Re: miketpoto

I see my thread has been born again, unfortunately I have to run away from my desk for a few service calls upstairs but I will be back soon.

Hos, how did you know what wass going on between me and cowardly? Did I have another tell-all-confessional blackout drunk dial?

Re: miketpoto

[QUOTE=miketpoto]I see my thread has been born again, unfortunately I have to run away from my desk for a few service calls upstairs but I will be back soon.

Hos, how did you know what wass going on between me and cowardly? Did I have another tell-all-confessional blackout drunk dial?[/QUOTE]

"obviously" was a bit strong. i was merely guessing that could be the case. nasty or jovial. i haven't had time to keep my fingers on the pulse of GYY lately. but if cowardly starts a thread titled "miketpoto", it would be reasonable for one to suspect a previous t?te-?-t?te :lol:

Re: miketpoto

no flies on 'os

Re: miketpoto

i had no files on my O.S. once, Had to totaly format H/D and start all over again

Re: miketpoto

[QUOTE=bart_smastard]i had no files on my O.S. once, Had to totaly format H/D and start all over again[/QUOTE]

:|

Re: miketpoto

[QUOTE=bart_smastard]i had no files on my O.S. once, Had to totaly format H/D and start all over again[/QUOTE]

i actually laughed pelo. :what

Re: miketpoto

[QUOTE=Hos]i actually laughed pelo. :what[/QUOTE]

:|

Re: miketpoto

[quote=peloquin]no flies on 'os[/quote] [quote=bart_smastard]i had [B]no files on my O.S[/B]. once, Had to totaly format H/D and start all over again[/quote]

theres a crappy lil joke in there somewhere .. but where :?:

Re: miketpoto

more emphasis on the crappy

Re: miketpoto

yeah i got the "joke"

Re: miketpoto

HEY... it beat the no-joke on sightlesess thread . unless he pm's it me

Re: miketpoto

[INDENT]this is from the high praise for madonnas....... thread

cowardly dj - What will be her first single The Geriatric Jingle

Isnt she like 96 or something like that

I am sure that when Moses parted the Red Sea she was on the otherside fishing talking about Hey, whered the water go?

If anyone sees her ask her if they tipped well at The Last Supper

miketpoto - Jesus Fucking Christ, enough with the fucking bible humor, it's not FUNNY!

so I, in good spirits and in fun joking way that I am and have been for years on this board, started this thread and put some actual jokes that are pertaining to religion for him and everyone to read. That being the first post in this thread. Then miketpoto responded with the pic that is in discussion here.

If one were to weigh the situation it weighs out like this:

1. I started the thread creation... intelligent design or happen chance I suggest a read of the thread for a summary of the whole situation.

2. Since that post I have been bashed repeatedly by many for that thread and I seem to be defending myself over and over in the last few days. I have been accused (by bart) of thinking I am better than mike by saying I hope someone comes into his life and shows him the right way and I will pray for him. This after the tasteless pic in this thread.

3. The clossest thing that can be construed as insulting that I have posted is me saying bart makes thoughtless posts. I have not insulted mike in any way and for that fact anyone.

Mike's photo in this thread was tasteless and insulting. That is a fact in itself even if those who think it is funny do not agree. It is a direct insult to my core belief system. Now notice that I am not accusing mike of doing it intentionally as he has repeatedly said it was not intentional and I do not know mike so I take his word as it is until proven otherwise.

I have not insulted anyones core beliefs here. In fact if I remember reading right mike said he was a "gay homosexual". That is expressly forbidden in the Bible but I did not attack that as it is his core belief. If I wanted to talk to him about that I would have pm'd him because something that personal does not deserve public discussion IMO.

I did not say or do anything to deserve that photo and it is wrong period. No amount of saying this is why or that is why will justify that to anyone who has a shread of decency in them.

I do not think less of mike for posting that. As I said in this thread after his post that I feel sad for him. I was accused of being closed minded by bart, when in fact it is not me whose mind is closed here.

I have taken this with a grain of salt but it is creating much more than I intended when I started this thread. It was to be a joking thread and it has turned into an insuilting thread. Nonsense IMO.

I apologize mike and bart and to anyone else for anything that I have said that may have insulted anyones core beliefs. I would appreciate some curteousy extended to me as I have to this and the other threads and others posts.

I do not mind talking about anything and in fact that is the very reason I started the creation thread, but there is a clear line drawn between talking and arguing for the sake of arguing.

[/INDENT]

Re: miketpoto

[QUOTE=cowardly dj][INDENT] I have not insulted anyones core beliefs here. In fact if I remember reading right mike said he was a "gay homosexual". That is expressly forbidden in the Bible but I did not attack that as it is his core belief. If I wanted to talk to him about that I would have pm'd him because something that personal does not deserve public discussion IMO. [/INDENT][/QUOTE]

hey, i think you'll find mike has no choice in the matter. his core belief? how can you compare sexuality to religion? sexuality is what you ARE, religion is what you believe in. people can CHANGE their faith. they can't change their sexuality.

Re: miketpoto

Mike I loved the picture! Thought it was funny as hell. I'm not a religious person and I am totally comfortable with my life and I also know a good laugh when I see one.

Re: miketpoto

[quote=Hos]hey, i think you'll find mike has no choice in the matter. his core belief? .[/quote]

Everything a person acts on is a choice. That is a fact of humanity.

Re: miketpoto

Sexual attraction . Same as in all species is a primeval urge . There are a few other species that have gay relationships and will have nothing to do with the opposite sex . Are they conscious of their decisions or are they born that way . And if they are capable of conscious decision why have they not been shown the light of god .And why do they not follow his teachings .. prove me wrong and i'll appologise

Re: miketpoto

It has been argued through the ages, long before science was ever involved, that homosexuality is merely a choice. Many people state that gays only have homosexual relations because they choose to do so. Others profess that homosexuality is not a choice and due to the societal stigma which is associated with homosexuality very few would consciously choose a homosexual lifestyle and the discrimination that accompanies it. Some state that simply due to the genetic makeup of the human race it is very unlikely that homosexuality would be anything other than a choice. In [URL="http://www.utexas.edu/students/amso/ror/homo0894.html"][U][COLOR=#0000ff]An Analysis of Biological Theories of Causation[/COLOR][/U][/URL], by Dr. Tahir I jaz, M.D., he states, "Of all animals, human beings are the most genetically indeterminate. In the words of Dr. Joseph Wortis, Department of Psychiatry, State University of New York: 'no complex high-level behavior of the human species can be reduced to genetic endowment, not language, not house building and not sexual behavior.' Preferential and exclusive homosexuality is not naturally found in any infrahuman mammalian species and it would be odd for such behavior in humans to be genetically determined." It is Dr. Tahir's opinion that homosexuality is completely a choice as it is not possible for it to be genetically determined. He further cites various accounts of leading psychologists and psychiatrists, such as Masters and Johnson, Dieber, Barnhouse, Socarides, Cappon, Hadden, Ribinstein and Leif, who have reported very high rates of success in curing individuals of their homosexual tendencies. Tahir does not believe that individuals could be helped if homosexuality were indeed genetic -- just as you would not be able to cure someone of his or her race or gender.

Re: miketpoto

I thought you were leaving this board.

Re: miketpoto

[quote=bart_smastard]Sexual attraction . Same as in all species is a primeval urge . There are a few other species that have gay relationships and will have nothing to do with the opposite sex . Are they conscious of their decisions or are they born that way . And if they are capable of conscious decision why have they not been shown the light of god .And why do they not follow his teachings .. prove me wrong and i'll appologise[/quote]

Elaborate please.

Are you saying animals should or do have the same cognitive reasoning as humans?

Re: miketpoto

^^ i mean i agree with cdj...

Re: miketpoto

CDJ do you realy want me to point to a hundred doctorates that say otherwise

Re: miketpoto

Much of the past genetic research into male homosexuality had focused solely on the X chromosome, passed down to boys by their mother, according to lead researcher Dr Brian Mustanski. His team looked at all 22 pairs of non-sex chromosomes of 456 individuals from 146 families with two or more gay brothers. [IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gif[/IMG][IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/start_quote_rb.gif[/IMG] [B]There is no one 'gay' gene. [/B][IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif[/IMG]

Lead researcher Dr Brian Mustanski

They found several identical stretches of DNA that were shared among gay siblings on chromosomes other than the female X. About 60% of these brothers shared identical DNA on three chromosomes - chromosome 7, 8 and 10. [B]Complex trait[/B] If it were down to chance, only 50% of these stretches would be shared, said the authors. The region found on chromosome 10 correlated with sexual orientation only when it was inherited from the mother. [IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gif[/IMG][IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/start_quote_rb.gif[/IMG] [B]The most important thing is that lesbian and gay men are treated equally. [/B][IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif[/IMG]

Alan Wardle of Stonewall

Dr Mustanski said the next step would be to see if the findings could be confirmed by further studies, and to identify the particular genes within the newly discovered sequences that are linked to sexual orientation. "Our study helps to establish that genes play an important role in determining whether a man is gay or heterosexual," he said, but added that other factors were also important. "Sexual orientation is a complex trait. There is no one 'gay' gene. "Our best guess is that multiple genes, potentially interacting with environmental influences, explain differences in sexual orientation." Alan Wardle from the gay rights charity Stonewall said: "It's an interesting study that contributes further to the debate. "Regardless of whether sexual orientation is determined by nature or nurture or both, the most important thing is that lesbians and gay men are treated equally and are allowed to live their life without discrimination."

Re: miketpoto

[IMG]http://www.owned.com/Owned_Pictures/jesusownedbydweebwithps.jpg[/IMG]

;)

Re: miketpoto

Britain[IMG]http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/grey.gif[/IMG][IMG]http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif[/IMG] The TimesOctober 13, 2004 So it is down to mother: gay gene survives because it boosts fertility By Mark Henderson, Science Correspondent [IMG]http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif[/IMG]THE biological enigma of how homosexuality evolved despite its obvious drawbacks for reproduction may finally have been resolved. The genes that make men gay also help their female relatives to have bigger families, according to new research. NI_MPU('middle');Scientists have discovered that gay men’s mothers, sisters and maternal aunts tend to have significantly more children than the norm — and that many of their nephews and male cousins are also gay. The findings suggest that the same genes that trigger homosexuality in men also promote fertility in women, and that this could explain how they survive in the population when gay men themselves are unlikely to breed. The genes are instead passed on through the female line and the enhanced fertility they confer on these women ensures that they are inherited by plenty of children. Some of these sons will grow up to be homosexual themselves. The study also revealed that gay men are more likely than heterosexuals to have a gay male relative, though only on their mother’s side of the family. The results, from the University of Padua, in Italy, offer strong support for the theory that homosexuality is at least partly determined by a person’s genetic make-up, and is not just about personal choice or upbringing and environment. It also suggests an elegant solution to the biggest problem with this hypothesis — the “Darwinian paradox” that any genes that favour homosexuality ought to have died out through natural selection, as those that inherited them had fewer and fewer offspring. Andrea Camperio-Ciani, who led the research, said: “Our data resolve this paradox by showing that there might be hitherto unexpected reproductive advantages associated with male homosexuality.” The work also points to a likely location for the genes that have this effect: they almost certainly lie on the X chromosome, the package of DNA that men always inherit from their mothers. In the study, published today in the journal [I]Proceedings of the Royal Society[/I], Dr Camperio-Ciani’s team interviewed 98 homosexual and 100 heterosexual men in detail about their extended families. In total, more than 4,600 individuals were thus indirectly involved. They found that both the mothers and maternal aunts of the homosexuals were significantly more fertile than those of the straight men: the mothers had an average of 2.69 children compared with 2.32, and the aunts 1.98 children compared with 1.51. Fertility rates among paternal relatives and among male relatives on the mother’s side were similar for both groups. All this points to genes that influence both male homosexuality and female fertility being passed down along the maternal line. “The results hypothesise that genetic factors, transmitted in the maternal line, increase both the probability of being homosexual in males and fecundity in females,” Dr Camperio-Ciani said. The study did not investigate lesbianism. The notion that homosexuality has at least some basis in biology is not now seriously disputed by scientists, though there is little consensus on what the causes might be. Some scientists think that genetics are critical, while others believe that conditions in the womb are all-important. The question of what causes homosexuality has long divided both the gay community and social conservatives who regard same-sex partnerships as wrong. Many gay activists think that identifying biological factors that contribute to homosexuality will prove that their sexual orientation is perfectly natural and encourage tolerance. Others fear that it will lead to greater hostility, with the risk that being gay will again be seen as a disorder that might one day be “cured”.

Re: miketpoto

trust me there are litteraly thousands of pages and accredited scientists to support this theory . being homosexual is down to the person but he would be going against every instinct he was born with to be hetro

Re: miketpoto

Since i am late getting into this thread, i will just comment on the first part of it.

This may sound hypocritical coming from me, especially considering some of the comments i have made in the past to get people to laugh at the expense of others. However, i believe it is the direction we are headed that is important, so i'll just leave this as my contribution to the conversation:

While several of the anti-christian jokes are obviously funny to some, they are at the same time offensive to others, and statistically speaking, probably more the latter than the former. I understand we are free to communicate whatever message we want, and living under a shelter hidden from negativity is indeed a pipe dream, but it is eventually up to the individual promote [B]POSITIVE [/B]which makes more of a difference than a lot of you probably realize. The jokes made are just destructive, and what cannot be argued is this fact:

[B]The jokes do SOME harm. [/B]

So my only question would be:

isn't the fact that they do indeed cause some harm enough of a reason not to make them in the first place? Or is the alternative, being selfish, the way we're going to continue to run this planet?

Re: miketpoto

you are not born with any sexuality at all, other than to procreate the species

it is a learned, conditioned response to your environment often times starting at a young age

just like anger and laughter, you learn things and put them into practice later in life

Re: miketpoto

[QUOTE=cowardly dj][INDENT]

I have not insulted anyones core beliefs here. In fact if I remember reading right mike said he was a "gay homosexual". That is expressly forbidden in the Bible but I did not attack that as it is his core belief. If I wanted to talk to him about that I would have pm'd him because something that personal does not deserve public discussion IMO.

I apologize mike and bart and to anyone else for anything that I have said that may have insulted anyones core beliefs. I would appreciate some curteousy extended to me as I have to this and the other threads and others posts.

I do not mind talking about anything and in fact that is the very reason I started the creation thread, but there is a clear line drawn between talking and arguing for the sake of arguing.

[/INDENT][/QUOTE]

Thank you cowardly, I truly appreciate the sentiments, and am glad you wrote this post explaining how you feel about things in general. I think the intelligent design thread is great to have on the board, and my issue with religious based posts only pertains to those that bring the bible and it's stories into completely unrelated topics. I had a very long discussion with my minister-pal about this all last night and he had some very interesting and amusing thoughts on the whole thing as well. His perspective on the issue that I admire and respect big time is essentially along the lines of the picture not having any statement or insult to make about who jesus is or was, (not to mention the fact that the picture doesn nothing to suggest that jesus was a bad guy at all and we all know he probably didnt have a clone). If the picture was used in a context to criticize or belittle it would have been a completely different scenario and he wouldnt have approved of my doing that.

One's personal beliefs about other people's behavior and how it will affect the rest of their lives or eternities is unavoidable, as it is a thought that happens in one's mind and that shouldn't and most likely can't be taken away. Anyone can feel certain and strongly about other people with good or bad intentions behind it, and either way that is fine as long as it doesn't manifest itself into actions. As true as your feelings of sadness are for me, you instantly negate any worth or respect for me as a person by the suggestion that my actions in life will result in punishment or spiritual rejection (I am assuming thats what you are sad about, correct me if I am way off on that). As polite and courteous as anyone may be, I wouldn't care to be around them if they knew me as a person and still believed something like that about me. My destiny for all of eternity in the end has nothing to do with anyone elses unless I choose to negatively step in the way of someone elses existence. I don't have any conflict about anyone's practice of religion as it doesn't impact me, but when another's belief system is used to dictate or try and dictate the course of my life and what I can or can't or should do.... then I have a big issue with that.

I haven't written you off as an asshole or as a person, the above was just an explanation of how I look at respect/personal beliefs. And I thank you again for the apology.

I have to run up to the 48th floor again for a few, so here's a link of pics of the view from up there to keep anyone amused while I am gone :) [URL="http://www.illcutyourface.com/media/index.php?path=pics%2Ftvland/"]http://www.illcutyourface.com/media/index.php?path=pics%2Ftvland/[/URL]

Re: miketpoto

[QUOTE=cowardly dj]you are not born with any sexuality at all, other than to procreate the species

it is a learned, conditioned response to your environment often times starting at a young age

just like anger and laughter, you learn things and put them into practice later in life[/QUOTE]

This I will get back to, cause I know you weren't there for my birth.

Re: miketpoto

Jenks i agree totaly , almost ;) mike's community is constantly attacked by the christian community they even go as far as to call them subhuman ( untermenchant= subhuman was the term the germans used to associate with the jews) mike has every right to poke fun back if someone names a joke thread based on christianity aimed at himself. I will admit that CDJ's jokes had a lot more tact and restraint than mikes . but fighting fire with fire is all fair in love and war as far as i'm concerned. I ain't going to get into the stuff i said previously with E for that is dead and buried . But while others defend what CDJ believes in i will defend what mike thinks is true

Re: miketpoto

I think everyone in this thread is a homo. except me.

this thread is the one thing all gays have in common.

Re: miketpoto

[quote=cowardly dj]you are not born with any sexuality at all, other than to procreate the species [/quote]

i am hetrosexual with no hangups about previous wonderings into the worlds of both. howeva I have "no" absolutely "no" intentions of procreating .

Re: miketpoto

pickle the ones that shout the loudest about there preferences are often the ones most confused

Re: miketpoto

Religion indeed been blamed for many things both good and bad.

Religion can not in itself do anything as it is not an entity. People however can and have. People can take the concept of religion and do crazy things just as easy as a person could say and do the same because they claim the apple is almighty.

Re: miketpoto

[quote]but fighting fire with fire is all fair in love and war as far as i'm concerned [/quote]
Fighting fire with fire is [B]destructive[/B]. It is that philosophy that only keeps negativity going.

Re: miketpoto

I'm not confused... this whole thread is definitely homo.

Re: miketpoto

You

Re: miketpoto

[quote=Jenks]Fighting fire with fire is [B]destructive[/B]. It is that philosophy that only keeps negativity going.[/quote]
in certain forest fires they will deliberatley set fire to all around it so the fire can't spread

Re: miketpoto

Bart you choose not to procreate, it is not something that was lacking at your birth.

Mike I can not and am not commenting on your birth or your sexuality. I am stating what some think are scientific facts.

Re: miketpoto

and i can point to a thousand scientific facts that say differently ..

anyhows bollox to this i'm gonna go bed i'll read how this has progressed tomorow