Marquis' Who's Who?"

"Um, no. I'm sure that's available at Rice also."

"Okay, then. Do you have the Congressional Record, The Federal Register, the
20-volume Oxford English Dictionary, the Tinsdale Bible, or The History of
the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides?"

"Sorry."

Not wanting the conversation to degenerate into a poor relation to the Monty
Python Cheese Shop skit, I asked: "Okay, what DO you have?"

"We have hand puppets, video games, CD music, hardback best-sellers (put
your name on the list). We have art work to loan out, paperback romances
(leave two, take two), a few toys and lots of puzzles. Over there are the
computers where you can surf the net..."

****ers have completely abrogated their role as a repository of knowledge!
Scrape 'em off the face of the earth, I say.

There are even "libraries" (in Berkely and maybe elsewhere - or maybe not,
there aren't any other places as screwed up as Berkely) that loan out TOOLS
(power saws, ladders, spray-painting equipment, drills, hammers, post hole
diggers, all of it).

On Nov 11, 6:20*pm, "John D99" wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 4:34 pm, "John D99" wrote:
...snip...





Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?

===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.

==
In what way? You asked if my kids were going to search them out and I
simply answered that they might. A pretty uninteresting response if
you ask me.
===
It was "interesting" becasue you said your kids "might very well search
them out", refering to books that promote homosexuality.

==
Yep, that's what I said and I still claim it's a pretty uninteresting
response.
==

Yeah, I see you *say* that.

I think most of us are concerned about what our kids are exposed to, and
taught or coached into thinking is normal.

Kids who grow up in alcoholic familes are much more at risk of beoming
alcoholics themselves. Same for drugs.

Many pedophiles were themselves victims of pedophilia.

It's best to keep kids aware that alcoholism, drug addicition, pedophilia
and homosexuality are not natural things, but nevertheless behavior that
people fall into.

Some catholic priest once said: "give me the boy when he is seven and I will
give you the man".

The hitler youth and the soviet kommsomols recognized the same.

snip some routine rationalizations

I wonder...do you ever go back a read what you write? Do you ever
notice that most of the time you completely ignore the points being
made by the person you are responding to? Do you notice that you tend
spin what is said towards whatever direction you want your post to go?

You take illogical steps in helter-skelter directions, you don't
respond to key points and you ask questions that aren't even relevant
to the discussion.

Some examples...

I say my kids might search for a book and you respond by implying I'm
not concerned about my children.

I point out that there are same sex couples raising kids and you ask
me if I'm a homosexual.

I ask for stats on a claim you made about the "average father" and you
ignore the question, yet when someone else makes a claim you ask "Do
you have scientific studies to back the premise?" Why is that question
OK for you to ask, but ignored when asked of you? (Don't bother
answering...I really don't care.)

To paraphrase Maxwell Smart, it's the old "instead of admitting I'm
wrong, I'll just change the subject" trick.

Please pass my sympathies along to your kids...the influence you have
had on them must be very painful.

John D99 wrote:
wrote in message
m...
John D99 wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:27:22 -0700, "John D99"
wrote:


Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?
===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.


==
Did you follow your's into the library every time?
==

I din't have to, they had no interest in it.




Do you have to search out TV programming that does the same, or is it
more
and more commonly just stuck into story lines?
===
I better stop the newspaper delivery and turn off the radio too. I
better block internet access to every news network, TV station and
radio station website too. There just might be a story about Gay
Rights that might influence my kids.
===

You're confused.
We're not talking about "gay rights". We're talking about people beiong
propagandised into thinking homosexual activity is normal.
Accepting homosexuality as "normal" or "acceptable" is a bit
different than promoting homosexuality.
It might get someone out of the closet a bit sooner, but it will not
"make" a homosexual.
How do you know all this?

Do you have scientific studies to back the premise?

There was a lot more homosexual activity in the ancient Greek and Roman
world, back when it was lagely accepted. Much of it was pedophilc in
nature.
What was acceptable to the ruling classes was not practiced by the
enslaved. And they had eunuchs, too. They fed slaves to the lions. So?
Nowadays, in places like Afghanistan, it apparently is not uncommon fpor
older men to take young boys off into the hills for "love days".

WTF does that have to do with "promoting homosexuality"? Nowadays, in
places like Florida, it is not uncommon for older men to kidnap

Quit cutting and rearranging the dialog in the posts and maybe you'll be
able folow what's being said.

snip


I didn't rearrange anything....you are obviously at a loss for an
informed response.

John D99 wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:31:21 -0700, "John D99"
wrote:

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Nov 11, 4:10 pm, "John D99" wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 3:42 pm, "John D99" wrote:



"DGDevin" wrote in message
m...
John D99 wrote:
The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with
pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?
Are you under the impression that your kids can somehow be
recruited
to become homosexual by seeing these supposed "pro-gay messages"?
Did
you really do such a bad job raising your children that you
think their sexual orientation can be changed by a movie?
A better question is what your kids are like, idiot.
As you're the one with paranoid delusions about your kids being at
risk
of
somehow being infected with homosexuality via the television it
would
seem
*your* parenting skills are the ones in question.
Only a total fool doesn't care what their kids are exposed to.
Of course kids get influenced by the crap they see on TV - is that a
big
revelation to you?
Do you think kids getting exposed to pedophile priest is also ok?
There are a lot of things
to worry about in relation to one's children, but them being turned
gay
by
the television is not something anyone rational is concerned about.
Also
notice there was no need for me to call you an idiot, you having
established that all on your own.
Do you think the effectiveness of propaganda and advertising is a
myth?
I notice you didn't answer the question: Are you under the
impression
that
your kids can somehow be recruited
It's caled a "rhetorical question" fool. You're supposed to be able to
understand that advertising and propaganda are done becasue they are
effective.
With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions
should
be
about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have any and
are
not
simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I have said.- Hide
quoted
text -
- Show quoted text -
===
"With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions
should be about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have
any and are not simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I
have said"

That's perfect...it just about proves that you live in your own little
world...

"assuming you actually have any and are not simply a gay who is
posting in oposition to what I have said"


You are aware that a person can be gay *and* have kids right? The 2
are not mutually exclusive - well, at least not in the real world
where the rest of us live.
===




Are you being honest and admitting that you are homosexual?
==
Are you and I participating in the same discussion?

How does my pointing out to you that there are gay people who are
raising children lead you to ask me if I'm a homosexual?

If you mistakenly implied that a person couldn't be a plumber and a
woman, and I pointed out that there are lots of female plumbers, would
you ask me if I was a female?

That was a strange place to ask that question.
==

I'm responding to the things you've said.

Most people *are* concerned about what their kids are exposed to and
prefer
them to be heterosexual in orientation.

There's a gay activist "community" that feels no restraint in
misrepresenting themselves and claiming to be people with normal sexual
orientation, and then argue for their agenda without revealing their
obvious
bias and agenda.


Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in a discussion where one party
might have a vested interest.
==
Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in *any* discussion. Are you
implying that it's OK to lie if you aren't interested in the subject
being discussed?
==

See above.


It has been postulated elsewhere that a large percent of vocal,
virulent homophobes are themselves latent homosexuals who feel
threatened by open homosexuality.

lol
Likewise, people who object to corruption, lying, pedophilia probably just
want to be thieves and liars and child molestors, themselves, right?


In particular in regards to police officers.
No, I will not look for or provide cites. Do your own homework.

You won't provide any backup becasue you're a liar and don't have any.

It's been postulated that people like you post the rubbish you do out of
fear and defensivness.






LOL....people like you?

HeyBub wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote:
OK, so what if they were "influenced"? I'll ask one more time:

Why would it matter?

BTW...you didn't answer my question about the library card.

I'll answer it. No, I don't have a library card. Most libraries should be
burnt to the ground and the ashes scattered. On another continent. Take no
chances.

Just for grins, I went to my local branch library a few years ago. "May I
help you," asked the library matron.

"Yes," I said. "Do you have Encyclopedia Judaica?"

"Er, no," she replied.

"How about Cumulative Books In Print?"

"You can access that at the Rice Library," was her reasoned reply.

"Okay, do you have Marquis' Who's Who?"

"Um, no. I'm sure that's available at Rice also."

"Okay, then. Do you have the Congressional Record, The Federal Register, the
20-volume Oxford English Dictionary, the Tinsdale Bible, or The History of
the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides?"

"Sorry."

Not wanting the conversation to degenerate into a poor relation to the Monty
Python Cheese Shop skit, I asked: "Okay, what DO you have?"

"We have hand puppets, video games, CD music, hardback best-sellers (put
your name on the list). We have art work to loan out, paperback romances
(leave two, take two), a few toys and lots of puzzles. Over there are the
computers where you can surf the net..."

****ers have completely abrogated their role as a repository of knowledge!
Scrape 'em off the face of the earth, I say.

There are even "libraries" (in Berkely and maybe elsewhere - or maybe not,
there aren't any other places as screwed up as Berkely) that loan out TOOLS
(power saws, ladders, spray-painting equipment, drills, hammers, post hole
diggers, all of it).


They have tools for the victims of "fundamental" schools....teach 'em
the ABC's and how to earn minimum wage.

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Nov 11, 6:20 pm, "John D99" wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 4:34 pm, "John D99" wrote:
...snip...





Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?

===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.

==
In what way? You asked if my kids were going to search them out and I
simply answered that they might. A pretty uninteresting response if
you ask me.
===
It was "interesting" becasue you said your kids "might very well search
them out", refering to books that promote homosexuality.

==
Yep, that's what I said and I still claim it's a pretty uninteresting
response.
==

Yeah, I see you *say* that.

I think most of us are concerned about what our kids are exposed to, and
taught or coached into thinking is normal.

Kids who grow up in alcoholic familes are much more at risk of beoming
alcoholics themselves. Same for drugs.

Many pedophiles were themselves victims of pedophilia.

It's best to keep kids aware that alcoholism, drug addicition, pedophilia
and homosexuality are not natural things, but nevertheless behavior that
people fall into.

Some catholic priest once said: "give me the boy when he is seven and I
will
give you the man".

The hitler youth and the soviet kommsomols recognized the same.

snip some routine rationalizations

==
I wonder...do you ever go back a read what you write? Do you ever
notice that most of the time you completely ignore the points being
made by the person you are responding to?
==

You don't make points. You just pretend that whatever kids exposed to is ok,
and mention stuff about homosexual ducks that you raise...

My points are plain and well founded and your problem is not that I'm
spinning things, but rather that you don't have any credible reply.

wrote in message
m...
John D99 wrote:
wrote in message
m...
John D99 wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:27:22 -0700, "John D99"
wrote:


Are your kids going to search out books that promote homosexuality?
===
They might very well search them out.
==

Interesting response.


==
Did you follow your's into the library every time?
==

I din't have to, they had no interest in it.




Do you have to search out TV programming that does the same, or is
it more
and more commonly just stuck into story lines?
===
I better stop the newspaper delivery and turn off the radio too. I
better block internet access to every news network, TV station and
radio station website too. There just might be a story about Gay
Rights that might influence my kids.
===

You're confused.
We're not talking about "gay rights". We're talking about people
beiong
propagandised into thinking homosexual activity is normal.
Accepting homosexuality as "normal" or "acceptable" is a bit
different than promoting homosexuality.
It might get someone out of the closet a bit sooner, but it will not
"make" a homosexual.
How do you know all this?

Do you have scientific studies to back the premise?

There was a lot more homosexual activity in the ancient Greek and Roman
world, back when it was lagely accepted. Much of it was pedophilc in
nature.
What was acceptable to the ruling classes was not practiced by the
enslaved. And they had eunuchs, too. They fed slaves to the lions.
So?
Nowadays, in places like Afghanistan, it apparently is not uncommon
fpor older men to take young boys off into the hills for "love days".

WTF does that have to do with "promoting homosexuality"? Nowadays, in
places like Florida, it is not uncommon for older men to kidnap

Quit cutting and rearranging the dialog in the posts and maybe you'll be
able folow what's being said.

snip


I didn't rearrange anything....you are obviously at a loss for an informed
response.

Any body that checks the posts upthread can see that sentences have been
deleted and rearranged.

I think that what you were asking me about, wasn't even posted by me.

wrote in message
m...
John D99 wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:31:21 -0700, "John D99"
wrote:

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Nov 11, 4:10 pm, "John D99" wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 3:42 pm, "John D99" wrote:



"DGDevin" wrote in message
m...
John D99 wrote:
The "entertainment" they put on is offal heavily laced with
pro-gay
messages. Do you want your kids watching that?
Are you under the impression that your kids can somehow be
recruited
to become homosexual by seeing these supposed "pro-gay messages"?
Did
you really do such a bad job raising your children that you
think their sexual orientation can be changed by a movie?
A better question is what your kids are like, idiot.
As you're the one with paranoid delusions about your kids being at
risk
of
somehow being infected with homosexuality via the television it
would
seem
*your* parenting skills are the ones in question.
Only a total fool doesn't care what their kids are exposed to.
Of course kids get influenced by the crap they see on TV - is that a
big
revelation to you?
Do you think kids getting exposed to pedophile priest is also ok?
There are a lot of things
to worry about in relation to one's children, but them being turned
gay
by
the television is not something anyone rational is concerned about.
Also
notice there was no need for me to call you an idiot, you having
established that all on your own.
Do you think the effectiveness of propaganda and advertising is a
myth?
I notice you didn't answer the question: Are you under the
impression
that
your kids can somehow be recruited
It's caled a "rhetorical question" fool. You're supposed to be able
to
understand that advertising and propaganda are done becasue they are
effective.
With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions
should
be
about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have any and
are
not
simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I have said.- Hide
quoted
text -
- Show quoted text -
===
"With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions
should be about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually have
any and are not simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what I
have said"

That's perfect...it just about proves that you live in your own little
world...

"assuming you actually have any and are not simply a gay who is
posting in oposition to what I have said"


You are aware that a person can be gay *and* have kids right? The 2
are not mutually exclusive - well, at least not in the real world
where the rest of us live.
===




Are you being honest and admitting that you are homosexual?
==
Are you and I participating in the same discussion?

How does my pointing out to you that there are gay people who are
raising children lead you to ask me if I'm a homosexual?

If you mistakenly implied that a person couldn't be a plumber and a
woman, and I pointed out that there are lots of female plumbers, would
you ask me if I was a female?

That was a strange place to ask that question.
==

I'm responding to the things you've said.

Most people *are* concerned about what their kids are exposed to and
prefer
them to be heterosexual in orientation.

There's a gay activist "community" that feels no restraint in
misrepresenting themselves and claiming to be people with normal sexual
orientation, and then argue for their agenda without revealing their
obvious
bias and agenda.


Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in a discussion where one
party
might have a vested interest.
==
Honesty is appreciated and it's relevant in *any* discussion. Are you
implying that it's OK to lie if you aren't interested in the subject
being discussed?
==

See above.


It has been postulated elsewhere that a large percent of vocal,
virulent homophobes are themselves latent homosexuals who feel
threatened by open homosexuality.

lol
Likewise, people who object to corruption, lying, pedophilia probably
just want to be thieves and liars and child molestors, themselves, right?


In particular in regards to police officers.
No, I will not look for or provide cites. Do your own homework.

You won't provide any backup becasue you're a liar and don't have any.

It's been postulated that people like you post the rubbish you do out of
fear and defensivness.


LOL....people like you?

I think it's plain who I meant.

On Nov 11, 7:55*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote:

OK, so what if they were "influenced"? I'll ask one more time:

Why would it matter?

BTW...you didn't answer my question about the library card.

I'll answer it. No, I don't have a library card. Most libraries should be
burnt to the ground and the ashes scattered. On another continent. Take no
chances.

Just for grins, I went to my local branch library a few years ago. "May I
help you," asked the library matron.

"Yes," I said. "Do you have Encyclopedia Judaica?"

"Er, no," she replied.

"How about Cumulative Books In Print?"

"You can access that at the Rice Library," was her reasoned reply.

"Okay, do you have Marquis' Who's Who?"

"Um, no. I'm sure that's available at Rice also."

"Okay, then. Do you have the Congressional Record, The Federal Register, the
20-volume Oxford English Dictionary, the Tinsdale Bible, or The History of
the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides?"

"Sorry."

Not wanting the conversation to degenerate into a poor relation to the Monty
Python Cheese Shop skit, I asked: "Okay, what DO you have?"

"We have hand puppets, video games, CD music, hardback best-sellers (put
your name on the list). We have art work to loan out, paperback romances
(leave two, take two), a few toys and lots of puzzles. Over there are the
computers where you can surf the net..."

****ers have completely abrogated their role as a repository of knowledge!
Scrape 'em off the face of the earth, I say.

There is no building that could hold all of the knowledge on earth.
Expecting your local library to have every book is basically asking
for higher taxes. And zoning.

That's why Al Gore invented the Interweb - so you wouldn't go bother
librarians anymore. And knowledge isn't a book. It's the stuff that
you _might_ get out of a book, or a magazine, or a CD, or an
audiobook, or a...you get the idea. Libraries aren't for arcane and
useless (to most) stuff. At least not the typical neighborhood
library.

Take a stroll through the NY Public Library, and the answer to your
questions would be, "Of course. Would you like to read it on the
computer or view the book? Which edition? It's so nice to see a fan
of dictionaries. If you read Dutch, we also have the Woordenboek der
Nederlandsche Taal, which has 43 volumes - really quite an impressive
work."

BTW, if you are actually interested in dictionaries, and not just in
telling stories of how you bust librarian's chops in your imagination,
you should read, The Professor and the Madman: A Tale of Murder,
Insanity, and the Making of the Oxford English Dictionary. Quite a
good read.

There are even "libraries" (in Berkely and maybe elsewhere - or maybe not,
there aren't any other places as screwed up as Berkely) that loan out TOOLS
(power saws, ladders, spray-painting equipment, drills, hammers, post hole
diggers, all of it).

So, if your library in Arkansas rented tools, you would refuse to rent
them? I think not.
In a library you might have found an alternative spelling of
"Berkely"...which for some reason the natives seem to prefer.

You probably don't realize that the original libraries in Mesopotamia
were tool rental shops. It's true. If you needed some Mesopotomian
weeds whacked, you went to the library and asked to rent a little
whacker.

Right now, John D(for douchebag)99 is getting all excited because he
saw 'little whacker' in print. That's why he doesn't go to
libraries. All those books with their GAY agenda just screaming at
him, "Take me, John Douche, take me!" The temptation would be too
much for him, he'd be found in the stacks choking his little John, a
librarian would faint, and he's off to jail to spend time with his
other I'm-not-gay-you-are rump ranger friends. Not that there's
anything wrong with that...

R

Bob F wrote:

Here in Seattle, they've been very responsive to me.

Same here in Oregon.

The problem I see now with comcast is that they have changed their pricing
structure. It used to be (about) fifty bucks for internet, and fifty bucks
for tv. Now, it's still (about) that price, but only if you have *both*
services. In other words, cancel the cable TV, and that internet jumps up
to $70 bucks, and vice versa.

I've been looking for an excuse to dump the TV (which is mostly commercials
and crap anyway), but now it looks like I'll be dumping *both* of their
services.

Jon

John D99 wrote:

As you're the one with paranoid delusions about your kids being at
risk of somehow being infected with homosexuality via the television
it would seem *your* parenting skills are the ones in question.

Only a total fool doesn't care what their kids are exposed to.

I never expressed the view that I would have no concerns at all about
anything my kids might be exposed to, although I'm not surprised you would
pretend I did given your apparent dishonesty. I expressed the view that
kids aren't going to somehow become homosexual by watching "pro-gay
messages" on TV.

Of course kids get influenced by the crap they see on TV - is that a
big revelation to you?

We're not talking about whether kids can be influenced to want a particular
video game or brand of basketball shoes or hamburger by television, we're
talking about whether their entire sexual orientation can be changed by
watching TV. If you believe that homosexuals are somehow manufactured by
television, well, you're a fool.

Do you think kids getting exposed to pedophile priest is also ok?

Did I express such a view? No? Then why do you ask?

It's caled a "rhetorical question" fool. You're supposed to be able to
understand that advertising and propaganda are done becasue they are
effective.

Please document your claim that the sexual orientation of children can be
changed by television advertising and/or "propaganda." And by "document" I
mean a reference to a credible source, as opposed to some bizarre wingnut
website intended for paranoid homophobes such as yourself.

With the cluelessness displayed in your responses, the questions
should be about how *you* raise your kids - assuming you actually
have any and are not simply a gay who is posting in oposition to what
I have said.

I'll have to ask my wife if she suspects me of being gay. In the meantime
let me say a little prayer for your kids, because with someone as messed up
as you in charge it will be a minor miracle if they don't grow up bent as
reclaimed nails.

HeyBub wrote:

Not wanting the conversation to degenerate into a poor relation to
the Monty Python Cheese Shop skit, I asked: "Okay, what DO you have?"

"We have hand puppets, video games, CD music, hardback best-sellers
(put your name on the list). We have art work to loan out, paperback
romances (leave two, take two), a few toys and lots of puzzles. Over
there are the computers where you can surf the net..."

****ers have completely abrogated their role as a repository of
knowledge! Scrape 'em off the face of the earth, I say.

An amusing if unconvincing yarn. My local library (a fine old red-brick
neo-classical building) is well-stocked with books (including home
improvement titles), and if I want something they don't have they'll happily
order it from another branch. They even bought a new book I was interested
in which I considered pretty good service. They have a good CD collection
too, lots of blues and jazz. However if you can demonstrate that your local
library no longer carries books on history, science, art and so on and has
just best-sellers and romances, I'll be prepared to reconsider your
apocryphal tale.

RicodJour wrote:

Right now, John D(for douchebag)99 is getting all excited because he
saw 'little whacker' in print. That's why he doesn't go to
libraries. All those books with their GAY agenda just screaming at
him, "Take me, John Douche, take me!" The temptation would be too
much for him, he'd be found in the stacks choking his little John, a
librarian would faint, and he's off to jail to spend time with his
other I'm-not-gay-you-are rump ranger friends. Not that there's
anything wrong with that...

R

Yup, those books are evil, that's why libraries are the devil's playground,
they're almost as bad as the mind-control beams that come from the
tee-vee.... One wonders how many layers of aluminum-foil John D99 has
wrapped around his head, and if the "99" refers to his I.Q.

On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 08:48:49 -0500, "desgnr"
wrote:

What is best ?
Comcast Cable TV or Satellite TV
If Satellite which provider is best deal ?


I hate companies that rope you in at a good deal, then crank up the
rate after so many months. I hate Comcast. Satellite will get you
more unusual channels. Comcast charges extra for high resolution and
you can pick that up with an antenna. Best deal is a one time charge
of $20 for an antenna unless you like paying $50 a month. I bought 4
antennas, picked the one with the best reception and returned three to
the store. The most expensive antenna was the worst, but I'm not
surprised.

On Nov 11, 12:10*pm, AZ Nomad wrote:
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 08:39:01 -0800, Bob F wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:25:15 -0500, dadiOH wrote:
desgnr wrote:
What is best ?
Comcast Cable TV or Satellite TV
If Satellite which provider is best deal ?

Best? *There is no best. *They all give you a jillion stations most
of which no one in their right mind ever watches and all of which
are loaded to the gills wih commercials. *And at an inflated price
*because* they are giving you all that junk.

Why can't we pay a basic fee for service and then pick and choose the
channels we want?

I'm still ****ed at how they have put a lock in what equipment
(theirs which is crap) you can use to record digital programming.
So far, I haven't had that problem. My computers digital tuners work fine.

Here in AZ with cox cable, they encrypt everything that isn't
available over the air. *I don't want to rent their ****ty DVR. *I've
connected my DVR to record OTA and now just have analog cable. *It's
ironic how the snowy channels are only what I get over the cable.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Why can't you use a DVR like TIVO with the cable box? TIVO uses an
IR transmitter to change the channel on the cable box, so it works
just fine. TIVO is the best I've seen and far superior to the crappy
recorder that Cablevision offers. I'm wondering if TIVO has some
patents that prevent others from implementing a similar interface,
channel guide and capability? Otherwise, yoo would think the other
companies would have fixed their crap by now.

In article ,
wrote:


It has been postulated elsewhere that a large percent of vocal,
virulent homophobes are themselves latent homosexuals who feel
threatened by open homosexuality.
In particular in regards to police officers.
No, I will not look for or provide cites. Do your own homework.

Translation: I want to spout off about things I know nothing about and
then pretend there is actually evidence out there to back me up and will
make it my adversary's fault that they can not find this non-existent
evidence.
If you had done YOUR own homework you would have been able, indeed
eager, to rub our noses in your vast knowledge.
Now go away before I taunt you a second time.

--
To find that place where the rats don't race
and the phones don't ring at all.
If once, you've slept on an island.
Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"

In article ,
"DGDevin" wrote:


in which I considered pretty good service. They have a good CD collection
too, lots of blues and jazz. However if you can demonstrate that your local
library no longer carries books on history, science, art and so on and has
just best-sellers and romances, I'll be prepared to reconsider your
apocryphal tale.

I got a library just so I could remotely access the online databases. I
can find about 80% of the medical journal articles I need in addition to
about 30 others.

--
To find that place where the rats don't race
and the phones don't ring at all.
If once, you've slept on an island.
Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"