What the hell is going on on this country? I don't want my son walking up to other little boys andgiving a red construction paper heart with the words "You're Cool" on it. When I was a kid if you did that to another boy you would have got the living hell beat out of you. I miss them days...

http://swiftreport.blogs.com/news/2005/02/parents_protest.html

February 14, 2005
Parents Protest Exchange of Same-Sex Valentines
A group of parents in a southern Illinois town is protesting the exchange of Valentine's Day cards between students of the same sex. The parents warn that students who give Valentines to their same sex peers are undermining the sanctity of the February celebration.


Parents decry 'heartless' attack on traditional family values

By Cole Walters, Education Correspondent

MT VERNON, IL—Christopher Biggins has been working on his Valentine's Day cards since last week. The 6-year-old, who attends the Buford Elementary School in this southern Illinois town, hand addressed 23 envelopes—12 to the girls in his class, 11 to the boys—and signed his name to cards bearing messages like "you're cool," "I like you," and "let's be friends."

But then Christopher's family got word that some parents here are planning a Valentine's Day protest. Their issue: the exchange of Valentines between students of the same sex. Giving cards and candy to their same sex peers, say the parents, constitutes an attack on traditional family values and undermines the sanctity of the February 14 celebration.

"We couldn't believe it when we got the news," says Christopher's mother, Elise Biggins, who works part-time as a bookkeeper in nearby Marion. "These are first graders. How can it undermine someone else's Valentine's Day to have them giving each other cards?"

The Bigginses decided that rather than risk attracting the ire of the protesting parents, Christopher wouldn't hand out any Valentines this year. "We gave him a choice between only giving Valentines to the girls or not handing out any and he decided to give it a pass this year," says Elise Biggins. "Can you blame him?"

Mary Ann Boone is one of the organizers of the Valentine's Day protest. She said that she had never really thought about just how offensive it is that girls and boys often exchange Valentine's with their same sex peers—until this year. "It just hit me all of a sudden that this is something that really undermines traditional family values," says Boone. While Boone's daughter Rebecca, who attends third grade at Buford Elementary, will be bringing Valentine's cards to school today, she will be distributing them only to the boys in her class.

To make their point, Boone, along with 15 like-minded friends and neighbors, plans to spend much of today demonstrating in front of Buford Elementary, a 1940's era brick school building on the west side of Mt. Vernon. Armed with signs that read "have a heart," "respect family values," and "no same sex VD," the parents are hoping that they can win over the hearts and minds of the students who go to school here—before it's too late.

"This is how it starts, with one little girl giving another little girl a Valentine," says Boone. "But before you know it, you've got serious problems."

A tarnished celebration
Boone's friend Michelle Nardullis says that she was originally planning to sit out the protest, as she has no children of her own. But she changed her mind, says Nardullis, after she realized what the exchange of same sex Valentines meant to her own celebration of the annual tribute to cupid.

"This is one of the biggest days of the year for me, second only to my wedding anniversary," says Nardullis. "I'm expecting at least a dozen roses, maybe even a piece of jewelry. What does it say about my Valentine's Day when school kids of the same sex are giving each other cards?"

Can this holiday be saved?
Officials at the elementary school say that they're now considering banning all future celebrations of Valentine's Day in the classroom in order to avoid offending parents to whom the exchange of same sex Valentines is offensive.

"We've already eliminated peanuts from the school cafeteria to accommodate children with food allergies," says Assistant Principal Cathy McGovern, noting that the Mt. Vernon school board will soon consider a measure banning cupcakes and cookies in an effort to combat obesity in the schools.

"Valentine's Day is a nice tradition," says McGovern. "But we don't want to end up undermining our families just so kids can give each other cards

The parents warn that students who give Valentines to their same sex peers are undermining the sanctity of the February celebration.

LOL! A holiday now largely underwritten by chocolate companies and lingerie manufacturers needs to have its "sanctity" protected?

Seriously, some people have too much time on their hands.

That's ridiculous. When I was a kid, you gave out Valentine's cards to everyone in class, regardless of gender. Everyone got cards and everyone was happy.

The only people doing anything subversive are these "family values" extremists--there never was any gay subtext to any of this until these "concerned parents" created one.

Ok, I'm strongly against homosexuality, but this is frickin ridiculous.

IIRC, when I was a 6, the entire class pretty much gave valentines to most of the class, boy or girl.

"no same sex VD"


Come on guys, aren't we on the same side here? Who wants to argue for same sex VD.

I should hope such mind-jarring stupidity takes effort, but I'm guessing it didn't in this instance.

"This is one of the biggest days of the year for me, second only to my wedding anniversary," says Nardullis. "I'm expecting at least a dozen roses, maybe even a piece of jewelry. What does it say about my Valentine's Day when school kids of the same sex are giving each other cards?"


That you realize how pathetic you are for expecting money as a show of affection, when all the kids really get out of it is a sense of well-being and maybe a sugar rush?

The article reads to me that the kid is just trying to spread goodwill and happiness. Clearly he should know better than that.... :rolleyes:

Parents decry 'heartless' attack on traditional family values

LOL. What about their own "heartless" attack on peace and harmony? :D

MT VERNON, IL—Christopher Biggins has been working on his Valentine's Day cards since last week. The 6-year-old, who attends the Buford Elementary School in this southern Illinois town, hand addressed 23 envelopes—12 to the girls in his class, 11 to the boys—and signed his name to cards bearing messages like "you're cool," "I like you," and "let's be friends."

So, he's giving out cards to girls and boys. Says it right there. Yep, clearly spreading homosexuality there. :rolleyes:

Giving cards and candy to their same sex peers, say the parents, constitutes an attack on traditional family values and undermines the sanctity of the February 14 celebration.

LOL! Do they make the same criticisms about Easter and Christmas? Well, they should. :) Sanctity. LOL!

To make their point, Boone, along with 15 like-minded friends and neighbors, plans to spend much of today demonstrating in front of Buford Elementary, a 1940's era brick school building on the west side of Mt. Vernon. Armed with signs that read "have a heart," "respect family values," and "no same sex VD," the parents are hoping that they can win over the hearts and minds of the students who go to school here—before it's too late.

Seriously, get jobs, or something.

"This is how it starts, with one little girl giving another little girl a Valentine," says Boone. "But before you know it, you've got serious problems."

Or hot lesbian sex, of course. :)

"This is one of the biggest days of the year for me, second only to my wedding anniversary," says Nardullis. "I'm expecting at least a dozen roses, maybe even a piece of jewelry. What does it say about my Valentine's Day when school kids of the same sex are giving each other cards?"

That you're a narrow-minded bigot who likes jumping to unwarranted conclusions?

LOL. :D

Silly silly silly. Just silly.

What a bunch of bigoted old farts.

People are stupid... I fear for the future of my country.

"This is one of the biggest days of the year for me, second only to my wedding anniversary," says Nardullis. "I'm expecting at least a dozen roses, maybe even a piece of jewelry. What does it say about my Valentine's Day when school kids of the same sex are giving each other cards?"


Anybody that *expects* roses or jewelry doesn't deserve them. It doesn't qualify as a gift if you are just fulfilling an obligation.

Why does it cheapen this person's Valentines day when a 6-year old boy gives a card to another 6-year old boy, and not to a 6-year old girl? Are the two 6-year olds really in love? This is just stupid.

"We've already eliminated peanuts from the school cafeteria to accommodate children with food allergies," says Assistant Principal Cathy McGovern, noting that the Mt. Vernon school board will soon consider a measure banning cupcakes and cookies in an effort to combat obesity in the schools.


This is unbelievable too. Do you really think the kids don't realize that the peanut clusters contain peanuts? How about adding a sign next to the item saying "contains peanuts"? No, much better to teach kinds that peanuts don't exist. This should prepare them for life on their own.

Do cupcakes and cookies really contribute that much to obesity? As I remember grade school, you could generally get only one cookie or cupcake on your way through the line. What good will you gain from cutting out one cookie at lunch when the kids get to go home and have all the crap food they want?

"Valentine's Day is a nice tradition," says McGovern. "But we don't want to end up undermining our families just so kids can give each other cards

Valentine's Day is a greeting card holiday. There are no family values associated with this holiday. There is no religious sanctity associated with this holiday. This is a made up holiday so the greeting card company can sell more cards.

All of this family values stuff is just so much crap. Teach your family values to your own family in your own home. School is one of the only places for these kids to experience the real world, and they need to learn that they have to find their place in the world. They can't expect the world to adjust for them.

That's ridiculous. When I was a kid, you gave out Valentine's cards to everyone in class, regardless of gender. Everyone got cards and everyone was happy.
I was actually talking to my girlfriend about this yesterday. I don't care if a guy is giving me a valentine: if it had candy in it, I could have cared less who had given it to me :D

SI

OMFG!!

This is unbelievable too. Do you really think the kids don't realize that the peanut clusters contain peanuts? How about adding a sign next to the item saying "contains peanuts"? No, much better to teach kinds that peanuts don't exist. This should prepare them for life on their own.

I see your point, but the kids in question are 6. I don't remember making any such distinctions at 6.

I see your point, but the kids in question are 6. I don't remember making any such distinctions at 6.

And yet kids allergic to peanuts managed to survive past the age of 6 before schools removed the peanuts.

And yet kids allergic to peanuts managed to survive past the age of 6 before schools removed the peanuts.

Actually, no. Well, not all of them.

Everyone here is joking, right?

Right?

People are stupid... I fear for the future of my country.

I hear ya, but I wouldn't be too worried. Seems we have more "well-headed" people then idoits, so I hope it balances out. Just idotic people get all the attention.

First giving cookies, then giving V-Day cards. Man, I starting to ready to start be a dick to people.

"This is one of the biggest days of the year for me, second only to my wedding anniversary," says Nardullis. "I'm expecting at least a dozen roses, maybe even a piece of jewelry. What does it say about my Valentine's Day when school kids of the same sex are giving each other cards?"

This little snippet just wraps up so completely everything I object to about this story (and many, many others). It's like a little epigraph of "What I Am Against," all tightly bound up into three sentences. Brilliantly done, though unknowingly, of course.

[QUOTE=Klinglerware]That's ridiculous. When I was a kid, you gave out Valentine's cards to everyone in class, regardless of gender. Everyone got cards and everyone was happy.QUOTE]

Same here, and I grew up in rural Georgia.

OMFG!!
Hey! Don't take your name in vain. You don't like that. Remember?

:p

So...they're thinking that if a 6 year old boy gives a card to another 6 year old boy he'll grow up gay? And their solution is to have him give a dozen cards out to only girls? So he can grow up to be a man-ho with his bitches? I mean, if they're looking at these cards as things you give to people you're sexually atracted to (however the hell a 6-year old can be) isn't that the result of giving a lot of cards to only the opposite gender?

I don't think that made sense, but what the fuck. Those idiots pissed me off I can't think straight. I still can't believe the quote about expecting gifts for this shitty holiday and having the "sanctity" of it ruined by kids being friendly.

Am I the only straight person who doesn't view being homosexual as some sort of disease?

Am I the only straight person who doesn't view being homosexual as some sort of disease?

No, but in some of these cowpoke idiotic places, you might be.

Ok, I'm strongly against homosexuality, but this is frickin ridiculous.

Well, you pretty well covered my reaction.

This story read more like The Onion than AP.

Maybe it's just me, but not once did I fear that giving valentines to males in elementary school was going to turn me gay.

Pathetic

Maybe it's just me, but not once did I fear that giving valentines to males in elementary school was going to turn me gay.

Pathetic

It seems quite fashionable these days to believe that anything with even the slightest homosexual overtones can and will cause a person to become homosexual...as if outside factors actually did play a part.

No, but in some of these cowpoke idiotic places, you might be.
Here we go again. "I am so much more enlightened because I live in the Northeast and don't listen to country music or wear cowboy hats."

:rolleyes:

BTW, the whole notion that a six year old boy giving another six year old boy a valentine is condoning homosexuality is completely absurb. This is just as absurb as the whole Spongebob video promoting homosexuality. I'm from rural Oklahoma, and we were expected to give everyone a valentine card with candy. This is just as absurb as the whole Spongebob video promoting homosexuality.

Yeah, when did homosexuality become an airborn infective thing? ;)

Stuff like this should show that the anti-homosexual groups are not in touch with reality.

Here we go again. "I am so much more enlightened because I live in the Northeast and don't listen to country music or wear cowboy hats."

:rolleyes:

BTW, the whole notion that a six year old boy giving another six year old boy a valentine is condoning homosexuality is completely absurb. This is just as absurb as the whole Spongebob video promoting homosexuality. I'm from rural Oklahoma, and we were expected to give everyone a valentine card with candy. This is just as absurb as the whole Spongebob video promoting homosexuality.

No, its the sign of extraordinarily stupid people. As for the remark, being as you are from Rural Oklahoma, do you think there are more people opposed to gay marriage there, as opposed to a random city ? Genuine question. If its affirmative, what's factually wrong about my remark ?

As a generally right-wing conservative who has argued against things like Gay Marriage here: this is ridiculous. I mean, until you get into at least high school, there is no real "Valentine's Day". It's more of a "Friendship Day" (what the call it at my daughter's daycare, for example), and sayings like "Let's be Friends" are perfectly fine. There are more important issues to deal with.

That's ridiculous. When I was a kid, you gave out Valentine's cards to everyone in class, regardless of gender. Everyone got cards and everyone was happy.

The only people doing anything subversive are these "family values" extremists--there never was any gay subtext to any of this until these "concerned parents" created one.
First I agree that when I was in grade school, if I gave Valentines out they went to everyone in the class.

Second, you are right that it is the whacko anti-gay crowd that is stirring this particular pot.

When I was 6, we made little boxes and exchanged cards with everyone, I doubt it influenced anyone to become a homosexual. The sad part is the school is going to call off future V-days because of these idiotic parents, who also feel the need to protest in front of the school.

No, its the sign of extraordinarily stupid people. As for the remark, being as you are from Rural Oklahoma, do you think there are more people opposed to gay marriage there, as opposed to a random city ? Genuine question. If its affirmative, what's factually wrong about my remark ?

Being morally conservative doesn't make you less enlightened. That's his point.

Being morally conservative doesn't make you less enlightened. That's his point.

No it doesnt. But actively working to discriminate against people makes you bigoted, which I equate to stupidity. There are plenty of morally conservative people who understand that their morals are their own, and not those to be applied willfully to everyone. They may disagree strongly with the likes of Gay marriage, but they understand in a Voltaire-esque sense that what they like and dislike isnt a rational basis for law.

February 14, 2005


MT VERNON, IL—Christopher Biggins has been working on his Valentine's Day cards since last week. The 6-year-old, who attends the Buford Elementary School in this southern Illinois town, hand addressed 23 envelopes—12 to the girls in his class, 11 to the boys—and signed his name to cards bearing messages like "you're cool," "I like you," and "let's be friends."

But then Christopher's family got word that some parents here are planning a Valentine's Day protest. Their issue: the exchange of Valentines between students of the same sex. Giving cards and candy to their same sex peers, say the parents, constitutes an attack on traditional family values and undermines the sanctity of the February 14 celebration.

"We couldn't believe it when we got the news," says Christopher's mother, Elise Biggins, who works part-time as a bookkeeper in nearby Marion. "These are first graders. How can it undermine someone else's Valentine's Day to have them giving each other cards?"

The Bigginses decided that rather than risk attracting the ire of the protesting parents, Christopher wouldn't hand out any Valentines this year. "We gave him a choice between only giving Valentines to the girls or not handing out any and he decided to give it a pass this year," says Elise Biggins. "Can you blame him?"

Mary Ann Boone is one of the organizers of the Valentine's Day protest. She said that she had never really thought about just how offensive it is that girls and boys often exchange Valentine's with their same sex peers—until this year. "It just hit me all of a sudden that this is something that really undermines traditional family values," says Boone. While Boone's daughter Rebecca, who attends third grade at Buford Elementary, will be bringing Valentine's cards to school today, she will be distributing them only to the boys in her class.

To make their point, Boone, along with 15 like-minded friends and neighbors, plans to spend much of today demonstrating in front of Buford Elementary, a 1940's era brick school building on the west side of Mt. Vernon. Armed with signs that read "have a heart," "respect family values," and "no same sex VD," the parents are hoping that they can win over the hearts and minds of the students who go to school here—before it's too late.

"This is how it starts, with one little girl giving another little girl a Valentine," says Boone. "But before you know it, you've got serious problems."

"This is one of the biggest days of the year for me, second only to my wedding anniversary," says Nardullis. "I'm expecting at least a dozen roses, maybe even a piece of jewelry. What does it say about my Valentine's Day when school kids of the same sex are giving each other cards?"



Glad these guys are slaves to the retail industry. If these people are so worried about V-days, send your kids to Christian schools. Biggest day of the year? How bout your birthday, your children's birthdays, Christmas/easter. Nothing special about V-days expect getting expensive gifts (I know, your birthday and Christmas could fall her, but they have alot more meaning, and family, behind it then V-days).

These guys should not protest, but go to work and worry about paying the bills and that first. So does giving your daugther v-day card or present make your gay or sick?

The family gave their son a "choice"? Sure....

No, its the sign of extraordinarily stupid people.
This is the point that I'm trying to make. You associate people who don't think, act, or share the same cultural or belief system as you do. As far as you are concerned, every bigot must be riding around listening to country music, wears a ten gallon cowboy hat, and plots using his pick-up to run him over a "nigger". You are showing that you are no better than the bigots that live all over this country.

As for the remark, being as you are from Rural Oklahoma, do you think there are more people opposed to gay marriage there, as opposed to a random city ? Genuine question. If its affirmative, what's factually wrong about my remark ?
Good question. Since over 70% voted to ban gay marriages, I would say that the difference is extremely minute between rural and urban Oklahomans. However, there are "cowpokes" who don't believe in blocking gay marriages. Is it fair to lump them into the rest of the bigots? It would be the same as myself calling people who did stupid things as "yankees". Whether you are a part of it, I would be lumping you into the same stereotypical category.

We also have a fairly good size Hispanic and African American communities in Tulsa and Oklahoma City. If memory serves me correctly, the rate of anti-gay marriages were higher in proportion than the white population. That would mean that the those groups are just as, if not more, responsible for the blocking of gay rights as your so called "rednecks".

Being morally conservative doesn't make you less enlightened. That's his point.
Thank you for defending me.

No it doesnt. But actively working to discriminate against people makes you bigoted, which I equate to stupidity. There are plenty of morally conservative people who understand that their morals are their own, and not those to be applied willfully to everyone. They may disagree strongly with the likes of Gay marriage, but they understand in a Voltaire-esque sense that what they like and dislike isnt a rational basis for law.
Yet, you show the exact same bigotry that you are calling stupid. It's like I said earlier discussions, you can't put people into neat little categories, so you can sleep better at night.

Duckman, when you asked me to define redneck earlier, I made no mention of race - you're introducing that into the discussion, not me. Are the people I tend to call "rednecks" more likely to be white ? yes- but that by no means suggests that I percieve all white southerners as rednecks, which is the leap you seem to be making. Some of this may be due to different perspectives and you might see race as a factor - I don't. That's akin to saying only white people can be racist - and inane.

So I'll state it again- characteristics I would define as "redneck", as I use the term - people who oppose gay marriage on "its icky" or "the Bible says no" principles, oppose evolution, think women have a place only at home, people who live in a rural environment - a combination of those factors makes them a redneck in my mind. Since these disagreement seems to be on my choice of word, I would appreciate an explanation as to what you think the term signifies.

Last point- you suggest that I "associate people who don't think, act, or share the same cultural or belief system as " idiots. Not true. I do not however believe in a morally relativistic system that suggests bigotry is okay, because of cultural differences - and I view the imposition on an individual's rights as such to be a sign of bigotry, which I see as idiocy.

I doubt you'll agree with me, but I at least want to make myself clear.

As a generally right-wing conservative who has argued against things like Gay Marriage here: this is ridiculous. I mean, until you get into at least high school, there is no real "Valentine's Day". It's more of a "Friendship Day" (what the call it at my daughter's daycare, for example), and sayings like "Let's be Friends" are perfectly fine. There are more important issues to deal with.


I agree with this completely.

It's funny to see people get all upset over an article that's fake.

"attends third grade at Buford Elementary": Buford Elementary (grds 4-5) (http://iirc.niu.edu/scripts/school.asp?schoolID=2504108002002&colName=SCHLNAME&searchStr=buford&test=all)

"Christopher Biggins has been working on his Valentine's Day cards...": clever name? - not sure (http://www.sky.com/showbiz/article/0,,50001-1170113,00.html)

Assistant Principal Cathy McGovern...: one of the unlisted principals I guess (http://www.district.mtv80.org/education/components/scdirectory/default.php?sectiondetailid=11616&sc_timestamp=1108440355)

i was going to say... y'all do realize this is fake, right?

This little snippet just wraps up so completely everything I object to about this story (and many, many others). It's like a little epigraph of "What I Am Against," all tightly bound up into three sentences. Brilliantly done, though unknowingly, of course.
So your against Selfishness, shallowness, AND stupidity!!

What the hell are you doing around here?

i was going to say... y'all do realize this is fake, right?
I was suckered in. It sounded just ridiculous enough to be true. Well then again I didn't read the article itself, so I am more of a sheep than a sucker I guess. Baaahhh Lead me on FOFC.


Oh and Crapshoot. You really need to work on your definition of a redneck. I think Jeff Foxworthy could give you a place to start.

Roffle - I bit on it. Nice catch Cam.

Glen, my roommate sophomore was a self-proclaimed West Virginia Redneck- I recall taking the Jeff Foxworthy, are you a redneck test and he scored a perfect on it.. - so I do have some familiarity wit that. :D

Nice fake. No need for self-flagellation, Glengoyne--there is precious little in the article that would have given it away, unless you already knew something about the area.

I doubt than many people would realize that it was not a real story unless it was pointed out.

Here we go again. "I am so much more enlightened because I live in the Northeast and don't listen to country music or wear cowboy hats."

:rolleyes:

BTW, the whole notion that a six year old boy giving another six year old boy a valentine is condoning homosexuality is completely absurb. This is just as absurb as the whole Spongebob video promoting homosexuality. I'm from rural Oklahoma, and we were expected to give everyone a valentine card with candy. This is just as absurb as the whole Spongebob video promoting homosexuality.
I totally agree with you, but um did you by any chance vote for Tom Coburn for U.S. Senate? The same guy who said that lesbianism was so rampant in Oklahoma middle schools that teachers had to prevent girls from going to the bathrooms at the same time.

The solution here is simple, we will just pull valentine's day out of the schools.

Everyone here is joking, right?

Right?
Sheesh. So you guys weren't kidding.

I guess everyone's looking for a reason to get upset. I thought this was pretty obviously satirical.

Sheesh. So you guys weren't kidding.

I guess everyone's looking for a reason to get upset. I thought this was pretty obviously satirical.

Not to open up old debates, but with half the crap being fought about in schools today (intelligent design/evolution, prom dresses, etc) this wasn't that far off base.

No, its the sign of extraordinarily stupid people. As for the remark, being as you are from Rural Oklahoma, do you think there are more people opposed to gay marriage there, as opposed to a random city ? Genuine question. If its affirmative, what's factually wrong about my remark ?

Well, I came from Urban Oklahoma (where we handed out valentines cards to everyone in class -- mine always were either dinosaur or space themed), and most people there don't even know that they know any gay people. (At least in the 1980-1990 time frame.) I recall explaining to someone that his question of "how can they tell which one is the man and which one is the woman" just didn't make sense. (FWIW, I'm not gay, but I knew a lot of gays in college.)

Well, I came from Urban Oklahoma (where we handed out valentines cards to everyone in class -- mine always were either dinosaur or space themed), and most people there don't even know that they know any gay people. (At least in the 1980-1990 time frame.) I recall explaining to someone that his question of "how can they tell which one is the man and which one is the woman" just didn't make sense. (FWIW, I'm not gay, but I knew a lot of gays in college.)

I would guess there were similar misunderstandings about homosexuality in many places from 1980-1990, not just Oklahoma. I am from urban Oklahoma as well, and I think people like Crapshoot would be surprised about how "enlightened" many people here actually are. There always seems to be a major misunderstanding between the concept of "enlightenment" and someone simply having a moral objection to homosexuality. It's amazing to me that some people never get that.

I would guess there were similar misunderstandings about homosexuality in many places from 1980-1990, not just Oklahoma. I am from urban Oklahoma as well, and I think people like Crapshoot would be surprised about how "enlightened" many people here actually are. There always seems to be a major misunderstanding between the concept of "enlightenment" and someone simply having a moral objection to homosexuality. It's amazing to me that some people never get that.

Actually, if you read what I said, I suggested that someone's morality is no excuse for bigotry from my perspective. Having said that, I have no problem with your moral objection, but rather with the idea that you (and I use the general "you" here) want to limit everyone because of those "morals." The day a gay couple insists they should be allowed to marry in your church is the day I'll stand with you (different as our points may be) stopping them, because that would be an imposition of them unto you.

Actually, if you read what I said, I suggested that someone's morality is no excuse for bigotry from my perspective. Having said that, I have no problem with your moral objection, but rather with the idea that you (and I use the general "you" here) want to limit everyone because of those "morals." The day a gay couple insists they should be allowed to marry in your church is the day I'll stand with you (different as our points may be) stopping them, because that would be an imposition of them unto you.

First of all, I don't think I've ever said that my legal objection to homosexual marriage has anything to do with my moral one. If you could find something like that from me, I would be surprised.

I have no desire or intention to "limit everyone" because of my morals. I appreciate you using the general term "you," but you're lumping me within that, and it's inaccurate. Personally, I'm of the mind that the government should largely remove itself from the marriage business and that anyone can enter into a legal contract with another adult.

So, I'd venture to guess that we're closer in our opinions than you would mistakenly assume. And that is at the heart of my issue with a number of your posts on this board, Crapshoot. You place people within nice little stereotypical groups because of the area of the country in which they reside, and no matter how anyone tells you otherwise, you hold true to your own brand of bigotry. At least you're consistent, I suppose.

First of all, I don't think I've ever said that my legal objection to homosexual marriage has anything to do with my moral one. If you could find something like that from me, I would be surprised.

I have no desire or intention to "limit everyone" because of my morals. I appreciate you using the general term "you," but you're lumping me within that, and it's inaccurate. Personally, I'm of the mind that the government should largely remove itself from the marriage business and that anyone can enter into a legal contract with another adult.

So, I'd venture to guess that we're closer in our opinions than you would mistakenly assume. And that is at the heart of my issue with a number of your posts on this board, Crapshoot. You place people within nice little stereotypical groups because of the area of the country in which they reside, and no matter how anyone tells you otherwise, you hold true to your own brand of bigotry. At least you're consistent, I suppose.

If I've made a mistake on the general you, I apologize - I wasnt overtly familiar with your posts, and I based it from the one post I did read and the general arguement I've heard from most people here in the gay marriage debates. Fair enough.

That being said, damnit, there is a difference between saying everyone from Oklahoma hates gay people (which is what you and Duckman are interpreting my words as) and stating that something like this incident (mythical as it may be) is more likely to happen in a "cowpoke" town, which is the point Im trying to make. I am not dealing in absolutes here, and Im not sure how to convince you of that. Would you dispute my contention that this is more likely to happen in a small rural community in the south or midwest as opposed to an urban community in the west ?

That being said, damnit, there is a difference between saying everyone from Oklahoma hates gay people (which is what you and Duckman are interpreting my words as) and stating that something like this accident (mythical as it may be) is more likely to happen in a "cowpoke" town, which is the point Im trying to make. I am not dealing in absolutes here, and Im not sure how to convince you of that. Would you dispute my contention that this is more likely to happen in a small rural community in the south or midwest as opposed to an urban community in the west ?

No, I wouldn't. And the truth is that I have not read all of your remarks in this thread. I was basing my comments on some general disagreements I have had with your posts in the past where it seemed to me that you were lumping entire states into your definition of pockets of stupidity and bigotry. If that's not your intention, then I apologize.

Edit: And although I wouldn't dispute your contention as it sounds like a logical one to me, I do not know it to be true.

No, I wouldn't. And the truth is that I have not read all of your remarks in this thread. I was basing my comments on some general disagreements I have had with your posts in the past where it seemed to me that you were lumping entire states into your definition of pockets of stupidity and bigotry. If that's not your intention, then I apologize.

Edit: And although I wouldn't dispute your contention as it sounds like a logical one to me, I do not know it to be true.

I admit to having a certain skepticism against some of the south, given its the only place in the US I've ever had people stare at me and give me looks such that I've felt uncomfortable. And I guess what you might interpret as me calling all Oklahoman's (is that the term ?) bigots on that issue, I view as saying its more likely there than elsewhere- the electron cloud principle, so to speak.

The solution here is simple, we will just pull valentine's day out of the schools.
You clearly haven't thought about this enough. Clearly we should pull the children all out of school since they're the problem.

SI