(laughing)

This(your comment) might(possibly) get through to(be understood by) him(dopps). We(Those on hockeybuzz who converse with Dopps) should always(as often as possible, when conversing with Dopps) talk(type) like this(Using parenthesis to be extremely clear(clear as in easy to understand, not transparent(transparent as in glass, not as in honest(we should be honest)))).

Dopps=Doppelganger(Not our Doppelgangers, but rather the poster(not as in something you put on a wall, but as in a person commenting on forums on the internet)) who we are discussing with.
- Feeling Glucky?

(laughing) (thumbs up, meaning that I agree)

(laughing) (thumbs up, meaning that I agree)
- laughs2907

You know, I don't think that we're(we as in you, laughs2907 and me, Feeling Glucky?(Aka, Andrew Gluck) are) being explicit enough with our(see previous set of parenthesis for explanation) explanation of the emoticon(describing it as laughing, only) we should probably explain what we are laughing at, how we are laughing(laughing with, or laughing at... laughing in agreement, laughing in disagreement, etc.). For example, in your case it would be(I assume/hope):

(laughing with you(feeling_glucky?), in agreement to the post that I(laughs2907) have quoted in this post)
- laughs2907

However, having all these parentheses in line may be making the posts hard to read. We(We used in the same sense as established earlier) should probably petition Ek(short for Eklund, the name assumed by the owner of this site) for a footnote feature, so we could just create a series of citations for people like Doppleganger(Doppelganger) to read through, so that it is easier for him to understand, while not taking away from the reading experience of other posters on this site([url]www.hockeybuzz.com).

Oh my god, you're so stupid you're actually frustrating... Who the (frank) do you think Dan Cathy was referring to? He was referring to those who wish to redefine marriage... Who do you think that is? Gay perhaps (well gays and those who support it, because you're obviously incapable of realizing this without me spelling it out)...
- laughs2907

At least you're admitting it's a new definition of marriage

At least you're admitting it's a new definition of marriage
- bruinsbeer69

It depends on whose definition you use. Its been around for longer than christianity. So, technically, who do you think actually redefined it in the first place?

It depends on whose definition you use. Its been around for longer than christianity. So, technically, who do you think actually redefined it in the first place?
- prock

Well, it is a redefinition of a redefinition. Only this time it's wrong to redefine it because the redefinition is helping the minority that the previous redefinition decided to (frank).

At least you're admitting it's a new definition of marriage
- bruinsbeer69

Glucky, if I (and you for that matter) were gay, I'd hump you.

Yes, bruinsbeer... I admit it would be a new definition of marriage (for many of us that is). Things change over time, so some form of equality is achieved. The rights of women, African Americans, and now homosexuals.

Make love not war, babies!

Did they call those who didn't come out to support it arrogant and beg for god's mercy because of them?

I stole this from someone else... It's for all those who flip out because we are questioning Cathy's beliefs. "By many laws in middle eastern countries it is acceptable for men to beat women, in fact it is tradition. But we as a society look at that as wrong. How can we judge their beliefs but not judge our own? It is safe to say that this world is a better place when we all look in the mirror and try and right our wrongs. If Tim Thomas had said he supported a Hitler type movement would you feel the same? Would you support his right to voicing his own beliefs ? I doubt you would."
- laughs2907

To be fair the Mayor of Boston look more like a Nazi than Thomas. The policy of banning a business because of opinions reminds me of how Hitler used the enabling act during the begining of his rule.

Did they call those who didn't come out to support it arrogant and beg for god's mercy because of them?

I stole this from someone else... It's for all those who flip out because we are questioning Cathy's beliefs. "By many laws in middle eastern countries it is acceptable for men to beat women, in fact it is tradition. But we as a society look at that as wrong. How can we judge their beliefs but not judge our own? It is safe to say that this world is a better place when we all look in the mirror and try and right our wrongs. If Tim Thomas had said he supported a Hitler type movement would you feel the same? Would you support his right to voicing his own beliefs ? I doubt you would."
- laughs2907

Just to go off on a tangent here... the bolded is exactly why I hate organized religion. What is written there, is, in some cases, sadly accurate, and is part of the religious law.

HOWEVER, of the Abrahamic religions, Islam is, in theory, the most progressive with regards to women's rights, and in no way gives anybody permission to beat a woman(or kill her for being raped, or completely screw her over in divorce)... In fact the punishments for rape and abuse are very strict against the men who do these things, and divorces are supposed to fall in a woman's favour... But the religious leaders don't follow the actual religion, and completely bastardize it until the masses think that their religion actually endorses turning women into second class citizens.

The same occurs in Christianity, and just about every other religion. Especially since these religions all rose up during a time when the majority of the population couldn't read, and relied on oral tradition, it was easy to change meanings. In some cases even if people could read, they still wouldn't be able do decipher the religion, because it wasn't written in their language.

And this creates problems even up to this day. The meanings of religions, either on purpose or by accident, get completely convoluted because of poor translations. A lot of anti-gay stuff comes from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah... and the term Sodomy is coined for the disgusting things that were done in Sodom.... but the actual story has absolutely nothing to do with sex... Except for the good guy offering up his daughters to an angry mob to try and appease them.

The cities are supposed to be destroyed because they actually aren't showing hospitality to strangers. That's what the story is about. Absolutely no buttsecks involved. Except for maybe what Lot wanted the guys to do to his daughters... who knows.

So when you have states banning Sodomy(aka, (frank)ing people in the ass, aka, pretty much one of only 2 ways gay guys can do it)... the thing they're actually, and unwittingly making illegal is inhospitable behavior towards strangers. Which is exactly what those states are known for.


So ANYBODY trying to use the bible as a reason to attack any other group should not attempt to do so unless they are fluent in ancient greek, ancient hebrew, and aramaic. And even then they won't get the original meaning, because for hundreds/thousands of (frank)ing years it was passed on through oral tradition, in a whole host of now extinct languages.


And then it's well known that the Christians started changing things around even more to facilitate the conversion of different pagans... and added a whole bunch of amendments to make things more convenient for themselves...(hmm, I want to divorce but my religion bans it... ohwaitno, god just spoke to me and said I could do it).

So, basically, organized religion, especially the Abrahamic ones, are the biggest cluster(frank)ed game of telephone ever. Except everyone in the circle speaks a different language, and every third guy is changing it to make the guy beside him look like an bumhole.

But yes, lets please make that the basis of the legal system in a country that is supposed to separate religion from state. Oh, right, I guess people in the states who hold on to the idea that they should always do what their founding fathers wanted completely forgot the whole separation of church and state... because (frank) it... gay guys make them uneasy, and evolution is too (frank)ing confusing to figure out.


/end rant.

Just to go off on a tangent here... the bolded is exactly why I hate organized religion. What is written there, is, in some cases, sadly accurate, and is part of the religious law.

HOWEVER, of the Abrahamic religions, Islam is, in theory, the most progressive with regards to women's rights, and in no way gives anybody permission to beat a woman(or kill her for being raped, or completely screw her over in divorce)... In fact the punishments for rape and abuse are very strict against the men who do these things, and divorces are supposed to fall in a woman's favour... But the religious leaders don't follow the actual religion, and completely bastardize it until the masses think that their religion actually endorses turning women into second class citizens.

The same occurs in Christianity, and just about every other religion. Especially since these religions all rose up during a time when the majority of the population couldn't read, and relied on oral tradition, it was easy to change meanings. In some cases even if people could read, they still wouldn't be able do decipher the religion, because it wasn't written in their language.

And this creates problems even up to this day. The meanings of religions, either on purpose or by accident, get completely convoluted because of poor translations. A lot of anti-gay stuff comes from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah... and the term Sodomy is coined for the disgusting things that were done in Sodom.... but the actual story has absolutely nothing to do with sex... Except for the good guy offering up his daughters to an angry mob to try and appease them.

The cities are supposed to be destroyed because they actually aren't showing hospitality to strangers. That's what the story is about. Absolutely no buttsecks involved. Except for maybe what Lot wanted the guys to do to his daughters... who knows.

So when you have states banning Sodomy(aka, (frank)ing people in the ass, aka, pretty much one of only 2 ways gay guys can do it)... the thing they're actually, and unwittingly making illegal is inhospitable behavior towards strangers. Which is exactly what those states are known for.


So ANYBODY trying to use the bible as a reason to attack any other group should not attempt to do so unless they are fluent in ancient greek, ancient hebrew, and aramaic. And even then they won't get the original meaning, because for hundreds/thousands of (frank)ing years it was passed on through oral tradition, in a whole host of now extinct languages.


And then it's well known that the Christians started changing things around even more to facilitate the conversion of different pagans... and added a whole bunch of amendments to make things more convenient for themselves...(hmm, I want to divorce but my religion bans it... ohwaitno, god just spoke to me and said I could do it).

So, basically, organized religion, especially the Abrahamic ones, are the biggest cluster(frank)ed game of telephone ever. Except everyone in the circle speaks a different language, and every third guy is changing it to make the guy beside him look like an bumhole.

But yes, lets please make that the basis of the legal system in a country that is supposed to separate religion from state. Oh, right, I guess people in the states who hold on to the idea that they should always do what their founding fathers wanted completely forgot the whole separation of church and state... because (frank) it... gay guys make them uneasy, and evolution is too (frank)ing confusing to figure out.


/end rant.
- Feeling Glucky?

I actually had a conversation with a Christian today that said bestiality, child molestation, and gay relationships are all on the same level. I guess consent doesn't matter?

I actually had a conversation with a Christian today that said bestiality, child molestation, and gay relationships are all on the same level. I guess consent doesn't matter?
- laughs2907

ITS HIS RELIGION SO IT'S OK.

To be fair the Mayor of Boston look more like a Nazi than Thomas. The policy of banning a business because of opinions reminds me of how Hitler used the enabling act during the begining of his rule.
- flamminghead

That's how the left usually works.

Pretend they are for the little people, free speech, etc.....but they are the real tyrants

That's how the left usually works.

Pretend they are for the little people, free speech, etc.....but they are the real tyrants
- bruinsbeer69

I'm with you on this, man... How dare he want equality. He shall burn in hell for this. What an evil evil man!



I wish I could slap my girlfriend/wife/mistress in the face, and then go take a long rewarding piss without having to worry about a black person being in the washroom with me... (frank), those were the days when family dining meant something.

I wish all those queers would quit their crying about wanting to marry. We allow them to eat, drink, and work... Now they want the right to marry? What a bunch of arrogant snots. How dare they want something we feel they should not have... How dare they!?!?

That's how the left usually works.

Pretend they are for the little people, free speech, etc.....but they are the real tyrants
- bruinsbeer69

Well certain individuals that fall left of centre do exhibit those actions, but it seems your opinions of the left are a little generalizing. There is an equally significant group from the right that acts in the same way.

What can I say? You annoy the sh1t out of me.
- laughs2907

So it's my fault that you can't exercise any level of decorum, and force you to swear, insult me and question my academic history???

Did they call those who didn't come out to support it arrogant and beg for god's mercy because of them?

"
- laughs2907

did they call the hockey players, who never played a game, the best ever players and beg for them to be inducted into the HHOF???


Make as much sense as your statement.

They're throughout this thread, you just chose not to see them. So no, I won't waste my time.
- Feeling Glucky?

They are not throughout this thread........because he did NOT say what you claim.

Your interpretations of his statements are though.

btw, just adding on to the previous post(I edited it, but left to do something before hitting submit):


So, he's guilty of two things. Same with Imams that use their religion to preach hate against the west, same with Rabbis who use their religion to preach hate against Muslims. Same with every single religious or political leader, who uses the "word of god" to rile up their followers against others. While I am an atheist myself, I've studied religions to a great degree, and the discrepancy between the theory and the practice is absolutely disgusting, and it's because of people like Cathy that this is the case.
- Feeling Glucky?

Well, we share something in common. I too am an atheist. I also share your views on "organized" religions and the influence they've had on humanity over time, and it's usually to hold power on them and profit for them (indulgences) and interpreting the religion to forward their own goals.

However I cannot equate Dan Cathy's statements with the Imans who call for the destruction on Israel and the West. The issue of same sex marriage pales in comparison to the goal of genocide that the extremest Islamic leaders call for.

I'm with you on this, man... How dare he want equality. He shall burn in hell for this. What an evil evil man!

:
- laughs2907

So in your world ONLY companies that agree with the Gay community and the progressive left's agenda should be allowed to operate in Boston.


That's what you call equality?

Think like me, and you can open your car wash.

Perhaps the mayor of Boston can identify the businesses in Boston that don't agree with his views by painting some sort of symbol on the doors of the establishments, like a blue triangle or an orange circle................and them people can choose to do business there or not.

Let's go one step further, maybe the owners of businesses that don't agree with the mayor of Boston should be forced to wear the symbol of their lapels too.

eep- well, I'm done with this.


edit: one of the many hilarious clips from the channel he considers to be a legitimate news source:

(he won't see what's wrong with this image)
- Feeling Glucky?

Once again you're assuming you know what news source I watch.

And once again you're wrong. (Surprise!!!!)

I don't watch a news source, I watch them all and seek out more POVs on radio and on the internet.

If you only follow one source of news, then you're only getting one POV and it could be heavily biased. You watch, listen and read a number of sources to get an idea of the truth, because nowadays the news sources have a distinctive "spin" top one degree or another.

Yes I watch FOX news, but I also watch CNN, MSNBC, Sun News, CBC, CTV and listen to various news/talkradio stations.

I also read the two Local newspapers everyday and on the Internet I read the Huffington Post, the Drudge report and these two sites
http://www.albawaba.com/en/
http://www.nytimes.com/

Well certain individuals that fall left of centre do exhibit those actions, but it seems your opinions of the left are a little generalizing. There is an equally significant group from the right that acts in the same way

Not really, but it sounds good. The "your side is doing it too so it's ok" argument doesn't fly when looking at this group of Left Wing Nazi's.

There has never been a larger decline in American freedoms than in the past 4 years. And yes, that included the Bush terms in office.

Once again you're assuming you know what news source I watch.

And once again you're wrong. (Surprise!!!!)

I don't watch a news source, I watch them all and seek out more POVs on radio and on the internet.

If you only follow one source of news, then you're only getting one POV and it could be heavily biased. You watch, listen and read a number of sources to get an idea of the truth, because nowadays the news sources have a distinctive "spin" top one degree or another.

Yes I watch FOX news, but I also watch CNN, MSNBC, Sun News, CBC, CTV and listen to various news/talkradio stations.

I also read the two Local newspapers everyday and on the Internet I read the Huffington Post, the Drudge report and these two sites
http://www.albawaba.com/en/
http://www.nytimes.com/
- Doppleganger

It's all the fault of George Bush

Yawn. Dude, it's hopeless. They love the left no matter how much logic, stats, and facts you use. They are the sheep unable to look beyond the surface of what their TV and liberal leaning teachers tell them.

It's sad, because they usually aren't stupid, they have just been indoctrinated. And in most cases, have good hearts, which the left exploits. Then, they have a certain amount of pride, which prevents them from ever backing off. This is why the left gets to them early

Yay for ideologies!

Never wish more for a vomit emoticon.

It's all the fault of George Bush

Yawn. Dude, it's hopeless. They love the left no matter how much logic, stats, and facts you use. They are the sheep unable to look beyond the surface of what their TV and liberal leaning teachers tell them.

It's sad, because they usually aren't stupid, they have just been indoctrinated. And in most cases, have good hearts, which the left exploits. Then, they have a certain amount of pride, which prevents them from ever backing off. This is why the left gets to them early
- bruinsbeer69

I'm not American, so I don't particularly care. But from an outsiders pov, Clinton was really the only president in the last 30 or so years that has had a successful presidency IMO. Reagan, bush times two, all disasters. Obama isn't faring very well either, IMO. He's making every bit of the mess Bush did. Make no mistake though, George W Bush was a total disaster. He made such a mess of your country it could take twenty years to dig yourself out.

In terms of tax cuts and what not, for forty years the US had a steadily improving debt situation. Reagan and the first George Bush wiped out thirty of those forty years of progress. Clinton turned it around, only to have the second bush wipe out his progress, and the other ten years that were left.

So it's my fault that you can't exercise any level of decorum, and force you to swear, insult me and question my academic history???



- Doppleganger

You twist everything around, and argue points that doesn't even make any sense.

did they call the hockey players, who never played a game, the best ever players and beg for them to be inducted into the HHOF???


Make as much sense as your statement.
- Doppleganger

Your response makes no sense. Be gone.