Geo-politics

[sox4lifeinPA]

So, it's not ok to make derrogotory references towards one's sexuality on this website...

 

but it IS ok to use derrogotory pictures referring towards one's faith or religion?

 

 

I'm just asking. I promise to behave

[sox4lifeinPA]

hmmm...that's disappointing. I only say that, because I have recently seen a few people's avatars that I personally could take offense to, however, choose not to because it's not worth it.

[CrimsonWeltall]

but it IS ok to use derrogotory pictures referring towards one's faith or religion?

 

GO FOR IT!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

go for what? I think it's either all or none. Selectively choosing one cause over another is what's wrong with our culture, or rather, yours. Sideshowapu chooses to ignore the rampant belittlement of such groups as catholic priests or evangelical Christians. This website is a microcosm for the outside world. It makes me sad that ANYONE has to be berated, discriminated, or prejudiced against. I just ask a simple question of what makes one person's rights more "worthy" of a cause?

[hammerhead johnson]

The one that immediately comes to mind:

 

 

Of course, no avatar has ever made me laugh harder, I'd have to say. Am I a bad guy? Yeah, probably.

[sox4lifeinPA]

The one that immediately comes to mind:

 

 

Of course, no avatar has ever made me laugh harder, I'd have to say.  Am I a bad guy?  Yeah, probably.

 

 

Precisely my point. We all have a great laugh at the Christian faith, but the second gay rights or abortion or something equally important, although not personally ascribed in my life, gets knocked.... the messanger is evil.

 

why? the crusades? the rich white folk who have had all their fun so we have to subconsciously repress them now? I don't get it.

[CrimsonWeltall]

go for what?

 

Connect Four is a two players game which takes place on a 7x6 rectangular board placed vertically between them. One player has 21 yellow men and the other 21 red men. Each player can drop a man at the top of the board in one of the seven columns; the man falls down and fills the lower unoccupied square. Of course a player cannot drop a man in a certain column if it's already full (i.e. it already contains six men).

 

Even if there's no rule about who begins first, we assume, as in chess, that the lighter side makes the first move. We also use the chess notation to represent a square on the board. That is, we number rows from 1 to 7 starting from the bottom and the columns from A to G starting from the leftmost.

 

The object of the game is to connect four men vertically, horizzontally or diagonally. If the board is filled and no one has alligned four men then the game is drawn (i.e. after 42 moves if no one wins).

 

Selectively choosing one cause over another is what's wrong with our culture, or rather, yours. 

 

Not if the traits are of a different type. Gender, race, ethnicity, and sexual preference are all inborn traits (though some people might argue the last one). It's stupid to make fun of them because people can't do s*** about it. People on Soxtalk who insult those traits usually get into some trouble. On the other hand, actions and opinions are different because people choose to do/have them, so comments against Cubs Fans or Liberals or Conservatives or people of religion X usually get by.

[CubKilla]

So, it's not ok to make derrogotory references towards one's sexuality on this website...

 

but it IS ok to use derrogotory pictures referring towards one's faith or religion?

I'm just asking. I promise to behave

 

Political Correctness my friend. America expects us to accept gays and fattys but not those that take religion into their life. Most of the media in lefty. So it doesn't surprise me that there are slightly more in the US that believe in God than are there of us that believe in the Right to be gay or fat

[sox4lifeinPA]

People on Soxtalk who insult those traits usually get into some trouble. On the other hand, actions and opinions are different because people choose to do/have them, so comments against Cubs Fans or Liberals or Conservatives or people of religion X usually get by.

 

 

That follows no logical course of thought. The United States Government protects my right to say things like "all women are inferior" (an inborn trait as you say) and not have any legal recourse. Likewise, I could get fired from a job because I am a practicing Muslim, and I could sue. Yet, you are saying, soxtalk's policies are to protect the non-legally protected and limit free speech?

 

how does that work?

[LowerCaseRepublican]

go for what? I think it's either all or none. Selectively choosing one cause over another is what's wrong with our culture, or rather, yours.  Sideshowapu chooses to ignore the rampant belittlement of such groups as catholic priests or evangelical Christians. This website is a microcosm for the outside world. It makes me sad that ANYONE has to be berated, discriminated, or prejudiced against.  I just ask a simple question of what makes one person's rights more "worthy" of a cause?

 

Rampant belittlement -- here's an idea, kinda novel...If a priest keeps his cock out of an 8 year old boy's asshole then there is nothing to belittle. But when the Catholic Church actively helps move priests accused of f***ING CHILDREN to new parishes where they can keep doing it, they lose all credibility to talk about how good, pious and moral of a group that the institution is. The Catholic church loses all claims to moral legitimacy in that they knew about and assisted in facilitating the rape of children by moving priests to new parishes where they would not be suspected.

 

And evangelical Christians -- would those be the ones who want to put 10 Commandments statues up everywhere? Here's crazy me thinking that Christianity is really about doing acts of kindness without asking for public recognition and being an attention whore of "Look at me and the good I'm doing! I'm so pious!" You see, PA, people can be religious without throwing their fundamentalism in peoples' faces and trying to be more pious than thou.

 

And the choice to be gay CK? Oh man, that's hilarious! "Lets see -- I can lose rights, be harassed, beaten, attacked, hated for no rational reason..." yeah, a lot of people are making that "choice".

[sox4lifeinPA]

Deep breaths everyone.

 

 

First of all, Apu, I have much more respect for you than to read the sweeping generalizations you just made in that last post.

 

c'mon, exactly HOW MANY Catholic parishes were involved in the child abuse scandals? And could it be that some people might just be sick enough to falsely accuse some of those priests? You're 100% right about the guilty parties. It's inexcusable what went on, and I stand with you in calling for earthly punishment for those people (cos they're in for it at a latter date). Point being that a large majority of catholic priests are doing quite well and serving their God faithfully. I honestly think they should be allowed to marry, but that's another story.

 

If every evangelical christian was out posting signs and holding rallies in the streets, I'd be REALLY impressed regardless with how "off" their message might be. Once again, I agree with you, "laying down your life for a friend" should be stamped on every heart of the Christian. I understand where people are coming from with the ten commandments but considering rate of divorce in evangelical churches, I'm not sure we should be focusing on keeping the commandments in court houses as much as we should just focus on simply keeping the commandments. I also agree with you that "God opposes the proud and gives grace to the humble." I again, don't think you're describing every christian but a very stereotypical view of a type of christian.

 

finally, I've seen 3 movies (De-lovely, Alexander, and House at the end of the world) all of them had VERY homosexual characters in them all of which didn't seem to have much of an everyday issue with being that way. The point being that there's far more of an influence in the media for us to "accept" that lifestyle as normal and ok. Yet with over 50% of the US population professing some belief in the Christian faith, where is the representation in TV and movies? It's a joke. I'm not sold on the "born gay" mentality, but I'm definitely not sold on a heterosexual male "choosing" to be gay. I think it's defects of development, genetics, and learned/responsive behavior.

 

by the way, I was watching a very interesting expose on the Matthew Shepard incident on TV. It turns out that his killer knew matthew quite well, had gay relations with at least one other male, and attacked another guy later that night.

so, hate crime? not so sure. oh yeah, that was on CNN.

 

 

 

Personally, I was born with a desire to seek out truth, The Truth. I can't say I knew what it was in my youth, but I knew I was different. I wasn't like everyone else. I found out that I was a child of God while I was in high school, and I've been practicing it, ever since.... (sound familiar????)

[CrimsonWeltall]

The United States Government protects my right to say things like "all women are inferior" (an inborn trait as you say) and not have any legal recourse. Likewise, I could get fired from a job because I am a practicing Muslim, and I could sue. Yet, you are saying, soxtalk's policies are to protect the non-legally protected and limit free speech?

how does that work?

 

Soxtalk isn't the US government or an employer. It's a f***ing internet message board. If you don't want to follow the rules of Soxtalk, you can leave. I explained how I think Soxtalk's rules generally work. If you disagree or think the rules should be "all or nothing", explain why.

[KipWellsFan]

c'mon, exactly HOW MANY Catholic parishes were involved in the child abuse scandals?

 

U.S. Catholic bishops receive 1,092 new sex abuse claims

 

Last year, the bishops released a statistical review that found 4,392 priests had been accused of molesting children in 10,667 cases between 1950 and 2002.

 

Read the article for much greater details.

[santo=dorf]

I have never seen someone get so whiny about politics on a f***ing baseball message board. :headshake

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

Soxtalk isn't the US government or an employer. It's a f***ing internet message board.  If you don't want to follow the rules of Soxtalk, you can leave. I explained how I think Soxtalk's rules generally work. If you disagree or think the rules should be "all or nothing", explain why.

 

 

why does everyone keep getting bent out of shape about this? I really worry about any medium that claims freedom, especially from its "enlightened" elitist members (just ask them), yet allows a clear disparity between one way of life over another all the while it silences dialogue and discussion about that problem. For me, however, I'm interested, as I said, in the microcosm that is soxtalk. I believe many of the ideals and policies here reflect the agendas of the left and are inconsistent with a clear logical, non-biased way of thinking.

 

That being said, I love this place and fully support the leadership in running this site and making the rules, and as a former moderator, I think it is vital to discuss and assess the rules that are implemented here. I really don't see how my role, or any of our roles are that different from our discussions of Bush's cabinet or Kerry's senate voting record. Discussion is good. banning bad.

 

I think there's a problem with censoring one poster for 5 or 6 words while allowing a whole thread of posts of nearly naked women. Or allowing posters to be berated for their thoughts on the white sox's rotation or bullpen, etc. or avatars or signatures involving offensive images of someone's faith.

 

Do I think we should censor those things? no. Do I think we should allow anyone spew filth on this website? no. Do I think there's a huge gap between protecting one set of beliefs and practices over others? definitely.

 

my point has been made.

[sox4lifeinPA]

U.S. Catholic bishops receive 1,092 new sex abuse claims

Read the article for much greater details.

 

 

I know this doesn't make a single one of those cases right at all, but there are 68, 000,000 baptised Catholics in the US. And over 44,000 priests. Your numbers are shown over a 50 year period, someone with number crunching abilities could show you how small of a percentage of the prorated totals would be 5% at worst?

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Deep breaths everyone.

First of all, Apu, I have much more respect for you than to read the sweeping generalizations you just made in that last post.

 

c'mon, exactly HOW MANY Catholic parishes were involved in the child abuse scandals? And could it be that some people might just be sick enough to falsely accuse some of those priests? You're 100% right about the guilty parties. It's inexcusable what went on, and I stand with you in calling for earthly punishment for those people (cos they're in for it at a latter date).  Point being that a large majority of catholic priests are doing quite well and serving their God faithfully. I honestly think they should be allowed to marry, but that's another story.

 

If every evangelical christian was out posting signs and holding rallies in the streets, I'd be REALLY impressed regardless with how "off" their message might be. Once again, I agree with you, "laying down your life for a friend" should be stamped on every heart of the Christian. I understand where people are coming from with the ten commandments but considering rate of divorce in evangelical churches, I'm not sure we should be focusing on keeping the commandments in court houses as much as we should just focus on simply keeping the commandments. I also agree with you that "God opposes the proud and gives grace to the humble." I again, don't think you're describing every christian but a very stereotypical view of a type of christian.

 

finally, I've seen 3 movies (De-lovely, Alexander, and House at the end of the world) all of them had VERY homosexual characters in them all of which didn't seem to have much of an everyday issue with being that way. The point being that there's far more of an influence in the media for us to "accept" that lifestyle as normal and ok. Yet with over 50% of the US population professing some belief in the Christian faith, where is the representation in TV and movies?  It's a joke. I'm not sold on the "born gay" mentality, but I'm definitely not sold on a heterosexual male "choosing" to be gay. I think it's defects of development, genetics, and learned/responsive behavior.

 

by the way, I was watching a very interesting expose on the Matthew Shepard incident on TV. It turns out that his killer knew matthew quite well, had gay relations with at least one other male, and attacked another guy later that night.

so, hate crime? not so sure.  oh yeah, that was on CNN.

Personally, I was born with a desire to seek out truth, The Truth. I can't say I knew what it was in my youth, but I knew I was different. I wasn't like everyone else. I found out that I was a child of God while I was in high school, and I've been practicing it, ever since.... (sound familiar????)

 

Correct. Institutionalized religions that refuse to change minutae that has nothing to do with the crux of what is being taught in the church (a la the Catholic Church) out of the sake of "tradition" are really making themselves not relevent. Thousands of priests have been implecated in these crimes -- but the movements and the making a conscious effort to keep them from being prosecuted for years is what irks me. There was a lot of knowledge that this was going on for a 50 year period and it goes pretty far up in the church that they had to be aware of at least the rumblings of this sort of scandal after a while.

 

I agree that the insane Christian right wing has hijacked the religion -- just as fundies have Islam and the Likudnik Zionists have for Judaism. There just seems to be a shortage now of the Archbishop Oscar Romero types (see the movie "Romero" for more info) and more of the partisan hacks that use religion as a political tool for elected office instead of standing behind any tenets of a religion.

 

I think any real religious faith is dealt with in detail in sitcoms etc. because it kind of does a disservice to whatever group is being covered -- just like Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, for instance for gays. It just reinforces plenty of stereotypes about gays. My friend who happens to be gay can't dress for s*** I'm not always sold on hate crime legislation -- because if somebody goes through in attacking/beating the Hell out of somebody, I think it may be a safe assumption to believe that it may have been inspired by hate.

[sox4lifeinPA]

I have never seen someone get so whiny about politics on a f***ing baseball message board.  :headshake

 

 

and apparently you've never been around to read israel4ever or cwsox's posts...

 

Because what I'm saying doesn't have ANY truth to it. And actually, if you didn't read, this is the sex, lies, and POLITICS forum. If don't want to read about politics, why are you reading this?

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Feb 21, 2005 -> 01:01 AM)

and apparently you've never been around to read israel4ever or cwsox's posts...

 

Because what I'm saying doesn't have ANY truth to it. And actually, if you didn't read, this is the sex, lies, and POLITICS forum. If don't want to read about politics, why are you reading this?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I wanted to see what your big triumphant return was about this time.

[sox4lifeinPA]

I'm with you on everything but I had to clarify. I'm not catholic, so don't let me stop you from tearing them apart , I just believe that there are many, many innocent priests who have been hurt by this scandal, and I seek justice mainly for them, after the justice for the victims.

 

There's definitely a "christian-lite" pressence in the media, 7th Heaven and most Peter Engel Productions (Saved by the bell, California Dreams) have moral undertones throughout their writing. Tom Hanks recently stumped me when he said that he thought it was quite interesting how far off Hollywood has gotten from reality, when their profession, or there art, rather, is supposed to mimic true life.

 

I know there aren't christians are out in the street being dragged by cars and crucified for their beliefs. I think it's far more subtle and sinsiter than that.

[sox4lifeinPA]

I wanted to see what your big triumphant return was about this time.

 

 

I've been back for a while. Keeping low key, and talking with a small portion of the soxtalk nation that hasn't put me on block

 

what's the point of words if we cannot use them? what's the point of minds if we cannot expand them? what's the point of this message board if we cannot use it to its potential?

 

btw, thanks for showing me your smilie faced boobies, santo

[YASNY]

Whoa. I can see both sides of this issue and agree with certain points made from either perspective. I'm not going to get into the back and forth discussion other than to ask .... If someone has an avatar or signature that is offensive to another, regarldless of why it is offensive, why not just eliminate the offensive item?

 

If a poster finds near nudity offensive, that person can choose not to open that thread. No problem. However, an offensive avatar will be found thoughout Soxtalk. It really all comes down to common courtesy. That's not a difficult concept to grasp, but one that seems to be forgotten all too often in this day and age.

[KipWellsFan]

Whoa.  I can see both sides of this issue and agree with certain points made from either perspective.  I'm not going to get into the back and forth discussion other than to ask .... If someone has an avatar or signature that is offensive to another, regarldless of why it is offensive, why not just eliminate the offensive item? 

 

If a poster finds near nudity offensive, that person can choose not to open that thread. No problem.  However, an offensive avatar will be found thoughout Soxtalk.  It really all comes down to common courtesy.  That's not a difficult concept to grasp, but one that seems to be forgotten all too often in this day and age.

 

But isn't there an option to not see sigs and avatars?

[YASNY]

But isn't there an option to not see sigs and avatars?

 

I like the sigs and avs. I shouldn't have to make an all or nothing choice because of one inconsiderate person.

[moochpuppy]

Glad to see nothing has changed since I've been gone.