What, I can't choose my blog topics now? I have to censor them to the sensibilities of everyone on this site? Sorry, ain't happening!

Umm, ok.

You have been picking on her non-stop for I don't know how long now. My question was: Why? (Ok, technically, it was "how come")

{o} This ain't the target God had in mind when he said "go forth and be fruitful" Maybe in one of the many reinterpretations of the Bible it was written "go forth and be fruits"

Cacto,

I do hope you can see SOME level of tongue in cheek in this article. Personally, I don't care WHO you boink. But don't try to put God's endorsement on it. That's all I'm saying! People who try to cast God as "pro-gay" are, in a sense, WORSE than those who try to cast God as anti-gay, at least when speaking of the Abrahamic God of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Because, while I believe many "anti-gay" people are missing the bigger picture (too much to 'splain here, so don't ask! LOL!), at LEAST there is scriptural support for their position, as Whip rightly pointed out on her thread.

Well your title and article suggest nature is against it, which is plainly untrue. Must I read scripture to have a conversation with you? Cos I really don't want to. It's so badly written.

PS. I did see the tongue-in-cheek, but hey, people like yourself answer seriously to my tongue-in-cheek articles so why not return the favour?

Oh, I have no problem with your response, cacto. I was hoping to stimulate some good discussion, and I feel it did that.

As to the God comments, I was just referring back to how this thread began. No, you don't need to mention God in the conversation, unless the topic is dependent on it.

I would like the issues between Loca and me to remain between Loca and me, please. I would have to rehash every exchange between us over the last six months to explain myself.

Suffice it to say, Loca is no "innocent victim". She deliberately, and willingly, invited the war of words, and I accepted. I have not degenerated into harsh personal attacks, only challenged her position.

Honestly, Gid, if you want to keep it between you and here, it would be best not to keep writing spin-off articles and mentioning/insulting her in your articles.

You may not see it, but it's like a flashing neon sign. Sorry, I can't ignore it.

I feel sorry for her. You keep slamming her day after day. And I definitely don't think it's fair. Even if you abhor her beliefs and political viewpoints, she is a good person and she does not deserve this.

I never questioned that she's a good person. But if she can't take strong debate, maybe she shouldn't engage in it.

I noticed you were silent when Loca wrote strings of article after article fomenting the feud, Tex. She chose the confrontation, I just engaged.

There was a stretch of several weeks where, if I backed down, she went on the offensive. The lesson I learned was, don't back down.

I really wish you would let these things stay between the people involved, Tex.

Please show me these articles because I didn't see her write article after article bring you up specifically.



I really wish you would realize that it's not between you and her if you post it on a public forum. If you want to keep your dispute private, call or email or post an article to a select audience.

By posting it here, you have involved everyone who reads your article.

Yes, I am calling you out. I think you are being unnecessarily mean and harping on her without good cause. If you think this is constructive and worthwhile, by all means, have it.

I think it's unbecoming of you and I feel sorry for Loca having to put up with it. Like I said, though, if you are comfortable with it...go to town. Whatever.

If Loca cannot stand debate on controversial topics perhaps she should not debate controversial topics. She has said nothing to me on this, and I refuse to be "called out" by proxy. Loca has shown herself perfectly capable of speaking her own mind in the past, and I do not see why she would suddenly be rendered unable to do so.

I will not entertain anymoere discussion on the topic. This thread has been hijacked far enough.

Whatever Gideon. You are throwing a total hissy fit over her.

I'm not her proxy. Just one of your readers who is irritated by the constant reference to Loca in your threads.

You know I like you and consider you a friend. As a friend I am being honest with you. Like I said, do what you want. This is just FYI.

Re: hijacking your thread

You have my phone # and my email address.

OK, TW. Now you are doing what people repeatedly do to LW all the time, falsely.

How far back do you have to go to find an article where I countered loca AT ALL in my threads? I went through the last twenty, and guess what? NONE of them, except this one, were about Loca AT ALL! It's flat out dishonest to accuse me of constantly attacking her in my thread.

So we can count ONE spinoff article in the last twenty? I'd have checked further, but I honestly don't want to spend my night filtering through threads to prove what I already KNOW.

My last article on illegals had nothing to do with countering Loca. It was a damn good article, and, in fact, had Loca read it, I'm sure she would agree. Yes, I have made flip references from time to time, but there is not the pattern of attack that you allege.

Frankly, I'm a little pissed at your insinuation that if Loca says something I disagree with I should treat it entirely different than I do anyone else on this site. I guarantee you, my response would have been the same for almost anyone who posted the same reply.

And again, if Loca has a problem, I DO expect Loca to take it up with me.

Gid if you say I'm mistaken, I believe you. I don't have time to go back over stuff looking for "evidence" since I have a very pressing issue in my home to resolve (we have a dispute over whether today is, in fact, opposite day).

The comments I've seen you make about her have bothered me. I don't think she deserves the ugliness that has been directed at her.

I know you have a problem with me standing up for her, but I would do the same for you were the tables turned. It has nothing to do with anyone's ability or lackthereof to defend themselves. I'm just not willing to sit by and watch a friend get slammed without voicing some dissent.

I've said my piece. You know how I feel. That's as far as I'll take it. Now I've got research the origins of opposite day. Haha.

Look what I missed. Here's what I have to say for myself and thank you for taking up for me, Tex. I appreciate it.



Gid, I think you definately seem to have a problem with me. I try to take it with a grain of salt and not let it bother me. To date you are the only person on JU who has ever blacklisted me. I have never deliberately went after you. I have never written an article directed specifically at you and fomenting the feud. I have written articles about my opinion on an issue. I have never written an article thinking - "ha, ha this will show Gid", the way you seem to do to me.

I think you are oversensitive to the extreme. If I make a statement, that isn't even directed at you, you take great offense and act like I've lobbed the first nuke in WWIII. I have my beliefs and opinions on issues. You have yours. Whatever. But I do think you have been unneccessarily nasty at times. You have called me a bigot, a hypocrite, Cindy Sheehan, left of Mao to name a few that I can remember off the top of my head. And apparently I am also an idol worshipping heathen too. That definately seems like name calling to me.

The fact is that I would rather spend my time on sites and articles that I enjoy. Occassionally, I do enjoy a good debate. Sometimes I feel like it's a pointless waste of time and I am putting unneccesary stress on myself engaging in it.

btw, MY nature LOVES the gays. That's why nature made rainbows to celebrate gay sex. ha.