BREAKING NEWS. . .Rehnquist Resigns????? - Page 9 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-22-2005, 10:28 PM   #121
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


You said we're short of intelligent conservatives.
Yes, which is true!? The liberals are in the majority. Dude I am a conservative on many issues. You are an intelligent conservative.

Since I've joined here I have seen a few interventions from random people, mainly gay-bashers frankly, who quickly disappeared. I would consider such people to be in the category of non-intelligent conservatives. Evidently, you are not in that category.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 10:31 PM   #122
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 12:12 PM
I appreciate that. I understand now. When I first read it, it sure seemed like you were disrespecting the conservatives, whcih I did find strange, because you are conservative on many issues, especially abortion.

I'm glad that's cleared up. Sorry I misunderstood.
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 10:38 PM   #123
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
because you are conservative on many issues, especially abortion.
Correct. My disapproval of certain polices of, shall we see, people in positions of power at this moment in time, could be misinterpreted for the point of view of a liberal. I tend towards the conservative point of view on issues such as abortion, the free market, and even the death penalty.

Believe me, I ain't no liberal, at least not in the modern sense of the word.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 10:54 PM   #124
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
u2bonogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Back on the blue crack after a long break
Posts: 6,726
Local Time: 01:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy


Yes, which is true!? The liberals are in the majority. Dude I am a conservative on many issues. You are an intelligent conservative.

Since I've joined here I have seen a few interventions from random people, mainly gay-bashers frankly, who quickly disappeared. I would consider such people to be in the category of non-intelligent conservatives. Evidently, you are not in that category.
I would even venture to say that theyre not so much conservative, but just bigoted
__________________
u2bonogirl is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 10:59 PM   #125
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
u2bonogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Back on the blue crack after a long break
Posts: 6,726
Local Time: 01:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


I'm not sure if you read the post above where I rephrased it, but here it is, in case you didn't:

"If you're not willing to have a baby (not necessarily desire) or if you wouldn't be responsible and mature enough to care for a baby in the case that birth control should fail, then sex isn't a good idea."

In other words, if you know that birth control failing and leading to a pregnancy would destroy your life and you'd run around like a chicken with its head cut off saying "On no, what do I do now - I'm pregnant - I can't care for this baby!", then I think sex is not a good idea.
Theres always a chance that birth control could fail, and I recognize that fact.
If I were to become pregnant after Im married I would be terrified at first but we would get through it.
I guess what Im saying is that Im not ready, and I would be really freaked out. But its not going to stop me from having sex as much as I want with my husband even if I know the pill isnt 100% effective
Now, if he was just my boyfriend then I would say its a better idea that we dont have sex

I had one pregnancy scare in my life and I was fully ready to be publically shamed in my church and family, and then give it up for adoption. I just think it would be wrong of me to keep it if I couldnt support it or care for it emotionally very well and there was somebody out there that could do it better.

In that case, me having sex was a really bad idea
__________________
u2bonogirl is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 06:43 AM   #126
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 12:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by starsforu2
I'm going to back out of FYM for a little while. Some are able to argue with great humor (Thank You Irvine!), but some (including myself) can get quite animated in their defense of a position and I'm not here to generate bad blood. I just wanted to introduce a different perspective than the prevalent one that exists here. We can sharpen each other's position when we debate back and forth, but once people's feelings get tossed in, it's hard not to offend. So I'm going to take a break. Have fun I'm sure I'll be back.

we'll miss you -- i do think you provide a more moderate right-of-center viewpoint that's lacking in this forum, where we tend to get Left, Center Left, and Right.

have fun taking a breather (something i've been considering, but i'm such an addict at this point) and we'll talk to you soon.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 06:55 AM   #127
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 12:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by u2bonogirl


Theres always a chance that birth control could fail, and I recognize that fact.
If I were to become pregnant after Im married I would be terrified at first but we would get through it.
I guess what Im saying is that Im not ready, and I would be really freaked out. But its not going to stop me from having sex as much as I want with my husband even if I know the pill isnt 100% effective
Now, if he was just my boyfriend then I would say its a better idea that we dont have sex

I had one pregnancy scare in my life and I was fully ready to be publically shamed in my church and family, and then give it up for adoption. I just think it would be wrong of me to keep it if I couldnt support it or care for it emotionally very well and there was somebody out there that could do it better.

In that case, me having sex was a really bad idea


try two methods of birth control.

the pill and condoms. a sponge and condoms. etc.

i would put the risk of catching an STD via gay sex as somewhat analagous to an unwanted pregnancy as a result of heterosexual sex. for me, the answer isn't necessarily to abstain (since i think abstincence can often lead to a binge-and-purge mentality, and that if and when one breaks down and has sex it is less likely to be protected sex ... in the gay world, this happens with many men on the down-low) but it is to doubly protect yourself and to fully educate yourself on exactly how STDs are passed, or how you get pregnant.

for example, if i do have penetrative intercourse, i use both condoms and withdrawal. i also know exactly how to put on a condom, i know which ones are best for anal sex (i.e., no spermacide), which lubricants to use (i.e., water based), and i also know that transmission of HIV is often dependent both upon the volume of semen as well as it's incubation period. i also have a frank discussion about STDs each time with a new partner, and i also make it a point to not have sex each and every time i hook up with someone (and i don't even hook up that often).

the point i'm getting at -- and while this might appear to be self-aggrandizing, i can honestly say that i've never had unprotected sex and never had an STD (nor gotten a girl pregnant) -- is that there's both safe sex, and there's smart safe sex.

and the key is education.

and none of this i learned in school. this was all done through a combination of internet research, talking with doctors, and talking with men older than i am who have much more experience.

protect yourselves, and have happy sex.

or don't have sex at all.

just so long as you are in control and making the decisions about your body.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 07:15 AM   #128
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
u2bonogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Back on the blue crack after a long break
Posts: 6,726
Local Time: 01:12 PM

I too have never had unprotected sex
Ive tried depo provera which is really effective but the side effects just make it a miserable thing to be on
I tried the patch, and it made me gain water weight, which was birth control enough because when I feel like a big bloated cow theres very little drive to show my body
I tried the regular old pill and that worked well, except I have trouble remembering to take it all the time
And now Im on seasonale
Ive done everything I can to make sure that I dont have an unwated baby, and you know the best thing about it?
Everything was completely free.
You can be protected if you just ask for it

Ive never had sex with somebody who wasnt a long term monogamous partner so Ive never risked STDs
Is it more of a risk for the gay population to contract an STD or is that a stigma?

Taking care of my body, and keeping it solely my body and not containing another one has been an ongoing process but its far less work than raising an unexpected child.
Dont think that I havent look at my friends who have had kids at 18/19 and thought the kid was so cute that I wanted one of my own
But of course that passes when they start crying and screaming and smell of baby poop
__________________
u2bonogirl is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 07:38 AM   #129
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 12:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by u2bonogirl


Ive never had sex with somebody who wasnt a long term monogamous partner so Ive never risked STDs
Is it more of a risk for the gay population to contract an STD or is that a stigma?


i think it's more of a risk for the highly sexually active gay population.

there are gay men -- more than i originally thought, to be honest -- who really are looking to have sex in the context of a monogamous relationship. while the Brian of "Queer as Folk" template does exist, and there are men who are looking to have sex with someone new every weekend, it's actually less prevelant than i had originally thought. or maybe i just know the right people? anyway, just goes to show how much even gay people internalize homophobia.

i think that gay men are more at risk for STDs for a few reasons: they are men, and i don't think too many people will argue that, on average, men are more inclined to seek multiple partners, the whole "sowing wild oats" idea, and this goes for straight men as well.

also, there are few incentives, and many outright barriers towards forming monogamous gay relationships, so it's almost as if society sets gay men up to be promiscuous and then turns that against them as means to attack civil unions and adoption rights and then to assert the natural "superiority" of heterosexuality over homosexuality.

finally, it's simply a smaller group of people. there are fewer degrees of separation between sexual partners than there are in the straight world.

also, there's a good degree of self-loathing in the gay world, men who have been taught to hate themselves and view themselves as unworthy of many of the things that society has to offer. and they hear this reinforced on the news every time a politicized Christianist talking head shoots his mouth off. feelings of worthlessness lead to self-destructive behavior (and which is why i feel the need to battle the idea that some people on this list have that homosexuality is simply "wrong" or "sinful" -- i don't think it's fully understood the amount of psychological damage this has on many gay people). there's no question that drug use is probably higher, on average, in urban gay centers (though this might have something to do with relative affluence and availability, as well as a means of self-medication), and according to my friend who's a doctor at the Whitman-Walker clinic (which just had it's budget slashed), most people who come in for an HIV test say the following, "i was really drunk/high last weekend, and i think i might have had unprotected sex." most times, people are fine. but not always.

this is why i feel so strongly about the need to give gay relationships structure, meaning, and purpose -- and the best way to do that, at a minimum, is through civil unions.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 07:45 AM   #130
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
u2bonogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Back on the blue crack after a long break
Posts: 6,726
Local Time: 01:12 PM
thanks for the glimpse into the gay world.
I wish christians werent so judgemental about things they feel superior over
If they/we all followed what God asked us to do we would acknowledge the fact that in Christianity people ultimately answer to God, and its not our place to judge people. we're just called to love one another
I dont think that a lot of things the public christian guys do is loving one another
Honestly, my take on the gay marriage, and I might get attacked for this I dunno.
Is that if a gay couple wants to get married, they should be allowed to do it, but churches who dont want to support that form of marriage just wont have to facilitate the weddings. That way, the people who dont support gay marriage dont have to take part in making it happen, but those that do can fully support it and allow the couples to get married

From your perspective, is that an unfair right wing opinion?
should this be in the ask the homo thread?
__________________
u2bonogirl is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 08:15 AM   #131
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 12:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by u2bonogirl
thanks for the glimpse into the gay world.
I Is that if a gay couple wants to get married, they should be allowed to do it, but churches who dont want to support that form of marriage just wont have to facilitate the weddings. That way, the people who dont support gay marriage dont have to take part in making it happen, but those that do can fully support it and allow the couples to get married


that's my position as well.

no one wants to force a church to do something it doesn't want to do -- though i'm sure we can find some episcopalian and unitarian churches who'd be happy to marry gay people.

i think you're getting at precisely what the argument for marriage equality is: marriage is not necessarily a religious union, but it is always a civil contract. to deny a segment of the population access to such contracts is tantamount to the denial of civil rights. straight people don't have to get married, and thus they might not benefit from this contract. but the always have the *option* of getting married. except in Massachusettes, gay people do not have the option of getting married (in a meaningful sense ... there are plenty of gay people married to straight people who have functional, but sexless, marriages).
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 09:28 AM   #132
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
u2bonogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Back on the blue crack after a long break
Posts: 6,726
Local Time: 01:12 PM
Wow, it seems so simple when we put it in these terms.
The government marrys gays. The church stays out if it wants to
I agree that if a gay couple wants to be together for life they should get the same benefits as a straight couple. Taxes, medical information, whatever
This is why people who know me consider me a leftist conservative
__________________
u2bonogirl is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 12:25 PM   #133
War Child
 
Sparkysgrrrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: under the table and screaming
Posts: 754
Local Time: 09:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by starsforu2


If you ask for help, people give it. No one wants to ask for help. Too prideful. Too much shame.
This statement is so infuriating to me I can't even see straight.
__________________
Sparkysgrrrl is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 08:12 PM   #134
New Yorker
 
Ultraviolet Light's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,792
Local Time: 01:12 PM

So has Rehnquist actually officially announced his resignation then? That is, is this "broken" news yet?


Not to get off topic.
__________________
Ultraviolet Light is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 08:30 PM   #135
Offishul Kitteh Doctor
Forum Moderator
 
bonosloveslave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Taking care of kitties
Posts: 9,655
Local Time: 12:12 PM
^^Thank you Ellen

I know these hot button issues are somewhat related to the next candidate - but it is frustrating that this has degenerated into the same old arguments that no one is being swayed by.

We'll let this go a bit longer - but let's try to get back to the topic - or shut up about it until we actually have a nominated candidate.
__________________

__________________
bonosloveslave [at] interference.com
bonosloveslave is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com