[Ranger]

Servus!

Whoooo! This one is a hot potato!

I will not argue for or against this topic - but fourgivn1, out of pure curiosity, which version of the Bible are you reading from - specifically regarding the 1 Corinthians 6:9 reference?

I ask merely because the word "homosexual" is considered a modern reference. From Merriam-Webster.com...

Main Entry: 1ho·mo·sex·u·al
Pronunciation: "hO-m&-'sek-sh(&-)w&l, -'sek-sh&l
Function: adjective
Date: 1892
1 : of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex
2 : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex


(edited for spelling)

 

[Toshi]

Originally posted by fourgivn1
Silly question, but isn't your account of not witnessing Christian-bashing while witnessing homosexual-bashing also an anecdote?

Yes. And that's why I said "Anecdotal evidence is meaningless, yadda yadda yadda, but add another point to the graph."

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by Ranger
Servus!

Whoooo! This one is a hot potato!

I will not argue for or against this topic - but fourgivn1, out of pure curiosity, which version of the Bible are you reading from - specifically regarding the 1 Corinthians 6:9 reference?

I ask merely because the word "homosexual" is considered a modern reference.

I read from the NKJV, because it's the most accurately interpreted as compared to the original texts.

I've done a little searching, and I will go so far as to say that some of the texts referring to homosexuality in the Bible are somewhat ambiguous. I don't have my Bible OR a Hebrew/Greek translation with me, so I can't really dig deep at the time. However I will include a quote I got from a website that refers to it, and how it ties in with the Bible.

' "Some passages that have been advanced as pertinent to the issue of homosexuality are, in fact, irrelevant. One is the attempted gang rape in Sodom (Gen. 19:1-29). That was a case of ostensibly heterosexual males intent on humiliating strangers by treating them "like women," thus demasculinizing them. (This is also the case in a similar account in Jud ges 19-21.) Their brutal behavior has nothing to do with the problem of whether genuine love expressed between consenting adults of the same sex is legitimate or not. Likewise Deut. 23:17-18 must be pruned from the list, since it most likely refers to a heterosexual prostitute involved in Canaanite fertility rites that have infiltrated Jewish worship; the King James Version inaccurately labeled him a "sodomite."

Several other texts are ambiguous. It is not clear whether 1 Cor. 6:9 and 1 Tim. 1:10 refer to the "passive" and "active" partners in homosexual relationships, or to homosexual and heterosexual male prostitutes. In short, it is unclear whether the issue is homosexuality alone, or promiscuity and "sex-for-hire." '

To get to the point, and to sum it up, even one or two quotes I used are somewhat ambiguous. The Greek words used in 1 Corinthians 6:9, for example, denote terms used in that time when referring to 'callboys,' in essence, who were taken to bed by abusive older men, and is a condemnation of that sort of relationship; but as far as applying to the central theme of homosexuality, it does not specifically refer to that.

I'm speaking about that specific example, however. None of the examples anywhere in the Bible say anything positive about, or support, homosexuality, and the 3 or 4 clearcut examples of the Bible's standpoint on it clearly condemn it.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by gravity
i don't believe that gays should be given the ability to have kids through IVF or sperm donation, that really IS playing God....

You and gravity plus have got to be kidding me. Many gay couples that have children do it through a surrogate mother or father. Is it suddenly okay, because it's done the "good old fashioned way"? Some do it through IVF or sperm donation, but I highly doubt your against those methods when they're used to help a hetero couple with fertility problems. Give me a freakin' break.

Gay couples also adopt quite a bit more than hetero couples. Cleaning up the mess that all that unprotected, unaborted hetero sex left behind. They take kids with no parents, or abusive parents and give them a loving healthy home. Is that ALSO playing god, because those children were not naturally birthed to them?

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by ohio

Gay couples also adopt quite a bit more than hetero couples.

You're saying that more adoptions are done involving gay couples than heterosexual couples? Now that I have a real hard time believing.

I'm not saying it's not true, because I haven't seen statistics, but I'm saying I have a real hard time believing that.

 

[ohio]

Yeah, rotecguy got what I meant. Sorry for being unclear.

And certainly a lot more would adopt if agencies looked more kindly on same-sex unions...

 

[gravity plus]

Originally posted by ohio


You and gravity plus have got to be kidding me. Many gay couples that have children do it through a surrogate mother or father. Is it suddenly okay, because it's done the "good old fashioned way"? Some do it through IVF or sperm donation, but I highly doubt your against those methods when they're used to help a hetero couple with fertility problems. Give me a freakin' break.

Did I say anything like that? No. All I said about the adoption thing is it can screw up the child they adopt psychologicaly.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by gravity plus


Did I say anything like that? No. All I said about the adoption thing is it can screw up the child they adopt psychologicaly.

My bad I misread one of your posts as being a response to Gravity, not Brian.

So, how can adoption by a gay couple screw a kid up psychologically?

 

[gravity plus]

Originally posted by ohio


My bad I misread one of your posts as being a response to Gravity, not Brian.

So, how can adoption by a gay couple screw a kid up psychologically?

It's o.k.
Any way. Children X, Y, Z have a mother who is gay, who was married to a man before getting divorced. When children X, Y, Z found out that their mother and father were getting divirced and that their mother was gay, they took it really bad. Child X moved out and never came back, and children Y and Z have small anger problems and depression problems now (after finding out).

*yes, these are real people, I used letters instead of names to protect the people*

*their problems could be from the divorce, but I'm leaning more towards the finding out that their mother is gay*

 

[Brian HCM#1]

Originally posted by fourgivn1


I read from the NKJV, because it's the most accurately interpreted as compared to the original texts.

According to whom? The majority of narrow minded people? How do you know its been accuratly interpreted? Cause thats what you were told to believe, or thats what your Church reads, so then it has to be the only correct version around.

 

[gravity plus]

Originally posted by Brian HCM#1
Cause thats what you were told to believe, or thats what your Church reads, so then it has to be the only correct version around.

Very good point.

 

[gravity plus]

Originally posted by rotecguy


I would much rather see a child brough up in a stable, loving household with gay parents than an abusive straight one.

I would too.

I probly should have said it can screw the child up, but not all the time.

 

[Damn True]

Originally posted by rotecguy


Here is one reason why people don't necessarily accept these accounts using a different example... In fact, I think this pretty much covers why people will not accept evidence published on Christian websites as conclusively supportive of a lot of these arguments. Or some of the reasons anyway.

Take for instance the case of Victims of Alien Abduction. If you looked around, you will find tons of evidence supporting these claims or experiences documented on their websites and in publications from groups of people who beleive in this stuff. If I told you that I know that UFO's exist, and I know this because I read a book written by a fellow who was abducted and probed, would you necessarily beleive it? I doubt I would.

Now, please realise that I am not saying that Christianity is akin to UFO's, aliens, or sasquatches... What I am saying is that there is a reason why people take stuff published on a christian site with a cristian agenda with a very large grain of salt. Hence the desire for more unbiased scientific information... "peer reviewed journals" as Toshi so likes to call for.

The belief in the "evidence" of homosexuality as a genetic predisposition, or of the big bang, or of global warming and the ozone hole are as equally dependant on faith as any of this. So if you believe one, why not the other?

My guess is because of the things that come with it.

 

[Damn True]

Originally posted by Brian HCM#1
According to whom? The majority of narrow minded people? How do you know its been accuratly interpreted? Cause thats what you were told to believe, or thats what your Church reads, so then it has to be the only correct version around.

Narrow minded extremists are easy to find regardless of which side of the issue you look.

 

[dh girlie]

Originally posted by Toshi
I don't have a problem with religious people, except on issues like this one. And this issue makes me quite angry.



Please provide a peer-reviewed reference of a study detailing the above. I don't believe it, and until you can show me that homosexuality is a choice, not just a way some people are "created by God," I'm going to treat your whole spiel as a bunch of unfounded Christian bigotry.

**applause** VERY well said, Toshi...I agree.

I have a cousin that is openly gay. Since he was a young kid, my parents thought that he was very effeminate and was probably gay. Now why would a 7 year old kid CHOOSE to be fashionably gay?

 

[Damn True]

Originally posted by rotecguy


Actually, I don't remember mentioning what I beleive, but thanks for assuming. Sorry bout that, it was a general statement, not a direct reply to your thoughts.


When did global warming or the ozone hole get into it? Or the big bang?
By virtue of the fact that people believe in them without and REAL proof of them yet call the belief in God or following the teachings of Christ thoughtless or blind faith. I can't proove Jesus was the son of God and you can't prove the Big Bang. What makes one belief less viable than another?


Besides, the very same could apply to you... If you beleive in one, why not the other?

Basically, after looking through a couple of threads, I have seen it asked, "why won't people accept this as evidence?" and I was trying to share my take on why.

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by Brian HCM#1
According to whom? The majority of narrow minded people? How do you know its been accuratly interpreted? Cause thats what you were told to believe, or thats what your Church reads, so then it has to be the only correct version around.

You know, after a while statements like this get old.

I know it may be tough for people to believe, but there are ACTUALLY Christians out there *hint* that go and VERIFY things they have been told. Non-Christians and the intelligentsia don't have a monopoly on research and fact-finding.

The KJV version is more accurate because it remains as true to the ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS (found in such places as Qumran, to name one) as possible. It does not sacrifice accuracy for the sake of 'readibility,' as the NIV version, for instance, does.

Below is a statement or two from "The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict" written my Josh McDowell, concerning the number of original manuscripts as it relates to the accuracy of the New Testament.

"F. E. Peters states that "on the basis of manuscript tradition alone, the works that made up the Christians' New Testament were the most frequently copied and widely circulated books of antiquity." As a result, the fidelity of the New Testament text rests on a multitude of manuscript evidence. Counting Greek copies alone, the New Testament is preserved in some 5,656 partial and complete manuscript portions that were copied by hand from the second through the fifteenth centuries.
There are now more than 5,686 known Greek manuscripts of the New Testatment. Add over 10,000 Latin Vulgate and at least 9,300 other early versions, and we have close to, if not more than, 25,000 manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament in existence today. No other document of antiquity even begins to approach such numbers and attestation. In comparison, Homer's Iliad is second, with 643 manuscripts that still survive. The first complete preserved text of Homer dates from the thirteenth century."

(I've omitted the footnotes simply because it's more typing I'd have to do. I'd be glad to put them up here.)

There is a LOT more information I could put up here....this is just an 'intro' of sorts. But the point is that very few people question the accuracy or the historical 'correctness' of the ancient classics, despite the fact that there exists today FAR more original New Testament manuscripts that are much smaller in the difference of time between the original writing and the date of the manuscripts. But yet the Bible gets questioned all the time.

Yes, I'm quite sure people can go and find something wrong with ANY argument presented. I can go and find evidence (EVIDENCE) all day long to support and prove my views, and so can anyone who is of the opposite view. That gets us nowhere. I have no problem if someone differs with my point of view. But don't go around accusing me of being devoid of thought or free will simply because I am a Christian.

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by Damn True


Narrow minded extremists are easy to find regardless of which side of the issue you look.

Ouch. *L*

 

[Damn True]

But don't go around accusing me of being devoid of thought or free will simply because I am a Christian.

Exactly.
When did non-Christians develop exclusive rights to critical thought?

 

[fourgivn1]

I thought I'd put this up here just for grins. I'm sure some will argue with it (I'd expect no less ) but oh well.

I think it should be mentioned here that my aim, when posting responses, is not to try to disprove other's beliefs or notions or what have you. It is not to prove that 'what I believe is better than what you believe.' (Or at least it shouldn't be. I'm sure at times I'm a victim of frustration or such, but I think anyone who has posted in this board can say the same.) My purpose here is simply to 'stick up' for my side, and get rid of the silly notion that ALL Christians are robots, brainwashed into believing what they believe, totally devoid of free will or independent thought.

Granted, there ARE plenty of them out there who DO believe simply it's 'cool' or because it's what their parents and THEIR parents have done since whenever. I'm not arguing that. And I'm not arguing that other points of view have no validity. But both sides can bring evidence to the table all day long, and both sides will find SOMETHING wrong with the others' point of view. I'm sure I'm guilty of that a few times myself. I don't care what people believe (although yes, by virtue of what I myself believe, I've got a heart that wishes that others would know Why I believe what I do). I just get tired of people attacking people like me because of stereotypes and presupposed notions about what I'm like or what I believe or WHY I believe. (The notion that I have no clue why I 'think' the KJV version of the Bible is more accurate than others is a good example.)

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by rotecguy

Now, please realise that I am not saying that Christianity is akin to UFO's, aliens, or sasquatches... What I am saying is that there is a reason why people take stuff published on a christian site with a cristian agenda with a very large grain of salt. Hence the desire for more unbiased scientific information... "peer reviewed journals" as Toshi so likes to call for.

I can definitely agree with that point of view, about wanting more 'peer-reviewed journals.' There's just two problems with that, and they're 'linked' sort of. One, there ARE plenty of people out there who have provided scientific proof for views supported by the Christian 'community.' Just because you haven't gone out and found them doesn't mean they're not there. There ARE plenty of Christians and Christian websites that just put junk out there that supports their view, and never bother to back it up with any research or evidence. I definitely don't argue that. But that doesn't mean that suddenly all Christian viewpoints are suddenly null and void whether they come with proof/facts/evidence or not.

Two, the vast majority of people who are arguing the Christian point of view as far as backing up their viewpoints go, are Christians. (Duh. *L*) That fact alone sort of 'tilts the playing field' I think. I don't know too many non-Christians arguing the Christian point of view.

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by dh girlie


**applause** VERY well said, Toshi...I agree.

I have a cousin that is openly gay. Since he was a young kid, my parents thought that he was very effeminate and was probably gay. Now why would a 7 year old kid CHOOSE to be fashionably gay?

I don't know why he would choose to be gay. I don't think he WOULD choose to be gay. This quote was taken from a response to one of my posts. The original post said

"Seriously, I will have to say that homosexuals (and I do not mean this in a derogatory sense) are NOT created by God. There are countless accounts of homosexuals of either gender having a spiritual experience, getting 'saved' or asking forgiveness, and *boom* suddenly for the rest of their life they are 'straight' with absolutely NO desires of going back to the way they were. It seems to me if you are created by God a certain way, you really can't change that. I hesitate to call it a 'chemical imbalance' in the brain because I really don't know WHAT causes it, but considering God made us in His image, and considering the Bible condemns homosexuality, I DON'T think Jesus was gay."

If you take a look at that post, you will find that nowhere did I say that people CHOOSE to be gay, and nowhere did I say that I condemn anyone who is gay. I simply argued that I do not believe that God creates people to be homosexual. I just want to make this clear.

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by rotecguy

The problem is that a lot of Christians (not anyone in this discussion in particular) like to try and force their beleifs and values onto others, and while sometimes it doesn't really hurt anyone, sometimes it does, and that ain't right. Unfortunately, that is the impression that a lot of folks have, and that is the notion that sits in the back of their minds when they read what you or fourgivn1 write.

Very true, very true. I agree with this. It just upsets me that anyone thinks that my presenting my views on this website, just as others have presented their views, amounts to forcing my beliefs/values on others.

I'd like to note that someone else asked the whole "Is Jesus gay" question first. I just answered it. I'm innocent, I tell ya.

 

[dh girlie]

Originally posted by fourgivn1


I don't know why he would choose to be gay. I don't think he WOULD choose to be gay. This quote was taken from a response to one of my posts. The original post said

If you take a look at that post, you will find that nowhere did I say that people CHOOSE to be gay, and nowhere did I say that I condemn anyone who is gay. I simply argued that I do not believe that God creates people to be homosexual. I just want to make this clear.

If you take a look at my post, you will find that nowhere did I say that you said that people choose to be gay.

I'm simply saying I believe there may be something that occurs within the genes or the brain that may determine someones sexual preference. I don't know this for a fact, but if people were saying they thought my cousin might have homosexual tendencies at age 7, there has to be something going on chemically, because why would a 7 year old just decide to be gay? I think there are plenty of people out there that choose to say they are gay for the shock value or other reasons unbeknownst to me....I worked with a guy that I believe claimed bi-sexuality to see the shock register on the faces of those he would blurt it out to...when he told me and I didn't falter, he never brought it up again, however, an older lady from a very strict Catholic family was flabbergasted, and that just egged him on....go figure...

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by dh girlie


If you take a look at my post, you will find that nowhere did I say that you said that people choose to be gay.

I'm simply saying I believe there may be something that occurs within the genes or the brain that may determine someones sexual preference. I don't know this for a fact, but if people were saying they thought my cousin might have homosexual tendencies at age 7, there has to be something going on chemically, because why would a 7 year old just decide to be gay? I think there are plenty of people out there that choose to say they are gay for the shock value or other reasons unbeknownst to me....I worked with a guy that I believe claimed bi-sexuality to see the shock register on the faces of those he would blurt it out to...when he told me and I didn't falter, he never brought it up again, however, an older lady from a very strict Catholic family was flabbergasted, and that just egged him on....go figure...

I apologize to you, then; I didn't mean to say that you said that I said...... (You know what I'm trying to say?

As far as why a 7-year old might decide to be gay.....you ask why. I ask why NOT? Yeah, I don't think very many people at ALL just get up and say "Hmm, I think I'm gonna be homosexual today." Probably almost NONE of them do. But that still does not mean that we're created by God this way.

An observation.....I've noticed that the vast majority of the people who are arguing against people being homosexuals by choice are non-Christians....who evidently don't believe in the God that I'm arguing does not create homosexuals.

 

[dh girlie]

Originally posted by fourgivn1


I apologize to you, then; I didn't mean to say that you said that I said...... (You know what I'm trying to say?

As far as why a 7-year old might decide to be gay.....you ask why. I ask why NOT? Yeah, I don't think very many people at ALL just get up and say "Hmm, I think I'm gonna be homosexual today." Probably almost NONE of them do. But that still does not mean that we're created by God this way.

An observation.....I've noticed that the vast majority of the people who are arguing against people being homosexuals by choice are non-Christians....who evidently don't believe in the God that I'm arguing does not create homosexuals.

Yeah I feel ya, I feel ya...no need to apologize...

 

[Brian HCM#1]

Originally posted by fourgivn1


I"Seriously, I will have to say that homosexuals (and I do not mean this in a derogatory sense) are NOT created by God. There are countless accounts of homosexuals of either gender having a spiritual experience, getting 'saved' or asking forgiveness, and *boom* suddenly for the rest of their life they are 'straight' with absolutely NO desires of going back to the way they were. It seems to me if you are created by God a certain way, you really can't change that. I hesitate to call it a 'chemical imbalance' in the brain because I really don't know WHAT causes it, but considering God made us in His image, and considering the Bible condemns homosexuality, I DON'T think Jesus was gay."

If you take a look at that post, you will find that nowhere did I say that people CHOOSE to be gay, and nowhere did I say that I condemn anyone who is gay. I simply argued that I do not believe that God creates people to be homosexual. I just want to make this clear.

How can you say that gays are not created by God? Aren't we ALL Gods children? Being Gay is not a choice, that is the way that particular person feels and that can't be changed. I believe its the same gene that makes us attracted to a certian person, by the way they look, body, hair color/type etc. There is something in your body that attracts you to that paticular thing about that person. Are you married? Did you chose your spouse? Or did your family arrange it for you if you are involved? I will stop now if your family arranged your relationship, but if you chose your spouse, what made you attracted to that one person, that made you decide you wanted to be with that person the rest of your life? Its that feeling inside that directed you that way? Probably so.

 

[Brian HCM#1]

Originally posted by fourgivn1



An observation.....I've noticed that the vast majority of the people who are arguing against people being homosexuals by choice are non-Christians....who evidently don't believe in the God that I'm arguing does not create homosexuals.

Please start opening your closed little mind, why is it only Christians that seem to believe its mostly a choice to be gay? And getting back to the bible. Maybe there were lots of people back then when the bible was being writen that was gay and the person writing the bible was against it and thought that by writing it down it may change the course of history and there will be no more gays cause thats what it say's in black & white.

 

[Damn True]

I never said ya'll were wrong. Of course I never said ya'll were right either. The problem is that a lot of Christians (not anyone in this discussion in particular) like to try and force their beleifs and values onto others, and while sometimes it doesn't really hurt anyone, sometimes it does, and that ain't right.

Again, that door swings both ways (bi-sexuality pun not intended).

There is a segement (not all of them mind you) of the gay community that adamatly demands the recognition, acceptance, and inclusion of their "way of life" as normal and healthy, yet they shun similar efforts by the Christian community as intrusive.

SIDE NOTE:
What's with bi-sexuals anyway? I just think they are greedy.

 

[Damn True]

Originally posted by Brian HCM#1
Please start opening your closed little mind, why is it only Christians that seem to believe its mostly a choice to be gay? And getting back to the bible. Maybe there were lots of people back then when the bible was being writen that was gay and the person writing the bible was against it and thought that by writing it down it may change the course of history and there will be no more gays cause thats what it say's in black & white.

Chalk another one up the the vast right wing conspiracy eh Brian? Heck, we are probably responsible for the extintion of the dinosaurs as well.

 

[Damn True]

Originally posted by Brian HCM#1
According to whom? The majority of narrow minded people? How do you know its been accuratly interpreted? Cause thats what you were told to believe, or thats what your Church reads, so then it has to be the only correct version around.

Beresh1t (geez it even sensors hebrew)
Shemot
Vayikra
Bamidbar
Devarim


Are these parts of the NKJV suspect as well?
























- Genesis
- Exodus
- Leviticus
- Numbers
- Deuteronomy

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by Brian HCM#1
Please start opening your closed little mind, why is it only Christians that seem to believe its mostly a choice to be gay? And getting back to the bible. Maybe there were lots of people back then when the bible was being writen that was gay and the person writing the bible was against it and thought that by writing it down it may change the course of history and there will be no more gays cause thats what it say's in black & white.

I don't know HOW many times I have to say that I DID NOT SAY it was a choice. Jeez. I also said I don't know exactly WHAT it is that makes us gay - whether it's an 'original sin' that some are subject to and others aren't, or whether it is a 'chemical imbalance' or a product of environment, or what have you. I could go on responding to this post, but so far you've implied I have free thought, and then said I havea a closed mind. Arguing this point isn't worth it with someone who is just as closed minded to my arguments as I evidently am to theirs.

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by Damn True


Chalk another one up the the vast right wing conspiracy eh Brian? Heck, we are probably responsible for the extintion of the dinosaurs as well.

Also global warming, UFOs, the current Snakefish infestation, probably the West Nile virus......

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by Brian HCM#1
Maybe there were lots of people back then when the bible was being writen that was gay and the person writing the bible was against it and thought that by writing it down it may change the course of history and there will be no more gays cause thats what it say's in black & white.

Hold on a second...I just caught this. You're essentially saying that the, uh, ONE person who wrote the Bible back then could have possibly been a homophobe, and decided to write the Bible in order to assist in stamping out homosexuality.

*ROTFLOL* I'm sorry, this just made me laugh. Yeah, I know it was a 'hypothetical' situation *L* but it IS funny. I'm going to go to bed on that note.

 

[Brian HCM#1]

Originally posted by fourgivn1


Hold on a second...I just caught this. You're essentially saying that the, uh, ONE person who wrote the Bible back then could have possibly been a homophobe, and decided to write the Bible in order to assist in stamping out homosexuality.

*ROTFLOL* I'm sorry, this just made me laugh. Yeah, I know it was a 'hypothetical' situation *L* but it IS funny. I'm going to go to bed on that note.

Good, it was ment as a hypothetical question.

 

[laura]

i have to say this is an excellent thread. im not going to tell you waht i think about all of this because i could go off on a never ending rant.

i will say that i think this is an excellent discussion and its being handled very well by almost everyone that is posting.

i love to see inteliigent conversations.

 

[gravity plus]

Originally posted by fourgivn1


I don't know HOW many times I have to say that I DID NOT SAY it was a choice.

It's either the persons choice or its how "God" made us. Is there any other possible way? I'm too tired to think of a third possibility...:

 

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by gravity plus


It's either the persons choice or its how "God" made us. Is there any other possible way? I'm too tired to think of a third possibility...:

Man, me too. *LOL* But I still want to know how all of the non-Christians out there think it is how God made us, if it's not the person's choice.

I really AM too tired! I'm hitting the sack. This IS a good thread; it coulda blown up (more than it has) but it's stayed respectable. One of the reasons I enjoy this board.

 

[Skookum]

We all have way too much time on our hands.
Interesting conversation from a loaded question. I'm coming back tomorrow to read the next 3 pages of post that are in developement i'm sure. This web site cuts my t.v. time to zero so I thank all of you!
Me i'm gonna go for a ride now!

 

[fourgivn1]

That's WHY I'm on the net so much....you'd think in Williamsburg, Virginia, one of the OLDEST colonies in the US, they'd figure out how to get decent reception by now on the local TV. But no, I get ONE, count 'em ONE channel.