HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
Stephe
FreeFITER wrote in message <19990528002327...@ng-cl1.aol.com>...
>Hello my name is Kevin, founder of Freedom Fighters International. FFI is
an
>interdenominational online support group dedicated to helping men and women
>find freedom from unwanted homosexual bondage.
Why would it be "unwanted" except for bigots like you making them think that
it's somehow wrong? And then: who said you have to be into bondage to be
homosexual? :-) You don't have a clue do you? I don't care that you're a
Christian, why should you care if I'm gay? Who's being accepting of other
people in this picture?
>
>Of course no one chooses to have homosexual inclinations.
>
BS I did.... :-)
Yes someone can be "ex-gay" in their external actions just like someone can
be an ex crossdresser (and believe me I've tried that more than once) but
inside they will STILL be who they are and no amount of guilt trips from
people like you are going to change them..
**Kevin, I think it's wrong for you to wear mens clothes because as I see
it, since I'm a man that likes wearing womens clothes, ALL other men should
see themselves as I do and wear womens clothes. **
See how stupid this crap sounds?
Stephe
http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/Heights/8187
Cathy Anderson
Christian, and is trying to 'save souls.' Now if he weren't trying
to save souls, he wouldn't be a very sincere Christian, would he?
The message was fairly diplomatic, in emphasizing "unwanted"
inclinations. A lot , if not most, crossdressers express, at the
very least, mixed feelings about their tendencies.
Cathy
Stephe
Cathy Anderson <11237...@CompuServe.COM> wrote in message ...
So explain **WHY** they have these mixed *guilt ridden* feelings if not from
people like Kevin explaining that this type of thing is "wrong" (according
to his views of the world). Remember religion was used as a basis for making
slavery OK as well as other forms of oppression.. I am a Christian myself
but see no reason to condemn people who live a different lifestyle from
myself that otherwise live as God would have us live. I don't think these
people give a damn about anyones souls, they are trying to remove anything
that they don't feel comfortable with..
Stephe
Jason Montoya
>Why would it be "unwanted" except for bigots like you making them think that
>it's somehow wrong? And then: who said you have to be into bondage to be
>homosexual? :-) You don't have a clue do you? I don't care that you're a
>Christian, why should you care if I'm gay? Who's being accepting of other
>people in this picture?
Hear, hear. I was just incensed earlier today by an article in a
local paper about how fundamental Christian groups are pressuring California
state representatives to vote against a bill that would specifically ban
discrimination in public schools against gay and lesbian students
(transvestism was specifically mentioned by the groups as well). Although I
have nothing against Christians (I myself am proud to be an agnostic leaning
toward the atheist side, get a dictionary if you don't understand) I have a
big problem with anyone who takes it upon themselves to interfere with
people's lives because of their own personal beliefs If you believe something
is wrong, then don't do it! Don't cram your beliefs down other people's
throats through forceful means.
Jason Montoya
>So explain **WHY** they have these mixed *guilt ridden* feelings if not from
>people like Kevin explaining that this type of thing is "wrong" (according
>to his views of the world). Remember religion was used as a basis for making
>slavery OK as well as other forms of oppression.. I am a Christian myself
>but see no reason to condemn people who live a different lifestyle from
>myself that otherwise live as God would have us live. I don't think these
>people give a damn about anyones souls, they are trying to remove anything
>that they don't feel comfortable with..
Exactly. And if God does exist, I think he/she/it/they would be more
concerned about the hatred and violence that plauges humanity than who loves
who and how. I find it patently ridiculous that our society virtually
worships violence yet demonizes sexuality.
fofol
> Exactly. And if God does exist, I think he/she/it/they would be more
>concerned about the hatred and violence that plauges humanity than who loves
>who and how. I find it patently ridiculous that our society virtually
>worships violence yet demonizes sexuality.
It's not only ridiculous, it's a way of controlling by abuse of power :
sexuality is mostly the ultimate expression of individual freedom, violence is
usually the device that allows exertion of power and thus repression. Both are
perfectly contradictory. The old slogan "make love not war" has social
implications that go quite far.
Hugs,
fofol
___________________________
PURITANS Adorers of the Holy Inhibition
(from fofol's Silly Little Dictionary)
http://surf.to/fofol Member of the Intergendered Webring
Cathy Anderson
believe Christianity should be a vehicle for transcending and
changing society. Jesus staunchly opposed the societal and
religiously-sanctioned sexual guilt-trips of his day. The theme
of defending prostitutes and adulturers is *unusually* pronounced
in the New Testament. So Christianity is, or at least is supposed
to be, especially concerned with the situation of people who are
oppressed as scapegoats because of society's problems with
sexuality.
Cathy
Cathy Anderson
for being tg. Jesus said "I come to save the world, not condemn it."
Lacking much scientific evidence about the nature of tg, I more or
less accept the common-sense observation that tg folks are partly
male and partly femaale. I think that is the real source of the
'guilt'--maybe the word conflict would be better. But let's
focus on where we agree: that, from time immemorial organized
religions have used guilt and fear to control people. And organized
Christianity is no exception. But that is not true Christianity
Cathy
Cathy Anderson
the repression of sexual urges.
Cathy
CrossdOVR
>it's somehow wrong?
Ok first..lets define bigot...
According to websters..
big*ot (noun)
[Middle French, hypocrite, bigot]
First appeared 1661
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and
prejudices
-- big*ot*ed (adjective)
-- big*ot*ed*ly (adverb)
Wow...that kinda sounds like some here on the board....>I don't care that
you're a
>Christian, why should you care if I'm gay? Who's being accepting of other
>people in this picture?
Being gay is your choice...but if you want out of it....then why would you rant
and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find his way to a
loving, lasting peace?
> but
>inside they will STILL be who they are and no amount of guilt trips from
>people like you are going to change them..
If you dont heal were the behavior is comming from.., you will be doomed to
repeat it.
>See how stupid this crap sounds?
Doesnt sound stupid, sounds pretty loving, compassionate, and caring to me.
CrossdOVR
>to his views of the world).
He also said it was a choice...he was offering his hand to people that feel
like they are in bondage....
>Remember religion was used as a basis for making
>slavery OK as well as other forms of oppression.
What is your point...he is not saying "Kill the gays"...it is a message of
healing...and if it reaches someone..and helps them live a more productive
happy fufilled life, what is wrong in that.
> I am a Christian myself
The bible tells us not to judge....and I try not to. I posted to this board in
Feb with a similar message to crossdressers. Is this quote judging?
CrossdOVR
>local paper about how fundamental Christian groups are pressuring California
so you are painting all fundamental Christians with this brush?
God bless
Amber Thompson
Being gay is not a choice, trying to change someone like that is
cruel.
--
Amber Thompson (Frostfire)
ICQ#5904742
http://homepages.together.net/~msfrost/tananda.html
(Please do not put a link to my site, on your website without
permission.
Thank You.)
Mimi CD TV
see what
> they are doing.
> Quite simply: They don't us to make them look bad... they do it
quite
> happily all by themselves.
Yes, and they just blindly throw their money into whatever
collection plate that comes around!
> -----
> Laura Blake
>
> You can lead a horse to water,
> but a pencil must be lead.
Actually, it's really graphite nowadays. lol :O)
--
Teddy Bear Hugs, Mimi CD TV (Mimi...@geocities.com)
Pretty please, with sugar on top, sponsor me in AIDS Ride 1999
(individuals are pledging $20-50 and organizations $350) I'm half
way there to $1900! PLEDGE DEADLINE IS JUNE 9, 1999!!! For
cash/check/money order:
http://www.geocities.com/FashionAvenue/Salon/3500/
My rider # is 740W. Or, you can chaaaaaaaarge it! (as Betty
Rubble and Wilma Flintstone used to say):
http://www.foodandfriends.org/aidsride4.html
Jan
I ofetn think your language is over the top.......but this time I'm
right with you - fundamentalists want to force everyone else to live
their way or noway, and the very idea that they 'lovingly' do anything
but kill the spirit (if not the literal flesh, in the case of the
so-called right-to-lifers) is a sick joke.
Jan
Laura Blake wrote:
>
> On 5 Jun 1999 19:02:10 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
> >so you are painting all fundamental Christians with this brush?
>
> No... THEY are painting themselves... Just watch their behaviour. Is it a
> minority issue? The bible thumpers will oppose it. Is it a sexuality
> issue? The bible thumpers will distain it. Is it a gender issue? Count on
> them to argue against it. Christians, in this century, have an almost
> unfaltering history of coming down on the side of ignorance and oppression.
>
> There are NO Fundamentalist Christian groups supporting social or legal
> equality. There are NO FC groups supporting gay marriage. There are NO FC
> groups endorsing transgender equality. There are NO FC groups pushing
> racial equality... they are on the opposing side of every one of these
> issues. They vote NAY wherever human freedom or human diverstity are
> concerned. The Fucking Christian's message is *always* one of oppression
> and conformity... they in fact seek to cage the spirit they claim to be
> freeing... and the dumb fucks are too blinded by their own faith to see what
> they are doing.
>
> Quite simply: They don't us to make them look bad... they do it quite
> happily all by themselves.
>
> -----
> Laura Blake
>
> You can lead a horse to water,
> but a pencil must be lead.
> -----
Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos
(Snip)
>Being gay is your choice...but if you want out of it....then why would you rant
>and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find his way to a
>loving, lasting peace?
The implication that one cannot find such a "loving, lasting peace"
without 'getting out' of being gay strikes some as offensive.
>Doesnt sound stupid, sounds pretty loving, compassionate, and caring to me.
So does communism, but have you checked the implementation?
Glenn,
sometimes known as Angie.
R Kivel
> Being gay is your choice...but if you want out of it....then why would you rant
> and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find his way to a
> loving, lasting peace?
Being gay is not a choice. It is not something I would chose. If you are honest
about who you are as am I, you are not welcome in a lot of places, I have a sister
(devote christian) who treats me as a non person. I cannot think of any body who
would if they had a choice asked to be treated in the manner most gays are. Add
the trans factor and you are in for a lot of hard core thumping by bible toters who
haven't read the book. Adultery is one of the 10 biggies of the old testament and
paul says if you divorce and remarry while your first spouse is still alive you are
committing adultery. yet the FCs don't have a problem with that hmmmm maybe it hits
closer to home.
When I read what Laura was saying All I could think of what that she echoed how I
felt about FCs who would rather tell me how I should live my life as opposed to
help the destatute.
Laura you go girl.
Rhonda
CrossdOVR
writes:
>ubject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
>From: ldb...@sprint.ca (Laura Blake)
>Date: Sat, 05 Jun 1999 22:10:53 GMT
>
>On 5 Jun 1999 19:02:10 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>>so you are painting all fundamental Christians with this brush?
>
>No... THEY are painting themselves... Just watch their behaviour. Is it a
>minority issue? The bible thumpers will oppose it.
Wait, here you go again..who are you saying represents all these funamentalist
Christians?
Is it a sexuality
>issue? The bible thumpers will distain it. Is it a gender issue? Count on
>them to argue against it. Christians, in this century, have an almost
>unfaltering history of coming down on the side of ignorance and oppression.
>
Its a difference of opinion....you are casting me as being in favor of
oppression. How about having an attitude that no one can NOT be a homosexual or
a crossdresser NO MATTER WHAT. So where do you get this idea...what study do
you take your thought on...
.<< There are NO FC groups supporting gay marriage.
So this makes them oppressive because they dont agree with you. If I support
gay marriage purposals.....then that is my approval of it. I am oppresive for
having my own ideas about what is appropriate for marriage? I believe that
homosexuality or crossdressing is a sin...so my belief is oppressive..? I do
not actively protest at gay rallies, or cding clubs..But I am there for those
that want to leave that lifestyle...You make the stiff judgement that being gay
or being a crossdresser is not a choice... If beliefs are "oppressive", then
arent you "oppressing" me and my belief?
There are NO FC
>groups endorsing transgender equality.
I am for equality for all...but that doesnt mean that you grant special rights
for certain groups. ALL should enjoy freedom. If you are discriminated against
because you are TG, I dont agree with that at all. But it shouldnt be limited
to just TG people...You shouldnt be discriminated against if your a Christian
either.
There are NO FC groups pushing
>racial equality.
I dont agree...
http://www.gospelcom.net/iv/urbana/seminars/racial_reconciliation_and_whit
e_responsibility.shtml
http://www.cc.org/publications/ca/0797/racial.html (Christian coalition
website)
.. they are on the opposing side of every one of these
>issues.
They vote NAY wherever human freedom or human diverstity are
>concerned. So if their belief doesnt agree with yours, then they are
oppressive?
> The Fucking Christian's message is *always* one of oppression
>and conformity... they in fact seek to cage the spirit they claim to be
>freeing... and the dumb fucks are too blinded by their own faith to see what
>they are doing.
Your opinion.
My message would be one of healing hurting souls by the loving power of Jesus
Christ. That is my message...if your hurting and you want out...I am here for
you. I want to show you how I did it...if you want me to. Maybe i am dumb, but
I am here for even you, one who hates what I stand for. I love you and those
who hate and ridicule me. If that is stupidity...I'm an idiot. Im not a smart
man, but I know what love is:)
CrossdOVR
<msf...@together.net> writes:
>> >Christian, why should you care if I'm gay? Who's being accepting of other
>> >people in this picture?
>>
>> Being gay is your choice...but if you want out of it....then why would you
>rant
>> and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find his way to
>a
>> loving, lasting peace?
>>
>> > but
>> >inside they will STILL be who they are and no amount of guilt trips from
>> >people like you are going to change them..
>>
>> If you dont heal were the behavior is comming from.., you will be doomed to
>> repeat it.
>>
>> >See how stupid this crap sounds?
>>
>> Doesnt sound stupid, sounds pretty loving, compassionate, and caring to me.
>
> Being gay is not a choice, trying to change someone like that is
>cruel.
Its not a choice? So it is not you controling your own body? It is not you, but
some bodily function that controls your mind?
>
>--
>
CrossdOVR
<kn...@nospam.erols.com> writes:
>> The F*ing Christian's ... are too blinded by their own faith to
>see what
>> they are doing.
>> Quite simply: They don't us to make them look bad... they do it
>quite
>> happily all by themselves.
>Yes, and they just blindly throw their money into whatever
>collection plate that comes around!
>> -----
>> Laura Blake
How are we blinded? What do you supose that we are doing? And how do you know
the value judgement of every Christian that gives money to their church? Easy
to throw words at someone....
CrossdOVR
Prophet of Chaos) writes:
>rom: ka...@ecn.ab.ca (Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos)
>Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 12:09:40 GMT
>
>On 5 Jun 1999 18:34:18 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>
>(Snip)
>>Being gay is your choice...but if you want out of it....then why would you
>rant
>>and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find his way to
>a
>>loving, lasting peace?
>
>The implication that one cannot find such a "loving, lasting peace"
>without 'getting out' of being gay strikes some as offensive.
DID I IMPLY THAT? NO. Lets reread it..."..but if you want out of it....then why
would you rant and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find
his way to a loving, lasting peace? " NOTICE>>>>>IF YOU WANT OUT.
>
>>Doesnt sound stupid, sounds pretty loving, compassionate, and caring to me.
>
>So does communism, but have you checked the implementation?
>
>Glenn,
>sometimes known as Angie.
My implementation is through free will, not law. How is that related to
communism?
CrossdOVR
>CrossdOVR wrote:
>
>> Being gay is your choice...but if you want out of it....then why would you
>rant
>> and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find his way to
>a
>> loving, lasting peace?
>
Then what is it? Being homosexual..or hetrosexual..is based on action...are you
saying that you dont control that action with your brain?
It is not something I would chose.
Are you saying that if someone gave you an alteranative that someone else had
used to rid themselves of this behavior, you would do it?
If you are
>honest
>about who you are as am I, you are not welcome in a lot of places, I have a
>sister
>(devote christian) who treats me as a non person. I guess she isnt following
what the bible says...
Luke 5:
30. But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to their sect
complained to his disciples, "Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and
`sinners'?"
31. Jesus answered them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the
sick.
32. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."
I cannot think of any body
>who
>would if they had a choice asked to be treated in the manner most gays are.
>Add
>the trans factor and you are in for a lot of hard core thumping by bible
>toters who
>haven't read the book. Adultery is one of the 10 biggies of the old testament
>and
>paul says if you divorce and remarry while your first spouse is still alive
>you are
>committing adultery. yet the FCs don't have a problem with that hmmmm maybe
>it hits
>closer to home.
>When I read what Laura was saying All I could think of what that she echoed
>how I
>felt about FCs who would rather tell me how I should live my life as opposed
>to
>help the destatute.
>Laura you go girl.
>Rhonda>
I am not telling ANYONE how to live their life...I am extending a hand...if you
choose to take it, is your choice. That is all the original poster was doing
also.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!newstf02.news.aol.com!portc01.blue.aol.com!news-peer.gip.net!news.g
sl.net!gip.net!newspump.sol.net!news.execpc.com!newspeer.sol.net!newstank.
sol.net!newsops.execpc.com!posts.execpc.com!daily-bugle.newsops.execpc.com
!usenet
>From: R Kivel <rki...@voyager.net>
>Newsgroups: alt.fashion.crossdressing
>Subject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
>Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 09:44:24 -0400
>Organization: NOR LEVIK Industries
>Lines: 22
>Message-ID: <7jdu0t$7...@newsops.execpc.com>
>References: <7il6l8$d0s$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>
><19990605143418...@ng-fu1.aol.com>
>Reply-To: rki...@voyager.net
>NNTP-Posting-Host: as1-dial9.grpd.mi.voyager.net
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Trace: daily-bugle.newsops.execpc.com 928676701 8065 (None) 209.153.135.18
>X-Complaints-To: ab...@execpc.com
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win95; U)
>X-Accept-Language: en
>
>
Clair
There's an article about homosexuality in animals other than humans
and also an article about a woman who is suing the school her daughter
attends because they will not let her wear trousers instead of the
regulation skirt.
Clair
ps just for the *some* of the girls on the other side of the pond
there is no such thing as the London Times...it's just the
Times...it's a national rag...sorry but that bugs me:)
slyfox
gay!........seems I don't look on myself as being that way..........
I have no real email so save your efforts
Its not a real account.
Jessica T
cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>
> >CrossdOVR wrote:
> >
> >> Being gay is your choice...but if you want out of it....then why
would you
> >rant
> >> and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find
his way to
> >a
> >> loving, lasting peace?
> >
> >Being gay is not a choice.
>
> Then what is it? Being homosexual..or hetrosexual..is based on
action...are you
> saying that you dont control that action with your brain?
No it's not based on action. There are many people who are gay, who
are still virgins. Their "identification" comes from what their heart
and soul tells them, it's a shame that some people like you have chosen
to judge against your own soul. Sounds to me, like you have taken it
upon yourself to decide good and evil for yourself...
> what the bible says...
> Luke 5:
> 30. But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to
their sect
> complained to his disciples, "Why do you eat and drink with tax
collectors and
> `sinners'?"
> 31. Jesus answered them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor,
but the
> sick.
> 32. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to
repentance."
Yes, you're being called... Maybe if you'll stop talking for a while,
you will hear?
> I am not telling ANYONE how to live their life...I am extending a
hand...if you
> choose to take it, is your choice. That is all the original poster
was doing
> also.
What are your qualifications to help? Are you a psychiatrist?
Therapist? I would never presume to try and personally help a drug
addict/ someone with obsessive/compulsive disorder or anything else
myself... I would direct that person to a trained professional.
Just some thoughts,
Jessica
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Jessica T
cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
> In article <375a64f4....@news.ecn.ab.ca>, ka...@ecn.ab.ca
(Glenn, thine
> Prophet of Chaos) writes:
>
> >rom: ka...@ecn.ab.ca (Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos)
> >Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 12:09:40 GMT
> >
> >On 5 Jun 1999 18:34:18 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
> >
> >(Snip)
would you
> >rant
> >>and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find
his way to
> >a
> >>loving, lasting peace?
> >
> >without 'getting out' of being gay strikes some as offensive.
>
> DID I IMPLY THAT? NO.
Yes! The fact that you felt the need to yell "NO!" indicates that
Glenn may have indeed struck a nerve by pointing that out to you.
>Lets reread it..."..but if you want out of it....then why
> would you rant and rave about someone lovingly helping another human
being find
> his way to a loving, lasting peace? " NOTICE>>>>>IF YOU WANT OUT.
Because you've used the word "loving" doesn't mean that there was real
love involved. Con-men as they swindle old widows out of their
money "lovingly" smile at them...
> >
> >>Doesnt sound stupid, sounds pretty loving, compassionate, and
caring to me.
Well, if you spend all your time trying to convince yourself that, that
is what it sounds like... How can anyone convince you otherwise?
Jessica T
> > Being gay is not a choice, trying to change someone like that is
> >cruel.
> Its not a choice?
No. Not if you want to be honest with yourself.
>So it is not you controling your own body?
Yes it is... But not your ego-driven you...
>It is not you, but
> some bodily function that controls your mind?
Not a bodily function, but the spirit which is your true self which
comes from God. Some people choose to listen to this "inner" call,
which is just their own selves calling to them. Others, such as
yourself, listen to the "outer" call of the world, and turn their back
on this "inner" voice in a vain attempt to seek approval and conformity
with the world.
Just some thoughts, again!....
Jessica
PS Another thought. God doesn't have or need religion...
CrossdOVR
I didnt say that..and I wont email anyone unless they ask me to.
CrossdOVR
writes:
>Subject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
>From: Jessica T <jessic...@my-deja.com>
>Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 16:04:31 GMT
>
>In article <19990606103615...@ngol07.aol.com>,
> cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>>
>> >CrossdOVR wrote:
>> >
>> >> Being gay is your choice...but if you want out of it....then why
>would you
>> >rant
>> >> and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find
>his way to
>> >a
>> >> loving, lasting peace?
>> >
>> >Being gay is not a choice.
>>
>> Then what is it? Being homosexual..or hetrosexual..is based on
>action...are you
>> saying that you dont control that action with your brain?
>
>No it's not based on action. There are many people who are gay, who
>are still virgins. Their "identification" comes from what their heart
>and soul tells them, it's a shame that some people like you have chosen
>to judge against your own soul. Sounds to me, like you have taken it
>upon yourself to decide good and evil for yourself...
>
>
>
>> what the bible says...
>> Luke 5:
>> 30. But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to
>their sect
>> complained to his disciples, "Why do you eat and drink with tax
>collectors and
>> `sinners'?"
>> 31. Jesus answered them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor,
>but the
>> sick.
>> 32. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to
>repentance."
>
>Yes, you're being called... Maybe if you'll stop talking for a while,
>you will hear?
>
Ya I am a sinner...all fall short of the glory of God. Judging in a spiritual
sense is saying " you are going to hell for your behavior" That is what the
Pharisees did. Jesus wasnt saying that their are no right and wrongs...but that
men do not know another mans heart, so they have no basis to judge it. I am not
passing judgement, but offering help.
>
>> I am not telling ANYONE how to live their life...I am extending a
>hand...if you
>> choose to take it, is your choice. That is all the original poster
>was doing
>> also.
> I would never presume to try and personally help a drug
>addict/ someone with obsessive/compulsive disorder or anything else
>myself... I would direct that person to a trained professional.
>
>
Well, that is your choice..so I guess your against online support groups for
transgendered people right? Well that is what I offer.(Its just not the kind
you agree with, so its not "right") I never claimed to be a trained
professional...but a loving christian that wants to help others out of the same
hole I was in.
>Just some thoughts,
>Jessica
>
>
>
CrossdOVR
writes:
>ubject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
>From: Jessica T <jessic...@my-deja.com>
>Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 16:15:35 GMT
>
>In article <19990606103614...@ngol07.aol.com>,
> cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>> In article <375a64f4....@news.ecn.ab.ca>, ka...@ecn.ab.ca
>(Glenn, thine
>> Prophet of Chaos) writes:
>>
>> >rom: ka...@ecn.ab.ca (Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos)
>> >Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 12:09:40 GMT
>> >
>> >On 5 Jun 1999 18:34:18 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>> >
>> >(Snip)
>> >>Being gay is your choice...but if you want out of it....then why
>would you
>> >rant
>> >>and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find
>his way to
>> >a
>> >>loving, lasting peace?
>> >
>> >The implication that one cannot find such a "loving, lasting peace"
>> >without 'getting out' of being gay strikes some as offensive.
>>
>> DID I IMPLY THAT? NO.
>
>Yes! The fact that you felt the need to yell "NO!" indicates that
>Glenn may have indeed struck a nerve by pointing that out to you.
>
Correction...I wrote NO...NOt NO! I was not implying that
>>Lets reread it..."..but if you want out of it....then why
>> would you rant and rave about someone lovingly helping another human
>being find
>> his way to a loving, lasting peace? " NOTICE>>>>>IF YOU WANT OUT.
>
>Because you've used the word "loving" doesn't mean that there was real
>love involved. Con-men as they swindle old widows out of their
>money "lovingly" smile at them...
>
Again, you are making a judgement about someone you dont even know...
>> >
>> >>Doesnt sound stupid, sounds pretty loving, compassionate, and
>caring to me.
>
>Well, if you spend all your time trying to convince yourself that, that
>is what it sounds like... How can anyone convince you otherwise?
>
>
>Just some thoughts,
>Jessica
I dont have to convince myself of something that I know has helped others. I
know men that were gay and lead a horrible permiscious life....and now are
happily married. But I have a feeling you will say that they arent really
happy....right?
So who can convince you otherwise?
>
CrossdOVR
>
>>It is not you, but
>> some bodily function that controls your mind?
>
>Not a bodily function, but the spirit which is your true self which
>comes from God.
still be good.
Some people choose to listen to this "inner" call,
>which is just their own selves calling to them. Others, such as
>yourself, listen to the "outer" call of the world, and turn their back
>on this "inner" voice in a vain attempt to seek approval and conformity
>with the world.>
>Just some thoughts, again!....
>
again your opinion on what I conform to.....
>Jessica
>
>
>PS Another thought. God doesn't have or need religion...
>
He didnt tell me that!
Mimi CD TV
> >collection plate that comes around!
how do you know
> the value judgement of every Christian that gives money to their
church? Easy
> to throw words at someone....
and Jim Bakker types.
Jessica T
cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>
> >
> >>It is not you, but
> >> some bodily function that controls your mind?
> >
> >Not a bodily function, but the spirit which is your true self which
> >comes from God.
> Your opinion....God cannot be imperfect and still be God. He cant be
evil and
> still be good.
It is you who is judging what is good and evil...
> Some people choose to listen to this "inner" call,
> >which is just their own selves calling to them. Others, such as
> >yourself, listen to the "outer" call of the world, and turn their
back
> >on this "inner" voice in a vain attempt to seek approval and
conformity
> >with the world.>
> >Just some thoughts, again!....
> >
> again your opinion on what I conform to.....
Yes it is an opinion isn't it? Glad your here to point that out...
> >Jessica
> >
> >
> >PS Another thought. God doesn't have or need religion...
> >
> He didnt tell me that!
Perhaps he/she did and you just weren't listening...
Jessica T
cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
> In article <7je6r2$10k$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Jessica T <jessica_2000@my-
Double correction... you still yelled "NO" the exclamation mark was
definitely implied. If you want to argue semantics we'll be here till
the end of time.
> >>Lets reread it..."..but if you want out of it....then why
> >> would you rant and rave about someone lovingly helping another
human
> >being find
> >> his way to a loving, lasting peace? " NOTICE>>>>>IF YOU WANT OUT.
> >
> >Because you've used the word "loving" doesn't mean that there was
real
> >love involved. Con-men as they swindle old widows out of their
> >money "lovingly" smile at them...
> >
> Again, you are making a judgement about someone you dont even know...
Do you feel judged? Merely pointing out that because someone can use
the word love doesn't mean that real Love was involved. If you feel
judged perhaps you should look inside yourself for guilt feelings?
Because I certainly didn't mean anything personal...
> >> >
> >> >>Doesnt sound stupid, sounds pretty loving, compassionate, and
> >caring to me.
> >
> >Well, if you spend all your time trying to convince yourself that,
that
> >is what it sounds like... How can anyone convince you otherwise?
> >
> >
> I dont have to convince myself of something that I know has helped
> others.
Apparently though you have to keep talking...
> I
> know men that were gay and lead a horrible permiscious life....and
now are
> happily married. But I have a feeling you will say that they arent
really
> happy....right?
Wrong... These men weren't gay to begin with but were probably
bisexual. There is not just black or white, but as nature should tell
you there are infinite shades of gray inbetween. There are some people
who can be happy either way...
> So who can convince you otherwise?
God?
Sincerely,
Jessica
Jessica T
> >
> >Yes, you're being called... Maybe if you'll stop talking for a
while,
> >you will hear?
> >
> Ya I am a sinner...all fall short of the glory of God. Judging in a
spiritual
> sense is saying " you are going to hell for your behavior" That is
what the
> Pharisees did. Jesus wasnt saying that their are no right and
wrongs...but that
> men do not know another mans heart, so they have no basis to judge
it. I am not
Read what I wrote and you wrote again... Offering help without wisdom
can be more damaging that doing nothing at all. Encouraging people to
be themselves would be truly helpful, playing on their fears and
anxieties over the world's opinion of their lifestyle is not...
> passing judgement, but offering help.
Again you're a sinner, I'm a sinner... You're not helping, you're
interfering with their direct connection to God.
> >
> >> I am not telling ANYONE how to live their life...I am extending a
> >hand...if you
> >> choose to take it, is your choice. That is all the original poster
> >was doing
> >> also.
>
> > I would never presume to try and personally help a drug
> >addict/ someone with obsessive/compulsive disorder or anything else
> >myself... I would direct that person to a trained professional.
> >
> >
> Well, that is your choice..so I guess your against online support
groups for
> transgendered people right?
You guess wrongly... However you came up with that conclusion is
really really... wacky!
> Well that is what I offer.(Its just not the kind
> you agree with, so its not "right")
Well if that's your conclusion, be happy with it!
> I never claimed to be a trained
> professional...but a loving christian that wants to help others out
> of the same
> hole I was in.
Again, because you use the word "loving" does not mean real love is
involved. If you were a real christian, you would help people become
the best people THEY want to be, regardless of whether you agree with
it or not...
>
> >Just some thoughts,
Jan
follow the FC way, and entered into 'normal' marriages, only to
eventually return to what turned out to be their true nature. (Of
course, FC-people would say that they didn't pray enough, have enough
faith etc.)
People don't choose heterosexuality either. Ask a heterosexual to give
up their 'lifestyle' and become gay - do you really think that they
could do it ? Even if offered the kingdom of heaven or a cool million ?
This whole ex-gay campaign is a political ploy designed to bolster the
right-wing's claim that homosexuality is a 'lifestyle choice', and has
absolutely nothing to do with spirituality.
[As an aside, congrats to Bill Clinton, scourge of the right, for
appointing the first gay US ambassador, Mr. Hormel !!]
Mr CrossedOVR - go and do something useful with your life - you will not
look back in later life on this effort with pride, I guarantee you.
Jan
caprice bellefleur wrote:
>
> In article <19990606142156...@ngol03.aol.com>,
> cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
> <snip>
> > I know men that were gay and lead a horrible permiscious life....and
> now are
> > happily married. But I have a feeling you will say that they arent
> really
> > happy....right?
> >
> They probably are happy. But they weren't gay. They appeared gay, even
> thought themselves gay, because they were able to suppress the
> heterosexual part of their bisexuality. Someone who can do that can
> then decide they want to suppress the homosexual side. If this makes
> them happy, fine.
>
> Oh yes. Gay does not equal promiscuous. The former is a sexual
> orientation. The latter is a lifestyle, which can be practiced by
> someone of any sexual orientation.
>
> Caprice
caprice bellefleur
CrossdOVR
<kn...@nospam.erols.com> writes:
>Subject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
>From: "Mimi CD TV" <kn...@nospam.erols.com>
>Date: Sun, 6 Jun 1999 15:03:08 -0400
K. Lot of people use Jim and Tammy or Kenneth Copeland, or Pat Robertson as
examples. But no one speaks of christian missionaries...Like Franklin Graham,
that are over in Kosavo helping refugees. Tv evangalists are not mainline
Christians.
God Bless.
CrossdOVR
writes:
>Subject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
>From: ldb...@sprint.ca (Laura Blake)
>Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 20:44:22 GMT
>
>On 06 Jun 1999 14:10:21 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>>How are we blinded?
>
>I don't believe you have to ask this... but anyway... Christianity stopped,
>being anything even vaguely resembling spiritual belief in a higher being a
>very long time ago.
Hmmm tell that to Billy Graham's son Franklin. While we sit here in
comfort...he is over in Bosnia being a missionary....that doesnt sound like the
KKK.
In fact, Christianity, these days is more akin to the
>KKK than anything God or Christ likely ever envisioned... It has become the
>primary weapon of bigots, used in the passing of moral judgement upon their
>fellow man.
>
Its easy to spout adjectives about christians..but can you give scriptural
references vs examples of your "bigots that pass moral judgement."
>Christianity has been contorted into a tool of hatred. Most christians
>stopped loving God, and started hating their fellow man... a long time ago.
Sure there are those men that Yell "fags will die", and I agree that isnt the
idea that Christ had in mind. But what about the men that go into the prisons,
and the homeless kitchens, and the countless volunteers in hospitals that are
serving Christ. I see them everyday.
>Take a look around you... you live in a world filled with many things that
>would look miraculous to anyone even as recently as 50 years ago. Yet here
>you are still clinging to this 2000 year old tome that was written in a
>moral, social and scientific atmosphere long gone.
Columbine, Paduca, LA Riots, Oklahoma City bombing, ......I could list a ton.
I challenge you to go into ANY nursing home and chat with the residents...ask
them if they would rather live now, or 50 years ago. I work around elderly, I
know the answer most would give.
You use this severely
>outmoded Bible of yours to sit in judgement of others, making vast
>pronouncements about entire classes of human beings without even once
>considering the harm you do your fellow man...
How am I judging,...tell me what I have said that states I am sitting in
judgement...What vast pronouncements......? Its easy to spout words...but hard
to give examples
What pronouncements..lets get specific.
>
>Do not talk to me about love, you don't know what it is!
>
Who is being the judge and jury here?
>
>>What do you supose that we are doing? And how do you know
>>the value judgement of every Christian that gives money to their church?
>Easy
>>to throw words at someone....
>
>Yeah... remember that the next time you bring up God in my presence... It's
>real easy to throw words at people... it gives you this really wonderful
>excuse for not bothering to understand.
>
>-----
>Laura Blake
You have no idea of how I understand. But from what you posted, that the only
solution is the one you agree with.
>
CrossdOVR
writes:
>From: Jessica T <jessic...@my-deja.com>
>Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 21:45:23 GMT
>
>In article <19990606142157...@ngol03.aol.com>,
> cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >>It is not you, but
>> >> some bodily function that controls your mind?
>> >
>> >Not a bodily function, but the spirit which is your true self which
>> >comes from God.
>> Your opinion....God cannot be imperfect and still be God. He cant be
>evil and
>> still be good.
>
>It is you who is judging what is good and evil...
>
No, I dont. Scripture tells me that...I dont make any decisions about what is
good or evil.
>
>> Some people choose to listen to this "inner" call,
>> >which is just their own selves calling to them. Others, such as
>> >yourself, listen to the "outer" call of the world, and turn their
>back
>> >on this "inner" voice in a vain attempt to seek approval and
>conformity
>> >with the world.>
>> >Just some thoughts, again!....
>> >
>> again your opinion on what I conform to.....
>
>Yes it is an opinion isn't it? Glad your here to point that out...
>
What is your point?
CrossdOVR
writes:
>Subject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
>From: Jessica T <jessic...@my-deja.com>
>Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 21:55:31 GMT
>
>In article <19990606142156...@ngol03.aol.com>,
> cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>> In article <7je6r2$10k$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Jessica T <jessica_2000@my-
>deja.com>
>> writes:
>>
>> >ubject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
>> >From: Jessica T <jessic...@my-deja.com>
LOL, you are talking about me..then you are talking about me talking about
Love, and then you talk about con-men. THAT is not implied? But NOT is
implied....explain the difference.
CrossdOVR
writes:
>ubject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
>From: Jessica T <jessic...@my-deja.com>
>Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 22:22:07 GMT
>
>
>
>> >
>> >Yes, you're being called... Maybe if you'll stop talking for a
>while,
>> >you will hear?
>> >
>> Ya I am a sinner...all fall short of the glory of God. Judging in a
>spiritual
>> sense is saying " you are going to hell for your behavior" That is
>what the
>> Pharisees did. Jesus wasnt saying that their are no right and
>wrongs...but that
>> men do not know another mans heart, so they have no basis to judge
>it. I am not
>
>Read what I wrote and you wrote again... Offering help without wisdom
>can be more damaging that doing nothing at all. Encouraging people to
>be themselves would be truly helpful, playing on their fears and
>anxieties over the world's opinion of their lifestyle is not...
but it is you saying that being gay or crossdressing is just them...its their
nature...
I am not discouraging others from cding or being gay. I personally have a
fellowship for people that dont want to cd..and they want a way out....
>
>> passing judgement, but offering help.
>
>Again you're a sinner, I'm a sinner... You're not helping, you're
>interfering with their direct connection to God.
>
>
According to you..
>> >
>> >> I am not telling ANYONE how to live their life...I am extending a
>> >hand...if you
>> >> choose to take it, is your choice. That is all the original poster
>> >was doing
>> >> also.
>>
>> > I would never presume to try and personally help a drug
>> >addict/ someone with obsessive/compulsive disorder or anything else
>> >myself... I would direct that person to a trained professional.
>> >
>> >
>> Well, that is your choice..so I guess your against online support
>groups for
>> transgendered people right?
>
>You guess wrongly... However you came up with that conclusion is
>really really... wacky!
>
>> Well that is what I offer.(Its just not the kind
>> you agree with, so its not "right")
>
>Well if that's your conclusion, be happy with it!
>
>> I never claimed to be a trained
>> professional...but a loving christian that wants to help others out
>> of the same
>> hole I was in.
>
>Again, because you use the word "loving" does not mean real love is
>involved. If you were a real christian, you would help people become
>the best people THEY want to be, regardless of whether you agree with
>it or not...
>
Who are you to say I am not doing that. Who are you to judge what love is. I
must restate what I said...personally I am not out trying to convert cds that
are happy crossdressing....I am looking to fellowship with those that are in
pain, and hurting..from those that are looking for an alternative.
CrossdOVR
<caprice_b...@my-deja.com> writes:
>Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 00:58:04 GMT
>
>In article <19990606142156...@ngol03.aol.com>,
> cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
><snip>
>> I know men that were gay and lead a horrible permiscious life....and
>now are
>> happily married. But I have a feeling you will say that they arent
>really
>> happy....right?
>>
>They probably are happy. But they weren't gay. They appeared gay, even
>thought themselves gay, because they were able to suppress the
>heterosexual part of their bisexuality. Someone who can do that can
>then decide they want to suppress the homosexual side. If this makes
>them happy, fine.
Ok then..define gay. To me it is a sexual attraction to a person of the same
sex exclusively. So if someone used to have same sex relationships...but now
have strictly heterosexual relationships, they were never Gay?
>
>Oh yes. Gay does not equal promiscuous.
I did not say this. I said the people that I knew, who changed....were
permiscous...not all gays.
CrossdOVR
From: Jan <J...@nospam.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 22:40:10 -0400
<<There are several documented cases of gay people who have tried to
follow the FC way, and entered into 'normal' marriages, only to
eventually return to what turned out to be their true nature. >>
If they are documented, please provide them. BTW you dont disprove something by
only showing the negative...just because "several" reverted back doesnt mean
that "several" dont leave happy content lives
<<People don't choose heterosexuality either. Ask a heterosexual to give
up their 'lifestyle' and become gay - do you really think that they
could do it ? Even if offered the kingdom of heaven or a cool million ? >>
Expose them to it...in early childhood, and take away their father....or have
them lack a positive male role model...and you wont even need a cool million.
<<This whole ex-gay campaign is a political ploy designed to bolster the
right-wing's claim that homosexuality is a 'lifestyle choice', and has
absolutely nothing to do with spirituality.>>
Where are your medical studies to prove its genetic...please provide them...
<<Mr CrossedOVR - go and do something useful with your life - you will not
<<look back in later life on this effort with pride, I guarantee you.>>
How about I worry about my life....and you worry about your own..I am very
proud to say that I am helping others find Christ and heal their pain.
Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos
(Snip)
>>So does communism, but have you checked the implementation?
>>
>>Glenn,
>>sometimes known as Angie.
>
>My implementation is through free will, not law. How is that related to
>communism?
Communism was instated by revolutionaries exercising their free will.
Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos
(Snip)
>> Being gay is not a choice, trying to change someone like that is
>>cruel.
>Its not a choice? So it is not you controling your own body? It is not you, but
>some bodily function that controls your mind?
That's one belief; that even the mind is just the sum of it's various
physiological components.
Bear in mind, that this theory reduces memories and experiences to
chemico-electrical impulse patterns held within the brain, not unlike
the hard drive on your computer. (Though, considering the difficulty
involved in altering them, perhaps eprom would be a better analogy.)
Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos
wrote:
(Snip)
>ps just for the *some* of the girls on the other side of the pond
>there is no such thing as the London Times...it's just the
>Times...it's a national rag...sorry but that bugs me:)
Yeah, but since many other cities have newspapers called "the Times,"
attaching a city name to it helps to pinpoint which one you're talking
about.
Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos
(Snip)
>I dont have to convince myself of something that I know has helped others. I
>know men that were gay and lead a horrible permiscious life....and now are
>happily married. But I have a feeling you will say that they arent really
>happy....right?
Perhaps they are.
But then, so are many people who've been indoctrinated into cults.
I mention this, because every ex-gay program I've heard of uses
techniques that resemble the indoctrination methods of various cults.
Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos
wrote:
>In article <19990606103614...@ngol07.aol.com>,
> cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>> In article <375a64f4....@news.ecn.ab.ca>, ka...@ecn.ab.ca
>(Glenn, thine
>> Prophet of Chaos) writes:
>>
>> >rom: ka...@ecn.ab.ca (Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos)
>> >Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 12:09:40 GMT
>> >
>> >On 5 Jun 1999 18:34:18 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>> >
>> >(Snip)
>> >>Being gay is your choice...but if you want out of it....then why
>would you
>> >rant
>> >>and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find
>his way to
>> >a
>> >>loving, lasting peace?
>> >
>> >The implication that one cannot find such a "loving, lasting peace"
>> >without 'getting out' of being gay strikes some as offensive.
>>
>> DID I IMPLY THAT? NO.
>
>Yes! The fact that you felt the need to yell "NO!" indicates that
>Glenn may have indeed struck a nerve by pointing that out to you.
Actually, it doesn't.
However, many people are blind to the implications they are making.
They may not intend to say something, but forget that others will read
their words from a different viewpoint.
Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos
wrote:
(Snip)
>haven't read the book. Adultery is one of the 10 biggies of the old testament and
>paul says if you divorce and remarry while your first spouse is still alive you are
>committing adultery. yet the FCs don't have a problem with that hmmmm maybe it hits
>closer to home.
Actually, they do. Most FC's don't recognize divorce, except under
certain very specific circumstances. (I believe that they'll allow it
if your spouse was adulterous, but that could just be a Lutheran
practice.)
The only difference is that they tend to be less vocal about this
issue.
Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos
>>CrossdOVR wrote:
>>
>>> Being gay is your choice...but if you want out of it....then why would you
>>rant
>>> and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being find his way to
>>a
>>> loving, lasting peace?
>>
>>Being gay is not a choice.
>
>Then what is it? Being homosexual..or hetrosexual..is based on action...are you
>saying that you dont control that action with your brain?
Being homosexual is not a choice; it's a label given to those who are
sexually attracted to people of the same gender. Sexual attraction is
still barely understood.
Who you sleep with, though, *is* a choice. This may be where you're
confusing the issue.
Changing these things may be possible. But IMO, it's like changing
fundamental aspects of your being.
If the issue were anything *but* homosexuality, such a change would be
seen as an assault on identity. Consider: the techniques used to
make gay men 'straight' can also be used in reverse. Or they can be
used to make a liberal into a conservative, or vice versa. With
sufficient knowledge of the mind, one can re-write any aspect of
someone's personality.
>It is not something I would chose.
>Are you saying that if someone gave you an alteranative that someone else had
>used to rid themselves of this behavior, you would do it?
Tricky question.
However, the fact that I dislike the way society treats me because of
who I am has no bearing on whether I wish to change who I am.
>I am not telling ANYONE how to live their life...I am extending a hand...if you
>choose to take it, is your choice. That is all the original poster was doing
>also.
Aye; and I am simply warning people to look at what's in your other
hand before taking your offer.
Lacey Leigh
discussion is OFF TOPIC?
Please take it elsewhere, 'cause no one in this debate is going to change his or
her opinions.
Thank you.
Lacey Leigh
--
A proud member of the Vanity Club sorority.
Please visit Lacey’s Follies, my personal photo pages, at:
http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/Stonewall/1674
Jessica T
cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
> In article <7jeqog$72s$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Jessica T <jessica_2000@my-
deja.com>
> writes:
>
> >Subject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
> > cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
> >> In article <7je6r2$10k$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Jessica T
<jessica_2000@my-
> >deja.com>
> >> writes:
> >>
> >> >Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 16:15:35 GMT
> >> >
> >> >In article <19990606103614...@ngol07.aol.com>,
> >> > cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
> >> >> In article <375a64f4....@news.ecn.ab.ca>, ka...@ecn.ab.ca
> >> >(Glenn, thine
> >> >> Prophet of Chaos) writes:
> >> >>
> >> >> >rom: ka...@ecn.ab.ca (Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos)
> >> >> >Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 12:09:40 GMT
> >> >> >
> >> >> >On 5 Jun 1999 18:34:18 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR)
wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >(Snip)
why
> >> >would you
> >> >> >rant
> >> >> >>and rave about someone lovingly helping another human being
find
> >> >his way to
> >> >> >a
> >> >> >>loving, lasting peace?
> >> >> >
> >peace"
> >> >> >without 'getting out' of being gay strikes some as offensive.
> >> >>
> >> >> DID I IMPLY THAT? NO.
> >> >
> >> >Yes! The fact that you felt the need to yell "NO!" indicates that
> >> >Glenn may have indeed struck a nerve by pointing that out to you.
> >> >
> >
> >Double correction... you still yelled "NO" the exclamation mark was
> >definitely implied. If you want to argue semantics we'll be here
till
> >the end of time.
> >
> >
> >> >> would you rant and rave about someone lovingly helping another
> >human
> >> >being find
OUT.
> >> >
> >> >Because you've used the word "loving" doesn't mean that there was
> >real
> >> >love involved. Con-men as they swindle old widows out of their
> >> >money "lovingly" smile at them...
> >> >
> >> Again, you are making a judgement about someone you dont even
know...
> >
> >Do you feel judged? Merely pointing out that because someone can use
> >the word love doesn't mean that real Love was involved. If you feel
> >judged perhaps you should look inside yourself for guilt feelings?
> >Because I certainly didn't mean anything personal...
> >
> LOL, you are talking about me..then you are talking about me talking
about
> Love, and then you talk about con-men. THAT is not implied? But NOT is
> implied....explain the difference.
No... I suppose if you ever use your intelligence you'll figure what
my response would've been, but I doubt it. Sadly, you remind me of
myself from many years ago. Always having to have the last word...
You know, in the time your wasting arguing with people here, you could
be spending that time "helping" those who want it. You're also
seriously delusional if you think that even those you're trying to
help, will be thinking you're the least bit Christ-like after wasting
all this time arguing (I suspect you'll argue my use of the word
arguing) with people here. To paraphrase a famous Jedi knight "Who's
more foolish? The fool? Or the fool that argues with the fool?"
You want the last word? You're welcome to it... (Can't speak for
anyone else though, but I'm off this topic now) Lacey's right, this is
getting seriously off-topic here, because you will always develop an
answer for anything anyone says, just as they will always have an
answer for you.
That's it for this...
Jessica
PS My apologies to everyone else, should've realized from the get-go
the futility in debating with someone like CrossdOVR...
moonw...@yahoo.com
This is a fashion newsgroup
This is not a religious newsgroup
This is not a sex newsgroup
Not everyone adheres to 'Scriptures'
I personally take offense at people who automatically assume that the Divine is
male.
The point's been made. Thank you. Next....
sbill...@mindspring.com
>A true Christian would not 'condemn' anyone for any reason--least of all
>for being tg. Jesus said "I come to save the world, not condemn it."
>
>Lacking much scientific evidence about the nature of tg, I more or
>less accept the common-sense observation that tg folks are partly
>male and partly femaale. I think that is the real source of the
>'guilt'--maybe the word conflict would be better. But let's
>focus on where we agree: that, from time immemorial organized
>religions have used guilt and fear to control people. And organized
>Christianity is no exception. But that is not true Christianity
>
This is drifting into off-topic discussion, but here's an observation
from the peanut gallery (me)
It seems to me that the "definition" of a particular group is (rightly
or wrongly) set by the actions of the majority of that group - and, of
course, by the leadership that they select.
Since, these days, the main thrust of the cristian beast AS-A-WHOLE
isy to control, judge, comdemn, and dictate what is right and wrong -
it follows that a "true" christian would go along with this silliness.
Now, someone who chooses to follow the teachings of the Man Christ as
portrayed it the book called the bible no longer fits what is
currently called a christian. The organized religions lay claim to
that label and will not surrender it in the forseeable future.
What these people now need is another name to call themselves and
disassociate themselves from that tainted label - christianity.
Though I am not one myself, I have little problem with the real
believers in Christ. I *DO* have a great deal of trouble with those
who cling so desperately to the book to avoid responsibility for their
past deeds or who feel threatened by my non-conformance to their
particular flavor of faith and *NEED* to do something about it.
To these people, I'd suggest that the read the book "Conversations"
With God", though what it contains would likely frighten them and
they'd run away screaming "Blasphemy". In it, God explains that he is
NOT judgmental.
Trying to steer myself back on topic, this means that he does NOT
CARE what I wear, or how I identify myself on the gender scale.
'nuff said.
XOXOXO
Sarah B.
>Cathy
Frances A. Smith
get down to what this group is all about FASHION !!!!!! RIGHT.
Frances.
CrossdOVR
writes:
>Girls, Girls, Girls, Please knock it off enough is enough, lets
>get down to what this group is all about FASHION !!!!!! RIGHT.
>
>Frances.
>
I plan to.
CrossdOVR
writes:
>You don't? Ok... so how is it you are here telling us homosexuality is
>sinful? Who, exactly, decided to post that first message? And who is now
>vigorously defending those views in a place where they are singularly
>unwelcomed?
Actually I wasnt the original poster. Also, Christianity was attacked and spit
on, in the beginning of this thread.I defended my belief, just as you have. I
will finish out this thread today....please send any corespondance regarding
this post to my main email address. Cross...@Juno.com
CrossdOVR
writes:
>On 07 Jun 1999 06:39:46 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>>Expose them to it...in early childhood, and take away their father....or
>have
>>them lack a positive male role model...and you wont even need a cool
>million.
>
>You know what's wrong here... you are making one HUGE assumption. You and
>all your so called christian buddies are *assuming* that heterosexuality is
>some kind of default human condition that some people fall away from. You
>are *assuming* that heterosexuality is good while homosexuality is bad.
I am assuming..? My posts and the guy that started this thread...where
speaking of those that want a way out...I wasnt assuming anything. I have
my own ideas and beliefs on cding and and homosexuality and their origins...but
I keep them to my self if I am not asked, or I am not painted a certain way by
someone that likes to generalize about me and my "buddies."
>
>Now why would you do that? BECAUSE... you have been taught all your life,
>by your stupid friends, that people are "Like this" and that being "Like
>this" is the only way to get into heaven. You are taught by other bigots to
>be a bigot. The social messages all come down to the shame thing... "If you
>aren't like ME, there is something wrong with you"... and you have stupidly
>believed them.
My momma always said that stupid is as stupid does.....Accorse we down here in
GReenbow, Alabama arent very smart..but we know what love is...LOL.
>
>In point of fact there is a single event in every person's life --puberty--
>when their sexuality emerges. This is a naturally occuring phenomenon,
>built into the endochrine system of every single human being on earth, and
>controlled by their genetics. We all reach sexual maturity according to the
>rythms and predispositions of our bodies... SO, in point of simple reality
>gays become gay by exactly the same mechanism that hets become het... by the
>onset of puberty.
Ok you state this as fact...back it up...with scientific proof.
>Who are you to tamper with God's plan for these people... how do you have
>the moral and personal authority to mess with the predetermined path of
>these people's lives? By what right do you interfere in God's work?
<<I dont....I help others that come to me for help.
>
>Why... of course... you do this because you have ignored God's plan and have
>instead taken on the **political** causes of the enemies of God, those who
>would presume to know his will without knowing his presence. You twist his
>word to suit your purposes and, in so doing, you usurp his grace and his
>love, claiming it instead for yourself.
>
>You, not we, are committing a mortal sin... you are impersonating God!
>
>Now... do us all a big favour, get that heathen ass of yours outa here...
>
>--
I know that God will judge me fairly..something you have not done..you have
taken my words and made them to say something I did not say.
Once again, I am not trying to convert anyone that doesnt want to be
converted...I dont force my theology on anyone that doesnt come to me search
for something.
fofol
>You are not a Christian... you are a bigot who uses the bible to push your
>own hateful agendum... As bad a blight on this community as I can imagine.
That sums it up.
Is it possible to be ex-human ? Yes, bigots are the living proof.
fofol
___________________________
PURITANS Adorers of the Holy Inhibition
(from fofol's Silly Little Dictionary)
http://surf.to/fofol Member of the Intergendered Webring
Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos
wrote:
>Girls, Girls, Girls, Please knock it off enough is enough, lets
>get down to what this group is all about FASHION !!!!!! RIGHT.
Sorry :(
I enjoy those heated debates a bit too much, and sometimes forget that
others just see them as annoyances.
Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos
(Snip)
>This is drifting into off-topic discussion, but here's an observation
>from the peanut gallery (me)
>
>It seems to me that the "definition" of a particular group is (rightly
>or wrongly) set by the actions of the majority of that group - and, of
>course, by the leadership that they select.
Ah, my favorite. Definition debates ;)
Here's the problem with accepting that concept: the majority (or at
least, it's most vocal spokesmen) "define" homosexuality and
crossdressing as illness and perversity. I've even seen some compare
it to alcoholism.
Many people fight the concept of the "tyranny of the majority" in the
political arena. I choose to fight it in all areas, including
linguistics.
>Now, someone who chooses to follow the teachings of the Man Christ as
>portrayed it the book called the bible no longer fits what is
>currently called a christian. The organized religions lay claim to
>that label and will not surrender it in the forseeable future.
Man laid claim to the moon about 30 or so years ago, yet has done
nothing with it. Claims have no intrinsic value.
Transgender activists fight the mainstream perception of them; why
should the followers of Christ not do the same? Why should we allow
the bigotted hate-mongerers to dictate that perception?
(With apologies, as I'd intended to drop the offtopic tangents of this
thread; I just have a weakness for definition debates.)
fofol
>Once again, I am not trying to convert anyone that doesnt want to be
>converted...I dont force my theology on anyone that doesnt come to me search
>for something.
No, you just go on and on and on and on babbling your proselytic unwisdom upon
anyone who doesn't want to hear it, because you are and will always be
off-topic in any TG/CD group.
Troll elsewhere and talk to yourself now, PLONK for good.
Jan
that it was therefore genetic in whole or part - that was your
construction. They are not the only possibilities.
The theory that homosexuality is caused by lack of a father or positive
male role model has not held up in research (just as the
'schizophrenogenic mother' proved to be nonexistent too).
I was not trying to prove 'the negative', but 'the opposite' - I was
illustrating the absurdity of trying to persuade people that they can
change things that are outside their control - do you choose who or what
will turn you on ? Decide that you like something your body hates (like
sea-food, say ?).
One of the groups that spouts your kind of hateful garbage is Exodus
International. Here is what http://www.affirmation.org/article73.htm
had to say about them:
Exodus International is a Christian referral
and resource network founded in 1976.
Its primary purpose is to "proclaim that
freedom from homosexuality is possible
through repentance and faith in Jesus
Christ as Savior and Lord." (Exodus
website) This "therapy" is based on the
out-moded idea that homosexuality is an
illness and the narrow belief of some
religions that homosexuality is a sin.
Exodus has never produced any success
rates. They can only estimate that about
half the men who complete their program
remain out of homosexuality after five
years.
In fact, the efficacy of a "cure" has been
called into question by many gays who
have gone through the Exodus program.
Perhaps the most famous "former
ex-gays" are Michael Bussee and Gary
Cooper, who were instrumental in
establishing Exodus International in 1976.
Ironically, the more they worked
together, the more they found
themselves falling in love. They realized
that the ministry was damaging more
people than it was helping. With many
people who had gone through the ministry
either attempting suicide or becoming
clinically depressed, Bussee and Cooper
realized they had to speak out about the
"ex-gay" ministries. "After dealing with
hundreds of people," Bussee concludes,
he and his lover hadn't "met one who
went from gay to straight. Even if you
manage to alter someone's sexual
behavior, you cannot change their true
sexual orientation."
Perhaps this meets your documentation request - it at least provides
enough material for you to search further if you really wanted to.
Dodge and weave all you like, the Bible can support anything YOU WANT it
to - it is your wilful construction of Biblical writings that has you
here today, not plainly stated, uncontradicted Biblical sayings. It is
just such psychological projection that allowed Christians to burn
others at the stake.
Why you have the arrogance to think you can succeed where thousands of
psychotherapists (most, presumably, Christian themselves) have admitted
defeat escapes me. Where are YOUR scientific studies, documentation of
your methods, your results ?
Lastly, a question - would it meet your goals if a person remained
exclusively attracted to others of the same sex, but married someone of
the opposite sex, and never had sex outside marriage? I bet it would,
and damn their happiness.
Jan
CrossdOVR wrote:
>
> << Subject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
> From: Jan <J...@nospam.com>
> Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 22:40:10 -0400
>
> <<There are several documented cases of gay people who have tried to
> follow the FC way, and entered into 'normal' marriages, only to
> eventually return to what turned out to be their true nature. >>
>
> If they are documented, please provide them. BTW you dont disprove something by
> only showing the negative...just because "several" reverted back doesnt mean
> that "several" dont leave happy content lives
>
> <<People don't choose heterosexuality either. Ask a heterosexual to give
> up their 'lifestyle' and become gay - do you really think that they
> could do it ? Even if offered the kingdom of heaven or a cool million ? >>
>
> Expose them to it...in early childhood, and take away their father....or have
> them lack a positive male role model...and you wont even need a cool million.
>
Frances A. Smith
Frances.
Glenn, thine Prophet of Chaos
wrote:
>On 08 Jun 1999 14:59:07 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>>Once again, I am not trying to convert anyone that doesnt want to be
>>converted...I dont force my theology on anyone that doesnt come to me search
>>for something.
>
>People like you disgust me... You don't care who you hurt or what kinds of
>lies you tell them, so long as you get the chance to foist your religious
>agendum onto them. You play on their desperation in hope of ensuring your
>own salvation come the judgement day. You victimize these people for your
>own selfish purposes. And I gotta tell you that is some pretty damned sick
>behaviour.
This one's a sheep.
He (assumption) believes that he is also ensuring their salvation.
Victimization is done unintentionally; much like the locals supporting
the NATO bombing, he thinks he's helping.
(Snip)
>DO NOT try to tell me it is otherwise... I've met a few people who have been
>through hell-holes like "Exodus International" (etc.) and they are not
>people. They are these pre-programmed little automatons. I mention
>crossdressing and they start spouting the bible. I mention personal
>freedoms and they spout off about God's will. The original person --the one
>who thought for themselves and had free will-- simply isn't in there. The
>healthy person they were is gone. All that remains is a whole bunch of
>pre-programmed responses, all of which are designed to maintain the DENIAL
>of their true natures... the natures that God gave them in the first place.
Check the name of the person you're responding to.
And re-read your own statements there. Fits the description, no?
CrossdOVR
it is unfair. If you would like to continue this discussion that is "off topic"
I would be glad to converse with you in private email. Thanks and God bless.
In article <375d4c23...@news.sprint.ca>, ldb...@sprint.ca (Laura Blake)
writes:
>On 08 Jun 1999 14:59:07 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>>Once again, I am not trying to convert anyone that doesnt want to be
>>converted...I dont force my theology on anyone that doesnt come to me search
>>for something.
>
>People like you disgust me... You don't care who you hurt or what kinds of
>lies you tell them, so long as you get the chance to foist your religious
>agendum onto them. You play on their desperation in hope of ensuring your
>own salvation come the judgement day. You victimize these people for your
>own selfish purposes. And I gotta tell you that is some pretty damned sick
>behaviour.
For someone that doesnt know me, thats a pretty strong statement..and I believe
it is unfair. If you would like to continue this discussion that is "off topic"
I would be glad to converse with you in private email. Thanks and God bless.
>
>Have you even considered WHY these people come to you?
>
>In today's world it is almost impossible for a transie to grow up with a
>positive self image. Everywhere they look they find analysis of their
>disorders, scandals, and religious proscriptions. Everything in their
>experience tells them they are not to be the way they are, that they are in
>for a lousy life, and they absorbe and believe these things. Most then
>become very desperate to be NOT-transgendered. They believe there is
>something wrong with them and they will do anything and everything they can
>to fix it. Some internalize this social transphobia to the point where they
>feel they have no choice but to make horrific changes to themselves... and
>these are the people who either go to idiots like you or have their bodies
>all hacked up in (so called) sex-changes. The entire and only purpose of
>their lives is to somehow escape being transgendered.
>
>When these deeply desperate people come to you what do they get? More of
>the same. They get told they are sinning and that the love of God or Jesus
>can save them from burning in hell. Now, not only are they sick and
>disgusting... they are doomed. Yep, that really helps them doesn't it?
>Take someone who is already desperate and confused and drive them the rest
>of the way into self-hatred and denial... good fucking plan, pally!
>
>Were these same people, instead, given the necessary tools to understand the
>workings of sex and gender. Were they educated to see the social pressures
>playing on them. Were they brought along a path that leads them out of
>self-hatred, I'm betting that most of them would end up like most of us
>here... perfectly happy transies, with no bigger issues than the price of
>pantyhose.
>
>But... You and your kind take them in the complete opposite direction. You
>play on their desperation for escape. You play on their self-loathing. You
>use their confusion and frustration to your own ends... You use these
>miserable people so that you can play "missionary". And you do it at the
>expense of their natural and innate selves. You oppress them into
>non-existence.
>
>DO NOT try to tell me it is otherwise... I've met a few people who have been
>through hell-holes like "Exodus International" (etc.) and they are not
>people. They are these pre-programmed little automatons. I mention
>crossdressing and they start spouting the bible. I mention personal
>freedoms and they spout off about God's will. The original person --the one
>who thought for themselves and had free will-- simply isn't in there. The
>healthy person they were is gone. All that remains is a whole bunch of
>pre-programmed responses, all of which are designed to maintain the DENIAL
>of their true natures... the natures that God gave them in the first place.
>
>You are not a Christian... you are a bigot who uses the bible to push your
>own hateful agendum... As bad a blight on this community as I can imagine.
>
>-----
>Laura Blake
>
>You can lead a horse to water,
>but a pencil must be lead.
>-----
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!newstf02.news.aol.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!howland.erols.net!newsfe
ed.cwix.com!207.136.66.98!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!east
1.newsfeed.sprint-canada.net!HME1-2.newsfeed.sprint.ca!newscontent-02.spri
nt.ca.POSTED!not-for-mail
>From: ldb...@sprint.ca (Laura Blake)
>Newsgroups: alt.fashion.crossdressing
>Subject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
>Reply-To: ldb...@sprint.ca
>Message-ID: <375d4c23...@news.sprint.ca>
>References: <375bf80...@news.sprint.ca>
><19990608105908...@ngol06.aol.com>
>X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.11/32.235
>Lines: 67
>Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 17:04:44 GMT
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.103.44.152
>X-Complaints-To: ab...@sprint.ca
>X-Trace: newscontent-02.sprint.ca 928861548 209.103.44.152 (Tue, 08 Jun 1999
>13:05:48 EDT)
>NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 13:05:48 EDT
>Organization: Sprint Canada Inc.
>
>
Jack
>
> There's an article about homosexuality in animals other than humans
Jack
sure that I am understanding clearly).
Some say you can stop being gay with the help of Jesus Christ, especially if
you don't like being gay (or a crossdresser, transsexual, etc.)
Others say that you cannot, even though they themselves have never
experienced it for themselves. Now, that sort of sounds like they are
quilty of negating someone else's form of expression, which is something
that they so noisily clamour about when it is done to them. They also say
that people don't understand where they are coming from because they have
never been there themselves.
COOL, MAKES ALL TO MUCH SENSE TO ME!
CrossdOVR
writes:
>
>
>>Some say you can stop being gay with the help of Jesus Christ, especially if
>>you don't like being gay (or a crossdresser, transsexual, etc.)
>
>Some people actually do it... for a while at least. The results of these
>programs are dismal at best. Most all their "clients" end up returning to
>the gay or trans life.
You state that as fact..your opinion should not automatically taken as fact.
So, if you are saying these programs are failures..then provide some proof. I
am not saying that the results are, as a percentage, high. The road less
traveled is called that for a reason. Many refuse to look inside themselves and
understand why we do the things we do.By you judging something by how many
conversions it produces does not in it self validate it. If the conversion was
100 percent..would you agree that it was valid then?
>
>
God bless,
Your bible thumping, Jesus freak,
Crossedovr
CrossdOVR
writes:
>On Thu, 10 Jun 1999 14:49:21 -0400, "Jack" <hiso...@sprintmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Human Beings are not animals.
>
>Yes, we are... We are a specific species in genus Mammal, first cousin of
>the primates.
>
>Just because we have a one-up on most other animals does not put us above or
>apart from the animal kingdom.
Boy how this thread has digressed..but you state evolution as fact..and that we
are the first cousin of primates. Yet there are no linkings of man to primates
in the fossil record. There is no direct link. If you believe in
Macroevolution....then please include examples of linking beings that take one
species to another. So if you claim a theory as true...at least provide some
proof of that theory. Man we are not surfing on the outside of this NG..we are
way off topic. Sorry that I am throwing us farther out.
God Bless.
Mimi CD TV
These discussions of religion and crossdressing should probably go to
alt.support.crossdressing. They have more to do with support than fashion,
don't you think?
--
Teddy Bear Hugs, Mimi CD TV (Mimi...@geocities.com)
Pretty please, with sugar on top, sponsor me in AIDS Ride 1999
(individuals are pledging $20-100 and organizations $350) I'm
half way there to $1900! SEND PLEDGES TO ME BY
DAY ZERO -- JUNE 23, 1999!!! For cash/check/money order:
http://www.geocities.com/FashionAvenue/Salon/3500/
My rider # is 740W. Sorry, but you may no longer
chaaaaaaaarge it!
http://www.geocities.com/FashionAvenue/Salon/3500
CrossdOVR <cros...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990610221034...@ngol03.aol.com...
> In article <3760361...@news.sprint.ca>, ldb...@sprint.ca (Laura
Blake)
Mimi CD TV
> Ever heard of "Lucy"? It's the oldest known human skeleton, and very much
> primate in spinal and cranial structure.
Everyone knows Lucy! Yes she was australopithicene, if I recall. One of
those Oldivei (sp?) Gorge girls, of was she from the Valley? I believe her
favorite fashion statement was an animal skin cover-up. I favor the cheetah
pattern myself. I'm sure she accessorized with perhaps a tiger claw
necklace. Whether it was genuine Saber Tooth or faux is a matter of
opinion. She was no doubt in need of some hair and make-up help. Her nails
must've been in dreadful shape -- just screaming for a manicure and
pedicure! And the poor dear probably had never experienced a bubble bath!!
Oh pushaw.
CrossdOVR
writes:
>Subject: Re: HOMOSEXUALITY--IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE EX-GAY?
>From: ldb...@sprint.ca (Laura Blake)
>Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 03:13:35 GMT
>
>On 11 Jun 1999 02:10:35 GMT, cros...@aol.com (CrossdOVR) wrote:
>>Boy how this thread has digressed..
>
>Well... I do have to keep in mind that I am talking to idiots.
You can talk about hatred...and judgementalism...and bigotry, but you practice
your own form of it. Expect tolerance from others..but do you practice it in
your posts?
CrossdOVR
<kn...@nospam.erols.com> writes:
>Dear T*girl anthropologists,
>> Ever heard of "Lucy"? It's the oldest known human skeleton, and very much
>> primate in spinal and cranial structure.
>Everyone knows Lucy! Yes she was australopithicene, if I recall. One of
>those Oldivei (sp?) Gorge girls, of was she from the Valley? I believe her
>favorite fashion statement was an animal skin cover-up. I favor the cheetah
>pattern myself. I'm sure she accessorized with perhaps a tiger claw
>necklace. Whether it was genuine Saber Tooth or faux is a matter of
>opinion. She was no doubt in need of some hair and make-up help. Her nails
>must've been in dreadful shape -- just screaming for a manicure and
>pedicure! And the poor dear probably had never experienced a bubble bath!!
>Oh pushaw.
http://www.wsu.edu:8001/vwsu/gened/learn-modules/top_longfor/timeline/afri
canus/africanus-b.html
Australopithicus africanus is both larger in body size and brain than the
earlier A. afarensis, but the configuration of its brain is still more ape-like
than human; thus it is classified as an ape.
This is not a transitional form. And so this will be on topic...Lucy...ever
hear of an epiapelady....how about some Nair...well..maybe a couple of gallons.
>
>
Mimi CD TV
> CrossdOVR wrote in message:
> >"Mimi CD TV" writes:
>
> >Dear T*girl anthropologists,
> >> Ever heard of "Lucy"? It's the oldest known human skeleton,
and very much
> >> primate in spinal and cranial structure.
> >Everyone knows Lucy! Yes she was australopithicene, if I
recall. One of
> >those Oldivei (sp?) Gorge girls, of was she from the Valley? I
believe her
> >favorite fashion statement was an animal skin cover-up. I
favor the cheetah
> >pattern myself. I'm sure she accessorized with perhaps a tiger
claw
> >necklace. Whether it was genuine Saber Tooth or faux is a
matter of
> >opinion. She was no doubt in need of some hair and make-up
help. Her nails
> >must've been in dreadful shape -- just screaming for a manicure
and
> >pedicure! And the poor dear probably had never experienced a
bubble bath!!
> >Oh pushaw.
>
>
http://www.wsu.edu:8001/vwsu/gened/learn-modules/top_longfor/timel
ine/africanus/africanus-b.html
> *snip*...Lucy...ever
> hear of an epi-ape-lady....
Oh, I love it!! hahahahaahhehehehehehe That's a good one!
> how about some Nair...well..maybe a couple of gallons.
How much wax do you think it would take to remove her unsightly
body hair??
NoelleRose
<kn...@nospam.erols.com> writes:
>These discussions of religion and crossdressing should probably go to
>alt.support.crossdressing. They have more to do with support than fashion,
>don't you think?
Well, I have to admit that I've been skipping most of the posts in this thread
but the little I have read hasn't had *ANYTHING* to do with crossdressing so
it's off-topic there, too. I've just read a few posts where Laura is arguing
with some idiot about evolution. Why bother, Laura? He's too closed-minded to
learn.
Hugs,
Noelle