So much for "Love thy neighbor"

[Bobbo]

Looks like this fire and brimstone preacher invites hate, and rejects affection.

http://www.charter.net/news/read.php?rip_id=%3CD9O6AAGO0%40news.ap.org%3E&ps=1011

[buffalobill]

Is this the Lovable Rev. Wright, our CIC'c Preacher?

[bigvalkriefan]

Really Bobbo? Just stirring the pot again huh?

[The Anvil]

Think it's actually an interesting story.

[John Schmidt]

Come right down to it....I think it's kinda funny. She was there with her husband so apparently not gay herself, just supporting those that are. Imagine the look on the preacher's face, I kinda agree with his message but not with the time and place he chose to give it. I think it left him open to ridicule more than acceptance.

Just my opinion, nothing more....and worth every penny you paid for it. 

[The Anvil]

Of course it being the wrong time and place might have something to do with why he chose it, no? To provoke something like this?

[SANDMAN5]

I think it should be sexual assault, not simple assault.

[The Anvil]

I think it should be sexual assault, not simple assault.

TOTALLY. She should have to register as a sex offender for the rest of her life. Cuz that punishment fits the crime.

[Bobbo]

I think it should be sexual assault, not simple assault.

Kissing encompasses many expressions of affection, sex being only one.  You've kissed your mother, right?

[The Anvil]

You've kissed your mother, right?

With or without tongue? 

[SANDMAN5]

Kissing encompasses many expressions of affection, sex being only one.

It was "unwanted and very personal contact". Kissing of one's Mother is not an issue.

[The Anvil]

Kissing encompasses many expressions of affection, sex being only one.

It was "unwanted and very personal contact". Kissing of one's Mother is not an issue.

No it is an issue because though you kiss them does not mean that you're expressing sexual desire. Kiss does not = sex. Sometimes it means familial affection, sometimes it means a prelude to sex or sexual desire and sometimes it means 70's kabuki theater influenced glam-rock. For that matter, I have kiss my wife, but I don't rail her every time I do. Sometimes it's just a "hey honey, I love you" kiss. Regardless, intent matters where the law is concerned.

[bigvalkriefan]

I think it should be sexual assault, not simple assault.

 

[SANDMAN5]

So you are saying the 'kisser' was the wife or mother of the 'kissee'?
Otherwise, it was unwanted personal contact. Sexual assault.
I'm going back to work tonight and don't have time to post more.
See youse guys next week.

[The Anvil]

So you are saying the 'kisser' was the wife or mother of the 'kissee'?
Otherwise, it was unwanted personal contact. Sexual assault.
I'm going back to work tonight and don't have time to post more.
See youse guys next week.

It's not that simple. 

[CajunRider]

You've kissed your mother, right?

With or without tongue? 

        

[Bobbo]

So you are saying the 'kisser' was the wife or mother of the 'kissee'?
Otherwise, it was unwanted personal contact. Sexual assault.
I'm going back to work tonight and don't have time to post more.
See youse guys next week.

I'm sure everyone appreciates that you are not part of the law enforcement or legal system! 

[KW]

FYI – Kissing someone against their will or without their consent would be considered CSC (Criminal Sexual Conduct) in Michigan. . . .

In the mid-70’s I had a buddy who happened to be a MSP Detective. He was at a local County fair with his, ahh, very well build bride who happened to be wearing extremely small & tight cut off shorts.  A kid, just turned 18, was drunk (age of consent in Michigan was 18 at the time) and with a group of other young, stupid boys. The well endowed woman walked past and without thinking the kid slapped her butt with his open hand and the whole group cracked up laughing. My buddy, who was walking 10 feet behind his wife, drew his pistol and arrested the kid. He wasn’t laughing. The kid went to prison over it. Seriously. It was CSC 4th degree (something I never knew existed prior to that incident.) My buddy and I disagreed strongly over the “case.”  He was happy, his wife was embarrassed and the ‘kid’ has a permanent record that says he’s a pervert. The 'bottom line' (trying for a pun) is; the punishment didn’t fit the “crime.” It was ridiculous, but please don’t anyone misunderstand me. I’m NOT saying its ‘ok’ for anyone – kid or not – to slap a girl on her rear, not matter how she’s dressed or acts (a whole different topic about personal responsibility and awareness that I’m not trying to start on this thread.)

[Bobbo]

FYI – Kissing someone against their will or without their consent would be considered CSC (Criminal Sexual Conduct) in Michigan. . . .

In the mid-70’s I had a buddy who happened to be a MSP Detective. He was at a local County fair with his, ahh, very well build bride who happened to be wearing extremely small & tight cut off shorts.  A kid, just turned 18, was drunk (age of consent in Michigan was 18 at the time) and with a group of other young, stupid boys. The well endowed woman walked past and without thinking the kid slapped her butt with his open hand and the whole group cracked up laughing. My buddy, who was walking 10 feet behind his wife, drew his pistol and arrested the kid. He wasn’t laughing. The kid went to prison over it. Seriously. It was CSC 4th degree (something I never knew existed prior to that incident.) My buddy and I disagreed strongly over the “case.”  He was happy, his wife was embarrassed and the ‘kid’ has a permanent record that says he’s a pervert. The 'bottom line' (trying for a pun) is; the punishment didn’t fit the “crime.” It was ridiculous, but please don’t anyone misunderstand me. I’m NOT saying its ‘ok’ for anyone – kid or not – to slap a girl on her rear, not matter how she’s dressed or acts (a whole different topic about personal responsibility and awareness that I’m not trying to start on this thread.)

A detective drew a pistol on an unarmed, drunk teenager?!  That won't go over well in a departmental review...

CSC in the 4th degree (Michigan penal code 750.520e) says that it must be "sexual contact".  That means specific areas of the body, buttocks included.  I can see how this applied, since the teen slapped the woman on her butt.  It also says it's a misdemeanor, which usually results in a fine rather than jail time.

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%28jc5cak45uxd31xfhongh2yjd%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-750-520e

In the case of the kiss, it can't be construed as sexual contact, since she didn't touch any of the legally defined areas.

[KW]

So. . . Bob, you’re familiar with what a police departmental review would consist of during the 70’s? Wow. .  .  impressive. Seriously, it is. . . I couldn’t do that. I would only be guessing. What really surprises me though, is you took the time to Google Michigan Compiled Law? To what end? To try and prove me wrong? LOL! I used to be PAID to research MCL on occasion and I hated it. . .   

As far as the threat level during the arrest, that’s usually determined by what apprehending officer perceives and if the report is righteous, there wouldn’t have been any question. A plains clothed LEO, by himself, facing a group of drunk teenagers, one of whom he believed had just committed CSC? You may be using modern math. . . . but where I come from, it adds up (though I don’t necessarily agree with the action.)

I’m not trying to start a debate over this with you Bob because I’m fairly sure, despite your amazing Google powers; you’re not qualified to have one with me. You gained more respect here brother if you stuck to what you know. . . . Opinions are never a substitute for facts. Of course, I’ve read your posts and I know you always allude to being. . . what? Ex-special forces? CIA black ops? Some type of LEO at some point in your past? You always stopped short of spelling it out. . . Why is that? Just curious. I’m retired, but if you want I’ll send you a copy of my resume. Nothing outstanding about it, but “it is what it is.”   

FYI - The kid in question did a short bit at a minimum (non-secured level 1) correctional facility.  It was a 6 month to 3 year bit if I recall right. Michigan has long since changed its incarceration laws and now no longer allows any CSC felons at non-secured level 1.

I still think my buddy was wrong. . . . That’s just an opinion though.

[Bobbo]

So. . . Bob, you’re familiar with what a police departmental review would consist of during the 70’s? Wow. .  .  impressive. Seriously, it is. . . I couldn’t do that. I would only be guessing. What really surprises me though, is you took the time to Google Michigan Compiled Law? To what end? To try and prove me wrong? LOL! I used to be PAID to research MCL on occasion and I hated it. . .  

As far as the threat level during the arrest, that’s usually determined by what apprehending officer perceives and if the report is righteous, there wouldn’t have been any question. A plains clothed LEO, by himself, facing a group of drunk teenagers, one of whom he believed had just committed CSC? You may be using modern math. . . . but where I come from, it adds up (though I don’t necessarily agree with the action.)

I’m not trying to start a debate over this with you Bob because I’m fairly sure, despite your amazing Google powers; you’re not qualified to have one with me. You gained more respect here brother if you stuck to what you know. . . . Opinions are never a substitute for facts. Of course, I’ve read your posts and I know you always allude to being. . . what? Ex-special forces? CIA black ops? Some type of LEO at some point in your past? You always stopped short of spelling it out. . . Why is that? Just curious. I’m retired, but if you want I’ll send you a copy of my resume. Nothing outstanding about it, but “it is what it is.”    

FYI - The kid in question did a short bit at a minimum (non-secured level 1) correctional facility.  It was a 6 month to 3 year bit if I recall right. Michigan has long since changed its incarceration laws and now no longer allows any CSC felons at non-secured level 1.

I still think my buddy was wrong. . . . That’s just an opinion though.

Oh, no, you've discovered my secret!!!        All I do is type a question into Google, click "I'm feeling Lucky" and then copy/paste whatever comes up into this forum!    

I am in so much awe of your powers of deduction, that I quake at the thought of debating you!

It took all of 5 minutes to look up the code you referred to and discover you were wrong in your FYI statement.  Those are the facts, not my opinion.  Your boast of superior debating finesse would hold more water if you weren't wrong right from the get-go...

I allude to CIA, Special forces?  Skunk Works?  Phantom Works?  I can tell you that I've served my country to the best of my ability, but I do not publicly discuss the details.  I have no need to wear my duties and services on my sleeve...  There's an old, apropos saying...  "Those who do, do.  Those who wish they did, talk about it."

[Fla. Jim]

So Bobbo You didn't get to say enough in the now locked Same Sex Marriage post so you thought you would move your Lifes work here? to reform the Homophobes?? LOL this is too funny. You need to find some new material this is a little old hat. And circumventive if you catch my drift. Don't see how it can sit well with a mod that already locked this same type of mud slinging......." Yesterday"

[Bobbo]

So Bobbo You didn't get to say enough in the now locked Same Sex Marriage post so you thought you would move your Lifes work here? to reform the Homophobes?? LOL this is too funny. You need to find some new material this is a little old hat. And circumventive if you catch my drift. Don't see how it can sit well with a mod that already locked this same type of mud slinging......." Yesterday"

If you refer back to that thread you will notice it was locked after your post that had offending text removed.

[Fla. Jim]

So Bobbo You didn't get to say enough in the now locked Same Sex Marriage post so you thought you would move your Lifes work here? to reform the Homophobes?? LOL this is too funny. You need to find some new material this is a little old hat. And circumventive if you catch my drift. Don't see how it can sit well with a mod that already locked this same type of mud slinging......." Yesterday"

If you refer back to that thread you will notice it was locked after your post that had offending text removed.

Um seems you are refering to a "different" locked thread. I said the"Same Sex Marrage" thread. You know the one about gays that turned into a religion vs gay thread. Here I'll save you the trouble of looking it up. I know these things can be confusing http://www.valkyrieforum.com/bbs/index.php/topic,29809.200.html Not the one about Hardleys where I must have posted a bad word but it escapes me now. 

[Bobbo]

Um seems you are refering to a "different" locked thread. I said the"Same Sex Marrage" thread. You know the one about gays that turned into a religion vs gay thread. Here I'll save you the trouble of looking it up. I know these things can be confusing http://www.valkyrieforum.com/bbs/index.php/topic,29809.200.html Not the one about Hardleys where I must have posted a bad word but it escapes me now.  

Since you have been among the last to post on many locked threads, it's hard to keep track of them all...  

Now that you have "unconfused" me, you will notice it got locked after 3fan4life personally attacked me, and you posted a religious message.  There were other religious posts after that (none by me), and only then was it locked.  Maybe you can "unconfuse" me some more, and show how only my posts resulted in a locked thread.

[3fan4life]

Now that you have "unconfused" me, you will notice it got locked after 3fan4life personally attacked me, and you posted a religious message.  There were other religious posts after that (none by me), and only then was it locked.  Maybe you can "unconfuse" me some more, and show how only my posts resulted in a locked thread.

Bobbo,

This is the second time in almost as many days that you have referrd to one of my post while trying to win an argument with someone else.

That leads me to ask, who's ATTACKING who?

And if you really think that I PERSONALLY attacked YOU...............


YOU ARE EXTREMELY THINNED SKINNED.

I would appreciate it if in the future you would leave me out of the arguments that you enter into with others.

My purpose in this life is NOT to be a pawn for you.

[Fla. Jim]

Here you are Bo Your the man!!  "Rave on "

[Bobbo]

Now that you have "unconfused" me, you will notice it got locked after 3fan4life personally attacked me, and you posted a religious message.  There were other religious posts after that (none by me), and only then was it locked.  Maybe you can "unconfuse" me some more, and show how only my posts resulted in a locked thread.

Bobbo,

If you really think that I PERSONALLY attacked YOU...............


YOU ARE EXTREMELY THINNED SKINNED.

It doesn't matter what I think, only what the Admin thinks...

[3fan4life]

Now that you have "unconfused" me, you will notice it got locked after 3fan4life personally attacked me, and you posted a religious message.  There were other religious posts after that (none by me), and only then was it locked.  Maybe you can "unconfuse" me some more, and show how only my posts resulted in a locked thread.

Bobbo,

If you really think that I PERSONALLY attacked YOU...............


YOU ARE EXTREMELY THINNED SKINNED.

It doesn't matter what I think, only what the Admin thinks...

If admin had such a problem with my "terrible personal attack" on you,  why wasn't I admonished for it?

If Willow had thought that my post that you refer to was "over the line" I have full confidence and faith that he would've let me know so.

As usual you see only what you want to see,  the way that you want to see it.

 

[MacDragon]

Now you all go to your respective corners...When the bell rings... come out swinging...

[Robert]

Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss.

[Robert]

The Gay Report, published by homosexual researchers Jay and Young in 1979, revealed that 73 percent of homosexuals surveyed had at some time had sex with boys 16 to 19 years of age or younger.5 (5. K. Jay and A. Young, The Gay Report (New York: Summit Books, 1979), p. 275. )
 
Although homosexuals account for less than two percent of the population. they constitute about a third of child molesters.6 (6. K. Freund and R.I. Watson, "The Proportions of Heterosexual and Homosexual Pedophiles Among Sex Offenders Against Children: An Exploratory Study," Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy 18 (Spring 1992): 3443, cited in "The Problem of Pedophilia," op. cit. Also, K. Freund and R.I. Watson, "Pedophilia and Heterosexuality vs. Homosexuality," Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy 10 (Fall 1984): 197, cited in NARTH Fact Sheet. ) Further, as noted by the Encino, Calif.-based National Association for research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), "since homosexual pedophiles victimize far more children than do heterosexual pedophiles, it is estimated that approximately 80 percent or pedophile victims are boys who have been molested by adultmales.7 (7. Thomas Schmidt, Straight and Narrow? Compassion and Clarity in the Homosexuality Debate (Downers Grove, IU.: Intervarsity Press), p. 114, cited in "The Problem of Pedophilia, op. cit., p. 2. )
 
APA ADMITS MISTAKE ABOUT PEDOPHILIA
The APA has attempted to distance itself from its article about pedophilia ever since the APA was exposed by an organization of psychologists and psychiatrists who treat homosexuals. They are The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH).

[The Anvil]

The Gay Report, published by homosexual researchers Jay and Young in 1979, revealed that 73 percent of homosexuals surveyed had at some time had sex with boys 16 to 19 years of age or younger.5 (5. K. Jay and A. Young, The Gay Report (New York: Summit Books, 1979), p. 275. )
 
Although homosexuals account for less than two percent of the population. they constitute about a third of child molesters.6 (6. K. Freund and R.I. Watson, "The Proportions of Heterosexual and Homosexual Pedophiles Among Sex Offenders Against Children: An Exploratory Study," Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy 18 (Spring 1992): 3443, cited in "The Problem of Pedophilia," op. cit. Also, K. Freund and R.I. Watson, "Pedophilia and Heterosexuality vs. Homosexuality," Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy 10 (Fall 1984): 197, cited in NARTH Fact Sheet. ) Further, as noted by the Encino, Calif.-based National Association for research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), "since homosexual pedophiles victimize far more children than do heterosexual pedophiles, it is estimated that approximately 80 percent or pedophile victims are boys who have been molested by adultmales.7 (7. Thomas Schmidt, Straight and Narrow? Compassion and Clarity in the Homosexuality Debate (Downers Grove, IU.: Intervarsity Press), p. 114, cited in "The Problem of Pedophilia, op. cit., p. 2. )
 
APA ADMITS MISTAKE ABOUT PEDOPHILIA
The APA has attempted to distance itself from its article about pedophilia ever since the APA was exposed by an organization of psychologists and psychiatrists who treat homosexuals. They are The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH).

Child molesters are neither gay nor straight. They are pedophiles, a separate classification altogether. You can't be a "homosexual pedophile". You're just a pedophile.

[Robert]

Historic Gay Advocate Now Believes
Change is Possible
May 9, 2001 - The psychiatrist who led the team that deleted homosexuality from the diagnostic manual in 1973, now says homosexuality may sometimes be changeable.

His provocative new study drew worldwide media attention at the American Psychiatric Association's annual conference on May 9th.

Dr. Robert L. Spitzer's study was funded by his department's research unit. He is Professor of Psychiatry and Chief of Biometrics at Columbia University.

"Like most psychiatrists," says Dr. Spitzer, "I thought that homosexual behavior could be resisted--but that no one could really change their sexual orientation. I now believe that's untrue--some people can and do change."
 
I am not against homosexuals but Bobbo has taken another provocative issue and slanted it as usual. To some homosexuality is a curse and to these people a kiss would indeed meant sexual assault. How is it we can respect gay rights but not other peoples rights. The protester knowingly did what Bobbo does put a dig and poked the issue. Now was the result a bit extreme, I think so but to each his own. But parades to accept homosexuality I think that is wrong. These are indeed extreme times so when people are pushed to the breaking point on so many issues the grace is not there. Liberals want to take God out of the US and enact laws to govern so we see the result here, why is anyone surprised? When you respond to inflammatory statements coming from a person who is off dont expect to get that warm and fuzzy reception. The truth is the truth and distortions will now or eventually be shown to be just that.

[The Anvil]

Look, I might think the pastor is a douche for pressing charges (and I do) but is she in violation of the law? Yeah she is. At least as far as that much I respect Father McD-bag's rights. But it's not sexual assault. No way no how.

Robert Spitzer's research ignores a few important things. For instance; that some people swing both ways. For them it may be relatively easy to change their behavior and "choose" a sexuality. As far as people changing their sexual orientation, could you go gay? If you found yourself in gay Rome would you be able to do as the gay Romans do? If I put you in prison and you became a bitch to survive (and you would) would you become gay or would you just have modified your behavior to fit in?

Do you see why the idea of fundamentally altering one's own sexuality is so patently silly?

No, what you can modify is BEHAVIOR. Is it any wonder that some homosexuals have modified their behavior to fit in when there are still so many ignorant and hateful people out there?

[Robert]

Child molesters are neither gay nor straight. They are pedophiles, a separate classification altogether. You can't be a "homosexual pedophile". You're just a pedophile.

Ok so on your terms that means that if they account for a third of the molesters we need to reclasify homosexuals to pedaphiles

[Robert]

Unfortunately it is sexual assault because of the action taken, If I had hit someone then that would not be sexual assault, If I had licked them then yes thats sexual assault. I understand the point you are making about sex but now I know why you got to a few people  . A that route wouldn't work for me, even in Rome

[The Anvil]

Child molesters are neither gay nor straight. They are pedophiles, a separate classification altogether. You can't be a "homosexual pedophile". You're just a pedophile.

Ok so on your terms that means that if they account for a third of the molesters we need to reclasify homosexuals to pedaphiles

Well you're assuming first of all that those numbers in that "gay report" are accurate. I'm not so sure they are. If there's anything Dateline has shown us it's that there are an AWFUL LOT of "straight" men looking for underage girls to molest. But see, they're not actually straight. They're pedophiles.

But "homosexuals" don't account for any percentage of the pedophile population. Pedophiles alone account for the pedophile population. What they do with other adults is incidental.

[The Anvil]

Unfortunately it is sexual assault because of the action taken, If I had hit someone then that would not be sexual assault, If I had licked them then yes thats sexual assault. I understand the point you are making about sex but now I know why you got to a few people  . A that route wouldn't work for me, even in Rome

Again, no it's not. Not in the eyes of the law anyway and that's what matters.

[KW]

People aren’t bragging bob when they tell of their military service. Far from it. It’s a level of kingship and brotherhood that you clearly are unaware of and can’t understand. There’s no ‘bragging’ or ‘conceit’ in sharing stories with fellow Patriots!   

We have two flag poles outside out home. One, the higher one of course, (Google it bob) has the America Flag. The second pole has an ARMY flag in it.  We’re NOT boasting of our family’s commitment to freedom, which in my bride’s case, can be traced to the Revolutionary war. No! We’re HONORING and showing RESPECT to the men & woman who are serving now, have served, or will be serving! Either you get that or you don’t.

In ‘fairness’ you’ve never specifically said you served in the “military” have you? Only hinted at it. . . . LOL! Too stinking funny!

Man. . . . I don’t know why in the world I respond to you. I really don’t. I guess it’s because you help me understand where we’re at historically as a civilization (Which would be in the preverbal ‘dustbin.’) So, thank you and please continue to post. I, for one, enjoy it.   

PS. I was not wrong that the act of “kissing” CAN be considered CSC, though in the case of a homosexual ‘kissing’ a person against their will, I would call it ‘felonious assault’ due to the much higher infectious disease rate and STD’s within the “gay community.” Oops! We’re not supposed to talk about that, are we? It’s not politically correct! Dang! Those ‘FACTS sure can get in the way though. . . . Here’s a link bob. Google it honestly for additional info and you’ll find how much more DANGEROUS it is to be “gay” but I suspect you already know that, yes?
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html