*sneaks in from the beach momentarily*

Vaevictus: If you've never seen Season Two, alls I can say is you're in for a treat.

So, anyone got any resolutions they intend to actually keep? ( ;
Harvester of Eyes
"God does not interfere in the affairs of man, they say. It's because he's not interested. He's done this planet. He's moved on. Perhaps one day he will put the entire kit back in its box, but probably not. You know kids, do they EVER put anything back in its box?" -Robert Rankin ("The Hollow Chocolate Bunnies of the Apocalypse")
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 11:25:34 pm EST from 71.74.28.233

ARRRGGHH!! My mother's computer is so antiquated that it is completely incapeable of running any program which can open AVIs. I think there literally doesn't exist a program that can open them, that can run on this computer. If I could just hook my PC back to the internet I could download a DivX reader in about 5 minutes, but there's only one modem in the house.

Purplegoldfish -- Really? I was mostly just sharing my thoughts for... um, I dunno. Certainly if you all told me "This is boring, shut up!" I'd have gone away, but it didn't occur to me anyone actually wanted to read my little "reviews." Heh. I'll keep writing them, then.

On the Magus and Katherine:
Katherine didn't seem so malicious. After all, she didn't curse five Gargs in a way that made it almost impossible to bring them back to life. Reading descriptions of the story, I had the impression that the Magus thought that the Gargs had actually killed the Princess. But watching the episode it was very clear that:

1. The Magus knew without a doubt that the Gargoyles had come to rescue the humans, and had no idea that the Princess was about to be killed.
2. The Magus is concerned that he and the Princess would have been ransomed, but he doesn't give a hoot whether the other humans are rescued or enslaved for life!
3. Whoever said it is right, I also got an impression of spinelessness.

So I know he might change a bit in the future, but right now I hate him.
I hate the Captain too. He didn't care about the human lives either, and he wasn't willing to risk his life to save the 40-odd gargoyles, either.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 10:02:52 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Asatira: Something I find interesting about Magus's character in later episodes. I've come to look upon one of his motives for taking on the Sisters (a fight that he knows he probably won't walk away from) as wanting to overcome his own weakness. If you look at him in Awakening, he was definitely something of a coward. When he freed himself from his bonds, he could have gone after Katherine, but he didn't even try to. He just gave her up for dead. So I think that there are lots of reasons that he took on the Sisters, and perhaps one of them was to test his own worth.
Harvester of Eyes
"God does not interfere in the affairs of man, they say. It's because he's not interested. He's done this planet. He's moved on. Perhaps one day he will put the entire kit back in its box, but probably not. You know kids, do they EVER put anything back in its box?" -Robert Rankin ("The Hollow Chocolate Bunnies of the Apocalypse")
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 8:38:45 pm EST from 71.74.28.233

Out of curiousity, Greg said #3 would address the topic on whether or not the clan would stay indoor during the day (albeit by a window to take in sunlight), right? Because in #1 they were so close to be seen at the castle by Fleance and Banquio.
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo,com]
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 7:58:16 pm EST from 71.115.242.120

I almost forgot, but it's New Year's Eve (or Hogmanay, as they call it in Scotland). 2006 is almost over. It's been a fairly good year for "Gargoyles" in some ways - though it could have been better (in light of the long delay of #2 and the sales for Season Two Volume One not being good enough to ensure a Volume Two). Let's hope that 2007 will be even better for "Gargoyles".

On Hogmanay, it's supposed to be good luck for the first person through the door being tall and dark. Goliath would certainly fit the description, but I doubt that too many Scottish humans would have been inviting them into their homes!
Todd Jensen
Gargoyles - did for monstrous-looking statues what "Watership Down" did for rabbits!
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 7:15:59 pm EST from 4.245.19.107

I think Castaway is out of his mind. He probably doesnt even thing of Elisa. He thinks of the huge gargoyles that "tried to kill his brother" and the one that killed his father. He would kill Elisa if she gets on the way, but i think is not probably that he would spend time planning on how to kill a human traitor when there are a lot of gargoyles out there to hunt.
"Demona's known where Elisa lives from as far back as "Long Way Till Morning" - and she hasn't done anything with that bit of information since that time".
I always wonder why.
Demon@ - [still searching for my avatar]
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 7:02:10 pm EST from 200.114.213.102

I don't know if Castaway would try deliberately targetting Elisa. The big problem that he'd have to worry about if he did was that Elisa is: a) a human and b) a member of the police. Hunting gargoyles probably isn't illegal (unless it's considered vigilantism), but trying to assassinate or abduct a cop? It would be too dangerous for the Quarrymen to pull off, unless Castaway could feel confident that he could prevent himself and his organization from being linked to it. (He'd also have to conceal it from all but the most hard-core members - mercenaries like Banquo and Fleance who would be too callous to worry about such activities. I doubt that the frightened citizens in the meeting hall from #1 would be too keen on that, and if they knew that Castaway was planning something like that, a lot of them would hurriedly turn in their hoods and hammers and leave.)

Not to mention that, as Greg Weisman pointed out once, Demona's known where Elisa lives from as far back as "Long Way Till Morning" - and she hasn't done anything with that bit of information since that time.
Todd Jensen
Gargoyles - did for monstrous-looking statues what "Watership Down" did for rabbits!
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 6:16:56 pm EST from 4.245.17.160

V.A.> I think a lot viewers were the same way about the Magus. For the longest time, until I saw the end of "Avalon", I did not like the Magus but saw he was honestly guilty about what he had done (especially out of anger and all, but even that was understandable). Was not so gentle on Katherine at the time, but on seeing again recently, I caught her fear more easily and could better understand where she was coming from. Don't you just love the series that can do this!
Asatira
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 4:08:08 pm EST from 66.191.158.77

elisa breaking goliath's heart: maybe some event happens in between the journey and issue 3 (or maybe in issue 3) that makes her change her mind (or makes her think she changes her mind). I'm curious to see what happens.

Another thought: will Elisa be staying in her apartment. I mean if I were her, I would hightail it out of there seeing as how the quarrymen know where she lives. and I wonder if Jon castaway has a personal vendetta against her seeing as she changed his brother's mind.

Vaevictus: I really like reading your reviews. It's such a breath of fresh air in here-since most of us have probably seen the episodes countless times and can quote every line, lol. Keep em' coming :) And the show is full of so many twists and turns-so don't be surprised if you change your mind about characters.

regarding Greg B's sig: I'm sorry but I have to say this since I took some offense-I know a lot of people make fun of those who go to "shrinks" and take medications because it turns people into wusses or whatever. But let me tell you that for me, seeing a therapist has helped me enormously and gave me a much better outlook on life when I felt there was no where to go and no where to turn to-and I'm not the only one. Mental health is just as important as physical health :shrugs:
Purplegoldfish - [skydragonn at aol dot com]
visit my garg art and other stuff :)
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 3:17:44 pm EST from 64.12.116.8

Something I've noticed, and perhaps I'm reading too much into this, is that despite the overwhelming desire for revenge he must have been feeling, his protector side was still in full swing. I can't remember the exact quote, but but did say "we will save the humans, AND we will have our revenge." He said the one thing first, and the other thing second. Which I think explains why he still saved the princess, even though he didn't like her.

Vaevictus: Katherine and the Magus might have been unlikeable in the pilot, but there was a definite change in their characters. Katherine was strong enough to admit that she'd done Goliath a great wrong. To me, she was saying that it wasn't just because his clan had been cursed, but she herself had been wrong for thinking Goliath and his kin to be little more than beasts. As far as Magus is concerned, if you haven't seen the "Avalon" three-parter, I'll stop talking, but I do have more I want to say.
Harvester of Eyes
"God does not interfere in the affairs of man, they say. It's because he's not interested. He's done this planet. He's moved on. Perhaps one day he will put the entire kit back in its box, but probably not. You know kids, do they EVER put anything back in its box?" -Robert Rankin ("The Hollow Chocolate Bunnies of the Apocalypse")
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 2:10:22 pm EST from 71.74.28.233

Vid -- do those formats work on a Mac?

A few other observations I forgot to include:

The Magus is a total jerk. I hated him as a kid, and I still hate him.
The Princess isn't so bad. In the dining hall I can see from her body language that she is mostly afraid of the gargoyles.
What a pair to trust all your eggs to. Not that anyone else was available, but still, unfortunate.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 1:51:47 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Vaevictis: AVI (referring to Audio-VIdeo) is a container format by Microsoft, sort of like a prececessor to WMV I think. The actual audio and video streams within can be encoded a zillion different ways. The most common codecs used for sharing movies in AVI files are DivX and XviD, as far as I know. These codecs are fairly easy to find for download, and once they are installed, you should be able to watch those AVI files, assuming they are in fact encoded with one of those formats.

---

Question to everyone who receives Toon Disney: Do you watch Gargoyles on Toon Disney when it's on in the late-night hours, record it and watch it later, or not at all?
Vid the Kid
Does this font make me look fat?
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 1:15:40 pm EST from 209.239.132.27

At that moment, there was hardly time to cry and mourn. Goliath and Hudson just came back, found their whole clan dead and massacred, and only four survivors. Time was not on their side. They had to track down the Vikings, and Goliath wanted revenge.

After that, he found the rest frozen in stone, so he brought them home, gave Katharine his last request for the eggs and then committed suicide. He was crying on the inside, if not on the outside.

But, still Goliath at those moments knew what he had to do. Plenty of time for mourning later.

As for whether you read the wrong books, well... my viewpoint on this is reflected in my sig. ::Points down::
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 11th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"Let me tell you something. Nowadays, everybody's got to go to shrinks and counselors and go on Sally Jesse Raphael and talk about their problems. Whatever happened to Gary Cooper, the strong silent type? That was an American. He wasn't in touch with his feelings. He just did what he had to do. See what they didn't know was once they got Gary Cooper in touch with his feelings was that they wouldn't be able to shut him up and then it's dysfunction this and dysfunction that and dysfunction va fa culo!" -Tony Soprano
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 12:57:15 pm EST from 67.87.175.245

Buh? An entire line of my post disappeared!
I mean to say "that led Goliath to suicide. Maybe I read all the wrong books, but I expected him to at least cry, or"
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 12:41:59 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Does anybody know how to run AVI files? I spent all that time downloading the episodes that aren't available on DVD, but my computer refuses to run them.

Siren -- I tried to email you Protection, but Hotmail would not let me upload it. I don't know what its problem is but it kept disconnecting me.
I need a better email service.


I watched Awakening last night, and liked it quite a bit. My initial feeling is that it seemed very short! Although it was a total of almost 2 and a half hours (I think), the Dark Ages part of it felt rushed. There did not seem to be enough time spent on the aftermath of the attack and the spell to fully show the feelings that led Goliath to cry, or say something like "everybody is dead, what am I going to do?" or at least sit down and look depressed for a few minutes. I dunno.
Of course that is probably because of the 22-minute limit put restrictions on how much they could show. And maybe it is not in Goliath's character anyway.

Initial thoughts and things I noticed:

The part where the survivors were cursed and Goliath comitted suicide actually made me cry a little bit -- I didn't expect that
Lexington isn't quite as ugly as I remember, but he still looks like a goblin (sorry, Lex fans)
The music is pretty nice, especially the flute bits in the menu.
I really like how the gargoyles are shaped, and how they move. I always liked that as a kid, too.
Lexington raises his wings up above his head and shoulders right before taking off, just like the others, even though in his case it is pointless since he doesn't fly with them like that. Must be instinct.
Although Demona claims she was frozen in stone like the others, her actions and vocabulary show that she's already more familiar with technology than Goliath.
The statues in Central Park are really strange looking. I wonder if they exist in real life.

Scenes I really liked: Brooklyn in the middle of the street trying to hail a cab, and Hudson's initial reaction to the TV.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 12:40:51 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Samuel> Greg has also stated that the people who looted the Mayan Pyramid and destroyed the (bulk of) the Mayan Clan are people we have not met yet in the series. But I think they had to be aware that the gargoyles were real gargoyles. Why else would they bother to destroy them if they were just looting the Pyramid. It is my belief that they knew about the Mayan Clan and felt that they were potentially guarding some treasure in the Pyramid, so they either waited til the Pendant Wearers were away or tricked them or got lucky that they were away for some reason and took the oppurtunity to raid the Pyramid, destroying the Clan on their way out as Hakon did so they wouldn't be pursued.
Of course, this is all my own speculation.

Anyway, the Mayan Clan is my favorite Clan so I'd love to talk about them.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"You mean the police. Your clan." "Right, my clan... who'll disown me if I don't get to work." -Goliath & Elisa "Reawakening"
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 10:53:19 am EST from 24.207.163.239

Ive just read the post of Quandra "Dusk Rider Q" and im quite touch. I have never gave it to much though about the black and withe people and the chiness ones on the show but yeasterday, after seeing the last movie of James Bond (Royal Casino i think?) and reading Quandra post i start noticing that she is right!. On that movie, almost all the black guys were either the bad ones or servants. There were no good black guys... I noticed the same in a lot of other shows (cartoons most of them) and gargoyles is the only one that has such variety if races. And species by the way :)
Another score for the show YEYYY!!
Demon@ - [still searching for my avatar]
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 10:21:42 am EST from 200.114.213.102

couple of points:

1)If you hadn't noticed, slg's website got a much needed facelift to become more web-friendly.

a)Also, they eliminated out of date info about stores; instead making store locator work off of a user entering a zip code. One wonders if slg paid money to get their website rebuilt or slg used interns to rebuild parts of the website or somebody in slg has been doing a lot of studying.

b)they haven't updated their production schedule page. Given how they redid the store locater page, I would think they would use dynamically generated content to show their production schedule.

c)according to their blog, last year they had 4 full-time and 1 part time person on editorial staff. this year, they have only 2 full-time people on editorial staff.

2)Todd - I assume you can quote Ask Greg to answer this recently submitted question:maria writes... Why did the creators of the show stop making the series?
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 10:01:42 am EST from 162.40.54.239

Sorry for the double post, but I forgot to say thank you.

So, THANKS! :)

*still lacks sleep*
Samuel - [AnglOfHellO at AOL dot com]
Noodles, anyone?
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 8:41:48 am EST from 68.55.107.142

Oh, darn. I guess I can chalk that mistake up to a lack of sleep and a gargoyles friendly... By friendly, I of course, mean frenzy.

-_-' That's what I mean by a lack of sleep. *off to work!*
Samuel - [AnglOfHellO at AOL dot com]
Noodles, anyone?
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 8:41:02 am EST from 68.55.107.142

Actually, Jon never said anything about destroying other clans anywhere in "Hunter's Moon"; if anything, the indication is that the Canmores, when they came to New York, had believed that Demona had been the very last gargoyle, the only one left in the world for a long time.

Also, the evidence in "The Green" is that the people who smashed the Mayan gargoyles were looters, who'd probably come to the pyramid to steal artifacts like the Mayan Sun Amulet. The Canmores' motivation in hunting gargoyles was ideological, rather than one based on greed.
Todd Jensen
Gargoyles - did for monstrous-looking statues what "Watership Down" did for rabbits!
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 7:45:36 am EST from 4.244.213.226

I've got something to say. *crickets chirp*

... Anyway. I watched The Green and the Hunter's Moon trilogy today, and a thought occurred to me. A Mayan gargoyle said something akin to "three years ago, poachers smashed all the sleeping gargoyles." And Jon said, "we've destroyed enough clans," or something to that effect. So, my thought was, did the Trio of Hunters perhaps destroy the Mayan clan?

As far as Elisa and Goliath go, I don't really mind, but I'd hope for a gargoyle child. Perhaps a lesson? Though, I doubt it. Still. It would be nice. 'Cos hatchlings are so cute. :)
Samuel - [AnglOfHellO at AOL dot com]
Noodles, anyone?
posted @ Sun, Dec 31, 2006 2:58:10 am EST from 68.55.107.142

Vaevictis> The commentary for the 5-part "Awakening" pilot on Season 1 has a lot of spoilers for both the rest of that season and even Season 2. If you're unfamiliar with the episodes, I'd definitely suggest watching all of them before re-watching "Awakening" with the commentary on.

The "City of Stone" commentary is also excellent but I'd also suggest leaving it for a later viewing.

The Season 2 episode introductions sometimes have spoilers, but as I recall it should be okay to watch them after each episode.

Harvester> The denial idea makes a lot of sense.
Abby
"Forty-two! Is that all you've got to show for seven and a half million years' work?"
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 7:09:56 pm EST from 24.118.226.247

On another subject, I just wanted to say that there was something very interesting in the preview for Issue #4 that I've been thinking about. I think it's interesting that in only the third issue, Elisa is going to break Goliath's heart. Especially because not too long before that, she had told Jason that there was someone who would always come first (who we can assume is Goliath). I think it's interesting that it seems to be coming so quickly. But then again, if I remember correctly, Greg did say that they would continue to try to deny for a time, due to their species difference.
Harvester of Eyes
"A good compromise leaves everybody mad." -Bill Watterson
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 6:55:13 pm EST from 71.74.28.233

Thanks for the advice, guys. Do you mean that I should watch all of Season One, or even of both seasons, before watching any of the extras? Or would it work to watch each introduction right after the actual episode?

I also got the Comic #1 since it only added 50c to my order (yay, free shipping!). My initial impression is that the art is less crisp, but I'll have to wait after the TV episodes to actually read and review it.

I agree that lady's response is indeed nice and eloquent.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 6:31:58 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Vaevictis Asmadi> I'd also recommend avoiding the introductions and the commentaries until after you've viewed the episodes.

I think Quandra "Dusk Rider Q" (in her first of two posts in Ask Greg made yesterday) makes a very eloquent response to Sapphire's earlier post regarding people of color in "Gargoyles."

I must read or think about this forum a bit too much. Earlier this week Matt mentioned a Gargoyles-related dream he had. I had a similar one last night, in which I was screening the episodes that would be in a S2V2 DVD with friends. The oddest part was that my name in this dream was "Angela," and they kept teasing me about the "Stop calling me 'Angie'!" line in "Turf."

And lastly, Laura San Giacomo (who voiced Fox) has a role in "Quigley Down Under," which I happen to be watching now.
Abby
"Forty-two! Is that all you've got to show for seven and a half million years' work?"
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 6:11:00 pm EST from 24.118.226.247

Vaevictis - I watched the episodes first, and then checked out the extra stuff. I wanted to re-familiarize myself with the characters and such first, because for some reason the extras seemed more important afterwards. Heheheh.
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 5:49:04 pm EST from 24.150.120.87

Vaevictis Asmadi> I'd avoid Greg's intros for now because many of them contain spoilers.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"You mean the police. Your clan." "Right, my clan... who'll disown me if I don't get to work." -Goliath & Elisa "Reawakening"
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 5:47:07 pm EST from 24.207.163.239

Vaevictis - "When a person can't understand that insulting somebody is offensive, they have problems." --*blinks* I actually wasn't referring to the insults traded between you two that weren't relevant to the debate; I was referring to the "homosexual equates to murder" bit, which wasn't so much an insult because it was more of a speculation, not an accusation or statement of belief, nor was it said with malicious intent. He did not actually MAKE an accusation like that, he speculated that **IF** sins were equal, then it's **possible** that murder and homosexuality equate in the eyes of God, not that that **is** the case.

"And why would it matter that he said "in the eyes of God"?" -- Because it basically says that it is not his (Blaqthourne's) opinion or belief on it? I could be Bob, and I could say that "God hates all gay people", but that doesn't mean I actually believe that is the case.

"The point is that saying God considers homosexuals comparable to murderers, is very clearly a moral judgement." -- I am not saying that it isn't a moral judgement. I AM saying that that was NOT what Blaqthourne was doing. There is a difference between making judgements like that, and wondering if a particular thing is so. I don't think it's wrong to have an unpleasant thought come to mind, and then ask, speculate, hypothesize, and come to a "conclusion" about it that may or may not be correct or even right, when you personally don't agree with or like the conclusion you end up with.

The point is, he didn't make a statement of FACT, nor did he claim to believe that. It is a case of a misread, or misinterpreted hypothesis/speculation. That is all I am trying to say. *shrugs* :)
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 5:43:02 pm EST from 24.150.120.87

I'm very sorry for the multiple posts, I just have difficulty expressing myself clearly when I am upset. Also, the DVD arrived in the mail just now.

Blaqthourne, I think that insulting gays is a "problem." But I really don't think you are "mentally bent" and I *definately* don't hate the Bible. OK? Can we please drop it now?


I really just want to change the subject and talk about Gargoyles again. The Season One DVD finally arived in the mail (just now) and I'm very eager to watch it. But I need advice whether I should avoid the episode introductions and commentary until I've watched each episode or even the whole season. Do they have lots of spoilers? I don't remember much from ten years ago so spoilers would be a problem.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 5:41:06 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Of course Bob is hypothetical here, I'm drawing an analogy. The point is that saying God considers homosexuals comparable to murderers, is very clearly a moral judgement.

I didn't want to be part of this conversation, but B&CF continually has accused me of saying horrible things to him, making up imaginary flames that I never said.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 3:23:49 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

And why would it matter that he said "in the eyes of God"? If Bob said "God hates all gay people." is anybody, in their right mind, going to dispute that Bob himself hates gay people?
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 3:18:03 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

That's absolutely right, Sadistic Cow. When a person can't understand that insulting somebody is offensive, they have problems.

I'm not offended that Blaqthourne thinks I'm gay, why would I be? I'm insulted that he accused me of hating Christians, of hating the Bible, and of saying horrible things to him like calling him "warped and evil" and an "ass" and "mentally challenged" and "mentally bent". I never said any of those thing, and I'm sick of being accused of this crap. Heck, I even defended him earlier when Greg B. was flaming him and calling him names. But of course he didn't notice.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 3:13:14 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Harvester - Captain Kirk likes the poonani, in whatever form it comes. ;)

Blaqthourne - This is a tender subject, anyway, and people's emotions have the tendency to run high when it is encountered. Which usually leads to fighting, and the actual meaning behind one's words getting lost or being misinterpreted. I know what you were trying to say in the "gay/murder" comment, and you weren't saying that homosexuality is comparable to murder. It's one of those unfortunare times when what is actually being said is taken differently than intended.

Though I disgree that homosexuality is dangerous in the case of STDs and so on. All humans, gay or straight, are at risk of catching STDs or having shorter lifespans, or what-have you. Our individual genetic makeup is what decides on many things for us, like how long we'll live, and it varies from person to person. Diseases can be caught through anything - contaminated needles, cutting yourself with a rusty knife, getting raped by a wacko and then getting a disease from them, etc. We are all at risk, so homosexuality and heterosexuality are both equally dangerous, in that sense. In my opinion, anyway.

Vaevictis - Deep breaths, deep breaths. ;) It's possible Blaqthourne became confused as to your orientation, since the words "gay" and "homosexual" have been flying around like mad lately, and it's easy enough to make a wrong assumption in debates like this. Though I think you're taking what he/she is saying a bit too literally and personally; you didn't say he/she is "mentally bent", though you made it clear Blaqthourne "has problems that I can't even begin to solve", which would indicate you believe he/she is "mentally bent". You can see the connection, yes?

Blaqthourne also did not actually say, or said that he/she believed, that homosexuality is comparable to murder:

"To the biblical scholars out there: Is there any place in the Bible where sins are ranked in degree of seriousness, such as murder is a worse sin than thievery? If not, then if, according to the Bible, homosexuality is a sin and murder is a sin, then they ARE comparable in the eyes of God.
If the Ten Commandments are listed in order of severity, then honoring your mother and father (#5) is more important than not committing murder (#6)."

IF being the key word, and "in the eyes of God" - not in the eyes of Blaqthourne. And that's only "IF" sins aren't ranked in degrees of seriousness, which would make ALL sins equal in seriousness. (Thievery would be as bad as murder, homosexuality would be as bad, too, because it is also a sin and all sins would be equally rated.) It's speculation, or a question/wondering, not so much a statement of fact or belief. And he/she has already said that he/she does not believe that homosexuality is "comparable to murder".

I'm not trying to be snarky or anything, but I wanted to clear that up. ^^; It seems to me like the arguement is for something that never really existed, which is kind of silly. :)
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 2:52:15 pm EST from 24.150.120.87

Dude, WTF? Did anybody ever see me use the words "mentally bent" to B&CF? When did I ever say I don't care about the Bible? Where did I ever state that *I* am Gay? Where are you getting this stuff?

And how much more straitfarward logic than a direct quote of you do you want, man?
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 1:05:00 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Yeah, that didn't add up to me either, but I decided not to comment on it. Just because you are gay doesn't mean you are going to get an STD or have a shorter life span, that's pretty poor logic.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"You mean the police. Your clan." "Right, my clan... who'll disown me if I don't get to work." -Goliath & Elisa "Reawakening"
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 11:27:35 am EST from 24.207.163.239

Sorry for the double post, but I just needed to add:

Blaqthorne: <Based on statistics about STD rates, life expectancies, and others, I would contend that homosexuality is not harmless.> By that logic, heterosexuality is just as "dangerous." I'm sorry, man, but your arguments are starting to confuse even me.
Harvester of Eyes
"You have the right to free speech, as long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it." -The only band that really matters.
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 11:25:33 am EST from 71.74.28.233

Patrick: Well, yeah, obviously we are dealing with hypotheticals. But the Star Trek example is another excellent point. Heck, even before TNG, Captain Kirk was consorting with all manner of species (when he wasn't hammer-punching them).
Harvester of Eyes
"You have the right to free speech, as long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it." -The only band that really matters.
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 11:00:23 am EST from 71.74.28.233

Any shown of love should NOT be call bestial hehehehe sorry
Demon@ - [still searching for my avatar]
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 10:59:22 am EST from 200.114.213.102

Patrick : Any shown of love should be call bestial. That would a bigot opinion ;). But just improbable for biological aspects. Its impossible that two creatures of different species and order have offspring.
A gargoyle, biologically would feel atracted by another gargoyles and so humans. It may`be possible, just as Goliath and Elisa, that they see each other like something more than just friends, and probably someone like the quarrymen or Demona would think of it like something bestial.
Demon@ - [still searching for my avatar]
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 10:58:33 am EST from 200.114.213.102

B&CF> I think you are too focused on the idea that there is a gene for everything. I am gay, and I did not choose to be gay, but I'm not convinced there is a "gay gene" either. The point is, all behaviors in an animal, esspecially the social behaviors, arise from a variety of factors. Some ARE genetic, but there are hormonal factors, environmental factors, cultural factors, etc. Trying to find a gay gene or a prostitution gene or whatever may be as difficult and as fruitless as finding an "I like 2% milk gene" or "I am afraid of worms gene".

Personally, looking at the evidence so far I tend to think that homosexuality in humans at least is caused by hormonal issues in the womb. There is a lot of evidence that the more male children a woman has, the more likely her next male child will be gay. In other words, many gay men have straight older brothers. Of course, this isn't a hard rule, but statistics point that way. In any event, this has not been proven yet, so it is only one idea out there.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"You mean the police. Your clan." "Right, my clan... who'll disown me if I don't get to work." -Goliath & Elisa "Reawakening"
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 10:38:05 am EST from 24.207.163.239

Scientists who've spend years studying chimpanzees and dolphins have reported that those species also show signs of being self-aware, but that doesn't mean it'd be appropriate for a human to have relations with them.

An appropriate analogy to pairings between gargoyles and humans really doesn't exist in real life, because there aren't any other intelligent, highly-evolved species on this planet. The best we can do is look to other examples in science-fiction and fantasy. Take "Star Trek", where species from different planets not only intermingle, they are able to sucessfully produce offspring most of the time in defiance of all laws of probability. No one calls it "bestiality" when Jadzia Dax takes Worf to bed, so why should that term apply to Elisa and Goliath?
Patrick - [<-- The Gathering 2007]
"Thank you for flying Church of England, cake or death?" - Eddie Izzard
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 10:16:03 am EST from 70.229.201.226

I'd just like to point out that "yamaka" is spelled yarmulke. Just so you know.

Concerning the comics: Who is pencilling #3? And I have to say, I'm a little uneasy about Gargoyles going to DC. (Washington DC, not DC Comics hahah)
Samuel - [AnglOfHellO at AOL dot com]
Noodles, anyone?
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 9:47:47 am EST from 68.55.107.142

Purplegoldfish> I wouldn't be too worried about it. February is still 2 months (give or take) away, and it's quite possible that they will still Gargs #3 on their site.

Maybe they're putting up the info as we speak.

Leo> I know. I was in a state of shock when I saw the news report. I knew they were going to execute him, but I didn't think it was going to happen this quickly.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
"Ignore me!" - Venture Bros.
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 8:55:35 am EST from 209.239.132.164

I just remembered something about penguins.
Matt re: penguins> It has recently been discovered that female penguins prostitute themselves in order to get better rocks for their nest. Using your logic which I read as gay animals don't choose to be gay (based on what, BTW?). If they don't choose to be gay, then why should we assume that females choose to prostitute themselves? So does this mean there is a prostitution gene in penguins? Since you use the animal kingdom--outside of humans--to try to prove things in the human species, then humans also have this prostitution gene.

Purplegoldfish> Don't just limit it to gays. I've seen many a drive-by bashing of Christianity and the Republican party, to name a couple off the top of my head, in this room. I'm sure many of the posters are Christians and Republicans.

I'm leaving this conversation at this point. You can call me a bigot, an ass, rude, mentally challenged. I don't care. Do whatever you like. You will not see a response from me about anything on this topic.

I just want to say that I NEVER said I thought gays were the same as murderers. Nor do I think such.

I will just finish with the following:
There has been no study yet that has shown that homosexuality is determined at birth. I'm not saying that it isn't, it just hasn't been proven.
Based on statistics about STD rates, life expectancies, and others, I would contend that homosexuality is not harmless.
Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury
"Dude, that was gayer than the pile." --South Park
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 6:43:15 am EST from 207.207.40.250

Ok, personally I just think it's rude to come in here and spout your negative propaganda and opinions on gays when many of the people who regularly post in here are gay. You can think whatever you want-but maybe you should keep it to yourself, or save it for someplace that cares.

and by the way, Sapphire didn't JUST insult gays. She pretty much offended anyone who isn't a white blonde haired/blue eyed devout Christian. She insulted my religion as well. Whether she was kidding or not she should have the common sense not to post something like that on a public message board.
And to say that what this person wrote isn't bigoted and hateful is ludicrous.

That's all I will say on the subject-moving on...

comic: I'm quite surprised and pleased that Greg actually seems pretty confident that he WILL be writing a 9/11 story. Seeing as how the first nine episodes take place during the last three months of 1996...it would take an awfully long time to get there. It gives me a lot more hope for the success of the comic :)

BTW; is anyone else worried that #3 isn't on the february list on SLG?
Purplegoldfish - [skydragonn at aol dot com]
visit my garg art and other stuff :)
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 3:11:09 am EST from 205.188.117.68

<sarcasm>
Matt> I'm offended that you say we're the same as penguins and whales.
</sarcasm>
I always thought fish spawned. How exactly does a homosexual fish work?
I'm not going to say that the penguins chose to be gay. Do you have proof that they have a gene that made them gay, though?

Vaevictis> I said I was PROBABLY skimming. That doesn't mean I WAS skimming.
Since you didn't answer my straightforward question of how you arrived at your conclusion, rather you just reverted to namecalling, I'm going to assume that you are basically looking for any excuse to be offended. Maybe an explanation as to your logic will start me on the path toward the light, since you think I am mentally bent.
Since you don't put any credence in the Bible--after all, why would you support a book which condemns your way of life--you will most likely take offense at any topic that deals with the Bible, unless it's something that does nothing but bash the book. I have also come to the conclusion that you will take offense to any statement made which is not in support of homosexuality.
Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 2:04:09 am EST from 207.207.40.250

Why are you talking about gargoyles?! What?! O_o Is it a gargoyles forum? Jo!
As vaeridictis (¿?) has said, you need something more than just spiritual love in a mates relaitionship. Thats the big diference between a GREAT :) friend and a lover.
I thinkg Goliath and Elisa are unique in these matter. Just like the gay thing we were talking about, in a physical attraction we have our own body working on it, not our mind or our soul. Thats why all people have their "type" when searching for a couple.
For a monkey to feel attraction for a bat...dont know, kind of rare.


Marty: It may have sounded bigot, i apologized if it did or if i offended someone but church wasnt always the poor victim and it wasnt written just by poor and hunted people.
During the Middle Ages the church was a powerfull institution. All biblical texts were studied for the Roman Church analyzed and then added to the bible.
I was attaking these kind if church, the same one that have golden and silver walls while talking on the streets about self sacrifice and how disgusted are the material possesions. The same church that worked out one of the most brutal movements of humans history: the inquisition. Thats not the church that, call me if you may, im bigot about.
Im not attaking the church of the people, the church that goes out every night to feed the homeless and the priest that brings hope to the hopeless. Thats not the church that, call me if you may, im bigot about. These is the church that i have as real.
Demon@ - [still searching for my avatar]
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 1:04:19 am EST from 200.114.213.102

TSC: Well, you did raise a good point. The main difference between gargoyles and apes is that gargoyles possess self-awareness. They're fully capable of everything humans are. Which, I think, is what would not make it unnatural.
Harvester of Eyes
"You have the right to free speech, as long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it." -The only band that really matters.
posted @ Sat, Dec 30, 2006 12:40:48 am EST from 71.74.28.233

Saddam has been executed
Leo - [<- Requiem for Saddam]
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 10:21:57 pm EST from 68.229.103.25

*LOL* Blaqthorne, you said yourself that you aren't even reading my posts, only "skimming" them. If you actually bothered to read them, you'd have noticed that I quoted you exactly.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 8:54:39 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Vaevictis> And thank you for putting words into MY mouth. When you said somebody, I'm assuming you meant a homosexual. I never compared a gay to a murderer.

Sadistic Cow> Thank you. You seem to be about the only person that understood my intent. Since you can't use bold, italics, underlines, or change the font size, the most emphasis you can get is to type "IF".
Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury
Music Selection: Final Fantasy XII OST (LE) (disc 3)
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 7:46:30 pm EST from 207.207.40.250

Marty Lund - Yes, I know that most teenagers are like that - that is the point. Religion is an extremely powerful thing, it is one of the core and essential parts of people's lives. It becomes a very dangerous tool when in the hands of those people.

Yes, anything can be used against other people - my issue is that religion doesn't *have* to be. The religious aspect present in Catholic/Christian/whatever schools is not the same as it would be in a public school. I was in public school in grade nine (grade ten and up, Catholic), and though stupidity was still there, it wasn't nearly as traumatizing as it was at Cathedral. Thus my opinion on that; my experience (right or wrong) has influenced my thoughts on it.

I don't think religion should be denied *completely* in schools, however; I think people of faith should be allowed to bring their Bible, or wear a Yamaka, or any sort of religious clothing or items which aren't dangerous. (Like ritual/spiritual blades.) Stuff like that shouldn't be disallowed. If you walk in there with a faith, you should be able to maintain it without having to defend it (unless you're having a decent discussion or debate. ). I simply don't agree with the amount of focus being put on the religious aspect of Catholic/Christian/etc schools, and I think a lack of religion in the curriculum and surroundings would lesson the amount of faith-generated harassment and hatred. I also think if you're going to teach religion, you should offer multiple courses for different religions, so you're not focusing on only *one*.

Since removing religion from schools won't happen (Darnit. :P), I'd like to see religion classes available to those who are *interested* in them, and *want* to know; let the students choose whether or not they want to learn about it, so it's not being shoved down anyone's throats. And give them the choice of learning about multiple beliefs as opposed to just one. But, that's just me - and that probably won't happen, either. But I can dream!

"People use just about ~ anything ~ to do those things. Race, "destiny," class, education, size, wealth - it is an unwholesome behavior that predates recorded history and greatly transcends religion."

Well, yes, of course. Like I said previously though, religion is a powerful tool - one that holds more influence over people than being rich or being of a particular race. These people say God is backing them up, that God approves of them setting fire to black churches and defiling mosques, or protesting at the funerals of murdered homosexuals because "my religion, my God says I can and that I'm right". Believing that an all-powerful diety is on your side, justifying your wrong-doings, is different than justifying your wrong-doings because "I'm white so you can't touch me."

Basically, I just think religion is too powerful a tool to toss around lightly, especially by people in positions of power, or who have an influence over many young and impressionable minds. And people are doing that more and more lately, from what I've seen. It can do great and wonderful things, but it can also do things that "demons" or Hell could never even dream of.

Vaevictis Asmadi - Hmm, true. It would be unnatural, technically, since humans are made for humans and dogs are made for dogs, and so on, and going against that is like going against the laws of nature (when the species in question are similar but different enough to make a difference.). Humans don't mate with apes, though they are like us to an extent.

At least, I hope humans don't mate with apes.... o.O

I'll be quiet now, otherwise my brain is going to go somewhere it shouldn't. @_@
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 7:39:59 pm EST from 24.150.120.87

Actually no, if it were a Christian or Muslim police state my religion would probably be quickly outlawed, but in an Atheist police state we'd probably be ignored for a while due to our small numbers.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 7:19:52 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

I'm not surprised my statement was inaccurate. I don't live in a police state, so I don't know what kind of methods they use.
If this *was* a police state, my religion is probably the second one that would be outlawed, right after Islam.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 7:08:12 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Vaevictis Asmadi >>

<< If the US were actually an "atheist police state" then the police would break into peoples' houses to search for and destroy Bibles, Qu'rans, and Torahs. As far as I know that's unconstitutional and does not happen at all. >>

Again, I used the term in hyperbole, but it is telling that part of your statement is quite inaccurate.

True Atheist Police States such as China and the now-defunct USSR didn't have to kick in the doors and steal everyone's religious items and scriptures to force their agenda. All they had to do was control the public sector - state-run media, schools, medical care, and employment where religious expression was banned and punished. They took away the right of religious institutions to speak on anything political. They even forcibly appointed their own leaders in churches (see the excommunicated "bishop" the PRC propped up recently).

All they had to do was make the Public Sector (IE - the State) big enough and make sure the religious were either excluded from it. cherry-picked for the state's purposes, or otherwise hobbled.

Again, it is hyperbole. We're not at that point - especially not in terms of police state powers. I'm just saying it doesn't take stormtroopers kicking in your doors and burning all your churches to establish an Atheist State. All it really requires is a subtle stranglehold on key institutions like Education and Media.
Marty "Kaioto" Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 6:53:24 pm EST from 67.128.112.166

Marty > Yes, a school where the people behave like that is definately intolerant. But not all secular institutions are intolerant and obnoxious. The school I went to wasn't like that, and the school I'm at now isn't either. Actually, it's a Methodist college.
As you beautifully pointed out, just because people use religion to justify hatred doesn't make religion itself hateful. The same is true of atheism and secularism. A lot of people are obnoxious and intolerant toward anyone who believes in any religion, but many others are not like that.

If the US were actually an "atheist police state" then the police would break into peoples' houses to search for and destroy Bibles, Qu'rans, and Torahs. As far as I know that's unconstitutional and does not happen at all.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 6:30:51 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Vaevictis Asmadi >>

<< Buh Marty? I don't have any idea what country you live in that you call an "atheist police state". Perhaps you live in the pre-collapse communist USSR? >>

Actually, until recently I lived in The People's Republic of ... er ... that is to say the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Its obviously hyperbole, since Massachusetts hasn't gotten as far as France along the lines of kicking students out of school for wearing Yamaka, head-scarf, or crucifix but the public education institutions where I grew up were extremely hostile towards religious people and extremely accomodating / approving of Atheists. Higher education, where people get to decide just who gets to be deemed "qualified" to educate children was even more overtly hostile - to the point of actively deriding various faiths on class time when they are supposed to be training educators.

"Secularism," is supposed to create a tolerant and respectful environment for everyone's beliefs. It does not mean being equally intolerant to all religions and giving children the impression that their religious traditions have no value or legitimacy in the "real world."

Freedom ~ of ~ religion is a far different concept than freedom ~ from ~ religion.

<< Atheists and other non-Christians aren't out to outlaw the Bible or destroy organized religion. We just want the freedom to have our own beliefs and not be forcibly indoctrinated by state-sponsered religions. >>

That's what you might think for yourself. It doesn't hold true for everyone. Considering that U.S. does not sponsor any specific religion like, say, Great Britain does with the Church of England, it puts an interesting context on many actions conducted within the U.S.. It isn't that you can't have a State Religion, but increasingly that you are not allowed to participate freely in the State unless you leave your religion at the door.

<< Marty, you think that anybody who doesn't presently have a child in public schools shouldn't ever have to pay taxes that support schools? Whence this idea that community is optional and that people can abandon society and their fellow human beings whenever they feel like it? >>

Perhaps you should have read my post twice (and maybe the passage it replied to for the sake of context) before you decided you "couldn't hold it in?"

Seriously, go back and re-read it. Someone asked why religious schools cost so much. I stated quite clearly that children who are enrolled in religious schools are denied their portion of tax dollars dedicated to education. I said nothing about it being wrong to pay taxes to support education as part of the public interest.

<< A school in which you are told repeatedly that God does not exist and you are not allowed to own a Bible or form religious student groups, is Atheist. A school in which the teachers tell you you can believe whatever you want and they won't tell you what to believe, is Secular. >>

What about a school in which you are not allowed to bring in a Bible but they can't take away your comic books, where you color your hair purple but not wear a Yamaka, or where you can pretty much talk all you want about sex and drugs but get censured for discussing anything remotely having to do with religion? What about a school where teachers routinely act in a dismissive or hostile manner towards certain religions in their casual speech and ill-advised commentary? What about a school where teachers encourage some students to attack the religious beliefs of other students? Sorry, but overtly shoving religious children and families into the closet isn't "tolerant."

Sure, that's not truly Atheist (again, hyperbole), just like a school where educators and school practice is overtly approving of Christianity above all other beliefs isn't technically Christian, either. You don't need to preach Atheism directly to make it an ad hoc policy. All you have to do is react with hostility to anyone that expresses an inkling of any sort of Theism.
Marty "Kaioto" Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 6:06:16 pm EST from 67.128.112.166

He also mentions that Issues 1-9 all take place in 1996. We know that the first two issues are taking place in October and probably the next issue or two will as well.
He has also stated that if/when he gets to September 2001, he will deal with 9/11, though it is clear he is concerned about it.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"You mean the police. Your clan." "Right, my clan... who'll disown me if I don't get to work." -Goliath & Elisa "Reawakening"
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 6:01:34 pm EST from 24.207.163.239

In Greg's Latest Responses, Greg mentioned he's now plotting issue 7.
Vicky82 - [Vickyfanofwwe at aol dot com]
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 5:41:47 pm EST from 195.93.21.4

Sadistic Cow > I agree with you that Gargoyles are sentient creatures, and that it is understandable that some humans or gargoyles would develop feelings for each other, since they are intelligent beings with somewhat similar emotions.
I really wasn't saying cross-species mating is at all like bestiality, though I may have been unclear. What I mean is that they are two separate species (and not closely related) and so mating between them is somewhat unnatural.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 5:00:10 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

TSC: <It would certainly be weird, but I wouldn't find it to be unnatural or anything, since they would be sentient creatures not too unlike us.>

You took the words right out of my mouth.
Harvester of Eyes
"You have the right to free speech, as long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it." -The only band that really matters.
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 4:56:44 pm EST from 71.74.28.233

Sorry for the double post, but I can't keep this in.

Marty, you think that anybody who doesn't presently have a child in public schools shouldn't ever have to pay taxes that support schools? Whence this idea that community is optional and that people can abandon society and their fellow human beings whenever they feel like it?

As for your "atheist police state" I feel a strong need to point out the massive distinction between Atheist and Secular. A school in which you are told repeatedly that God does not exist and you are not allowed to own a Bible or form religious student groups, is Atheist. A school in which the teachers tell you you can believe whatever you want and they won't tell you what to believe, is Secular. BIG DIFFERENCE.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 4:34:14 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Give it time...
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"You mean the police. Your clan." "Right, my clan... who'll disown me if I don't get to work." -Goliath & Elisa "Reawakening"
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 4:31:10 pm EST from 24.207.163.239

Buh Marty? I don't have any idea what country you live in that you call an "atheist police state". Perhaps you live in the pre-collapse communist USSR?

If you live in the US then you have no call to say that. This country has NO state religion and that includes NOT atheism. It is also manifestly NOT a police state, even with crap like the Patriot Act on the books.

Atheists and other non-Christians aren't out to outlaw the Bible or destroy organized religion. We just want the freedom to have our own beliefs and not be forcibly indoctrinated by state-sponsered religions.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 4:20:00 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Siren >>

<< If Christians want their children not to learn about evolution and instead want them learn about Creation and God, then make Christian schools FREE. They whine and complain about God not being allowed in schools, and yet, they charge the parents that CAN afford their high priced schools unbelievable amounts. A lot of these regular Christian schools cost as much as COLLEGE. There is something seriously wrong with that. >>

Yeah. The main problem is that the people who send their kids to religious schools still pay the same amount of taxes as if they were sending their kids to the public system, and none of the taxpayer funds for education go to those religious schools. So, effectively, families that choose religious schools are forced to forefit the educational funding their child is otherwise entitled to. Considering that some low-income school districts dump over $10K per head in public schools and give parents that send their kids to religious schools zilch. That's where you get your dispairty from.

Go to your appointed atheist police-state school or you'll never see your money again. Yeah, that's a system that abides liberty and justice for all, all right. :P

One of the things I was happy to learn about when I moved to Arizona was that they have an educational donation tax credit program that allows taxpayers to donate up to $500 (or $1000 married filing jointly) on a dollar-for-dollar tax credit to any acredited school in the state (public or private). Alternatively, you can actually link the money to a particular student or family, wherever they might go. Ergo, you donate $500 wherever you want to help pay for the cost of educating a child, and the government cuts that $500 out of the tax money they were going to collect from you to pay for education.

Demon@ >>

<< I dont think it a dubious statment. I dont think that a book written for the church, the same
church that killed thousand of people becuase they were different, based only on stupid
and irrational believes. Why do you think it talks so much about hell and demons and satan,
it was a subtle message: "Obey the church or you will suffer endless torments" >>

See, now this is a prime example of rationalized bigotry.

The Torah wasn't written for the Catholic Church's purposes. It was written for Hebrews. The modern version's scriptures were taken from many time periods - during most of which the Jews were constantly on the verge of being wiped out as a culture. Considering they were surviving through enslavement or and subjugation by just about every great Empire in the region over the span of centuries I don't think your point holds water.

The New Testament's scriptures were written during the first few centuries after Christ during a time where Christianity couldn't put together enough legal or martial might to fill a thimble. Imprisoned, enslaved, and otherwise oppressed the authors of these scriptures never had a perspective through which they could hope to subjugate anyone.

Like any set of morals or rules - religious or otherwise - unscrupulous people can manipulate them as excuses to subjugate and oppress others. If you have a problem with rules and people telling you what's right and what's wrong, I can understand that. Taking it out on someone else's religion, however, is a hateful act of bigotry.

The Sadistic Cow >>

Sounds to me like you went to school with a bunch of immature and malicious little monsters in an environment where the adults didn't keep them in line. Welcome to high school - religious or otherwise. Take a look at C.S. Lewis's experiences as a child in his autobiography "Surprised By Joy" some time.

<< People use religion to justify their hate, to excuse it, and to dominate anyone that they can. >>

People use just about ~ anything ~ to do those things. Race, "destiny," class, education, size, wealth - it is an unwholesome behavior that predates recorded history and greatly transcends religion.

It is kind of like observing that baseball bats are often used to beat people to a pulp.

<< The Church (as in, the Vatican) isn't so much about faith anymore; it is about money and power. >>

Actually, that's pretty much entirely false. The Vatican has one of the few departments dedicated exclusively to theological question and expanding the understanding of its faith. Moreover, about 99% of the Church operations you and I come across in the course of our lives are under the jurisdiction of a Bishop - not under the direct control of the Vatican. Heck, even the property of the various parishes ultimately belongs to the Bishop's legal authority, not the Papacy.

The Vatican exists primarily to help maintain orthodoxy, work large-scale public relations, and direct global charity efforts that transcend any individual see. The proportionate amount of AIDS relief in Africa that comes from the RCC (who can't really collect taxes from anybody like a government can) through organizations like Catholic Relief Services puts the governments of the first world to shame.
Marty "Kaioto" Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 3:59:07 pm EST from 67.128.112.166

Vaevictis Asmadi: Cross-species - Maybe I'm just really weird, but *if* Gargoyles were real creatures, I wouldn't see much of a problem with a human/gargoyle relationship. They're sentient creatures, and though they don't have the same thought process as humans do, they have more in common with humans than, say, a horse or a dog. They can converse, they can think logically and aren't governed only by instinct, they can read and enjoy/appreciate literature, they can be artists or technophiles, etc.

It would certainly be weird, but I wouldn't find it to be unnatural or anything, since they would be sentient creatures not too unlike us. If a human decided to get into a relationship with a watchbeast, however... THAT would be icky, to me. o.O;;

On Blaqthorne's comment - I don't think he/she was actually saying that homosexuality is a sin comparable to murder. He/she asked whether the Bible says anywhere if some sins are "worse" than others, or if they are all ranked the same in severity. ---"If not, then if, according to the Bible, homosexuality is a sin and murder is a sin, then they ARE comparable in the eyes of God." There was a very big "if" there, and it sounded more like a speculation or a wondering, as opposed to a belief that that is so.

On the comic - I finally got it! It does seem a bit too dark, and once again I am unimpressed with the art. But, it's issue #2, and I'm just glad I finally have it. ^^;
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 3:13:07 pm EST from 24.150.120.87

Actually, you guys might yell at me over this, but I find the idea of cross-species matches just slightly icky. Only slightly though, I mean it happens often enough in fantasy and superhero stories. Maybe it's just that Gargoyles is set in the real world and thus feels less fantastical than, say, D&D. Maybe it's because I only saw about 6 episodes and barely remember them anyway, that I never actually saw Goliath and Elisa's relationship, I've only read about it.
Not that I think it's sinful or immoral, just... well, unnatural.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 2:22:36 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Once again, we see the dangers inherent in just taking what someone says (especially some hypocrite in a pulpit)at face value. I was raised in a very devout Irish Catholic family, but that certainly doesn't mean I uphold every single ideal. In fact, the Vatican doesn't know it, but we're probably secretly at war. But anyway, I do what I think everyone should. I take only what makes sense to me and disregard the rest. Because the Bible says lots of things, and most of them vaguely. In fact, there are books I find more enlightening (and with more relevant lessons, despite the test of time) than the Bible.

Patrick: I think we can both agree that homosexuality is not a sin. Pairing certain gargoyles with humans, however, now there's an issue open to debate in the fandom. ( ;
Harvester of Eyes
"Charlie don't surf. He never learned. Charlie don't surf, now he's gotta burn." -The only band that really matters.
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 2:15:48 pm EST from 71.74.28.233

Since I won't need to go into religion, I'm going to respond to this

Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury >"If she believes what she has been told about gays, she only thinks them to be sinners. I don't believe that automatically makes her a bigot. If that's the case, I'm a bigot because I believe murderers and thieves have sinned."

Hating murderers and thieves aren't bigoted, because:

1. They make the conscious choice to commit their actions.
2. Their actions hurt people physically or financially (money wise).

Whereas being Gay:

1. Doesn't hurt anyone.
2. Isn't a choice.
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 1:07:38 pm EST from 71.115.231.16

Like I said, I will not participate in this conversation any more, so stop asking me to. If you can't fathom how comparing somebody to a murderer is hateful and offensive, then you have problems I can't begin to solve. I certainly can't be bothered to waste my time talking about it.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 12:11:53 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Against my better judgement...

B&CF> Your argument that being gay must be a choice because it does nothing for the evolution of our species is severely flawed. Evolution works in an incredible variety of ways. It isn't about having kids that survive, it is about having GENES that survive. Take the common honeybee. Most individual bees are sterile. They are a living productive part of bee community, but they never pair off with the opposite sex and they never have children. To this you would tell me that they are clearly choosing to not mate and that they are dooming their species to extinction because the vast majority of them are genetic dead ends. But this is not to be. All these sterile worker bees are putting all their efforts into the queen's reproduction. And since the queen and her workers share a lot of genes, the workers are in effect living on through the queen's offspring. Bees have survived many millions of years with this system. So, to use your own analogy, if you put 100 worker bees in isolation (an island or whatever), yeah, they'd all die out very quickly, but that isn't the point. No one is saying that gay men and women are required to have children for mankind's survival, and clearly our species is doing alright population-wise despite the large number of homosexuals throughout history. Having non-breeding individuals in a community is often a boon to the species.

On another note, homosexuality is no limited to humans in the slightest. In fact, the amount of gay individuals in our species is pretty low compared to other species. There are virtually hundreds of species of animals that exhibit homosexuality to one extent or another. Fish, Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds, Mammals and more. An interesting trend is that the more a species depends on a community of individuals and the more intelligent memebers of that community are, the more likely it is that you will see instances of homosexuality. So, in that vein, every one of the great apes has gay members, in fact virtually every Bonobo is bisexual. Most whales have gay members too. Many gay couples throughout the animal kingdom are completely monogamous too (you may have heard of the Humboldt Penguin gay couple in a New York Zoo).

The point is, homosexuality is completely natural in the animal kingdom, and in fact it would be very odd if there weren't gay humans. Tell me you are not going to say that the penguins I mentioned are choosing to be gay?
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"You mean the police. Your clan." "Right, my clan... who'll disown me if I don't get to work." -Goliath & Elisa "Reawakening"
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 11:40:31 am EST from 24.207.163.239

Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury: not necesarily. Bible, again, was written for humans, have that in mind.
Demon@ - ["its a heavy burden, but i have power now"]
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 10:39:45 am EST from 200.114.213.102

Ed re: Gene> Actually, it would apply to evolution, too. The point of evolution, if I'm not mistaken (please correct me if I'm wrong), is that traits evolve based on better survivability and the ability to propagate the species. A gay gene would definitely go counter to the latter.

Vaevictis> I went back through your posts, and I apologize for saying you called her warped and evil. As you pointed out, I misread your post--I was probably skimming somewhat. Totally my bad.
I have a couple questions regarding one of your posts regarding me: "Oh yes and I might add, Blaqthorne, that your explicit statement that homosexuality is the same as murder, is extremely bigoted."
Are you saying that you think I believe that homosexuality is the same as murder?
What is the explicit statement, and how is it bigoted?

Ok, I'm going to step back and ask a question to those who I've offended. My original statement was: "If she believes what she has been told about gays, she only thinks them to be sinners. I don't believe that automatically makes her a bigot. If that's the case, I'm a bigot because I believe murderers and thieves have sinned."

In all seriousness, for those who concluded that I equated gays with murderers and thieves from the above statement, please tell me how you arrived at that conclusion.

Do not factor in my following post where I wanted to know if it was accurate to state that the BIBLE and by extension God, not ME, viewed murder, thievery, and homosexuality as equal.
Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 10:00:42 am EST from 63.20.82.188

Comic > I think it would help the comic if some of us started taking some of our enthusiasm over to the Newsarama website. It gets a lot more traffic, and we have better odds of sucking new people into the fandom. (More fans = more DVD sales = more season 2) Some people may not even be aware that issue 2 is out, so I think it's for the book's benefit to make our presence known. All we need to do is say the stuff we say over here... but over there too. You can click my name for a link to the thread.

Also, Greg Weisman might want to consider doing more interviews for the comics sites when the new material comes out. I don't know how interviews are decided, but I think not doing any interviews for Newsarama and not announcing when issue 2 was finally coming out might have hurt sales. Issue 3 is going to be a big deal, because it's the first new Gargoyles story in over a decade. At the very least, we should get loud about it.
Scott Iskow - [smiskow at lycos dot com]
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 8:40:59 am EST from 207.226.255.67

I'm pretty sure Sapphire's post is taking the mickey, possibly in a parody of anonymous' homophobic comment. But I wonder about anonymous. She reads to me like someone quite young, not that you can really tell this sort of thing. Perhaps reading Lexington's storyline, which I anticipate will be well-characterised, will encourage her to be a bit more tolerant. Probably not, but let's hope so.

In any event, I don't really see the point of laymen trying to work out whether the Bible is innately homophobic. There's plenty in the Bible that seems to me tremendously bigoted, violent, perverted and bizarre, at least by today's standards; but also a lot that people find inspiring, comforting, uplifting. Those who are essentially good-hearted and tolerant will interpret things in a way that's essentially good-hearted and tolerant; those who are narrow-minded and bigoted interpret things in a way that fits their interests as well. The same with any tract of this nature, from the Koran to "Das Kapital". I don't consider "God says it's a sin" a decent excuse for a lack of compassion and tolerance, though. But then, I don't consider "God says..." a decent reason for anything.

B&CF: (1) I think Sorkin nicked the "Canadian" essay off the original author actually.
(2) The "why would this gene exist?" question is only a problem if you assume there's intelligent design. At any rate, it hasn't guaranteed the end of the species and I think the odds of 100% of babies suddenly being born gay is as likely as 100% of babies suddenly being born redheads. In any event, gay people aren't usually infertile.
(3) Of course homosexuality and murder is a daft comparison. There's a perfectly logical reason for not liking people who want to do you harm which has nothing to do with the stigma of "sinning". But Anon's homophobia is predicated solely on the "sinner" label. And besides, who would be INSULTED by thieves and murderers being shown in a comic?

Sadistic Cow: That was a really interesting post. Thanks for writing it all up.
Ed
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 8:11:24 am EST from 213.187.39.245

Antiyonder> I fail to see any rudeness in Bishansky's reply.

Siren, re: cost of Catholic schools> Since Catholic schools aren't subsidized by the government, someone has to pay for the operation of the schools and salaries of the teachers. Since most Catholic schools' teachers aren't drawn from the ranks of nunneries and deacons/priests, they have to find teachers willing to teach. What quality of teacher would you truly expect if the school was free? And since Catholic schools no longer, for the most part, have large student bodies, the cost per student naturally goes up.

Bishansky> "Why the hell would anyone voluntarly choose to be a part of the most persecuted minority around today."
Let's look at the flip-side of that argument: If there is a gene that causes someone to be gay, why would such a gene exist that would guarantee the end of the species? Example: If you took 100 gay men and put them on an island--they are the only humans on the island. No one is allowed to enter or leave the island. Come back in 80 years and how many humans would there be on that island?

I really was dumbfounded that some people took the leap from my basically asking: "If I'm a bigot for thinking homosexuality is wrong, am I a bigot for thinking murder and thievery is wrong?" to "Good gravy, he thinks gays are the same as murderers!! I spit on you! I fart in your general direction! I pick my nose at you! I wave my tes---"

In my mind, this is the same as if I said, "I like the movie 'Revenge of the Killer Tomatoes', and I like the movie 'Citizen Kane'"; or "I like the song 'MacArthur Park', and I like the song 'Rhapsody in Blue'", and came to the conclusion that I view each pair as equals.

I was going to list a bunch of statistics refuting the "homosexuality is harmless" claim, but I've decided not to.
Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury
Music Selection: Final Fantasy XII OST (Limited Edition) (disc 2)
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 5:57:17 am EST from 207.207.40.250

God in school - What I have to say may sound very offensive to some, and can be considered religion-bashing, but that really isn't the intent. This is also very long; I apologize for that.

For the purpose of convenience, when I moved to my current city I was sent to a Catholic high school. Convenient because it was a five minute walk away from my home, and the cost of a bus pass every month would equal or be greater than the fee for going there. (I can't remember now, as it was so long ago and at the time I never asked my mother what the cost was to send me to Catholic school. Though the bus passes even then were expensive.) That is why I went there.

To say that my experience at that Catholic school was unpleasant, is to say that the Atlantic Ocean is damp. I walked into that school with faith in the God that is talked about by Christians and Catholics; a kind God who loved me and so on. I walked out of there believing God was a war-mongering monster who employs the worst degenerates of humanity into His ranks, and gets His jollies out of watching His children suffer. (I don't think that anymore; my beliefs have shifted to thinking of "God" more as an entity that humanity cannot and will never be able to comprehend. Since I've only had actual contact with Christianity and Catholocism, my general belief is that the "God" they speak of isn't quite what those texts say He is; rather, "God" is a divine being which is good and evil both, encompasses everything, and I doubt that the Bible even comes close to the truth of what God is, since humans - in my opinion - are unable to comprehend or understand just what this being is.)

During my time there, I was tormented and harassed not just by students, but by teachers. They called me "witch", "Satan lover", and "worshipper of the Devil", among many other unsavoury names. I was asked by students I had never laid eyes on before, "Why do you go to a Catholic school when you worship the Devil?" I never wore makeup, I never wore any "odd" jewelry, I wore the school uniform (kilt, or pants, and the shirts/vests), and the ONLY thing that separated me was my "trenchcoat". (It was actually a dress coat, but students and teachers still spread rumours that I was part of something called the "trench coat mafia", and for some reason they thought I was going to walk into school with an Uzi and start shooting people.) I was rarely seen except in class, and even then I was never noticable. The only time I wore my coat was coming and going to/from school, and on breaks, and for breaks I usually stayed inside to draw.

Teachers went out of their way to talk down to me and treat me like an inferior; they sneered at me and told me I was an awful person. Students I had only seen in passing, or had never seen before, would leap out at me from hiding places and scream, "WITCH!" and "SATAN-LOVER!" (The most common of the phrases they used against me.) I put up with that for three and a half years, and it did nothing to help my mental illnesses or depression. In the end, I was forced to literally beg the principal to transfer me to another school, because by then I was at my wit's end. That man transfered me to a school that was a part of Cathedral, but for the "degenerate" students who could not keep up with the regular curriculum, or had any assortment of problems that the "normal" students didn't have.

That school for "degenerate" students was more warm and welcoming than Cathedral *ever* was. I almost didn't get my high school diploma because of the students and teachers at Cathedral; but at this other place, I managed to do it. (If I had stayed at Cathedral, I probably wouldn't be around to this day.)

I think that when treated properly - whether in school, or in the working world, or the regular world - religion can be a good thing. God in school, and God in places can be good for people, as faith in itself isn't a bad thing. But the way people use it these days, God in the hands of students and God in the hands of people in a position to influence young minds, is a bad idea. My experiences can't be the only ones, so I have come to believe that God in school, religion in politics, and religion anywhere that isn't church or in your own personal life (not interfering with others) is not as good a thing as people would believe, if only for the fact that people abuse it, and warp it to suit their own needs.

People use religion to justify their hate, to excuse it, and to dominate anyone that they can. The Church (as in, the Vatican) isn't so much about faith anymore; it is about money and power. Who they can control, who they need to get under their control, and how to get more money to fund their endeavours. It is the same with regular people; they use religion to either force, persuade, or buy compliance from others to reach their goals and get what they want. For many, religion is an excuse to dominate others in any way they can.

I'm not saying that *everyone* does this, or that everyone is corrupt or abuses God, or religion. I simply think that placing religion as part and parcel into institutions which hold some power over the populace is a bad idea, because there are enough people out there abusing it who cause the problems there are with it today.

I also have no problem with religious groups being organized in schools, or a moment of silence/prayer, etc, like Siren said. And if people want to have Christian/Catholic/Jewish/whatever schools, and they want to pay for it, or the Church or whoever pays for it, fine by me. People can do what they want, they are free to do so, and I won't do anything to stop them. It's not my place to say what they can or can't do, or believe in. I may not agree with them but hey, it's not my life. I just don't think that it's a good idea, because of the way people treat religion.

As a side note, I personally think religion should be taught when people are old enough to treat it properly. Children are blind, children don't have the experience that adults do, and I think every child should be given the freedom to choose what religion they want to follow. Learn about it first, I think, once they've grown up enough to know how to treat it properly and once they've got enough life experiences under their belts. Teach them when they want to be taught, and teach them *everything*, or at least what they are interested in by their own choice. My mother never pressured or pushed me into having a certain faith; Sunday School was my choice, and I chose to go to Church with her when she went, and I agreed to going to Catholic High (which was nearly my bane).

I made my own choices, and though my faith may not coincide with many others', I can still say that - while I'm not perfect and have issues out the wazoo - I'm still a good person. I think that, in general, all we really need to know is "Harm none without cause" and "Treat others as you would be treated." I think everybody believes at least that.

... Er, many, many apologies again for the length of this post. A lot of this is stuff that I keep inside and never talk about, but I have quite a lot to say about it - even though I'm not always right. This is just my opinion, right or wrong... and I'm always willing to concede an error.

*coughs and flees into lurker-dom*
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 2:33:55 am EST from 24.150.120.87

Greg Bishansky> No need to be rude, I was just asking. Wasn't sure if he did mention it or not.
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 1:18:53 am EST from 71.115.231.16

Antiyonder> If he had, he would have talked about it.
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 11th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"They spent so much time looking at Janet Jackson's tit, I actually thought Osama bin Laden was hiding in it." - Lewis Black
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 12:55:25 am EST from 67.87.175.245

I thoguht I'd asked here first before submitting it to Greg. He's worked for DC as editor for I believe All-Star Squadron, The New Teen Titans and cowriting Captain Atom with Cary Bates,

Has he ever written or edited for Marvel? The closest I can think of was him about to take over writing for Marvel's Gargoyles Comic before cancelation.
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Fri, Dec 29, 2006 12:50:30 am EST from 71.115.231.16

Marty "Kaioto" Lund : I dont think it a dubious statment. I dont think that a book written for the church, the same
church that killed thousand of people becuase they were different, based only on stupid
and irrational believes. Why do you think it talks so much about hell and demons and satan,
it was a subtle message: "Obey the church or you will suffer endless torments"
Thats a church that distroyed all other religions and cultures twisting their own gods and godess in demons of evil
and their followers into evil mans that needed to be destroyed or "saved".They hunted people with the same
message: "follow my god or burn in hell".
The bible has a lot of things on it, good and bad, its up to us to decide wich we shall follow
I made my point already, i think. I will drop the topic now and here before someone gets offended.
And i sure agree with you with the rest of your statmemt. We should stop worrying about what other
do and start thinking in what sh** we are doing to others.

The problem with having some kind of religion been taught on schools is that it would
certainly destroyed freedom of religion. Not all people is christian.
Demon@ - ["its a heavy burden, but i have power now"]
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 11:58:33 pm EST from 200.114.213.102

Siren >Which only makes me feel stronger that organized religion is more about the money and less about the soul.

It seems that way. Infact when my family and I first moved to Washington, we attended a church for a while. The reason we were there for a short time, was it seem like such a cold place. The church we went to before moving, the people there were really friendly, made you feel at home.

Oh and to further support my comment about how some Christians are more concerned with flaunting authority than doing good. Why do they spend all of their time and effort persecuting those who are gay, when they could be doing more Christianly things? Things such as having a recycling and donating to homeless shelters. Those activities would definately be more positive than gay bashing and there would be no conflict involved.

Then of course the other problem with religious groups being overzealous, it leads me to thinking that a lot of the people involved grow up with the old black and white mindset. It works for a Saturday Morning cartoon, but not for real life.

Religion or no, you sometimes have to factor in the grey area. I mean the bible doesn't regard killing as 100% bad (as long as it's done as self defense).


Anyway, that's my last religion comment. I hope my point was clear and civil.
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 11:30:33 pm EST from 71.115.231.16

My boyfriend and I were walking around the neighborhood tonight and saw a sign that says on one line "Gargoyle Lounge Greg W" I kid you not. I think Gargoyle Lounge is a bar in that building, but I have no idea who that particular Greg W is and why his name was right there.
Todd, you live in the Central West End neighborhood also, did you see the sign? It is on the Chase Park Plaza's movie theater sign.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"You mean the police. Your clan." "Right, my clan... who'll disown me if I don't get to work." -Goliath & Elisa "Reawakening"
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 11:05:58 pm EST from 24.207.163.239

As I said before...the Bible is full of good lessons and stories, but the rules it has no longer apply to present day. I say live with the common sense like, don't cheat on your spouse or kill another human being. But leave out the keeping your daughter a slave, stoning women, and damning gays to hell.

On God in school...I must say how I feel...I have NO problem with having a moment of silence for students to choose to think/pray/daydream about whatever they want. I have no problem with having student religious groups created and meet on school grounds. I have no problem with evolution being taught in schools...
If Christians want their children not to learn about evolution and instead want them learn about Creation and God, then make Christian schools FREE. They whine and complain about God not being allowed in schools, and yet, they charge the parents that CAN afford their high priced schools unbelievable amounts. A lot of these regular Christian schools cost as much as COLLEGE. There is something seriously wrong with that. The church should fund their own schools as much as taxpayers fund public schools. Make religious schools free and then EVERYONE can live happily. It is such common sense that it makes me sick to think they don't do it. Which only makes me feel stronger that organized religion is more about the money and less about the soul.
Siren - [Click my name for Hunter's Moon Trailer!]
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 10:55:52 pm EST from 67.8.165.253

**dph's better judgement collapses**

Patrick - The issue of 'unclean' meat was dealt with in Acts, when Peter visited a gentile called Cornelius.

As for myself, I started with the two basics: Love the Lord your God and Love your neighbor as yourself and literally got everything else (except for homosexuality) to fall in line. It's all about seeking the best as opposed to getting instant gratification. Romans 1:26-27 deals with homosexuality, specifically calling it unnatural. That's the only new testament passage that I am aware of dealing with homosexuality.

I feel sick over some of the stuff committed in the name of Christianity over the years and frankly I don't believe we ever had the "good old days" in Americans schools that some many of the previous generation of Christians claim. Before prayer was taken out of public schools, we had a bigger problem which still lingers on: racism.
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 9:29:39 pm EST from 162.40.54.239

Vinnie, Warcrafter> He did say 'God'.

BROOKLYN: No, Broadway! Lex wouldn't want us to.
BROADWAY: (Wrenches his arm away) God!

Case in point.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
"Ignore me!" - Venture Bros.
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 8:57:52 pm EST from 209.239.132.132

Vinnie > "I think the only other place the word God is used is the old VHS version of heros awakening when Goliath mutters God speed to the clan as they glide off to Cyberbyotics to do Xanatos' bidding."

I thought about this while watching "Awakening" this past weekend - I wondered why this bit wasn't included in the broacast version of the episode. To wish someone "Godspeed" would be very in-character for a medieval character like Goliath (for example, Mary's final words to her son Tom in "Avalon" part 1 were "Godspeed, my angel").
Abby
"Forty-two! Is that all you've got to show for seven and a half million years' work?"
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 8:27:20 pm EST from 24.118.226.247

Gregarius > No, I haven't been here that long. But often after I post something, I think "oh no, I wanted to say X instead!"
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 6:40:31 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Warcrafter:- <I could of sworn Broadway said "god" when brooklyn was pulling at him from getting Lex.>

Interesting. I think the only other place the word God is used is the old VHS version of heros awakening when Goliath mutters God speed to the clan as they glide off to Cyberbyotics to do Xanatos' bidding.
Vinnie - [tpeano29 at hotmail dot com]
Remember the old Gargoyles comics!
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 5:25:46 pm EST from 69.54.209.62

I thought of saying something thoughtful, but instead I loled. D:
Chikaze
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 5:02:25 pm EST from 69.170.34.168

Odd utterances>> In "Metamorphosis", I thought I heard Brooklyn utter "F***!" after being hit with a tranquilizer dart. (I think it was really just a growl of shock and pain under his breath, but ...)

Lex>> IIRC Greg Weisman was said the he and several of his co-workers independently "discovered" that Lex was homosexual just after making "Turf." Any idea on what that could have meant?

Off-topic>> Ever read old your old postings and wonder, "Did I write that?"
JJ Gregarius
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 4:34:42 pm EST from 12.78.61.31

Here's something a little of topic from the bible. I was watching "Ransom" last night (yeah, i dont know why) and i noticed, during the scene where broadway and brooklyn are looking down at the captive Lex, I could of sworn Broadway said "god" when brooklyn was pulling at him from getting Lex. Im thinking he said "gaw" but with the subtitles it said god.
Warcrafter - [grafixfangamer1 at sbcglobal dot net]
Humans are such easy prey for a gargoyle!........and I need more friends on XBOX Live for 360. Anyone?
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 3:41:43 pm EST from 69.231.202.213

Demon@ >>

Dubious statements like this: << Bible was written for humans, humans that wanted the populace subdue. >> don't do our side of the argument any credit.

The Torah was certainly written for humans. It was written for humans that YHWH wanted to survive as a culture despite levels of persecution, ethnic cleansing, conquest, disaster, and forced migration that by all rights should have wiped them out a dozen times over. If you hate the idea of people telling you what's right and what's wrong, that's fine. Just don't mis-characterize historical purpose of the literature's content.

<< Maybe for that reason was considered a sin. But now? >>

Now it's still a pointless exercise in self-gratification that contributes in no way to serving the interests of God or man - hence it's still sinful. So are about a billion other things we don't make a big stink about in our day-to-day lives. We aren't going to see massive repercussions of many of those petty vices since we aren't eeking out an existence in the middle of a wasteland. Wasting water, for example, is still wasteful - but it isn't putting someone's life a risk in day to day life. Contaminating the water supply is still a major hazard, though the means to do so have changed. Meanwhile driving recklessly and running a red light aren't addressed directly, but are pretty easy to figure out by reading in context ...

Humans are flawed, sinful, petty creatures - still loved and commanded to love one another - despite our ubiquitous personal failings, inadequacies and vices. Picking a particular petty fault to persecute or lord over your neighbor is exactly the kind of thing Jesus speaks against in Matthew 7:3 when he teaches about fussing over the speck in the eye of another when one has a beam lodged in one's own.

The real problem stems from the completely irrational double-standards being applied, not the idea that fornication (of any sort) "isn't really a sin."
Marty "Kaioto" Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 3:11:20 pm EST from 67.128.112.166

Patrick - "It's the Bible, not Burger King."

*L* Never heard it put that way before.
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 3:01:17 pm EST from 24.150.120.87

Shara >> It's kind of what happens when people make tangents of questionable accuracy on sensitive topics.
Marty "Kaioto" Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 2:36:24 pm EST from 67.128.112.166

looks in room. ACK what happend to gargoyles? why are we talking about the bible? Not that I dont like the bible or anything, I read the one with pictures ;-P
Shara
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 2:12:43 pm EST from 4.245.115.238

Oh damn, i just realize that when you add the . thing the word dot appears on the mail thing Hahahahaaha.
Demon@ - ["its a heavy burden, but i have power now"]
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 1:39:09 pm EST from 200.114.213.102

Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury: Not all of us live blindly through what the bible says. Not all
of us believe in an intolerant and prickly god that cares more for whom we sleep with than if
we kill a fellow human, or well, as is not rated, i could just go and kill a little kid,
so what, at the eyes of god im already doom becuase i kissed another woman.
Bible was written for humans, humans that wanted the populace subdue. Maybe then, when sickness
killed almost half of the children that were born and a lot of womans died during the process
of giving birth, having sex with someone of the same gender was to decrease the chance of having another
person around. Maybe for that reason was considered a sin. But now?
God condemm evilness. Killing someone, rape someone THAT is something evil.
Our own freedom ends when the freedom of others start. So, sin, is something
that someone does to hurt others for no reason.
You can think wathever you want about guys, but i never hurt anyone, i never thought of hurting
anyone so i am quite sure that i wont burn in hell.
Demon@ - [" dot dot dot its a heavy burden, but i have power now dot dot dot "]
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 1:36:19 pm EST from 200.114.213.102

Sorry, "comparable to murder in the eyes of God." Whatever.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 1:00:59 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Oh yes and I might add, Blaqthorne, that your explicit statement that homosexuality is the same as murder, is extremely bigoted.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 12:07:02 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

I'm going to leave this thread since it has devolved into flames, but I want to set the record strait. Blaqthorne accused me of calling the anonymous poster "warped" and "evil." That is patently untrue. I do NOT appreciated being misquoted in this manner. Get your story strait.
What I actually said is that calling homosexuals warped and evil, is bigoted.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 12:04:53 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

B&CF >>

<< To the biblical scholars out there: Is there any place in the Bible where sins are ranked in degree of seriousness, such as murder is a worse sin than thievery? >>

Well, there are two degrees that are recognized by the Roman Catholic Church, anyway - Mortal and Venial Sins. Mortal Sins involve violation of the Ten Commandments. Venial Sins are considered to be more petty but still indicative of putting up spiritual barriers between yourself, God, and your fellow man.

None of the sexual acts comdemned in the Bible qualify as a Mortal Sin except for Adultery.

Most of the offenses that don't speak to the Commandments that still carried the penalty of death when introduced in Hebrew Scripture are survival laws for the Tribe of Israel during the times in which their culture was in danger of being wiped out.

As to the priority of the Commandments, Matthew 22:36-40 has Christ answer that exact question.

Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love he Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Patrick >>

<< If the Old Testament laws still apply, you can't pick and choose. >>

Funny thing that. Peter actually challenged that notion in the most early years of the Church, when people were trying to figure out if Gentiles need become Jews to be Christians. That particular incident with Peter in Antioch is why Christians aren't required to keep Kosher.

<< It's the Bible, not Burger King. >>

True. You don't get to "have it your way" on a whim. The Bible does, however, require interpretation. That's why the New Testament is seen as a companion and fulfillment of the Old. The Second Great Commandment is supposed to give a better context for understanding what those laws are supposed to mean. When you know how to cook pork without wiping out your family due to parasites, it isn't nearly the same moral context as feeding people pork when it could easily kill them.

The Old Testament laws are still relevant, but they need to be read for meaning in context rather than applied without any sort of discriminating though. That's why Christ laid down a strong Apostolic Tradition to marry to the Word.
Marty "Kaioto" Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 11:40:48 am EST from 67.128.112.166

Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury> No, sins are not ranked by degree in the Bible. In fact, James 2:10 says, "Whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it."

But the Old Testament law was not set down as "Rules to Live By". It's really "How to Get Yourself into Heaven", and the point is that it can't be done. No one is perfect. That's why Christ came and died… (I won't get into that here, but if you'd like to know more, please e-mail me.)

If you're looking for Biblical "rules to live by" don't look at the Law of Moses. Jesus Christ summed it all up in two commands: 1) Love God and 2) Love your "neighbor" (Matthew 22:36-40)
Phil - [p1anderson at go dot com]
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 9:38:00 am EST from 134.215.196.82

Leviticus also says that eating pork is a greivous sin. That should put quiet a damper on the next Southern Baptist cook-out. Other things mentioned in Leviticus as serious sins include women having any physical contact whatsoever with men who are not their relatives or husband (i.e., no shaking hands or hugging), men trimming their sideburns or beards (hello, ZZ Top), and wearing clothes made of two different fibers (goodbye cotton-poly blends).

I consider myself a Christian, but I have a pretty skeptical view of other Christians who want to cite Leviticus to justify persecution of homosexuals. If the Old Testament laws still apply, you can't pick and choose. It's the Bible, not Burger King. If, on the other hand, you believe that Jesus came to make a new Convenant, then you have to look to his teachings. And Jesus never uttered a word about homosexuality, eating pork, or cutting hair.
Patrick - [<-- The Gathering 2007]
"Thank you for flying Church of England, cake or death?" - Eddie Izzard
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 9:13:21 am EST from 66.72.199.39

Since some people took offense at one of my points...

Anonymous has been called a bigot, warped, a creep, and evil just for stating her view about homosexuals. Her view is a commonly held view.

Just because she posted as anonymous does not mean that her (or anyone else who posts at AG or here anonymously) question/point should be ignored because "he didn't have the cahones to put his name. I've seen this spouted several times in here. So, if the anonymous poster gave a name of "Joe-Bob the Buider", this would cause it to magically become a legitimate post?

Since this person may have arrived at AG from an outside site, she may not have hunted around the site and come across this Room. She may have also only been planning on posting one question, and would have no real reason to give a screen name--a new screen name seen once and once only would be the same as an anonymous post.

So, I'm trying to step into her shoes.

To the biblical scholars out there: Is there any place in the Bible where sins are ranked in degree of seriousness, such as murder is a worse sin than thievery? If not, then if, according to the Bible, homosexuality is a sin and murder is a sin, then they ARE comparable in the eyes of God.
If the Ten Commandments are listed in order of severity, then honoring your mother and father (#5) is more important than not committing murder (#6).

Using examples from the "Why Can't I Own a Canadian?": planting two different crops, wearing garments made of two different threads; and adultery and all punishable by death. Seems to me, that these are equally egregious offenses according to the Bible.
Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury
Music Selection: Final Fantasy XII OST (Limited Edition)
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 6:04:17 am EST from 207.207.40.250

Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury> I've decided not to read your post because I don't wanna get involved in this heated debate, however, now that I'm back from "Tijuana" (I got your reference!) I want to say that really made me laugh!
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Thu, Dec 28, 2006 12:00:57 am EST from 198.53.28.99

Well, Siren. Whatever the legal status, I really enjoy your music vidoes. Videos too. n.n'

I forget who said it, and I'm feeling too lazy to go back and check, but s/he said how would Demona reactt o Lex kissing Owen. The image I had in my mind made me laugh. Mostly due to the fact that Owen is so very non-sexual.

Speaking of Owen, he's around for 2198, right? Is this because he doesn't die as long as of Alex lives, or because Alex cast a spell of immortality kind of thing? Or maybe Oberon removed the gaes. Geas? However it's spelled.
Samuel - [AnglOfHellO at AOL dot com]
Noodles, anyone?
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 11:50:51 pm EST from 64.12.116.8

Ntripy > My brother has a torrent client that can do that, but he tried to find one for the Mac and could not. I have Tomato Torrent which is pretty basic.

My brother said that he might create and upload a new Torrent set that only contains the missing episodes... but I think he's already deleted them. He is only watching each episode once and then deleting it, and he's already started the World Tour. It turns out that he doesn't keep downloaded files on his computer, he watches or listens them and then decides to buy them, or deletes them. Besides I don't think he has time to create a new torrent, he's very busy.
Also the set I'm downloading has Season Two slightly out of order, it's putting Kingdom after Grief, whereas on the DVD it comes right after Heritage.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 11:43:18 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Issue 2> Well, its good to finally have it in my hands. I pretty much agree with what everybody else has already said about the story and the art, so I wont elaborate. I'll be glad to see the new artist on issue 4 though.

Vaevictis Asmadi> What torrent client are you using? You should be able to set priority on individual files and set them as "do not download".
Ntripy
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 11:30:57 pm EST from 72.232.196.138

Sorry for the double post...meant to add

The only people who profit from fan music videos ARE the production companies. Many people who watch my Last Unicorn and Gargoyles videos tell me that that they were either reminded or introduced to them by my music videos and thus, are or did go out and BUY the DVDs.

So at the end of the day....production companies are getting free advertisement from people like us. We spend our money and time making videos for nothing, but the sheer joy it bring us, and they get bigger pocketbooks. So I never understand their reasoning for calling videos "infringment", since music videos are so editted, that they can't be used as a substitute for the real deal.
Siren - [Click my name for Hunter's Moon Trailer!]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 11:06:34 pm EST from 72.189.220.217

Technically, production companies consider it copyright infringment.

Though from talking to several people in the entertainment business (and by people, I mean, people who have been in the business for years and are well known), and once a lawyer from Hollywood, these production companies use strong arm tactics by simply using their name to scare small companies like YouTube to take down music videos made by fans. But if the fan vid community ever got together and fought this on a legal battleground, we would likely win, since what we do doesn't gain us profit nor is it profitable for anyone. Essentially, video making is the equivlent of fan fiction and art, nothing more.
Siren - [Click my name for Hunter's Moon Trailer!]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 11:02:46 pm EST from 72.189.220.217

Siren, I'm relieved you aren't yelling at me! I think it's neat that some folks have VCR recordings from ten years ago, but I'm not so lucky. Honestly, I only managed to see a handful of episodes, most of them I never saw at all.

The problem with it is that I can't find a download file of only the missing episodes. I only found a huge torrent download with every single episode from all three seasons! I can't read or even delete any of the episodes until ALL of them finish downloading..... my computer estimates it will take between 2 and 7 days to finish. Then I can delete most of the episodes. By then my Season 1 DVD will have arrived and I'll have watched all the DVDs!

Is it actually legal to read things from a DVD to a computer and then edit it or share it? Or to share VCR recordings?
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 10:56:19 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Well, I have Season 1 and Season 2 Part 1 DVDs. And I downloaded what episodes they didnt release to DVD. However, my DVD player that is connected to my computer died and I cant get Protection off it to finish the video.

I see little problem with downloading the episodes not on DVD yourself. I do the same thing. It just annoys me that NOW my DVD player dies.
Siren - [Click my name for Hunter's Moon Trailer!]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 10:42:37 pm EST from 72.189.220.217

Siren, I'm downloading the second half of Season Two since there is no other way to get it. I know some of you may yell at me for it... if Disney ever makes a legal DVD of those episodes, I'll certainly buy them. I finally just went and ordered Season One although I can barely afford it. I figured there was no point owning Season Two Volume One otherwise and didn't feel comfortable just downloading it illegally.
Anyway, IF it ever finishes downloading, I'll send you that episode, Siren.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 10:34:45 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

I really really need the episode "Protection", if anyone has a DVD-rip of that episode, please send it to me sirengarg (at) yahoo (dot) com. I need it for a music video. Thanks
Siren - [Click my name for Hunter's Moon Trailer!]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 10:22:28 pm EST from 72.189.220.217

*looks more closely at some earlier posts*
Hey Greg B. I think you should be careful what you say!
I too find BT&CF's comment to be very offensive, but it does no good to become offensive yourself. We should at least ask what she/he meant by that statement before assuming. If she/he did mean it in the way you interpret, then that is bigoted. But also remember that a bigot is not at all the same as a homicidal terrorist and does not really warrant you to call them "fucked up."



Marty>
<<Well, the person involved in it should certainly care. :)

Moreover, we should not cheapen something as profoundly important as Love by treating it interchangeably with Lust or Infatuation. They are very different things. For one thing, Love transcends far beyond the bounds of human sexuality that constrains sexual Lust. We seem to have a much more regard these days for sexually expressed love than bonds of friendship, family, and comraderie though.>>

Yes, I agree! I only meant that whether a gay person feels love or only infatuation for someone of the same sex, it is equally involuntary, and equally blameless. And also, I was implying that physical attraction, though less sublime than love, is not dirty or bad in itself. Saying "it is only infatuation, not real love" does not make it false, warped, or voluntary.

Lust is a word with further implications, which I perhaps should not have used.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 10:12:51 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Marty Lund - Ahhh, I see. Finally, I get it. (My brain malfunctions on an hourly basis. Today seems to be a day where the meds are messing about with my ability to figure out what people are saying to me, among other things. Sorry! ^^; )

Usually when I encounter words like "abuse" and "malice", I immediately associate it with unwarranted cruelty (like beating your wife because dinner was cold, or harassing a coworker because they're gay, etc). Things like that, I encounter and think of more often than the types you mentioned.
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 9:04:15 pm EST from 24.150.120.87

Harvester of Eyes- Hahaha, yeah i know it was a joke. I though it was stupid start a discussion out of it but i wasnt sure then if you were been serious after you posted a reply. Sorry :P
Demon@ - [dot dot dot and where is the donkey??]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 8:00:19 pm EST from 200.114.213.102

Demon@: Why are you bringing up torture? I'm not advocating that. These are X-rays. The kind hospitals use. I've had X-rays. They didn't blind me or give me cancer. About the only thing the doctor did was give me a lead "cup" to prevent sterilization. I'm not talking about doing any experiments. Just a once-over with X-rays, and that's that. And anyway, if you actually took what I said seriously, you need to lighten up. I'm perfectly content to just sit back and let the idiot problem take care of itself (thank you, Darwin Awards).
Harvester of Eyes
"Rapes for sale." -A sign my brother and I passed earlier today that I suspect was missing either a D or G.
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 7:50:36 pm EST from 71.74.28.233

Sadistic Cow >>

<< Marty Lund - "Jesus preached compassion and love towards others - which doesn't exclude hurting them emotionally or even physically. It does exclude selfishness, malice, abuse, and cruelty, though (which are the main reasons people hurt one another)."

Those are all part of the same type of behaviour. Abuse, cruelty, malice etc all harm people emotionally or physically, depending on the situation. If I'm reading this right, then it makes no sense, because it's contradicting itself: "You should be loving and compassionate, but go ahead and treat people like crap." I don't know if I'm reading that right or not, but that is what it sounds like to me. o.O >>

You are definitely reading it backwards. That's why I went through pains to point out that society at large puts forth a false image of "Pain = Evil" and "Pleasure = Good." Lots of things that are good for us in the long run cause us pain or discomfort, while things that are harmful to us are a source of pleasure.

Causing someone pain and "treating someone like crap" are quite distinct concepts. While treating someone like crap usually implies inflicting pain of some sort on them, inflicting pain on someone doesn't necessarily mean you are treating them like crap. Detoxing someone inflicts a tremendous amount of pain on them, for example. Healthy exercise isn't something most of us find to be fun. I'm sure that stalker felt really bad when the police arrested him on that restraining order you took out too.

Just because something causes pain or discomfort doesn't mean it is a cruel and intolerable act. There is far more to cruelty, malice, and abuse than that.

<< Er... did I say otherwise? I don't believe I said that "You shall not kill" referred to killing anything at all, for any reason. Sorry if it came off that way. >>

No, you were just using the word "murder" in a context where the proper word is "kill," which is noteable because many people insert the word "kill" instead of "murder" in reading the Sixth Commandment and try to the mistranslation to try and justify everything from militant vegitarianism to total pacifism. The original Hebrew from which Commandments are translated uses the word "ratsah" (roughly translated as "killing a man without just cause," "illegal homicide," or "murder") not the word "harag" which more generally encompasses all acts of any victim for any reason.

It was more of a tangent discussion than anything else, not an accusation.

Vaevictis Asmadi >>

<< Who cares if it is love or lust or a schoolyard crush? >>

Well, the person involved in it should certainly care. :)

Moreover, we should not cheapen something as profoundly important as Love by treating it interchangeably with Lust or Infatuation. They are very different things. For one thing, Love transcends far beyond the bounds of human sexuality that constrains sexual Lust. We seem to have a much more regard these days for sexually expressed love than bonds of friendship, family, and comraderie though.

<< You can't control who you're attracted to, either. >>

I agree completely.

<< Nobody has the right to judge somebody else and tell them their feelings aren't real. >>

While I'm sure the right psychologist would have a field day with caveats on this, I agree that it isn't really anyone's business on most occasions. People will always be critical towards how others express their feelings or act upon them though.

<< If two people are consenting adults and they think they're attracted and want to kiss or have sex, they aren't hurting anybody else (unless it's an affair). >>

Which is pretty much the long as the short of it. If we're going to crack down to such a severe degree on the "bad choices" and "small harms" consenting adults inflict on themselves this is the least of our worries. There are hordes of people running up unpaid medical bills for self-inflicted injuries and condition that I'm getting stiffed for right now who need to be way ahead in the line. ;)

Again, it definitely seems to be a case of finding a vulnerable element to abuse rather than taking a stand on an actual principle.

<< Judge not lest ye be judged. >>

Of course, that passage expresses very clearly that we should be concerned with identifying and rejecting sins rather than punishing sinners. We are under and obligation as moral and rational creatures to judge the merits of Actions, but not People.

If you're looking for people to stop judging what you say and do as wise, foolish, right, or wrong though ... then I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree with this assertion.
Marty "Kaioto" Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 6:57:09 pm EST from 67.128.112.166

Well these all started with the guy thing, and religion come out... But hey, with all the fuss we lost the main thing here. How do you thing the clan members would take the news?
Can you imagine Demona gliding trough the city and suddenly seeing Lex and, say, Owen kissing? XD
Demon@ - [dot dot dot and where is the donkey??]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 6:21:50 pm EST from 200.114.213.102

How intereting: the week of a major Christian festival, and we have a discussion concerning Christianity.
Interesting.
JJ Gregarius
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 6:11:37 pm EST from 12.78.55.30

Who cares if it is love or lust or a schoolyard crush? You can't control who you're attracted to, either. Nobody has the right to judge somebody else and tell them their feelings aren't real. They might not be. I'm sure there are plenty of people, hetero and homo, who think they're attracted or in love when they really aren't, and plenty who are but try to deny it. But how can anybody but that person know, and how could anybody have the right to tell them they are lying or faking? Nobody has that right.

If two people are consenting adults and they think they're attracted and want to kiss or have sex, they aren't hurting anybody else (unless it's an affair).

Judge not lest ye be judged.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 5:46:44 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

This debate comes up in here quite often, and I think it's pretty natural, considering that the Bible was brought up in the Gargoyles series early on in reference to Goliath, and proof is the point. He may have been named after the Biblical character, but he's very little like him.
Note that I said "Character" the Bible is a book after all-written by human beings. Despite how god like the words we want to believe, and there are many values within the book we can learn from - it is JUST A BOOK! Some of you may take offense to that, that's fine. I was raised roman catholic, went to catholic school right though high school. Went to mass almost every day there, hada religion course. Despite that, I've grown away from it. It's not that I don't believe in a supreme being, it's just I have major problems with the Bible and other books of it's type. They were all written by human beings and can suffer from the same slants and opinions as a news reporter. Say what you want, but there are many things in the Bible that we no longer follow because they are foolish and out dated concepts. I'm generally conservative minded, but when it comes to this, we've got to wake up a bit and see what we're doing to ourselves. letting words on a page dictate how we live our lives and judge other people.
As for the homosexuality aspect. Lex is gay-fine. It's greg's story, and I have no problem with it at all. As for those of you who think being gay is a lifestyle, I suggest you try and live in the shoes of someone who is, or become friends with a gay person and talk to them about what they had to go through to "Come out". All of my homosexual friends that I've talked to about this have told me they've known from the time they were very young. You have to think about what you say to everyone because you don't know how they might react. Your family, your job, your friends. If you stop to realize that you end up losing some of those after you open up to them, you might think twice about some of the comments you make.

That's my thoughts on the subject. I am entitled to my opinion, although I'm sure there are those that would rather I just go away.
Wingless
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 4:30:03 pm EST from 74.105.128.170

Matt - I don't know about anyone else, but I'm enjoying the discussion. At least, the one I'm involved in. (I'm ignoring certain others. XD) 'Tis a learning experience! :)
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 3:58:15 pm EST from 24.150.120.87

Can't we all just get along?
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"You mean the police. Your clan." "Right, my clan... who'll disown me if I don't get to work." -Goliath & Elisa "Reawakening"
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 3:44:58 pm EST from 24.207.163.239

Harvester of Eyes I never said you wanted to kill them. There were all kind of torture and
experiments that the Nazis applied on the Jewish. Such experiments could kill them, blind them or ruin their reproductive organs.
I don't think either that is up to me or no one to decide who has right to breed and who doesn't.
After seeing all the things that a couple can go through to have a baby i am not sure if all of them would have "long and happy lives". Acting like them doesn't make you any better. You are acting JUST like the vermin you are fighting against.
And that variety is one whole group .An intolerant, irritating and mostly cruel group but one group nevertheless.
Demon@ - [dot dot dot and where is the donkey??]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 3:29:57 pm EST from 200.114.213.102

Marty Lund - "Jesus preached compassion and love towards others - which doesn't exclude hurting them emotionally or even physically. It does exclude selfishness, malice, abuse, and cruelty, though (which are the main reasons people hurt one another)."

Those are all part of the same type of behaviour. Abuse, cruelty, malice etc all harm people emotionally or physically, depending on the situation. If I'm reading this right, then it makes no sense, because it's contradicting itself: "You should be loving and compassionate, but go ahead and treat people like crap." I don't know if I'm reading that right or not, but that is what it sounds like to me. o.O

"Well, you do apparently have a biblical reference of some sort handy. You could certainly look it up and decide for yourself what He was saying."

Yes, I do. (Though sometimes I wonder why, since I'm not religious. o.O) The Bible itself promotes battling against "evil" or "wrong" forces. "The Lord said to Moses, 'Say to the Israelites:' Any Israelites or any aliens living in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech must be put to death. The people of the community... to stone him.'"(Lev. 20:1-3) "If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death." (Lev. 20:9) "If a man commits adultery with another man's wife... both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death." (Lev. 20:10) Just as examples; there are a lot of references (in my version of) The Bible which dictate to man that they punish the "wicked". Stoning people to death, cutting them off from the community, and so on. So, yes - I probably was wrong when I said it was something Jesus had said, but the Bible itself does basically say to fight against such "wrongs".

"Well, that's your opinions, but I disagree about the last part being wrong at all. While killing someone in self-defense or the defense of someone else is undesirable, I can't fathom it being a moral wrong. Rather, it is a disappointing last recourse in the face of something awful someone else has chosen to do."

I'm not sure if I said it right. ^^; What I meant was, the act itself of murder (to me) is wrong. Killing in those instances is only considered bad because the act of murder *itself* is wrong, but that doesn't mean the person defending themself was wrong to do it. If that makes any sense. ^^;

"They aren't a "murderer" either. The word has a very specific definition."

Then I used the wrong word for it. My apologies.

"Speaking of definitions, the casual (mis)translation of the Sixth Commandment is "You shall not kill." The accurate translation prohibits acts we would deem murder. It does not prohibit killing plants, dumb animals, or killing as part of lawful execution or the defense of self or others."

Er... did I say otherwise? I don't believe I said that "You shall not kill" referred to killing anything at all, for any reason. Sorry if it came off that way.

"True. They aren't "murderers" for doing so either."

No. They aren't. And again, I apologize for using the word "murderer" as lightly as I did.


Just for the record - I'm not saying I'm right or wrong on any of this. It's just my opinion. And I don't always do a very good job of explaining myself properly, so things have the tendency to not come off the way they were meant to. XD

Greg B. - The world is f*cked up. But at least it's an entertaining ride. ;)
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 3:19:09 pm EST from 24.150.120.87

Demon@: Who said anything about killing anyone? I don't want to kill anyone. And irradiating them with X-rays wouldn't murder them. They'd still be free to live long and happy lives. Their reproductive organs just wouldn't produce anything (and they'd probably still enjoy the use of them). Also, I'm not discriminating against any race or creed. Ignorant shits come in all varieties. Besides, I wouldn't be actively capturing them. I'd find a clever way to get them all in the same room, such as organizing a Pauly Shore film festival.

Greg B: No apologies needed. Rock on!
Harvester of Eyes
"Rapes for sale." -A sign my brother and I passed earlier today that I suspect was missing either a D or G.
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 2:42:11 pm EST from 71.74.28.233

Todd - How far along are you on approving newly submitted questions? The question submitted by Abbie "aka Becky"lol writes... clearly violates the rules on not allowing multiple topics in the same post.
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 2:35:17 pm EST from 216.96.23.36

The Sadistic Cow >> << Jesus and the Bible supposedly teach one basic rule for everyone to live by: Don't hurt anyone. Causing pain comes in many forms, from physical to emotional to verbal. Jesus said that to do so is wrong; >>

That's kind of inaccurate. Jesus certainly hurt that merchants and moneychangers at the Temple, for example. He made the priest and scholars feel bad all the time. He ragged on his own disciples for their various failings.

Jesus preached compassion and love towards others - which doesn't exclude hurting them emotionally or even physically. It does exclude selfishness, malice, abuse, and cruelty, though (which are the main reasons people hurt one another).

We're a very comfort-oriented, pain-averse society these days. We often confuse pain with evil and satisfaction with good these days. It is important to remember the difference.

<< though if I remember right, Jesus also promoted fighting against "wrong-doing" - which is what people on both sides are doing. >>

Well, you do apparently have a biblical reference of some sort handy. You could certainly look it up and decide for yourself what He was saying.

<< It is wrong to kill someone/something in cold blood, or to get your jollies. It is still wrong in a way, but to a far lesser degree to kill someone/something in self-defense or in the defense of someone else. >>

Well, that's your opinions, but I disagree about the last part being wrong at all. While killing someone in self-defense or the defense of someone else is undesirable, I can't fathom it being a moral wrong. Rather, it is a disappointing last recourse in the face of something awful someone else has chosen to do.

<< The cold-blood murderer is evil, he/she is wrong, because they wanted to and possibly enjoyed the destruction of a life. They should be punished. The self-defense/defense of someone else murderer should not be punished, and they are not evil; >>

They aren't a "murderer" either. The word has a very specific definition.

Speaking of definitions, the casual (mis)translation of the Sixth Commandment is "You shall not kill." The accurate translation prohibits acts we would deem murder. It does not prohibit killing plants, dumb animals, or killing as part of lawful execution or the defense of self or others.

<< animals kill out of necessity, to survive, and mankind does that as well. They are not evil. >>

True. They aren't "murderers" for doing so either.
Marty "Kaioto" Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 2:17:20 pm EST from 67.128.112.166

Greg B. - "Show me where in the Bible Jesus Christ said ANYTHING about homosexuality being wrong. Show me... it ain't there."

According to the Holy Bible New International Verion (Year 1978, New York Bible Society), Jesus did not say being gay was bad; it was God Himself who did. Amongst a whole lot of "Do not have sexual relations with (anybody)" stuff the Lord was telling Moses, God said: "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." (Leviticus 18:22)

Murder, bigotry and things like that are wrong because they promote the same kind of behaviour: willfully hurting people. Jesus and the Bible supposedly teach one basic rule for everyone to live by: Don't hurt anyone. Causing pain comes in many forms, from physical to emotional to verbal. Jesus said that to do so is wrong; though if I remember right, Jesus also promoted fighting against "wrong-doing" - which is what people on both sides are doing.

The people who think being gay is a choice, the people who terrorize gays, believe they are fighting "wrong"; the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, so they fight it. The people who support, or are fine with gays, believe they are fighting "wrong"; they/we see gays being terrorized, killed, tormented, abused, and we fight against that wrong.

Wrong and evil-doing can have a very fine line in certain cases. It is wrong to kill someone/something in cold blood, or to get your jollies. It is still wrong in a way, but to a far lesser degree to kill someone/something in self-defense or in the defense of someone else. The cold-blood murderer is evil, he/she is wrong, because they wanted to and possibly enjoyed the destruction of a life. They should be punished. The self-defense/defense of someone else murderer should not be punished, and they are not evil; animals kill out of necessity, to survive, and mankind does that as well. They are not evil.

I believe homosexuality is not a choice; it is something a person is born with. Nobody can help being born black, or white, or Asian; so if we can't choose our skin colour, how can we choose our sexual orientation? Being gay also does not hurt anybody. If one dude decides to poke another dude in the bum, or whatever, that doesn't effect the ozone layer, or create more pollution in the large water bodies on earth. Two dudes kissing doesn't create more homeless people. Homosexuality doesn't make people decide to kidnap a child for the child porn industry.

Homosexuality itself does not hurt anyone. It's like harassing somebody just because they like oranges better than apples, and you like apples better. And I don't see why people have to stick their noses in the sexual exploits of gay people anyway. I mean, honestly - if you don't want anyone sticking their face into YOUR bedroom business, why do you think you have the right to do so to anyone else?

Homosexuality hurts no one. Racism, bigotry, murder, hate and so on - they DO hurt people.
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 1:57:02 pm EST from 24.150.120.87

Todd Jensen >> << Of course (and I'm probably in danger of stereotyping here), I suspect that a lot of the people who'd be most strongly prejudiced against gays would probably believe all gargoyles to be demonic monsters that should be sent back to Hell at the earliest opportunity. >>

You'd be surprised, I think. It seems like a logical conclusion, except that bigotry isn't really logical. The fact that I can go out and find people who viciously denigrate homosexuals in one breath and decry institutional racism in another strikes me as sad but telling. While we do have the rare specimen who is afraid of anything different from him or herself, most people tend to have some particular axe to grind.

There are all sorts of sketchy rationalizations they'd throw around for being prejudiced against a certain kind of human but viewing Gargoyles with curiousity or apathy - "Gargoyles never tried to rob my store," or "I never have to see Gargoyles sucking face in front of me at a restaurant," or whatever other nonsense they can come up with. There are also all sort of similar arguments people might use to justify hostility towards Gargoyles but not "their fellow man."

I think it'd be a rather mixed bag in real life - something akin to Alien Nation, maybe.

Vaevictis Asmadi >> << Can't you see the difference between a chosen behavior that hurts somebody, and an involuntary feeling of love for another person? >>

A couple of points here.

First, such acts aren't good for comparison. All they really do well is illustrate that there is a consensus against total permissiveness. Nearly everyone agrees that there is a line between what you can and can't do of your own accord. The argument, therefore, shifts to where the line is drawn and why. That's why "the difference" is so important.

Secondly, let's not confuse Love with Lust in passing. They really aren't the same thing, neither requires the other at all.

I do think it very odd to for people to assert that humans have the ability to choose who they have sexual attraction to. Humans can choose how they act on their feelings, but not how they feel.

Well, unless you start brainwashing them with questionable medical practices, anyway. * shudder *


GregB >> << B&CF> You're comparing hating murderers to hate gay people? >>

To be fair here, you're engaging in faulty reasoning on a number of levels.

Primarily, it is wrong to express outrage at comparisons. Saying, "Leave them alone. It isn't like they killed someone," also offers a comparison. Comparison allows people to realize just how important the differences between things are. It might also call into question whether hatred is something we should ever direct towards any human being for any reason.

Now suggesting ~ equivalence ~ between something like murder and something like homosexuality is certainly messed up, IMO.

Secondly, you're dealing with a Straw Man. Making the leap from seeing someone as "a sinner" to hating them isn't justified. Making the leap between someone not liking what you do and someone being a bigot is also unjustified (though not for the same reasons).

All that out of the way, I have a real problem seeing the logic of treating someone who engages in homosexual fornication worse than the hordes of people who engage in heterosexual fornication. That smacks of singling out a smaller group that you feel you can "get away with" mistreating, rather than standing up in any sort of principled fashion.

That epitomizes bigotry to me.
Marty "Kaioto" Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 1:29:16 pm EST from 67.128.112.166

B&CF> You're comparing hating murderers to hate gay people?

I want to apologise to the room first, before I say what I am about to say.

Jesus Christ, you're fucked up.
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 11th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"They spent so much time looking at Janet Jackson's tit, I actually thought Osama bin Laden was hiding in it." - Lewis Black
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 12:31:13 pm EST from 67.87.175.245

BQ&CF > Hating or disaproving of murderers is NOT bigotry. Reducto ab adsurdem. Can't you see the difference between a chosen behavior that hurts somebody, and an involuntary feeling of love for another person?

I don't understand how anyone, for even a split second, can think people choose to be gay. How many stories do we have of Romeos and Juliets falling in love with somebody against their will? How can anyone possibly think you can choose who you fall in love with?? It makes me extremely sad that anyone would think that.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 11:47:32 am EST from 209.162.56.94

BCF: I don't believe that automatically makes her a bigot. If that's the case, I'm a bigot because I believe murderers and thieves have sinned.
I dont think you should not compare a gay person to a murderer or a thief. The difference is quite clear.

Was "homosexuality" even a term when Jesus lived? He also didn't say anything about assault rifles. :P

Again, you are comparing something brutal with something harmless. Jesus first lesson, at all rates, was to love the others as you love yourself. I dont
see were hating gay people fit on that remark.
If we were to follow what the bible sais we could start burning mages, womans with black cats and killing snakes. I think humanity should have learnt long ago the brutal consequences of following the bible.
There are more people ponting out the evil things that the bible has to tell us than the good things we can read on it.
Demon@ - [dot dot dot and where is the donkey??]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 11:25:30 am EST from 200.114.213.102

Antiyonder, Samuel> Count me in on the list of people curious about Lex's mate.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
"Ignore me!" - Venture Bros.
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 10:59:18 am EST from 209.239.132.188

*makes a conscious decision not to get more involved than I already am in this conversation*

All I'm gonna say is that I'm gay and I'm not a bad person. My boyfriend on the other hand... : )
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"You mean the police. Your clan." "Right, my clan... who'll disown me if I don't get to work." -Goliath & Elisa "Reawakening"
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 10:51:19 am EST from 24.207.163.239

Of course (and I'm probably in danger of stereotyping here), I suspect that a lot of the people who'd be most strongly prejudiced against gays would probably believe all gargoyles to be demonic monsters that should be sent back to Hell at the earliest opportunity.
Todd Jensen
Gargoyles - did for monstrous-looking statues what "Watership Down" did for rabbits!
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 7:49:43 am EST from 4.244.209.19

Been meaning to comment on it sooner, but I for one am interested in seeing who Lexington ends up with. Yeah I'm a Christian, but of the openminded variety. The only reason I believe some religious folks are so uptight is that they see themselves as being better than those who don't go to church. It's more about ego than right or wrong, IMO.

As for the person who commented on gay being wrong, it seemed more like someone thinking with a black and white view.

So to close my comment, whether we're Caucasion, Asian, African, Mormon, Christian, Thanagarian, Kryptonian, Martian, we're only human.
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 5:51:21 am EST from 71.115.231.16

Sorry for the double-post. But I just read the Sapphire post. All I can say is holy crap. I can't believe people think things like that. It also seems really odd that a person with such... beliefs would embrace a show like Gargoyles. Or, I can only assume she did. Either way. That was really shocking.
Samuel - [AnglOfHellO at AOL dot com]
Noodles, anyone?
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 4:50:06 am EST from 205.188.117.68

Personally, I'm looking forward to seeing Lexington's mate. Assuming he ever finds one. :\ Maybe that's why Greg never says anything about him. Woe...

But anyhow. I hope everyone had their happy holidays, and will have a happy New Year.

Another thing I'm really looking forward to is the double-date arc. Oh, Gargoyles, you are joy. n.n
Samuel - [AnglOfHellO at AOL dot com]
Noodles, anyone?
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 4:43:47 am EST from 205.188.117.68

Can't decide if my casting landed. Ooh, I've found a new pasttime.

Harvestor> Funny you should link to that definition, because I purposely looked it up at dictionary.com before posting to make sure that I was using the term bigot correctly. The reason I used the qualifier "not necessarily" was because I got no indication that she was "utterly intolerant" of gays. If you are calling someone who simply doesn't approve of gays a bigot, which is how I'm reading your comment, then anyone who has an opinion about anything would be a bigot.

Vaevictis> "Homosexuality is NOT a 'lifestyle' or a 'behavior'. It is simply how some people are born." I believe the jury is still out on that.
A little nit: there is a difference between homosexual ORIENTATION and homosexual BEHAVIOR. You don't need to have a homosexual orientation to engage in homosexual behavior.
Again, I got no sense that she thought gays were warped, evil, or that she hated them. If she believes what she has been told about gays, she only thinks them to be sinners. I don't believe that automatically makes her a bigot. If that's the case, I'm a bigot because I believe murderers and thieves have sinned.

Bishansky> Isn't the Bible the source of the moral code that is used by Judeo-Christians? So why shouldn't those people use the Bible to justify their views on whether something is right or wrong? It seems to me that the Bible should be the FIRST place people of those faiths should turn to.
Was "homosexuality" even a term when Jesus lived? He also didn't say anything about assault rifles. :P

Why Can't I own a Canadian> Looks like the person who wrote this is a fan of West Wing: http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=928488
Since all the references are from the Old Testament, wouldn't they apply only to Hebrews, since isn't the purpose of the Old Testament to lay down Hebrew law?
As a nitpick, a "pigskin" is not made from the skin of a pig, much like the strings of a tennis racket are not made from the guts of a cat.

As I said, I'm not an expert on the Bible (thank you, Matt, for reiterating that--I'm still trying to figure out why you felt the need to), but doesn't the Bible outright contradict itself in several instances?

Interesting commentary about Leviticus 18:22
"Bible publishers are under strong economic pressures to turn a profit. If a translation of Leviticus 18:22 were included that did not generally condemn at least male homosexual behavior, their sales would drop precipitously. They are unlikely to deviate from traditional interpretations, unless they were preparing a translation specifically for Christian and Jewish liberals." (http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh.htm)
Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury
"The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose." --William Shakespeare "The Merchant of Venice"
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 2:36:51 am EST from 63.20.25.160

Harvester of Eyes: Mmm, tempting, but i dont think is the proper thing to do. I know it was a joke but words are powerful. That is exactly what the nazies did to the Jewish.
Talking about prejudice sh**, just today was foundated a Community Center where the poor could go to eat in the capital of my country, once of the most beautiful and expensive places where tourist and rich people spend their lives and their vacations,near the river, on fishing clubs and expensive restaurants. Duro de Domar, a gossip programm on TV had gone out to ask the people there what they though about these Center been in their (apparantly just theirs) oh so beatifull area. I couldnt believe some of the things i hear.
An Argentinian said that the miseries of a country shouldnt be shown to the tourists and proposed that it should, at least, be dissimulated.
An other one said that there was a place and a time for everything; apparently the starving kids next to him should wait for the MF to move his damn "Piccaso" to be able to eat a plate of cold stew.
A French tourist, insulted, said imperturbable that she didnt come from so far to see that kind of things.
Those are evil people, because only evil people can feel nothing when looking at a starve and abandonded child asking for a piece of bread.
But later, when i remember a men who was giving to the kids of the homeless , not far away from the river, where Mr Hide The Poor and Ms These Starving Creatures Offends My Gold Visa Card where having a great time, cakes and cokes the day before Christmas i coudnt help myself but felt sorry for Mr My Card Cant Be Around Those Loosers and the others.
They are selfish people, ignorant of all the world around them except for the money, the fun and the material things they can get. You can see all kind of wonders around the world and you can feel so damn proud when a tourist say "Wow, i love these place is so clean and unpoor". Its all based on material things. They are just empty inside and probably will never be able to feel the happiness that only born from helping others, live with others and be there for others. They will never know what it is to put a smile on the face of a sad an inocent face or feel the huge pride that i feel every time someone, the goverment or the common people, makes something to help others in the name of the fatherland.
They are lost on their arrogance and on their selfish pride, and for that they deserve nothing more than our compassion not or hate.
These is what we should see and learn from the bible. The physical power, gain long ago through fear and violence, of the bible was endend on the Middle Ages, now it only has the power of the word. Now it can only be an influence on those who read it. And each person takes their own conclution and their are inspire on what they read according of the feelings that each of us have on our own souls.
Uff, sorry fot the long post, its a delicate subject for me.
Demon@ - [dot dot dot and where is the donkey??]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 1:09:42 am EST from 200.114.213.102

GregB >> Dude, swearing doesn't make your point any more compelling or important. You help set the rules here, and you care deeply about logical discourse - so try not to let it slip just because something understandably touches a nerve.

The hyperbole for Bin Laden is just another form of the "reductio ad Hitlerum" logic fallacy. Seriously, the argument deserves to be done more credit than that. Bin Laden's personal bigotry is nowhere near as much of a problem as his inhuman cruelty and disrespect for life and freedom.

Also, the anecdotal evidence about people what "makes someone" homosexual is a shoddy argument in general. It is a justification of feelings rather than a scientifically formed logical proof. My own best friend is homosexual, and everything I know about him indicates nothing particularly genetic about it. His experiences with gender roles, role models, and interpersonal interactions are far more prominent in his life. That doesn't mean homosexuality is a learned behavior either. Like most expressions of sexuality, I think it is a personally unique mixed bag of environmental, genetic, and social factors - not a recipe.

Heck, some people think skewed hormone levels due to diet at key points of biological maturation has a huge impact on this sort of thing. Lots of stories, theories, and other rather muddy waters - and all largely irrlevent. Human beings are human beings - whether you like how they live their lives or not.

<< Show me where in the Bible Jesus Christ said ANYTHING about homosexuality being wrong. Show me... it ain't there. >>

This probably isn't the best argument tactic to take. Jesus Christ was a practicing Jew. He was a scholar and teacher of the Hebrew Scriptures - including Deuteronomy and Numbers, which condemn just about every sexual or hygenic behavior ever perceived to reduce the likelihood of maximizing the next generation of offspring raised in the Hebrew traditions. It was pretty darn brutal too.

Rather than argue that Jesus didn't offer an opinion on homosexual sex acts being wrong, look to His acts towards the Adulteress. Jesus stood up and defended someone considered to be the most despicable sexual criminal under Hebrew Law - against the stoning death old Hebrew law dictated. He did not deny that what she had done was a sin, but instead told her to "go and sin no more." He asked that he who was without sin should cast the first stone. In so doing, Jesus set down an important lesson that hurting people just because they sinned - rather than harmed people or endangered the tribe - was just an exercise in cruelty, not justice. All men are sinners, after all. Why don't we stone all of them to death?

The far greater issue is that no matter what is perceived to be wrong with homosexual fornication, heterosexual fornication would logically be much, much worse. The first is self-indulgence between two adults. The second risks involving a third, perfectly innocent, unconsenting, and vulnerable human being. Even beyond that, what about breaking up families with "no fault" and "at will" divorces? Doesn't that sort of retroactively remove the "sanctity of marriage" and all the social value it is supposed to attribute to the otherwise base sexual act? The fact that the people who rant and rave and target homosexuals refuse to address the much more pressing issues facing "family values" is the true telling point of bigotry and ignorance, IMO.

It's a classic example of trying to remove the speck from the eye of another before you've pulled out the beam lodged in your own, IMO.
Marty "Kaioto" Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 1:01:01 am EST from 68.231.1.30

Gerald Ford:

I... feel really bad that my inner smartass thought, 'if there really is a stairway to heaven, he's boned'. Bad, bad thoughts.
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 11th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"They spent so much time looking at Janet Jackson's tit, I actually thought Osama bin Laden was hiding in it." - Lewis Black
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 12:33:18 am EST from 67.87.175.245

Former President Ford is dead.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061227/ap_on_re_us/obit_ford
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Wed, Dec 27, 2006 12:24:39 am EST from 216.96.23.36

*reads Sapphire's question, and nearly falls out of his seat*

It's funny. A few years ago, I tried to start a program that targeted ignorant shits, weeded them out of a crowd, and somehow got them all into the same room so they could be irradiated with x-rays, and thus be prevented from poisoning the rest of the world with small versions of themselves. I need to revive this plan somehow. Anyone else interested?

Greg B: Wow. It's like someone reached into my head. Thanks for putting that into words better than I could.

Bottom line is, the Bible says a lot of things, most of them not very clearly.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"Goddamn, this thing is cold." -Kurt Cobain's last words (probably).
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 10:59:23 pm EST from 71.62.210.112

Yeah, I also hate when people use God, Jesus, and The Bible to fuel their propaganda. Look what we did the blacks, Jews, Native Americans...all using the Bible as our spreadsheet for violence, hatred against groups of people.

Also, we need to remember The Bible was written in an age when it was OKAY to marry your 10 year old daughter to a 40 year old man, with the payment of a few goats and some land. It was common practice in the Bible to keep slaves too. Should we do that now? There are "rules" that say when you should eat certain food, look at a woman, and sacrificing animals. Picking and choosing what Bible rules we should follow is like saying "I know murder is worse than robbing someone, so I'll just rob them instead.". You can't pick and choose laws/rules and then break all the others because it suits you.

Look, the Bible has some good lessons. But it shouldn't be taken 100% literally to be applied to present day. It no longer applies to now.
A good article (albiet sarcastic) is called "Why Can't I Own a Canadian?"
You can find it here: http://www.humanistsofutah.org/2002/WhyCantIOwnACanadian_10-02.html

I don't expect the world to agree with gays or accept them. But using The Bible as an excuse to not accept them is a cowardess and ignorant scapegoat. I agree fully with Greg B. in all he said. If you don't like gays, we can't make you like them. Nor am I trying to make you like them. People will ALWAYS disagree with someone else. We are entitled to our opinions, 100%. But don't use the Bible to belittle others you disagree with. For those who like to do just that...would you throw the Bible in the face of a black man when it mentions how it is perfectly okay to keep a slave?
We are a species that is very fickle. Once we kept blacks as slaves, beat them, insulted them, spat on them, killed them. We are doing the same things to gays. And for the same reason we did it to blacks....NO GOOD REASON.
Siren - [Click my name for Hunter's Moon Trailer!]
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 9:57:15 pm EST from 72.189.220.217

I also believe gay people are born the way they are. I never understood why anyone would think it could ever possibly be a choice.

Why the hell would anyone voluntarly choose to be a part of the most persecuted minority around today. Gay people are the last people that "it's cool to hate"... just FYI, I don't think it's cool at all, it's horrible, but the social taboo is still not there.

You have people like Matthew Sheppard who are murdered brutally or otherwise victimized just for the way they were born.

And, the people who use the Bible to justify their bigotry are the worst. Show me where in the Bible Jesus Christ said ANYTHING about homosexuality being wrong. Show me... it ain't there. I may not be a Christian, but Jesus was supposed to be preaching messages of loving your fellow human being... and the fact that people use his name to justify hatred is disgusting....

... it would be like a black person twisting Martin Luthor King's words to justify the genocide of white people.

I judge people based not on what they are, but who they are. Every ethnic and religious group, race, orientation, has its own wastes of life walking through them. Everyone. I may be one of the most politically incorrect people on the planet, but it's always in good humor. I'm not going to compare a normal human being who happens to be a Muslim to, let's say, Osama bin Laden.

But, the fact that people in this country are so concerned with "those goddamn fags" is a fucking disgrace. Let these people live and pursue the same happiness that you yourself do. Homosexuality is not a problem. It's not a threat to your way of life, it does not affect you.

If you use God to justify your hatred of anyone for who they are... you are exactly the same as Osama bin Laden. Go find an al Qaeda recruitment center somewhere, and sign up. You are just like them.

Bigotry is bigotry, no matter who it's aimed at.
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 11th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"They spent so much time looking at Janet Jackson's tit, I actually thought Osama bin Laden was hiding in it." - Lewis Black
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 8:43:56 pm EST from 67.87.175.245

I'd say "Sapphire" is being serious. Which is both sad and funny, because she is asking on the WRONG forum. LOL

Gay Discussion:
There are two types of people...
Those who think gays choose
And those who think they are born that way.

I have always leaned towards being born that way. My friend comes from a large family. 4 boys, 2 girls. Her parents never raised one kid any differently than another one. They were raised in the same household all their lives. Same stimuli and experiences.

And yes, out of those kids. 2 of the boys were gay. My friend said she always knew one of them was, since she was a little girl. Because he'd come to play with her and her sister with Barbies and dress up, etc. And the other brother was a little more slow coming, but not as feminine. Both never "came out" officially to the family, because it was an "everybody knows, everybody doesn't care" attitude. They were accepted no matter what they felt.

Also, my other argument for gays being born.

Right now, close your eyes and think of your dream girl/guy. Every detail. Hair color/style, skintone, eyes, chest, height, etc.
Now, tell yourself WHY you think that is the PERFECT guy/girl for you? Don't really have a reason other then your opinion on what you feel is beauty and sexy, right? Well, that's because we are PRE-PROGRAMMED at birth for finding our mate. There is a lot more proof to being pre-programmed then to one god saying "no, that's bad.". We love whom we love. Few people can go from finding Pam Anderson sexy to choosing Kathy Bates as sexy. We simply feel a certain way because we are programed to. So asking a gay to not be gay, is like asking you to choose between Pam and Kathy. Who would you choose? :P
Siren - [Click my name for Hunter's Moon Trailer!]
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 8:29:26 pm EST from 72.189.220.217

-delurks-
hope everyones holidays were well- even if there wasnt many activities hope you all had a moment of relaxation!

Lex being gay- now Ive seen this topic come up more than once over the years, and I must say that no matter what, flame wars always start. Lets all try to stay calm and make this conversation about the show and the characters, and not attack anyone in the process.

ok Ill stop trying to sound like this moral peacekeeper
faytefire - [dragondreamer at comcast dot net]
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 8:01:28 pm EST from 71.234.169.135

Sorry for the double post.

Maybe I spoke too soon. I'm looking on Amazon and the shipping cost for DVDs is lower than books. The set is also $23 instead of $30. It looks like maybe with the money I got for Christmas I might be able to get it after all! The DVD and comic are even both elligible for free shipping, so I might be able to get the comic #1 essentially free, if I can buy the DVD itself.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 6:00:34 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Shara -- I highly doubt that will happen! I think loincloths will remain "in" for the foreseeable future.

Argh, I am really frustrated that I have this DVD and can't watch it! I don't get why my Dad bought Season 2 but not Season 1. He just didn't look on the box.
I don't think I can afford the other one. Does anybody have any advice what I can do?
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 5:42:13 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

haha I really dont care about lex being gay but I dont wanna see him in a rainbow colored speedo.
Shara - [jeanie54_2000 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 5:33:52 pm EST from 4.246.215.75

*returns from where I was*

Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, though I'm a bit late! ^^; Hope ya'll had a good time and got lots of joy and pressies out of it. XD (Is still squealing about my new scanner. BWAHAHAA!)

And yes, Canada celebrates Boxing Day. But I doubt anyone would let you steal it, Harvester. ;)

Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury - Homosexuality was mentioned in one other place in the Bible. The only two places I'm aware of was Sodom and Gomorrah, and one other place (though I forget where, and I don't recall the exact wording) that said something like, "Man shall not lie with another man as he would with a woman."


*looks at the silly questions in AG*

... Oh my. o.O; And goodwill unto men, and all that. Yeesh.

None too pleased with either of them (understatement of the century), but I would like to see how Greg W. handles them. It should be interesting, at any rate. It really is incredible how nasty and ignorant people are these days. We're supposedly in an age of intelligence, but sometimes it feels like we're going backwards more often than we're going forwards.

Yeow. @_@
The Sadistic Cow
It's me and you against the world. So when do we attack?
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 5:04:22 pm EST from 24.150.120.87

Matt> Cool dream. Was I being an asshole in it?

Sapphire's Question> I want to see this one get to Greg, this could be funny.
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 11th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"They spent so much time looking at Janet Jackson's tit, I actually thought Osama bin Laden was hiding in it." - Lewis Black
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 12:28:22 pm EST from 67.87.175.245

That's horrible! If she's being sarcastic, she needs to learn to mark it. She doesn't seem sarcastic to me.

Blaqthorne > Homosexuality is NOT a "lifestyle" or a "behavior". It is simply how some people are born. Hating people for how they were born and accusing them of being warped or evil is most definately bigoted by any definition. There's no two ways about it.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 12:26:15 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

*looks up from RE4, reads Sapphire's question, then...*

Hopefully I'm not out of line here, but what the *BEEP* was THAT?!

Geez.

And that comment she made about Europeans. I have German in my heritage, and am wondering whether I should be offended by that or not.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
"Ignore me!" - Venture Bros.
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 12:10:37 pm EST from 209.239.132.254

Hahahaha. Maybe Sapphire is just making fun of the previous post i´ve made today, down below, pointing out that a KKK member would get offended with Elisa been black. If you checked she has posted her extremely offending question after i posted the comment. If these is the case, Sapphire, your sarcastic sense of humor deserves a bow. If its not...well...as i said before, we are all individuals with differents thoughts.
Demon@ - [dot dot dot and where is the donkey??]
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 12:04:38 pm EST from 200.114.213.102

Latest question, Dec. 26 2006, by a "Sapphire." Groan. Please tell that's a joke. *groan*
Asatira
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 11:49:33 am EST from 66.191.158.77

*pulls out his 1,111 foot pole out to protect himself from the current discussion*

Anybody read the latest submission to Ask Greg: "Sapphire writes"?
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 11:47:37 am EST from 216.96.23.36

I would also like to say a couple of things about what the bible says about a lot of things but its best not to get on that here.
Demon@ - [dot dot dot and where is the donkey??]
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 10:19:26 am EST from 200.114.213.102

B&CF> As you said, you are clearly not on expert on the Bible, Koran or other texts.

Boy, did I have an interesting dream last night. I think Greg W or SLG or someone decided to form a sort of panel to evaluate Gargoyles and the new comic issues esspecially. And I was all excited because I was invited to be one of the members. I remember Greg B and Siren and Lynati and several others were also members. So we would sit in this room around a table and slowly go through every panel of the comic. The cool news is that we got to evaluate every issue before it went to the printers. We were looking at Issue 3 in my dream. All I can remember of it is that apparently Xanatos was bringing together representatives of all the Gargoyle Clans to discuss the gargoyle issue. I remember that some of the english gargoyles were the first to arrive at the Eyrie. It was really cool, but I remeber someone saying the english gargs didn't look right, lol. Anyway, there ends up being a big party for Halloween and there are dozens of gargoyles there, it was fun.

Clearly, this is not how Issue 3 is likely to be, in fact, I'm not sure which part of my dream is most unlikely.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"You mean the police. Your clan." "Right, my clan... who'll disown me if I don't get to work." -Goliath & Elisa "Reawakening"
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 9:25:33 am EST from 24.207.163.239

Blaqthorne: Technically, they are bigots.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bigot

And feel free to e-mail me, if you'd like to learn exactly how that passage has been taken out of context by narrow-minded hypocrites. I'd rather not get into it here.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"No excuses for the word-weary, no excuses for who I am." -Ian Anderson
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 6:49:00 am EST from 71.62.210.112

Shara & Demon@> I've reported that bootleg site to Disney, Fox, and maybe another company (it was several months ago). I know at least one other poster here has done the same to Disney. Every sale of that is one less sale of the legit release, and one less sale needed to get the rest of the show released.

Siren> I don't think Greg really thought that he would ever have a medium to continue the show when he made the revelation about Lexington being gay.

Bishansky> Just because someone doesn't approve of homosexual activity doesn't make him/her an idiot or creep, and not necessarily a bigot.

I'm not an expert on the bible, Koran, or other like texts, but the only instance I can think of off the top of my head that would deal with homosexuality would be the passage regarding Sodom and/or Gomorrah in the bible. God didn't seem to take too kindly to that lifestyle according to the bible.

But I don't want to get into a discussion about gays/lesbians or into religion.
Blaqthourne & Crimson Fury
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 3:36:27 am EST from 63.20.8.201

OH Ive seen taht site before its actully Ok. Basicly what it is and this is probally illegal what they are doing.

They take the VHS Footage of a show they collected and run it on the computer and switch it to dvd format.

But to package up a box like taht they have broken all the rules. Someone should report it.
Shara - [jeanie54_2000 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 2:49:18 am EST from 4.246.214.214

Yeah, I think I've seen that pic before -- best not to get it.
Phoenician - [theoneandonlyphoenician at yahoo dot com]
Pheon
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 12:47:59 am EST from 70.162.220.224

Demon@> hm, im pretty sure it's fake
Warcrafter - [grafixfangamer1 at sbcglobal dot net]
Humans are such easy prey for a gargoyle!........and I need more friends on XBOX Live for 360. Anyone?
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 12:44:27 am EST from 69.231.248.249

Oh and would someone check on here?
http://www.tvdvdplanet.com/movie/cartoon/gargoyles.html?gclid=CPWEy8qzr4kCFQVySgodzWNDLQ
Is it true? :S
Demon@ - [dot dot dot and where is the donkey??]
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 12:33:08 am EST from 200.114.213.102

Greg Bishansky: I dont think we should regret that Greg W made Lex gay. There were a lot of things on gargoyles that liked or didnt like to a lot of people. Homosexuality is just a delicate subject for tolerant and intolerant people. If a member of the KKK sees the color skin of Elisa, they would probably get offended becuase she is not blond with blue eyes and because her parents are not from England or Europe. I dont think that we should regret that Elisa is how she is because some...people...think she is WRONG.
Im gay myself and i also learn long ago that people who hate gays are intolerant creatures towards people who may think or act diferent than them. Call them creeps, idiots and bigots ( i cant help myself but agree with you, though) doesnt make us any better `cause we are acting just like them.
We humans, and gargoyles why not ;), are individuals, each of us with diferent points of view, diferent ways of action and motives.
All of us in some way or another are correct.
Demon@ - [dot dot dot and where is the donkey??]
posted @ Tue, Dec 26, 2006 12:28:36 am EST from 200.114.213.102

Merry Christmas to everyone. Love Gargoyles. Can't wait (aka anxiously awaiting) for Season 2 volume 2 and Season 3 to come out. Anyone have any idea when?
Bridget McMaster - [jono2019 at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 11:06:38 pm EST from 69.211.77.65

****Blaise flies into the Room through the window, trailing red and green fire.****

A brief stop by to wish everyone a Merry Christmas--or whatever you celebrate. It's all good.

Cheers! ****A cup of eggnog materializes in Blaise's outstretched hand. He chugs it down and vanishes in a burst of light.****
Blaise
"Well, it's nothing very special. Try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations."--Monty Python's Meaning of Life
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 8:23:01 pm EST from 4.232.165.123

Hey, I didn't know my deadbeat Southern Baptist uncle liked Gargoyles. Or that he poses as a woman on Ask Greg. Amazing.

Probably good for the CR that I'm not drunk. "I was always told being gay is a sin," that line alone is a goldmine.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"I'm here to eat candy canes and kick ass! And I'm all out of candy canes!" -Kevin Murphy as Santa Claus.
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 8:07:04 pm EST from 71.62.210.112

BISHANSKY - Of course, there are also the people out there who deplore Greg's idea of making Lexington gay, not because they disapprove of that particular orientation, but because they believe that it's presenting a negative stereotype of gays as scrawny little people. :)
Todd Jensen
Gargoyles - did for monstrous-looking statues what "Watership Down" did for rabbits!
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 8:00:27 pm EST from 4.244.211.254

Greg B.>My only gripe with revealing that was now, the plot twist factor won't be there when it comes out. I'm not sure whether Greg planned to shock audiences with the sudden admission by Lex, or have it be gradual. Similar to Willow on Buffy. The audience knew it, slowly, but the characters, they didn't at all.
And I do agree with your second statement. You do see the bigots in the fandom. Or those who say they have nothing against gays, but have a problem with Lex being one...oxymoron much?

It just suprises me sometimes that a show that is SO MUCH about prejudice ruining lives of those who are prejudice, as well as all those they touch, could be so prejudice against a group of people. The same people see that it is wrong to hate another race or religion, have no problem hating gays, and think its perfectly normal to hate them. It never made sense to me.
Siren - [Click my name for Hunter's Moon Trailer!]
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 7:58:55 pm EST from 72.189.220.217

Greg B.> That's out of left field. Why bring that up?

Jurgan> *clicks on your name*
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
"Ignore me!" - Venture Bros.
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 7:41:54 pm EST from 209.239.132.48

Of course miss bigot didn't have the courage to show her name. *sigh*

Todd, there's a cookie-cutter "when's S2v2 coming?" question you can take.


I'm quite sick which is very aggravating. But I'm very happy that I got Season 2 for Christmas! The only problem is... I don't have Season 1 and can't afford it. So I don't like to complain about presents, because presents are awesome and I'm happy but... what do I do now? I am glad that they got S2 since it is the more expensive of the two sets.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 6:40:40 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Part of me wishes Greg never revealed Lex's orientation. Too many people seem unable to deal with it. But, it's a good way of seeing who all the creeps, idiots and bigots in the fandom are.
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 11th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"They spent so much time looking at Janet Jackson's tit, I actually thought Osama bin Laden was hiding in it." - Lewis Black
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 6:35:35 pm EST from 67.87.175.245

*returns to goggle at the sole comment made on Dec 24th, anonymously, in the AG queue* Oookay, the first and third line are bigoted, and the fourth is silly - believe anything you like, but the world was still created by Greg and he gets to decide what is canon and what is not. You can not like the sky appearing blue but insisting that it is green does not make it so.
But the second line... ... ... what does your own gender have to do with it, Anonymous? Are you implying that the preference in question is insulting to women everywhere, or just you? You might want to take a reality check and examine the views you hold and how you actually feel about them, not how you've been told you should feel about them.
Lynati
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 6:07:44 pm EST from 71.163.27.144

Happy Holidays, everyone. Oh, look, someone in s8 chat is giving away Arno-shaped holes.

And...You're a mean one, Mr. Harvester. ; )
Lynati
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 5:48:24 pm EST from 71.163.27.144

Happy Solstichristmahanukwanzaadan

Although Ramadan was over a few months ago.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 3:31:00 pm EST from 209.162.56.94

Merry Chrismahanakwanzaka everyone!!!!!!
Warcrafter - [grafixfangamer1 at sbcglobal dot net]
Humans are such easy prey for a gargoyle!
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 2:52:48 pm EST from 69.231.193.234

Merry Christmas (or Happy Holidays) to all!

Do I spy a "Princess Bride" reference there, Harvester? That's a great movie.

I had some spare time yesterday, and enjoyed watching the "Awakening" episodes with commentary one more time.
Abby
"Forty-two! Is that all you've got to show for seven and a half million years' work?"
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 2:44:18 pm EST from 24.118.226.247

Really, I just want to steal a holiday. It's a very lucrative business with a proud and glorious tradition. Doesn't matter to me which holiday I steal. I'm equal opportunity.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"I'm here to eat candy canes and kick ass! And I'm all out of candy canes!" -Kevin Murphy as Santa Claus.
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 2:25:51 pm EST from 71.62.210.112

Canada celebrates Boxing Day too, I think.

All the same....happy holidays all!
Siren - [Click my name for Hunter's Moon Trailer!]
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 2:03:57 pm EST from 72.189.220.217

You have to fly to england to steal Boxing Day?
Demon@ - [dot dot dot and where is the donkey??]
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 1:35:56 pm EST from 200.114.213.102

Plus I don't have to waste money flying over to England.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"Hungry Hungry Hippos? Blast you, Claus, you porcine double-crosser! And to think I was actually nice!" -Stewart Gilligan Griffin
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 1:11:06 pm EST from 71.62.210.112

Oh, very well, I'll stick to stealing Kwanzaa. Gotta steal something.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"Hungry Hungry Hippos? Blast you, Claus, you porcine double-crosser! And to think I was actually nice!" -Stewart Gilligan Griffin
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 1:10:28 pm EST from 71.62.210.112

Boxing Day is the day after Christmas. Stealing it would be especially cruel, though, because it belongs to the poor. Traditionally, you give to friends on Christmas and to the poor on Boxing Day.

For more information, click on my name.
Jurgan - [jurgan6 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 12:44:38 pm EST from 68.58.219.175

Harvester> What's Boxing Day?
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
"Ignore me!" - Venture Bros.
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 12:02:18 pm EST from 209.239.132.96

Has anyone ever stolen Boxing Day before? Because if not, I aspire to be the first.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"Hungry Hungry Hippos? Blast you, Claus, you porcine double-crosser! And to think I was actually nice!" -Stewart Gilligan Griffin
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 11:35:53 am EST from 71.62.210.112

Merry Christmas!
Patrick - [<-- The Gathering 2007]
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 9:46:56 am EST from 70.229.202.22

Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good bite... er, night.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"Hungry Hungry Hippos? Blast you, Claus, you porcine double-crosser! And to think I was actually nice!" -Stewart Gilligan Griffin
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 9:35:43 am EST from 71.62.210.112

Todd> Ditto.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
"Ignore me!" - Venture Bros.
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 8:00:07 am EST from 209.239.132.215

Merry Christmas, everyone!
Todd Jensen
Gargoyles - did for monstrous-looking statues what "Watership Down" did for rabbits!
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 7:25:42 am EST from 4.244.209.97

Yami> Same to you. :)

And welcome to this board.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
"Ignore me!" - Venture Bros.
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 6:36:48 am EST from 209.239.132.215

Happy Holidays! I hope everyone is having a great time!
Yami Raven - [raven_Mccloud2002 at yahoo dot com]
"Delicious Tea...or Deadly Poison?" -Uncle Iroh, from Avatar: The Last Airbender
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 5:26:22 am EST from 68.58.196.207

Or, rather, tenth, I suppose.
Jurgan - [jurgan6 at yahoo dot com]
"What? I'm saying I'd rather kiss you than die- it's a compliment!" -Aang, from Avatar: The Last Airbender
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 2:14:29 am EST from 68.58.196.207

9th, and Joyous Christmas to all! And if you celebrate some other holiday, then I hope you had/are having/will have a good one!
Jurgan - [jurgan6 at yahoo dot com]
"What? I'm saying I'd rather kiss you than die- it's a compliment!" -Aang, from Avatar: The Last Airbender
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 2:14:10 am EST from 68.58.196.207

Delurking...

Ninth! And Merry Christmas!
Makhasu - [aknellthatsummonsthee at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 2:13:34 am EST from 75.85.163.117

8th!
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"Cold does not bother us..." -Goliath "Reawakening"
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 1:26:48 am EST from 24.207.163.239

7th!!
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 12:54:19 am EST from 216.96.23.36

Sixth, in the name of King Cobra.

Merry christmas to all, and to all a good night... unless it's day, but then shouldn't you be stone?
Vid the Kid
Does this font make me look fat?
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 12:31:47 am EST from 209.239.132.8

Fifth!
Vid the Kid
Does this font make me look fat?
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 12:29:55 am EST from 209.239.132.8

Fourth!

Merry Christmas! Happy Hanukkah!

In short, Happy Holidays!
BrooksBabe
"Those aren't tumors, you moron, that's your finger on the lens!"
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 12:24:32 am EST from 64.228.99.180

Third! Merry Christmas, y'all!!
Asatira
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 12:19:04 am EST from 66.191.158.77

Second!!! And Merry Christmas to you all!!!!!!!!
Demon@ - [dot dot dot and where is the donkey??]
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 12:18:34 am EST from 200.114.213.102

1st, and Merry Christmas!
Alex Garg - [fiatnox at gmail dot com]
posted @ Mon, Dec 25, 2006 12:10:58 am EST from 68.48.114.157