Jesus says to love one another.

One question.  Have you served your country?  I mean have you served in the armed forces?
I did.  I served 6 years in the United States Marine Corps.  I was an armorer in an artillery unit I was in charge of 200+ weapons.  I cleaned and repaired them so often I got to the point where I hated them.  I haven't touched a gun in 22 years. 

When I enlisted I swore an oath to uphold and defend the constitution on the United States of America against all enemies foreign and domestic.  Freedom of speech is in the constitution therefore to defend the constitution,  I have to oppose censorship.

Quote - Until/Unless you're willing and able to shoulder at least some of the risk yourself, you have all the credibility of some random obese gent at a bus stop talking about how some sports figure should do his or her job.

I think though by one expressing their opinion it's a start in taking the risk.

Certainly - but consider this: If we were talking about some poor bastard in North Korea who risks execution to spray-paint a mild rebuke of his government's policies in the dead of night? Hell yes the guy has balls of pure platinum, in spite of his never holding a public office. I would also be the absolute last human being to call him a coward for doing it under cover of darkness on the side of a rural bridge...

...and what would you think of someone who did call him one?

/P

Quote -
When I enlisted I swore an oath to uphold and defend the constitution on the United States of America against all enemies foreign and domestic.  Freedom of speech is in the constitution therefore to defend the constitution,  I have to oppose censorship.

I agree (and took the same oath), but it stops cold at private property, and what the owners of that property determine concerning what can or cannot be said while on that property. The only censorship that is explicitly disallowed by the US Constitution is censorship of opinion by the US Government, and all state and local governments who adhere to it. This is why public property is uncensored, save for the obvious (and Supreme Court established) libel/slander, and inciting panic by fraud (e.g. shouting "Fire!" in a crowded room).

/P

Remember that person who stood up against the column of tanks at tenimin square?

*...and what would you think of someone who did call him one?

The person who would call him a coward would not have an understanding of guerilla tactics.

Pat, Freedom of speech means that private citizens are protected from government prosecution for expressing their opinions.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean you get to say whatever you want to whomever you want and suffer no social consequences.  Two very different things.
Please go read the definition of censorship and try to understand what it actually is, before you go on.

I'm not a johnny come lately Jesus freak, I'm Roman Catholic, plenty of stigma and judging good and bad.

Which country, Pat? The one I defected from because it was run by crappy extremists and forced my family and I to do things we objected to under the threat of losing your life, or the US?

Seriously, by whining and complaining about censorship in the US, you minimize the dangers of extremism. I really have no sympathy whatsoever for whiners complaining about censorship merely because they can't post nudie pictures whenever and wherever they want. Anti-social spoiled brats having a tantrum, really. Screaming about some serious extreme and dagerous forms of censorship while in reality every step of the way they demonstrate they're rather clueless about it. If I took it personally, I'd find it rather insulting.

As for guns, in my old country I was an olympic qualifier for target shooting. There were couple fruit trees from the neighbor that hung over my grandma's back yard. The neighbor would let us pick the fruit off the branches that hung over, but many were too high and far to reach. I used go up on the 2nd story balcony, and with my competition grade air rifle shoot the stalks off the pears and apples, and pick them when they'd fall on the ground.
I was also recruited by communists to be a sharpshooter (shortly before I defected)

*The only censorship that is explicitly disallowed by the US Constitution is censorship of opinion by the US Government, and all state and local governments who adhere to it. This is why public property is uncensored, save for the obvious (and Supreme Court established) libel/slander, and inciting panic by fraud (e.g. shouting "Fire!" in a crowded room)

I wonder if that's why we have obelisks ( phallic symbols ) for monuments  i.e Washington monument  and statues of women showing their boobies on public property and government buildings?

Quote - Remember that person who stood up against the column of tanks at tenimin square?

*...and what would you think of someone who did call him one?

The person who would call him a coward would not have an understanding of guerilla tactics.

Dude, do you suffer from PTSD or something?
This is not a Tienamen square, and there aren't any tanks around here. You're having a MAJOR over-reaction.
Things aren't black and white, they occur in shades of gray, and one needs to learn to tell those shades of gray apart.
Every little act of normal everyday moral or societal censorship does not result in extemism, very very VERY few acts result in extremism.

Calm down,  I merely asked if you have served in the armed forces of the United States of America.  BTW there were a few immigrants in my unit that came from dictatorial countries.  They joined to earn their citizenship and fight oppression.

There is no good censorship.
And noone has a "right" to be "not-offended".

Everyone who wants to censor people is a fascist. Period.
No shades of grey, no "ifs" and "maybes".

That's why I love the internet.
It's uncontrollable.
"The internet treats censorship as damage and roots around it"
(John Gilmore)

You loose, we win.
The genie is out of the bottle and noone will ever be able to put it back.

Quote - The United States was founded by dissidents.  I don't think they were fond of censorship either.

That's right and it was forgotten, now are servants of the King, no matter if elected, king anyway.

Quote - Get used to it, you'll encounter forms of censorship in all facets of life. Not all 'censorship' is a bad thing.

You see, Lenim was right.

Quote - Nudity and sexuality aren't the kinds of things you want to push in people's faces wherever and however you please. Same goes for a number of other sensitive subjects.

The same with religion, politics, race. How dares someone to push a statue of Virgin Mary in my face, it's offensive, how dares the Pope to speak, idolater!!!
You see, Lenin was right, again...

holy crap batman!
This debate always gets so twisted it is terribly difficult to make any sense of it.
so let me get this right, so far we have hitler, 2nd amendment, did you serve your country and love it or leave it philosophers, and something about believing in jesus - ??

Some brilliant guy thinks we'd all be safer to leave our doors unlocked.   In at least Illinois the level of crime drops when a burgler does not have to break in to enter the home.  Therefore if you leave your door; car or home unlocked, the person if caught will recieve less of a penalty.  I believe it is unlawful entry vs breaking and entering.  I think this idea should be put up for a Darwin award. 

I really do dislike the love it or leave it philosophy - I don't think anything has ever changed based on that. 

Quote - > Quote - The United States was founded by dissidents.  I don't think they were fond of censorship either.

That's right and it was forgotten, now are servants of the King, no matter if elected, king anyway.

Quote - Get used to it, you'll encounter forms of censorship in all facets of life. Not all 'censorship' is a bad thing.

You see, Lenim was right.

Quote - Nudity and sexuality aren't the kinds of things you want to push in people's faces wherever and however you please. Same goes for a number of other sensitive subjects.

The same with religion, politics, race. How dares someone to push a statue of Virgin Mary in my face, it's offensive, how dares the Pope to speak, idolater!!!
You see, Lenin was right, again...

And the sky is falling too.... :lol:

Bringing up rare and extreme cases to try and support your argument against a mainstream action is a logical fallacy. Makes your argument incongruent. That goes for Joe public too.

Quote - Some brilliant guy thinks we'd all be safer to leave our doors unlocked.   In at least Illinois the level of crime drops when a burgler does not have to break in to enter the home.  Therefore if you leave your door; car or home unlocked, the person if caught will recieve less of a penalty.  I believe it is unlawful entry vs breaking and entering. 

I think this idea should be put up for a Darwin award. 

diet coke spew
Ouch, that hurt!

Quote - There is no good censorship.
And noone has a "right" to be "not-offended".

Everyone who wants to censor people is a fascist. Period.
No shades of grey, no "ifs" and "maybes".

That's why I love the internet.
It's uncontrollable.
"The internet treats censorship as damage and roots around it"
(John Gilmore)

You loose, we win.
The genie is out of the bottle and noone will ever be able to put it back.

**fas·cism **[fá shìzzəm] or Fas·cism [fá shìzzəm]n
dictatorial movement: any movement, ideology, or attitude that favors dictatorial government centralized control of private enterprise, repression of all opposition, extreme nationalism.

Who is trying to force their control on a private enterprise (a web forum)?
Who is attempting to repress oppostion to their viewpoint?
Who is expressing and promoting extremist opinions?

Want to see fascism at work, get a mirror.

Quote - The only censorship that is explicitly disallowed by the US Constitution is censorship of opinion by the US Government, and all state and local governments who adhere to it. This is why public property is uncensored,

As the country is controlled by companies, shareholders, churches and media that own almost all, all private institutions, they can imposse censorship at its own will.
All you hear and know comes from the media, that are private, the goverment owns nothing and so, no problem to apply censorship to anything you hear, watch or know.
  Seven seconds delay in any real time transmission, the country of freedom!!!

Lenin's paradise and you live happy in this paradise.

PS. During Feudal times there were kings, but there were landlords too (private property) and were the landlords that dictated the rules and not the king!
Nothing changed, poor Washington, Jefferson......

Quote - There is no good censorship.

...until someone commits slander or libel against you.

Quote - And noone has a "right" to be "not-offended".

Common Courtesy dictates that you don't go out of your way to offend others, lest you find yourself ostracized.

Quote - Everyone who wants to censor people is a fascist. Period.

So when will we see you publicly agitate in real life against libel laws?

Quote - That's why I love the internet.
It's uncontrollable.

The Internet is not, but people on it are. If someone makes an asshat of themselves enough, that person starts getting kicked off of sites and banished to the wilderness. Don't believe me? Ask Ron Knights about it.

/P

Quote - Bringing up rare and extreme cases to try and support your argument against a mainstream action is a logical fallacy. Makes your argument incongruent. That goes for Joe public too.

Extreme? I have no problem to see a nude image even if porn, but I have a problem hearing all the screams coming from an Evagelist church near my house.
Does it mean that censorship must be applied to the church?
hmmmm..., thinking well, it's not a bad idea....

Quote - I have no problem to see a nude image even if porn, but I have a problem hearing all the screams coming from an Evagelist church near my house.

The church near my house burned down. The screaming didn't stop right away, but did stop eventually. Hang in there.

Hope that helps,
Anton

Quote - "There is no good censorship."

...until someone commits slander or libel against you.

Apple and Oranges. Grasping for straw (men), are we ?

Quote - "And noone has a "right" to be "not-offended"."

Common Courtesy dictates that you don't go out of your way to offend others, lest you find yourself ostracized.

I never had a problem pissing my fellow men off when I thought they were idiots.

Quote - "Everyone who wants to censor people is a fascist. Period."

So when will we see you publicly agitate in real life against libel laws?

As I said, apple and oranges. Libel is when you knowingly spread lies about another person. If it's the truth, it's called journalism. Or gossip.

Quote - "That's why I love the internet.
It's uncontrollable."

The Internet is not, but people on it are. If someone makes an asshat of themselves enough, that person starts getting kicked off of sites and banished to the wilderness. Don't believe me? Ask Ron Knights about it.

Shrugs. That's what proxies are there for.

Pengy, you still think like a 13year old who is eager to get some sort of "respect" or "credibility" from his online buddies.
This might be a foreign concept to you, but I really don't give a rat's ass of what people think of me.

I'm not here to socialize or build a reputation.
I'm here because I care about Poser as a concept.

I don't mind finding like-minded people, but basically all my social needs are covered, so no, the prospect of not being considered to be a valuable pillar of this or any other online "community" doesn't exactly scare me.

:-)

hmmm, the problem is that the church is made of brick and masonery and nothing to burn......
There's another one, I don't know where it is, I only hear it.

Well I'm gonna head out.  I don't belong here. I still intend to finish my models and hopefully offer them here at renderosity.  But I don't want to come to the forums anymore. Too much hate and discord, people looking for others to attack.  Too many people who think it's their job to police everyone else, honestly, running off to harass other sites, my god, I thought I left that kind of thing behind in jr. high. Isn't that what we have admins for, and real police?  This is nothing to do with the admin here they have been wonderfull to me and I appreciate their kindness.  But I don't like feeling depressed or as if I must be very very carefull to not offend the wrong wolf pack here.  as I said I do not belong in that type of environment, my life and my work suffer for it .  Some of you I have come to know as friends and I hate to leave you here in this mess, as if in abandonment.  I am sorry. I will look for somewhere or create my own site if need be.

Quote - hmmm, the problem is that the church is made of brick and masonery and nothing to burn......
There's another one, I don't know where it is, I only hear it.

gas?
If you don't know where it is, then how do you know it is made of brick and masonry? :)

Quote - Phantom3D wrote: This is nothing to do with the admin here they have been wonderfull to me and I appreciate their kindness.

umm. you ever stop to consider the fact you are planning to offer your human figures here might have something to do with it? :) In the past, most of the rest of us had our WIP threads/posts moved. Glad you haven't run into that.

Seriously though, don't take forums too seriously.

Quote - If you don't know where it is, then how do you know it is made of brick and masonry? :)

There are two, one I know, there are more, but the others don't bother me, the sound doesn't reach me
In the past was worst, today are in decline, thanks Lord! (he, he, he).

Quote - Lions, especially a pride of lions is fully capable of taking down an elephant. They've even been filmed doing so. Actually, it's mostly female lions that hunt, and if SHE lets him, a lion will eat elephant :tt2:

Now, don't make me eat anyone!

Sure, a pride of lions working together can (maybe) take down a lone elephant.  Just like a pack of wolves might be able to take down a bear.  A single lion hunting alone wouldn't be wise to try.

But it looks like the thread is back to arguing about child(?) nudity again since I last checked in, so.........

......or perhaps now we are advocating burning down churches?  I've lost track............

Looking things over -- I dunno, folks.  I doubt that even cat pictures could save this one.

SWAMP (going back to render a few butt naked faeries)

jhmcd2, I hope you at least found some answer to your question. As far as I'm concerned this topic has gone from one persons question into 8 or more pages of everything but answering the persons question. And before anyone says "If you don't like it then don't read it!" I'm not condeming anyones opinion. I mean a simple I don't know or I don't think so would have been enough of an answer.

OK -- lemme be sure that I've got this straight --

So far, we've determined that we are to follow this set of Rules for Life:

1.  Make images of Naked Kids, because such is our Constitutional Right !  (Uh-huh.....)
2.  Leave all of our doors, our cars, and our cabinets unlocked, so that the burglars will rob our neighbors instead of us.
3.  Eat elephant meat.
4.  Read up on sociology texts.
5.  Hang posters of Adolf Hitler over our beds & in our living rooms.
6.  Demand social justice from our site admins.
7.  Condemn the site admins for being a bunch of fascists.  In fact, ALL website mods & admins -- at any website -- are fascists by definition.
8.  Proudly announce that we don't care what anyone thinks of our 'interesting' forum presence.
9.  Burn churches down.
10.  Take the forums seriously.
11.  Don't take the forums seriously.
12.  Uh.....I think that I've already mentioned Hitler..........
13.  Don't "censor" anyone, ever.  Except for when they say something that I don't like.
14.  Let everyone have their say, but don't let them say it unless if it agrees with what I've said.
15.  The United States was founded by dissidents who advocated the posting of child nudity in online galleries.  Yes, I distinctly recall reading about the fact that this very topic was discussed in some detail at the 1st Continental Congress.  The issue was high on their agenda, and it was priority #1 -- as being representative of the very essence of liberty: and of obtaining True Freedom from the Oppressor.  Without child nudity posted in online galleries: there can be no freedom from the Nazis.  Liberty only exists in an environment where underage bottoms are displayed as trophies of our cultural maturity & Artistic Freedom.

Someone needs to go attend an Obama or a Clinton political rally, and publicly Stand Up for Freedom by asking the candidate about their position on all of these burning issues in front of the TV cameras.  In doing so, not only would you stand out in the crowd: but you'd likely end up being a topic of discussion on the Sunday morning political round-table shows, too (Hey, Mort.....what did you think of the nut at that Obama Q&A session in Pittsburgh?).  Heh -- you might even manage to make the local news in your own hometown!  Yeah -- that's it -- don't be a stinkin' coward.  Show some spine.  Let 'em know that you don't care what ANYBODY thinks about you !  Also there's this: the Obama and/or the Clinton supporters in attendance will be absolutely overjoyed by the fact that in asking their candidate whether or not they will fight for the right to display images of nude children in online galleries -- that you thereby effectively tie their candidate of choice to the issue.  Great political strategy, that.

Do all of these things, follow all of these rules: and you'll be a Real Kewl Guy.

Ahhhhh......so much wisdom can be gleaned from the forums.  So much to order & enlighten one's life by.

This thread has become a game of verbal Twister mixed with Forum Trivial Pursuit.  But I have to admit that it has its moments.

Quote - ......or perhaps now we are advocating burning down churches?  I've lost track............

No need to burn churches, only put a cork in their mouth.

As for the original question you can use Dork's penis for the job, it has no difference with a kid's penis.
Just export the genital body part, import it again, put in the right place and set the hip as parent

Quote -
No need to burn churches, only put a cork in their mouth.

True, true.  See rules #13 & 14 above.

16- FREEDOM TO SMOKE!!!!!!

Quote - 16- FREEDOM TO SMOKE!!!!!!

That's easy.  Just stand near a burning church & breath real deep.

Not bad idea for the label of a cigarrette pack, "Burning Church".
Maybe I do a prop!

Quote - Not bad idea for the label of a cigarrette pack, "Burning Church".
Maybe I do a prop!

ROFL!!!!!! No filters....

      My original Quote - "The religious right in the US are dictating morals for all of us."

     Your Quote - "every political group in existence is trying to dictate morals for all of us - left or right."*

You missed my point. Every political or religious group in existence (almost) would like to dictate morals, as you say.
But the problem is, the US religious right have succeeded.

Ownership of huge systems like CC companies, PayPal, eBay, ISP's, big TV companies, media conglomerates, etc... just think what that means. They get to decide the rules on the web and in media.
They decide what we see, read, think about, discuss, have access to, what is taboo, what is 'moral'.
And that affects ALL of us, all over the world. Not only people in the US.

While everyone hotly contests issues like what is moral etc, they go about their business.
:] Fish

>> That's not fair at all, as pointed out earlier one guy (Thorne in this case) is bearing all that risk while you bear none of it.  I'd say he's been very tough indeed to have borne all the risk for his users for the past several years - someone else can take a turn (possibly you?)

Oh, please. If we're going to start the personal attacks, then we might as well stop the discussion right now, okay?

YES, we can be a spineless bunch sometimes. We'll get all up in arms over a stupid freckle from someone's texture work, but when it comes to an issue like this, one that affects not only our work as artists but that little thing called "freedom of expression", we'll cave like there's no tomorrow.

You're right: I applaud Thorne for putting up with all the BS he was handed over the years. Frankly, it came from a bunch of people who had no business whatsoever with what he and his friends did with their artwork, and I damn sure didnt see the same outrage over imagery of real sexual assault from these same, terribly concerned citizens.

But throw a kid into the mix, and we cant rush fast enough to cozy up with the same people who tell us we should be ashamed of nudity, that anyone who even looks at a kid sideways is some kind of pervert... and we do it willingly. "Oh, it's a federal law, and therefore it must be obeyed!" Right. We have federal laws on the books about a whole bunch of moral issues, and I have happily flaunted them in the past -- just as I will continue to flaunt them in the future when it comes to something that's becoming as stupid and idiotic as this entire discussion. Seriously, I'm waiting for one of the candidates for the presidency to use that tired line "If it'll save the lfe of one child!!!" -- as though children are the new Flag and Cross that politicans wrapped themselves in about six years ago when there was all this "considered discussion" around the issue of gay marriage. I mean, heck, there's another perfect demonstration that sometimes the feds have no clue what they're talking about -- and folks like me are just supposed to take it? Sorry, no. No. No. No. Stem cell research? Oh no, we cant have that either, because it's "unethical". It's a bunch of posturing over dead tissue that could save lives, but oh no, we cant even discuss it because it infringes on the rights of the Never To Be Born. Yeah, that one also makes a lot of sense, huh.

But the position you and Conniekat seem to be taking is to just shrug your shoulders and say, "Well, that's how it is" and walk away for someone else to clean up the mess. Good going, I must say.

So dont give me the bullsh*t line about "well, if you think it's so wonderful, open your own site!". I do my time in the trenches, thanks, on issues that you probably dont give a damn about because they dont affect you, at least not right now, not this second. But every little bit of power you hand over to the government when it comes to issues of morality, they're gonna see that as the green light to take more. And more. And more. And if that's the kind of world you want, have at it.

Quote - Oh, please. If we're going to start the personal attacks, then we might as well stop the discussion right now, okay?

No, I think you interpreted that the wrong way.  The point I've been making, I thought quite clearly, was that Thorne has borne a lot of risk, at his own personal expense, for many years, and is worthy of great respect for holding out this long.  How could you turn that into insult?

>> How could you turn that into insult?

Easily. Twice now, your response -- in addition to the above has been variations of "well, why dont you do it?" That's difficult to misinterpret.

Yes, as I wrote in the post above, I applaud Thorne for putting up with the nonsense he's endured from all quarters from people who, frankly, should have better things to do than worry about a bunch of naked fairies. That's not open for any kind of debate. What he and the rest at FW have tolerated in the name of "uber-morality" is amazing compared to the issues we think are all so very, very important.

And for all the applause we gave him, one thing we didnt was any kind of vocal support. And yeah, I was just as guilty of that as anyone else. Looking back, I should have said something a little more pointed about how silly the attitude was towards FW. But I didnt. Frankly, neigher did a lot of people. And what happens as a result? We as a site overall caved. "Oh, its not our site and therefore we shouldnt say anything at all!" And look what happens: now we have a lot of folks either (1) wringing their hands about how awful it all is or (2) telling us it's best to just go along, because Uncle Sam Knows Best. And yeah, there's the third bunch that thinks that posting some pseudo-politicla zinger is actually contributing to the conversation.

But the bottom line? When all of this was happening, we did nothing. Didnt affect us directly, and it was Thorne's problem, not ours. He was the one taking the risk, not us, so our hands were clean.

Welcome back to the 50s.

Quote - That's difficult to misinterpret.

Then you have achieved a difficult thing! :blink:

You have my congratulations, and good day.

Whatever.

Your words, not mine.

Guess it's easier to just shoot the messenger than deal with the message,

Quote - I think the amount of people killed by guns is proportional to the amount of guns being sold.
In Holland guns are only allowed when you have a permit, in the whole country there were less than 200 murders last year which is less than the murderrate in New Orleans.
One argument for having guns is that guns don't kill but people do. I state it the other way: guns (and all other weapons)  make it easier for people to kill.

It has far more to do with the culture, economics, and mentality of the people than to do with the tools.

Sean, you're insisting on a fight where there is none.  If you want to focus passion where it will actually do some practical good, click this link:
http://www.aclu.org/

Quote - Sean, you're insisting on a fight where there is none.

But there's fight, it's a war. A war declared by the moralists and we have all the right to defend, retaliate and even do our "preemptive" strikes.

Quote - Quote - "There is no good censorship."

...until someone commits slander or libel against you.

Apple and Oranges. Grasping for straw (men), are we ?

sigh. Here, let me hold your hand for a bit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States

"Certain forms of speech, such as obscenity and defamation, are restricted in major media outlets by the government or by the industry on its own."

Now go look up defamation (it's linked as well) - guess what libel and slander are forms of?

Please, for your own sake, learn at least something about the subject you're pontificating on, then go look up what a strawman argument really is before claiming it. Thx in advance.

Quote -
I never had a problem pissing my fellow men off when I thought they were idiots.

I'm guessing you don't do that to anyone capable of stomping you into the mud, but only to those you think are physically weaker than you. Oh, wait - is this the part where you get to claim that you're ten feet tall, bulletproof, and can out-fight a horde of Shaolin Monks? Okay, you go right ahead and do it now. ;)

Quote - As I said, apple and oranges. Libel is when you knowingly spread lies about another person.

...and it is actionable under US law, hence a form of censorship. What part of this fails to sink in for you?

Quote - If it's the truth, it's called journalism. Or gossip.

Truth is not libel - in fact it is a perfect defense against libel under US law (though not always UK law). No one has said otherwise.

Quote - Shrugs. That's what proxies are there for.

Which get you approximately nowhere once the right controls are in place. Between RBL's and a requirement for using a non freemail address to sign up? You can be banned outright, and no proxy (not even TOR) will let you post when you're not wanted. Open Proxies are not the magic bullet they once were.

Quote - I'm not here to socialize or build a reputation.
I'm here because I care about Poser as a concept.

It would help if you actually knew what you were talking about sometimes. ;)

/P

Quote - >> That's not fair at all, as pointed out earlier one guy (Thorne in this case) is bearing all that risk while you bear none of it.  I'd say he's been very tough indeed to have borne all the risk for his users for the past several years - someone else can take a turn (possibly you?)

Oh, please. If we're going to start the personal attacks, then we might as well stop the discussion right now, okay?

It's not a personal attack. Everything he wrote is true. If you're going to make the charge, then at least be prepared to either count yourself among the accused, or to do something about it.

Quote - But the position you and Conniekat seem to be taking is to just shrug your shoulders and say, "Well, that's how it is" and walk away for someone else to clean up the mess.

Perhaps it is because we all recognize and respect others' personal property? If I felt as strongly about it as you, and felt that something must be done, I'd open a forum that addressed the issue head-on, or at least helped someone else who felt the same.

Thorne did. Mehndi did. Diane did. You don't.  That's not an attack, but a simple statement of fact.

Quote - I do my time in the trenches, thanks, on issues that you probably dont give a damn about because they dont affect you, at least not right now, not this second.

That's nice and all, but if you're going to make so much hue and cry over the issue, then when shall we see you take some action on it?

To borrow an Ozark colloquialism: So, you got the talkin' part done...

/P

What is it with some of you people, the way you make remarks towards each other. Are you like this in real life?
It's like some people are just waiting for the next opinionated comment so they can get going again.
Is there a point to any of this?

Yes, it's OK to tell me to take a hike.

Quote - I'm guessing you don't do that to anyone capable of stomping you into the mud, but only to those you think are physically weaker than you.

That's the great, magical thing about the Internet.  Everyone's an expert, everyone's a lawyer, everyone's a walking God.  You know, like Stephen Boursy or Hipcrime.
edit: I guess bringing up Boursy was a low hit.  Sorry.

Quote - > Quote - ......or perhaps now we are advocating burning down churches?  I've lost track............

No need to burn churches, only put a cork in their mouth...

Add a new rule to Xenophon's list:
Fight censorship by censoring the censors.

Never mind that silly 1st ammendment guaranteeing freedom of speech (among a few other meaningless freedoms), we've got to do everything we can to stop censorship. :tongue1: