I'm getting married!

[Oxyaena]

The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
see, and we're both queer transwomen.

[erik simpson]

Congratulations! WIshing you both a lifetime of happiness.

[Zen Cycle]

Congrats and best wishes! I've been told any type of venue that will host a wedding is nearly possible to secure for the foreseeable future because the pandemic pushed everything off for a year. So, you must be looking at someplace out of the ordinary?

[Burkhard]

brilliant, congratulations!

[jillery]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 09:18:13 -0500, Oxyaena <oxy...@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

>The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
>engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
>see, and we're both queer transwomen.

I'll forego the snarky low-hanging fruit, and simply wish the best for
you and your significant other.

--
You're entitled to your own opinions.
You're not entitled to your own facts.

[Joe Cummings]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 09:18:13 -0500, Oxyaena <oxy...@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

>The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
>engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
>see, and we're both queer transwomen.

Congrats!

June's a good month; I'll be celebrating my 91st June, and I'll take
a libation in your honour on the 6th.

Joe Cummings

[André G. Isaak]

Congratulations! All the best.

André

--
To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail
service.

[Glenn]

Meaningless drivel. Thank you for the confirmation.

[erik simpson]

Very classy. And quite confirmatory as well.

[Zen Cycle]

+1

[Mark Isaak]

Congratulations!


--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) curioustaxonomy (dot) net
"If one day, my words are against science, choose science."
- Mustafa Kemal Ataturk

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 09:18:13 -0500, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Oxyaena
<oxy...@invalid.invalid>:

>The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
>engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
>see, and we're both queer transwomen.

Congrats, and have a great life!
--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

[Glenn]

That sure as hell is, Eric.

[Martin Harran]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 09:18:13 -0500, Oxyaena <oxy...@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

>The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
>engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
>see, and we're both queer transwomen.

Best wishes to both of you. I hope this brings nothing but happiness
and contentment into your lives, here's an old irish Wedding Blessing
for you:

May the wind be always at your back, may the warm rays of sun fall
upon your home...

May love and laughter light your days, and warm your heart and home...

May your mornings bring joy and your evenings bring peace...

Love, life and happiness, may your troubles be few and your blessings
many.

[RonO]

Good luck and have a prosperous union.

Ron Okimoto

[Kalkidas]

Capitulations. Be fruitless and divide.

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 21:52:11 +0000, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Martin Harran
<martin...@gmail.com>:

And don't forget "And may you arrive in Heaven an hour
before the devil knows you're dead". ;-)

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:44:55 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Kalkidas <e...@joes.pub>:

Ooh, look! It's Kalki the Unshriven! Continue to have a
joyless and unproductive life, Kalki!

[*Hemidactylus*]

Could we expect anything different from a knuckle dragging goon such as
Glenn?

[*Hemidactylus*]

Congrats but remember that marriage, at least in the incapable hands of
obnoxious cis-hetero traditionalists, is the leading cause of divorce.

[Glenn]

Sure. Those words were Oxy's own, to Ron Dean in another thread.
Do you suppose I would congratulate you on an engagement either? Guess I'd be a goon not to, eh.
Hopefully, Oxy is "marrying" another knuckle dragging goon just like him.

[Glenn]

On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 9:55:47 PM UTC-7, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:44:55 -0700, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Kalkidas <e...@joes.pub>:
> >On 3/11/2021 7:18 AM, Oxyaena wrote:
> >> The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
> >> engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
> >> see, and we're both queer transwomen.
> >>
> >
> >Capitulations. Be fruitless and divide.
> Ooh, look! It's Kalki the Unshriven! Continue to have a
> joyless and unproductive life, Kalki!
> --

There's the spirit!

[Joe Cummings]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 21:14:12 -0800 (PST), Glenn

<glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 10:05:47 PM UTC-7, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>> erik simpson <eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-8, glenn...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 7:20:47 AM UTC-7, Oxyaena wrote:
>> >>> The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
>> >>> engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
>> >>> see, and we're both queer transwomen.
>>
>> >> Meaningless drivel. Thank you for the confirmation.
>> >
>> > Very classy. And quite confirmatory as well.
>> >
>> Could we expect anything different from a knuckle dragging goon such as
>> Glenn?
>
>Sure. Those words were Oxy's own, to Ron Dean in another thread.
>Do you suppose I would congratulate you on an engagement either? Guess I'd be a goon not to, eh.
>Hopefully, Oxy is "marrying" another knuckle dragging goon just like him.

I suppose this is what passes for Christian charity in Glenn's mind.
Glenn, try not to give your religious beliefs a bad name.


Have evangelical fun,

Joe Cummings

[Zen Cycle]

As far as his fellow christo-fascists go, he's pretty typical.

[Oxyaena]

Glenn is both homophobic and transphobic at the same time. Is anyone
surprised?

[Glenn]

I doubt anyone is surprised that you aren't a female, or a woman.
Or that women wear different clothes than men.
https://dictionary.apa.org/sexual-deviance

But no, I have no fear of you, and my criticism is neither irrational nor apathetic. It is your character that I criticize the most, but I don't criticize physical, mental and emotional disabilities. I do not, however, consider sexual deviance to be a disability. Those who would congratulate you on your alleged and even perhaps fabricated engagement do you no favors, and do society no favors.

[Martin Harran]

On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 10:02:52 -0500, Oxyaena <oxy...@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

Which is a well-recognised symptom of someone having fears or doubts
about their own sexuality.

> Is anyone
>surprised?

[Glenn]

Nah, it is a popular claim by deviants about normal people.

So where have I ever expressed fear or doubt about my own sexuality, deary?

[Glenn]

Perhaps members of the Catholic Church have doubts about their own sexuality, like you.

"The Catholic Church considers sexual activity between members of the same sex to be a sin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_homosexuality#Dissent_from_church_teaching

[Robert Carnegie]

Let's remember who this is about. Not him.
Something that he seems to have misunderstood.

And of course, "Congratulations", "I give it a year",
and "You can do better", as applicable :-)

[Glenn]

On Friday, March 12, 2021 at 5:00:48 PM UTC-7, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Friday, 12 March 2021 at 05:05:47 UTC, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> > erik simpson <eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-8, glenn...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >> On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 7:20:47 AM UTC-7, Oxyaena wrote:
> > >>> The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
> > >>> engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
> > >>> see, and we're both queer transwomen.
> > >> Meaningless drivel. Thank you for the confirmation.
> > >
> > > Very classy. And quite confirmatory as well.
> > >
> > Could we expect anything different from a knuckle dragging goon such as
> > Glenn?
> Let's remember who this is about. Not him.
> Something that he seems to have misunderstood.
>

You do seem to understand that this is a concern of mine and many others.
Marriage is a social institution bound by laws and rules, and affects others.
So is sexual behavior, among many other behaviors.
And everyone should be concerned with the well being, physical and mental health of others.
I suspect you "misunderstand" all of that.

[Joe Cummings]

On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 15:49:32 -0800 (PST), Glenn

For what it's worth, Pope Francis has said kind words about homosexual
partnerships. I'm sorry I can't give you a source apart from the fact
that he was talking to reporters on an aircraft.

Glenn, of course justifies this by appealing to (his) AUTHORITY.

This isn'tthe place to talk about religion, but I won't walk away from
discussing the interpretation of Christian doctrine., and I note that
so far Glenn has refused to state his own beliefs, although they leak
out in many of his rants such as this one.

Have exegetic fun,

Joe Cummings.

[Glenn]

It's worth less than nothing, quite likely deceptive.
"Pope Francis has never officially pronounced support for gay civil unions."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Francis_and_homosexuality#Civil_unions

>
> Glenn, of course justifies this by appealing to (his) AUTHORITY.

Whether you refer to the Pope or me, I'm not Catholic. And that has "leaked out" in many of my "rants".
Homosexuality is rampant in the Catholic Church, which only reinforces my accusation, in response to Harran's suggestive comment about my having fear or doubt about my own sexuality, that he should look to himself and his Church as an example of a "well-recognised symptom of someone having fears or doubts about their own sexuality."

>
> This isn'tthe place to talk about religion, but I won't walk away from
> discussing the interpretation of Christian doctrine.,

Of course this is the place to talk about religion. It's a favorite pastime of evolutionists.
But I don't see you rushing to the front of the line to discuss anything, least of all your own religious beliefs.

>and I note that

With crayon of course.

> so far Glenn has refused to state his own beliefs, although they leak
> out in many of his rants such as this one.

What religious beliefs have leaked out, Joey? And why should I be at your beck and call to explain my religious beliefs? I don't make claims or arguments based on my religious beliefs. It's your brains that have leaked out.
>
> Have exegetic fun,
>
You *are* funny, in a silly way.

[Martin Harran]

On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 15:49:32 -0800 (PST), Glenn

Based on your remarks about marriage, I assume you regard adultery as
sinful. Do you therefore think that people who engage in adultery
should be ostracised from society, treated as some sort of perverted
personality or even deprived of civil liberties?

[Martin Harran]

Pope Francis has demonstrated his love for and acceptance of LGBT
people on so many occasions that he was named 'Person of the Year
2013' by American LGBT magazine The Advocate. My personal favourite
quote from him is "When a person (who is gay) arrives before Jesus,
Jesus certainly will not say, 'Go away because you are homosexual.'"

Most of his remarks have been focused on homosexuals but his similar
attitude to transgeneder people is demonstrated in his handling of
Diego Neria Lejarraga, a 48-year-old transgender man, when the two met
at the Vatican at the Pope's invitation.
https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/report-pope-francis-meets-hugs-transgender-man

Unfortunately, the Catholic Church has its own share of hard-line
conservatives who share much in common with fundamentalists like
Glenn, including homophobia; for various reasons, those people hold
disproportionate power and wield disproportionate influence. Pope
Francis has taken them on but, as with all bureaucracies, it is a slow
war of attrition.

[Martin Harran]

On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 15:18:46 -0800 (PST), Glenn

Where did I claim you ever expressed such fear or doubts?

[Martin Harran]

On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 23:02:04 -0800 (PST), Glenn
<glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip for focues>

>Homosexuality is rampant in the Catholic Church,

Cite please

[Glenn]

I think you think you can ignore my questions but expect me to answer such leading questions as that.
I regard adultery to be harmful to society. Sin is a religious concept, and the Bible says that even thinking about committing adultery is a sin against God. I regard such behaviors as injurious to oneself and others.
Adultery should be discouraged. But since I have not advocated for anyone to be "ostracised from society, treated as some sort of perverted personality or even deprived of civil liberties", I'll just ask you whether you think adultery should be encouraged or accepted?

[Glenn]

You clearly have no problem with bearing false witness.

[Glenn]

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 1:25:47 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:

Deny it first.

[Glenn]

You accepted the claim above by replying "which is..." I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you have seen me express such fear and doubt. So I'll ask you again. Where did I claim you ever expressed such fear or doubts?

[Glenn]

The question should be, where have I ever expressed fear or doubt about my own sexuality, deary?

[Glenn]

On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 4:45:47 PM UTC-7, Kalkidas wrote:

> On 3/11/2021 7:18 AM, Oxyaena wrote:
> > The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
> > engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
> > see, and we're both queer transwomen.
> >

> Capitulations. Be fruitless and divide.

I can't recall when one friend has told another that they were getting married, and left it at that, without saying anymore or being asked any questions, but just "congratulations".
Here it boils down to "we're getting married because we're proud of being queer transwomen." - "Well, congratulations".
So much for the value of friendship.

[broger...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 9:20:47 AM UTC-5, Oxyaena wrote:
> The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
> engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
> see, and we're both queer transwomen.

Congratulations!

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 03:18:01 -0800 (PST), Glenn

Where above did I bear false witness?

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 03:15:10 -0800 (PST), Glenn

Your own words to Oxy above:

"I do not, however, consider sexual deviance to be a disability. Those
who would congratulate you on your alleged and even perhaps fabricated
engagement do you no favors, and do society no favors."

> I'll just ask you whether you think adultery should be encouraged or accepted?

No I don't think they should be either encouraged or accepted but
unlike you, I work on the principle of hating the sin but loving the
sinner

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 03:22:04 -0800 (PST), Glenn

No, I neither made nor accepted any claim about your sexuality, I
simply observed that the behaviour you exhibit here is often
*symptomatic* of someone having fears or doubts about their own
sexuality. I am in no position to make any judgement about the sexual
tendencies of someone whom I don't know and have never even met. Even
if you did have such doubts, I wouldn't expect you to express them
here anyway, not least because those whose homophobia iarises from
their own internal struggles are often in self-denial about those very
struggles.

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 03:23:28 -0800 (PST), Glenn

<glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 1:25:47 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 23:02:04 -0800 (PST), Glenn
>> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip for focues>
>> >Homosexuality is rampant in the Catholic Church,
>> Cite please
>Deny it first.

I have no particular knowledge of what the frequency of homosexuality
in the Catholic Church but nothing I have read or directly experienced
suggests that it is *rampant*. Anyway, you are around here long enough
to know how it works - you are the one making the claim, it's up to
you to back it up. If you can't, then I'll just have to put it down to
another example of you making up shit about people based on nothing
but your dislike of them.

[Martin Harran]

Oxy said no such thing. Do you seriously think people don't see
through that sort of deliberate lie or the hypocrisy of you accusing
others of being dishonest?

[Robert Carnegie]

On Saturday, 13 March 2021 at 00:25:47 UTC, glenn...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, March 12, 2021 at 5:00:48 PM UTC-7, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> > On Friday, 12 March 2021 at 05:05:47 UTC, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> > > erik simpson <eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-8, glenn...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >> On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 7:20:47 AM UTC-7, Oxyaena wrote:
> > > >>> The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
> > > >>> engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
> > > >>> see, and we're both queer transwomen.
> > > >> Meaningless drivel. Thank you for the confirmation.
> > > >
> > > > Very classy. And quite confirmatory as well.
> > > >
> > > Could we expect anything different from a knuckle dragging goon such as
> > > Glenn?
> > Let's remember who this is about. Not him.
> > Something that he seems to have misunderstood.
> >
> You do seem to understand that this is a concern of mine
> and many others.

What is "a concern" of yours is not a concern of mine
or anyone else here. I repeat: it is not about you.

As for crossdressing: various clothing items have been,
in different places and times, exclusive to men /and/
exclusive to women. Trousers. High heels. Fancy wigs.
In most pictures of Jesus, he's wearing a dress.

[Bob Casanova]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:58:45 +0000, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Martin Harran
<martin...@gmail.com>:

Looking over the last few weeks, I'm pretty well convinced
that if Glenn didn't exist the traffic on t.o would be damn
close to zero. He seems to be living rent-free in quite a
few heads...
--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

[Joe Cummings]

On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 23:02:04 -0800 (PST), Glenn

Let me remark, as an obiter dictum, that vehement denial of sexual
deviancy is often a sign of hidden deviancy.
I'm not aware of Glenn's proclivities, deviant or not, so we can move
into a discussion of the issues as hey affect us.

Queer bashing is a "pastime" that appeals to people of a certain
limited intelligence andexperience. How better to show your
masculinity than kicking t he shit out of some poor, harmless bugger?

A little excursus here:

In Russia and other postcommunist countries it's very important not to
be in any way deviant, and I'm reminded of a song about Stenka Razin,
a Volga pirate who brought his bride on board his ship. The crew dn't
like the amount of time Razin passed with her, and when they
complained, he threw her into the river to drown.

This kind of attitude persists in Russia, and other ountries today and
finds expression in the claim that there are no sexual deviants in
Russia , or Uzbekistan, or where ever.
And we come back to our poor benighted Glenn, who shares a similar
anti-deviant attitude. Of course, I don't accuse him of queer bashing,
but he certainly is hostile to the whole idea of sexual deviancy.

He should take a leaaf from the book of Francis and be tolerant.

I'll further develop my thoughts later.

Have fun,

Joe Cummings

[*Hemidactylus*]

I’ve evicted the squatter.

[erik simpson]

I doubt further thinking on l'affaire Glenn is going annywhere interesting, His whole
message, if you could call it that, is simply anti-everybody, and anti-anything anyone
suggests. There's nothing to see here.

[Glenn]

Associating me with those you consider fundamentalists.
You knew that, and asking where you bore false witness is just another form of bearing false witness.

[Glenn]

You aren't even convincing yourself of that. "Which *is*'" is an acceptance of the accusation.

>I am in no position to make any judgement about the sexual
> tendencies of someone whom I don't know and have never even met.

Actually you do and just did: "which is a well-recognised symptom".
You've been making claims and judging me since you came to t.o.
And you have to live with your lies, not me.

>Even
> if you did have such doubts, I wouldn't expect you to express them
> here anyway, not least because those whose homophobia iarises from
> their own internal struggles are often in self-denial about those very
> struggles.

Now how do you know that?

> > I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you have seen me express such fear and doubt. So I'll ask you again. Where did I claim you ever expressed such fear or doubts?

I've already told you, and you know yourself. You developed that preconceived notion long ago.

[Glenn]

You're looking in the mirror, and you have no understanding of my emotional state. But that doesn't stop you from making claims you don't support, but I doubt you put yourself down to another example of making shit up based on nothing but your dislike of them.
"Rampant" is somewhat of a subjective term, but essentially means in this case something officially discouraged but flourishing and spreading unchecked. And "Catholic Church" refers to the hierarchy of the clergy, and excludes the sheep.

"Estimating numbers"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_clergy_in_the_Catholic_Church#Estimating_numbers

Go play with yourself.

[Glenn]

Wow, another leading question, just begging to be answered.

It is exactly what he is "saying". He and assumedly his partner are making a statement, and a political one at that. That is not usually a reason for getting married, nor a good sign of a chance at a lasting relationship.

[Glenn]

Clearly.

[Glenn]

You *are* accusing me of "queer bashing", and also of being "hostile" to sexual deviancy. Perhaps you should take a leaf from Francis, whatever that means, if there exists within an explanation of tolerance.
You'll interpret that as a person hostile to sexual deviancy wishing to be tolerated.

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:38:08 -0800 (PST), Glenn

<glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 6:50:47 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 03:23:28 -0800 (PST), Glenn
>> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 1:25:47 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 23:02:04 -0800 (PST), Glenn
>> >> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> <snip for focues>
>> >> >Homosexuality is rampant in the Catholic Church,
>> >> Cite please
>> >Deny it first.
>> I have no particular knowledge of what the frequency of homosexuality
>> in the Catholic Church but nothing I have read or directly experienced
>> suggests that it is *rampant*. Anyway, you are around here long enough
>> to know how it works - you are the one making the claim, it's up to
>> you to back it up. If you can't, then I'll just have to put it down to
>> another example of you making up shit about people based on nothing
>> but your dislike of them.
>
>You're looking in the mirror, and you have no understanding of my emotional state. But that doesn't stop you from making claims you don't support, but I doubt you put yourself down to another example of making shit up based on nothing but your dislike of them.
>"Rampant" is somewhat of a subjective term, but essentially means in this case something officially discouraged but flourishing and spreading unchecked. And "Catholic Church" refers to the hierarchy of the clergy, and excludes the sheep.
>

Wow, that's some backtracking even for you.

>"Estimating numbers"
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_clergy_in_the_Catholic_Church#Estimating_numbers

Ah, a website that admits to the difficulty in quantifying numbers and
gives a range of estimates varying from 9% to 50% - is that really the
best you can produce?

>
>Go play with yourself.

As opposed to mentally jerking off in public like you?

[Martin Harran]

Glenn take a leaf from the book of Francis - are you serious? I
wouldn't like to place bets on whom he hates more, the Pope or
homosexuals.

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:15:57 -0800 (PST), Glenn

As you are curiously reluctant to give any direct indication of your
religious beliefs, one can only judge them from your behaviour and the
things you say which are in line with those of people with
fundamentalist beliefs (note the lower case 'f' used in both my
original post and in this one).

Are you now stating that your beliefs are not fundamentalist?

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:26:56 -0800 (PST), Glenn

It seems to me that you are the master judger around here.

>And you have to live with your lies, not me.
>
>>Even
>> if you did have such doubts, I wouldn't expect you to express them
>> here anyway, not least because those whose homophobia iarises from
>> their own internal struggles are often in self-denial about those very
>> struggles.
>
>Now how do you know that?

Err, I thought you knew how to use Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia#Internalized_homophobia

[Glenn]

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 3:00:47 PM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:38:08 -0800 (PST), Glenn
> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 6:50:47 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> >> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 03:23:28 -0800 (PST), Glenn
> >> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 1:25:47 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> >> >> On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 23:02:04 -0800 (PST), Glenn
> >> >> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> <snip for focues>
> >> >> >Homosexuality is rampant in the Catholic Church,
> >> >> Cite please
> >> >Deny it first.
> >> I have no particular knowledge of what the frequency of homosexuality
> >> in the Catholic Church but nothing I have read or directly experienced
> >> suggests that it is *rampant*. Anyway, you are around here long enough
> >> to know how it works - you are the one making the claim, it's up to
> >> you to back it up. If you can't, then I'll just have to put it down to
> >> another example of you making up shit about people based on nothing
> >> but your dislike of them.
> >
> >You're looking in the mirror, and you have no understanding of my emotional state. But that doesn't stop you from making claims you don't support, but I doubt you put yourself down to another example of making shit up based on nothing but your dislike of them.
> >"Rampant" is somewhat of a subjective term, but essentially means in this case something officially discouraged but flourishing and spreading unchecked. And "Catholic Church" refers to the hierarchy of the clergy, and excludes the sheep.
> >
> Wow, that's some backtracking even for you.

There is no backtracking, you're just reacting emotionally and negatively to what you asked for.

>
> >"Estimating numbers"
> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_clergy_in_the_Catholic_Church#Estimating_numbers
>
> Ah, a website that admits to the difficulty in quantifying numbers and
> gives a range of estimates varying from 9% to 50% - is that really the
> best you can produce?

Maybe not, but more than sufficient, when the whole section is read.
Would you be satisfied to find that 30% of the clergy are homosexuals?

>
> >
> >Go play with yourself.
>
> As opposed to mentally jerking off in public like you?

No, as opposed to you trying to play with me. Put that in your context.

[Glenn]

Now you're judging that I "hate". Boy, can you imagine what your reaction would be were I to accuse you of that?
I don't have to imagine.

[Glenn]

And with a specific expression of fundamentalism, at that. You just also accuse me of homophobia, as well as "holding disproportionate power and wield disproportionate influence".
And you have repeatedly demonstrated a disregard for needing a reason to support such claims or other such suggestive language.

> >You knew that, and asking where you bore false witness is just another form of bearing false witness.
> As you are curiously reluctant to give any direct indication of your
> religious beliefs,

Do you or do you not believe in the existence of Satan?

>one can only judge them from your behaviour and the
> things you say which are in line with those of people with
> fundamentalist beliefs (note the lower case 'f' used in both my
> original post and in this one).

So lacking evidence, you judge. You aren't judging my behavior, you're judging on your assumptions based on preconceived notions.

>
> Are you now stating that your beliefs are not fundamentalist?

No, I'm not stating that above. But I've said many times before that I am not a fundamentalist of any flavor. However, that never makes any difference to anyone here, including you. You're only interested in getting any response as an excuse to further criticize and dehumanize.

[Glenn]

Excuse me if I don't believe what you claim "seems to be".
But you *have* been making claims and judging me since you came to t.o.

> >And you have to live with your lies, not me.
> >
> >>Even
> >> if you did have such doubts, I wouldn't expect you to express them
> >> here anyway, not least because those whose homophobia iarises from
> >> their own internal struggles are often in self-denial about those very
> >> struggles.
> >
> >Now how do you know that?
> Err, I thought you knew how to use Wikipedia.

Are you Wikipedia? And how does Wiki know I'm homophobic?

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 14:24:40 -0800 (PST), Glenn

You have backtracked on "rampant", admitting it is a subjective term;
you have given nothing to support that it is either *flourishing* or
*spreading unchecked* - your own definition; you have reduced your
claims about *the Catholic Church* to the clergy who are less than
0.04% of the membership of the Church. Yes, that is some backtracking
even for you.

>>

>> >"Estimating numbers"
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_clergy_in_the_Catholic_Church#Estimating_numbers
>>
>> Ah, a website that admits to the difficulty in quantifying numbers and
>> gives a range of estimates varying from 9% to 50% - is that really the
>> best you can produce?
>
>Maybe not, but more than sufficient, when the whole section is read.
>Would you be satisfied to find that 30% of the clergy are homosexuals?

What on earth would I find *satisfying* about it?

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 14:29:24 -0800 (PST), Glenn

When you describe someone's upcoming marriage as "meaningless drivel"
and express the hope that they are marrying another "another knuckle
dragging goon just like him", I regard that as hate. I suspect most
decent minded people would agree with me.

>Boy, can you imagine what your reaction would be were I to accuse you of that?
>I don't have to imagine.

You don't have to imagine because you know I would ask you to back it
up and you wouldn't be able to.

[Glenn]

So Wiki tells you that homophobics are "often in denial".
The Wiki article below includes just two incidences of the word "denial":

"This can include extreme repression and denial....' 'wiki provides no source and is not a quote from a source.

"Various psychoanalytic theories explain homophobia as a threat to an individual's own same-sex impulses, whether those impulses are imminent or merely hypothetical. This threat causes repression, denial or reaction formation." - this allegedly from a 1977 book, not available to read and provides no direct quotes.

Where is the "often", Martin?

And where is your refutation of my claim that the claim of "most' or 'often" comes from deviants (homosexuals and transexuals)?

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 14:57:40 -0800 (PST), Glenn

Do you never get tired of posting meaningless drivel?

[*Hemidactylus*]

I recall vaguely when something similar came up here almost two decades ago
and someone used the trope that homophobic people may be secretly gay,
curious, or in the closet an actual gay person who was a regular here
pointed out that gay people might take offense to such a rhetorical move.
It insinuates that a person is actually gay and toxic towards others as a
result and it’s kinda negatively connoted and not considered a helpful
move.

Not quite the same as someone saying homosexuality is rampant in the
Catholic Church, but that too is a negative connotation in a different way
in that it makes being LGBT to be a bad thing hence an insult towards
Catholics. If Catholic priests happened to have more gays in their ranks
compared to the general population...so what?

[*Hemidactylus*]

Martin Harran <martin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
[snip]

>
> When you describe someone's upcoming marriage as "meaningless drivel"
> and express the hope that they are marrying another "another knuckle
> dragging goon just like him", I regard that as hate. I suspect most
> decent minded people would agree with me.
>

I think there’s something to be said for refraining from mud wrestling pigs
as it benefits neither you nor third party onlookers and Glenn is probably
the only one enjoying it.

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 14:49:05 -0800 (PST), Glenn

I didn't accuse you of holding disproportionate power and wield
disproportionate influence, particularly when that power and influence
referred to is clearly within the Catholic Church. Apparently
punctuation is not a strong point with you, the role of semi-colons in
splitting two statements seems to elude you.

>And you have repeatedly demonstrated a disregard for needing a reason to support such claims or other such suggestive language.
>
>> >You knew that, and asking where you bore false witness is just another form of bearing false witness.
>> As you are curiously reluctant to give any direct indication of your
>> religious beliefs,
>
>Do you or do you not believe in the existence of Satan?

Unlike you, I have no hesitation in expressing my religious beliefs so
yes, I do believe in Satan or the devil, whichever nomenclature you
wish to use, which shows the total nonsense of your claim that I
don't .

>
>>one can only judge them from your behaviour and the
>> things you say which are in line with those of people with
>> fundamentalist beliefs (note the lower case 'f' used in both my
>> original post and in this one).
>
>So lacking evidence, you judge. You aren't judging my behavior, you're judging on your assumptions based on preconceived notions.

An awful lot of people around here must have the same preconceived
notions as most here draw the same conclusions from your behaviour as
I do.

>>
>> Are you now stating that your beliefs are not fundamentalist?
>
>No, I'm not stating that above. But I've said many times before that I am not a fundamentalist of any flavor.

Funny how I have never seen any of those "many times."

>However, that never makes any difference to anyone here, including you. You're only interested in getting any response as an excuse to further criticize and dehumanize.

I would actually be more interested in having a serious discussion
about your views but time and time again you show your inability or
reluctance to do so (I'm never quite sure which of those it is).

[Glenn]

I didn't "admit" it was anything other than being somewhat of a subjective term.

> you have given nothing to support that it is either *flourishing* or
> *spreading unchecked* -

Oh yes I have. You're the one in denial here. Officially the Church looks with disfavor on homosexuality.
But homosexuality exists within the clergy in greater percentage than the general public.
And the Church has done little or nothing to check that.

>your own definition; you have reduced your
> claims about *the Catholic Church* to the clergy who are less than
> 0.04% of the membership of the Church. Yes, that is some backtracking
> even for you.

I didn't produce that percentage, and you don't, and can't support it - by your own admissions.
But hear this. Even within a small minority, a behavior can be discouraged but flourishing and spreading unchecked. I never made any claims about homosexuality being in the majority.

Honesty is not your best policy, is it, top hat.

>
> >>
> >> >"Estimating numbers"
> >> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_clergy_in_the_Catholic_Church#Estimating_numbers
> >>
> >> Ah, a website that admits to the difficulty in quantifying numbers and
> >> gives a range of estimates varying from 9% to 50% - is that really the
> >> best you can produce?
> >
> >Maybe not, but more than sufficient, when the whole section is read.
> >Would you be satisfied to find that 30% of the clergy are homosexuals?
> What on earth would I find *satisfying* about it?

Scientifically, logically, rationally? 30% is in the middle of 9 and 50.

[Glenn]

I haven't tired yet of being entertained by such responses as "Er, I thought you knew how to use Wikipedia" to "How do you know that".

[Glenn]

Good question. But taking offense of facts being reported is not cause to regard the reporter as being offensive, or secretly homophobic.

[Glenn]

You certainly enjoy referring to me as a mud wrestling pig.

[Martin Harran]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:44:18 -0800 (PST), Glenn

<glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 7:00:48 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 03:41:53 -0800 (PST), Glenn
>> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 4:45:47 PM UTC-7, Kalkidas wrote:
>> >> On 3/11/2021 7:18 AM, Oxyaena wrote:
>> >> > The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
>> >> > engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
>> >> > see, and we're both queer transwomen.
>> >> >
>> >> Capitulations. Be fruitless and divide.
>> >
>> >I can't recall when one friend has told another that they were getting married, and left it at that, without saying anymore or being asked any questions, but just "congratulations".
>> >Here it boils down to "we're getting married because we're proud of being queer transwomen." -
>> Oxy said no such thing. Do you seriously think people don't see
>> through that sort of deliberate lie or the hypocrisy of you accusing
>> others of being dishonest?
>
>Wow, another leading question, just begging to be answered.
>
>It is exactly what he is "saying".

No it isn't; her reference to them being pride and being queer
transwomen was clearly in reference to selecting the date of the
wedding (pride month), not the reason for getting married. Yet again,
your lack of comprehension lets you down or maybe you are seeing what
you want to see.

Also, please note that when you paraphrase or summarise what you think
is the essence of what someone has said, you should not put it in
quotation marks which suggest that that you are quoting the person's
actual words. I would cut the tripe out of a first year undergraduate
for doing that.

[*Hemidactylus*]

Or it may have been instead that such a move is more or less calling the
interlocutor gay which does its real work by implying being gay is the
insult traded. On the face one might think they are making an important
point but not realizing the implicit stigma of being gay (at least
historically) even if only from the POV of the interlocutor. Just pointing
out that insinuating someone is actually gay in such a manner may not be
the right rhetorical move to make.

[Glenn]

Except that you claim I share much in common, "including homophobia; for various reasons..."

>Apparently
> punctuation is not a strong point with you, the role of semi-colons in
> splitting two statements seems to elude you.

Curious. And how does same semi-colon differentiate "like Glenn" from "those people"?

> >And you have repeatedly demonstrated a disregard for needing a reason to support such claims or other such suggestive language.
> >
> >> >You knew that, and asking where you bore false witness is just another form of bearing false witness.
> >> As you are curiously reluctant to give any direct indication of your
> >> religious beliefs,
> >
> >Do you or do you not believe in the existence of Satan?
> Unlike you, I have no hesitation in expressing my religious beliefs so
> yes, I do believe in Satan or the devil, whichever nomenclature you
> wish to use, which shows the total nonsense of your claim that I
> don't .

Why is that unlike me? You did hesitate several times by not admitting you believe in a physical Satan.
Whether your claim now is true or not, is subjective, and my claim is not necessarily nonsense.
You have no qualms about accusing me of being homophobic, but I doubt you'd call that nonsense.

> >
> >>one can only judge them from your behaviour and the
> >> things you say which are in line with those of people with
> >> fundamentalist beliefs (note the lower case 'f' used in both my
> >> original post and in this one).
> >
> >So lacking evidence, you judge. You aren't judging my behavior, you're judging on your assumptions based on preconceived notions.
> An awful lot of people around here must have the same preconceived
> notions as most here draw the same conclusions from your behaviour as
> I do.

Oh I agree completely! Not to the "must" part, but to the preconceived notions.
I pretty much knew that anything I said with respect to the OP, with the exception of either saying nothing or only saying "congratulations' and other "good" things, would be seen as an unmistakable sign of homophobia.
Most of you are one minute moral wonders. And it doesn't stop there. Every white person is a racist. All Republicans are deplorables. And the movement is gaining steam and speed. In recent news, the whole Nevada State Democratic Party left when the Progressives took over. The person in charge of US military has ordered a filtering of all members with "naughty" thoughts, and apparently is helping to make defense of the US more efficient by providing such needed items as paternity flight suits. Perhaps that will catch someone's interest.

[Glenn]

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 4:55:47 PM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:44:18 -0800 (PST), Glenn
> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 7:00:48 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> >> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 03:41:53 -0800 (PST), Glenn
> >> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 4:45:47 PM UTC-7, Kalkidas wrote:
> >> >> On 3/11/2021 7:18 AM, Oxyaena wrote:
> >> >> > The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
> >> >> > engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
> >> >> > see, and we're both queer transwomen.
> >> >> >
> >> >> Capitulations. Be fruitless and divide.
> >> >
> >> >I can't recall when one friend has told another that they were getting married, and left it at that, without saying anymore or being asked any questions, but just "congratulations".
> >> >Here it boils down to "we're getting married because we're proud of being queer transwomen." -
> >> Oxy said no such thing. Do you seriously think people don't see
> >> through that sort of deliberate lie or the hypocrisy of you accusing
> >> others of being dishonest?
> >
> >Wow, another leading question, just begging to be answered.
> >
> >It is exactly what he is "saying".
> No it isn't; her reference to them being pride and being queer
> transwomen was clearly in reference to selecting the date of the
> wedding (pride month), not the reason for getting married. Yet again,
> your lack of comprehension lets you down or maybe you are seeing what
> you want to see.

Nope. You are technically correct, literally. But your interpretation is not. The reason for selecting the date was because it is *pride* month. You actually seem to suffer from a lack of comprehension here, and likely refuse to see what you do not want to see. Either way, you are "reading between the lines".

>
> Also, please note that when you paraphrase or summarise what you think
> is the essence of what someone has said, you should not put it in
> quotation marks which suggest that that you are quoting the person's
> actual words.

No, it suggests no such thing. "Boiling down" does not suggest "quoting from". Neither would "what he really means is" or any other such phrase.
You should go back to the basket weaving school from which you were hatched.

>I would cut the tripe out of a first year undergraduate
> for doing that.

Oh my, another brain surgeon. Oxy was a scientist when he was 20, before he was 19, and has been for over 10 years on the Internet. Perhaps you should ask him to marry you.

[Glenn]

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 4:45:48 PM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 14:49:05 -0800 (PST), Glenn

snip

> >So lacking evidence, you judge. You aren't judging my behavior, you're judging on your assumptions based on preconceived notions.
> An awful lot of people around here must have the same preconceived
> notions as most here draw the same conclusions from your behaviour as
> I do.
> >>
> >> Are you now stating that your beliefs are not fundamentalist?

Did you have to ask? Was something I said not literal?

> >
> >No, I'm not stating that above. But I've said many times before that I am not a fundamentalist of any flavor.

> Funny how I have never seen any of those "many times."

Why is that funny, Martin? Are you lying and making a joke? Or do you not believe me? Or do you not believe me now? Or all of the above?

> >However, that never makes any difference to anyone here, including you. You're only interested in getting any response as an excuse to further criticize and dehumanize.

> I would actually be more interested in having a serious discussion
> about your views but time and time again you show your inability or
> reluctance to do so (I'm never quite sure which of those it is).
> >

No you aren't. Your first post in this thread is proof of that, as is the last thing you say above. I doubt you even understand what a serious discussion is. You get defensive, aggressive and personal at the slightest perceived provocation. I'm much less tolerant of such behavior than I am of same sex unions.
Talk.origins isn't designed for, intended to be or regarded as a forum for serious discussion, and I seriously doubt that is what you are here for. Your intolerance of creationism and intelligent design is obvious, as is your defense of Catholicism and evolution, as well as your choice or identification of adversary. This isn't a perception based on preconceived notions, it is an obvious fact.
I suspect that you do not even want me to express my views, and that assumption is also based on what and how you argue.

[Robert Carnegie]

There only are twelve months anyway. And the reason
that they're getting married is that they want to be married
to each other. And you are not invited. Apparently you
still want to be Thomas Markle. My suggestion is shut up.

June is propitious for brides. And here are two of them.

[Bob Casanova]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 11:47:58 -0600, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by *Hemidactylus*
<ecph...@allspamis.invalid>:

>Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:58:45 +0000, the following appeared
>> in talk.origins, posted by Martin Harran
>> <martin...@gmail.com>:

>>
>>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 03:41:53 -0800 (PST), Glenn
>>> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 4:45:47 PM UTC-7, Kalkidas wrote:
>>>>> On 3/11/2021 7:18 AM, Oxyaena wrote:
>>>>>> The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
>>>>>> engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
>>>>>> see, and we're both queer transwomen.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Capitulations. Be fruitless and divide.
>>>>
>>>> I can't recall when one friend has told another that they were getting
>>>> married, and left it at that, without saying anymore or being asked any
>>>> questions, but just "congratulations".
>>>> Here it boils down to "we're getting married because we're proud of
>>>> being queer transwomen." -
>>>
>>> Oxy said no such thing. Do you seriously think people don't see
>>> through that sort of deliberate lie or the hypocrisy of you accusing
>>> others of being dishonest?
>>>

>>>> "Well, congratulations".
>>>> So much for the value of friendship.
>>

>> Looking over the last few weeks, I'm pretty well convinced
>> that if Glenn didn't exist the traffic on t.o would be damn
>> close to zero. He seems to be living rent-free in quite a
>> few heads...
>
>I致e evicted the squatter.

I did that a while back, and only let him out temporarily as
part of a killfile cleanup (it was getting rather large...).
--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

[Glenn]

If they are 'transwomen", they would not be "brides".

You don't even know, and really should know that you have no good reason to assume Oxy is telling the truth - about any of it.
Marriage should not be considered lightly. Wanting to get married is not a reason, nor should sexual gratification be a reason. Sex is not love, and can change as much as claims of love can also change. Marriage is a commitment that is hard for many to keep for even a short time. And marriage, as well as divorce, can and often does, have profound effects on peoples lives, including family and friends.

Oxy recently claimed he lives in poverty. Yet he appears well educated, and capable of intelligent discourse. If autistic, does not appear to affect him in any significant way that would impede his ability to support himself. But he's highly opinionated toward all kinds of alternative realities such as anarchism. He is intolerant of and reacts negatively and aggressively towards anyone who do not share his views.

Posters here for the most part tip toe around him, for the sole reason that he appears no longer to be creationist. I doubt they care about him for any more than that, and they do him no favor by going along with the gag and wishing him well. Nor are they likely to be wishing him well; more likely only presenting themselves as a "good' person to other evolutionists. Such "empathy" is seen here on a regular basis, with the treatment their adversaries have been and are regularly subjected to.

I care more about him than anyone else here. Those that really wish Oxy well should be concerned and at least express a willingness to advise or help with such an important decision, if not to provide actual advice and counsel.

My first post to Oxy in this thread was to bounce back at him what he said to one of his adversaries that he shows antipathy for. Certainly not conventional psychology, but perhaps the only one that stands a chance to have an impact on with regard to his influence on another human being as well as himself.
.

[Bob Casanova]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 23:25:02 +0000, the following appeared

in talk.origins, posted by Martin Harran
<martin...@gmail.com>:

<snip>

>When you describe someone's upcoming marriage as "meaningless drivel"
>and express the hope that they are marrying another "another knuckle
>dragging goon just like him", I regard that as hate. I suspect most
>decent minded people would agree with me.

FWIW, and IMHO, "hate" is used far too often recently.
Everything from mild distaste to disagreement has been
termed "hate" and "hate speech" has come to mean, in many
cases, "you disagree with me about X (frequently about
politics), and don't accept my beliefs". It's been as
overused as "Nazi", and frequently for much the same reason.
YM, of course, MV.

I's call his posts bigoted and intolerant, and frequently
flamebait; I believe this one qualifies for all three.

[Glenn]

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 7:55:48 PM UTC-7, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 23:25:02 +0000, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Martin Harran
> <martin...@gmail.com>:
> <snip>
> >When you describe someone's upcoming marriage as "meaningless drivel"
> >and express the hope that they are marrying another "another knuckle
> >dragging goon just like him", I regard that as hate. I suspect most
> >decent minded people would agree with me.
> FWIW, and IMHO, "hate" is used far too often recently.
> Everything from mild distaste to disagreement has been
> termed "hate" and "hate speech" has come to mean, in many
> cases, "you disagree with me about X (frequently about
> politics), and don't accept my beliefs". It's been as
> overused as "Nazi", and frequently for much the same reason.
> YM, of course, MV.
>
> I's call his posts bigoted and intolerant, and frequently
> flamebait; I believe this one qualifies for all three.
> --

For you, I must be.

[Glenn]

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 6:35:48 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 03:15:10 -0800 (PST), Glenn
> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 1:10:48 AM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:

> >> On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 15:49:32 -0800 (PST), Glenn
> >> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Friday, March 12, 2021 at 4:20:47 PM UTC-7, Glenn wrote:
> >> >> On Friday, March 12, 2021 at 4:00:47 PM UTC-7, Martin Harran wrote:
> >> >> > On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 10:02:52 -0500, Oxyaena <oxy...@invalid.invalid>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> > >On 3/12/2021 8:46 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> >> >> > >> On Friday, March 12, 2021 at 2:25:48 AM UTC-5, Joe Cummings wrote:

> >> >> > >>> On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 21:14:12 -0800 (PST), Glenn
> >> >> > >>> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >>>
> >> >> > >>>> On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 10:05:47 PM UTC-7, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> >> >> > >>>>> erik simpson <eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-8, glenn...@gmail.com wrote:

> >> >> > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 7:20:47 AM UTC-7, Oxyaena wrote:
> >> >> > >>>>>>>> The wedding is gonna be in June at the earliest, but I'm definitely
> >> >> > >>>>>>>> engaged. We're getting married in June 'cause June is pride month, you
> >> >> > >>>>>>>> see, and we're both queer transwomen.
> >> >> > >>>>>

> >> >> > >>>>>>> Meaningless drivel. Thank you for the confirmation.
> >> >> > >>>>>>
> >> >> > >>>>>> Very classy. And quite confirmatory as well.
> >> >> > >>>>>>
> >> >> > >>>>> Could we expect anything different from a knuckle dragging goon such as
> >> >> > >>>>> Glenn?
> >> >> > >>>>
> >> >> > >>>> Sure. Those words were Oxy's own, to Ron Dean in another thread.
> >> >> > >>>> Do you suppose I would congratulate you on an engagement either? Guess I'd be a goon not to, eh.
> >> >> > >>>> Hopefully, Oxy is "marrying" another knuckle dragging goon just like him.
> >> >> > >>> I suppose this is what passes for Christian charity in Glenn's mind.
> >> >> > >>> Glenn, try not to give your religious beliefs a bad name.
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >> As far as his fellow christo-fascists go, he's pretty typical.
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >Glenn is both homophobic and transphobic at the same time.
> >> >> > Which is a well-recognised symptom of someone having fears or doubts
> >> >> > about their own sexuality.
> >> >> >
> >> >> Nah, it is a popular claim by deviants about normal people.
> >> >>
> >> >> So where have I ever expressed fear or doubt about my own sexuality, deary?
> >> >
> >> >Perhaps members of the Catholic Church have doubts about their own sexuality, like you.
> >> >
> >> >"The Catholic Church considers sexual activity between members of the same sex to be a sin.
> >> >
> >> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_homosexuality#Dissent_from_church_teaching

> >> Based on your remarks about marriage, I assume you regard adultery as
> >> sinful. Do you therefore think that people who engage in adultery
> >> should be ostracised from society, treated as some sort of perverted
> >> personality or even deprived of civil liberties?
> >I think you think you can ignore my questions but expect me to answer such leading questions as that.
> >I regard adultery to be harmful to society. Sin is a religious concept, and the Bible says that even thinking about committing adultery is a sin against God. I regard such behaviors as injurious to oneself and others.
> >Adultery should be discouraged. But since I have not advocated for anyone to be "ostracised from society, treated as some sort of perverted personality or even deprived of civil liberties",
> Your own words to Oxy above:
> "I do not, however, consider sexual deviance to be a disability. Those
> who would congratulate you on your alleged and even perhaps fabricated
> engagement do you no favors, and do society no favors."
> > I'll just ask you whether you think adultery should be encouraged or accepted?
> No I don't think they should be either encouraged or accepted but
> unlike you, I work on the principle of hating the sin but loving the
> sinner

So in effect you are calling me a hater of the sinner.
I will assume you do not consider adultery or homosexuality to be a disability,
but regard both to be a sin. You made the comparison, not I.

So you hate the sin but love the sinner to the extent of encouraging the sinner to sin by wishing the sinner well in marriage to another sinner. That doesn't sound like "hating the sin". More like not loving the sinner.

How, I wonder wonder, will you correct my misunderstanding?
That you do not consider homosexuality to be a sin?

And/or much worse, that you know that I consider homosexuality to be a sin,
yet accuse me of hating the sinner and loving the sin?

You seem to be in a bit of a quandary, when your accusations against me as being homophobic are in evidence.

Must it be that I hate the sinner because you do not believe homosexuality to be a sin?

And to compound the apparent discrepancy of your claim, that I must therefore love the sin, and have doubts about my own sexuality?

Personally, were I a Catholic, I'd advise others to think twice about saying "unlike you, I work on the principle of hating the sin but loving the sinner".

[Joe Cummings]

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:52:53 -0800 (PST), Glenn
<glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 10:55:48 AM UTC-7, Joe Cummings wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 23:02:04 -0800 (PST), Glenn
>> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> >> For what it's worth, Pope Francis has said kind words about homosexual
>> >> partnerships. I'm sorry I can't give you a source apart from the fact
>> >> that he was talking to reporters on an aircraft.
>> >

>> >It's worth less than nothing, quite likely deceptive.
>> >"Pope Francis has never officially pronounced support for gay civil unions."
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Francis_and_homosexuality#Civil_unions
>> >
>> >>

>> >> Glenn, of course justifies this by appealing to (his) AUTHORITY.
>> >

>> >Whether you refer to the Pope or me, I'm not Catholic. And that has "leaked out" in many of my "rants".

>> >Homosexuality is rampant in the Catholic Church, which only reinforces my accusation, in response to Harran's suggestive comment about my having fear or doubt about my own sexuality, that he should look to himself and his Church as an example of a "well-recognised symptom of someone having fears or doubts about their own sexuality."

>> >>
>> >> This isn'tthe place to talk about religion, but I won't walk away from
>> >> discussing the interpretation of Christian doctrine.,
>> >

>> >Of course this is the place to talk about religion. It's a favorite pastime of evolutionists.
>> >But I don't see you rushing to the front of the line to discuss anything, least of all your own religious beliefs.
>> >
>> >>and I note that
>> >
>> >With crayon of course.
>> >

>> >> so far Glenn has refused to state his own beliefs, although they leak
>> >> out in many of his rants such as this one.
>> >

>> >What religious beliefs have leaked out, Joey? And why should I be at your beck and call to explain my religious beliefs? I don't make claims or arguments based on my religious beliefs. It's your brains that have leaked out.
>> >>
>> >> Have exegetic fun,
>> >>
>> >You *are* funny, in a silly way.
>> Let me remark, as an obiter dictum, that vehement denial of sexual
>> deviancy is often a sign of hidden deviancy.
>> I'm not aware of Glenn's proclivities, deviant or not, so we can move
>> into a discussion of the issues as hey affect us.
>>
>> Queer bashing is a "pastime" that appeals to people of a certain
>> limited intelligence andexperience. How better to show your
>> masculinity than kicking t he shit out of some poor, harmless bugger?
>>
>> A little excursus here:
>>
>> In Russia and other postcommunist countries it's very important not to
>> be in any way deviant, and I'm reminded of a song about Stenka Razin,
>> a Volga pirate who brought his bride on board his ship. The crew dn't
>> like the amount of time Razin passed with her, and when they
>> complained, he threw her into the river to drown.
>>
>> This kind of attitude persists in Russia, and other ountries today and
>> finds expression in the claim that there are no sexual deviants in
>> Russia , or Uzbekistan, or where ever.
>> And we come back to our poor benighted Glenn, who shares a similar
>> anti-deviant attitude. Of course, I don't accuse him of queer bashing,
>> but he certainly is hostile to the whole idea of sexual deviancy.
>>
>> He should take a leaaf from the book of Francis and be tolerant.
>>

>You *are* accusing me of "queer bashing",


Total bullshit. Just look four lines up from here.

>and also of being "hostile" to sexual deviancy.
This is true.
As you said, sexual deviancy is not a disability. By implication, this
must mean sexual deviancy is a conscious decision taken by the deviant
and therefore is sinful.

I wonder if Glenn has the same reluctance as the former VP Pence, to
being alone with a woman?

I find it interest

> Perhaps you should take a leaf from Francis, whatever that means, if there exists within an explanation of tolerance.
>You'll interpret that as a person hostile to sexual deviancy wishing to be tolerated.

[Joe Cummings]

I find it interesting that Glenn, although claiming not to be a
fundamentalist does have points of agreement with them.

Perhapswe whould have a discussion about denial.


Have fun,

Joe Cummings
>oes>> Perhaps you should take a leaf from Francis, whatever that means, if there exists within an explanation of tolerance.

[Glenn]

And the surrounding lines, where you accuse me of being hostile and intolerant of "queers".
Hint hint, eh, old boy?

>
> >and also of being "hostile" to sexual deviancy.
> This is true.
> As you said, sexual deviancy is not a disability. By implication, this
> must mean sexual deviancy is a conscious decision taken by the deviant
> and therefore is sinful.

No that does not "must mean".

>
> I wonder if Glenn has the same reluctance as the former VP Pence, to
> being alone with a woman?

You're a wonder, all right. I wonder if you know what you're doing here, as Biden has said.
>
> I find it interest

Fall asleep?

[Glenn]

"We"? Ok, I don't regard agreeing with anyone, as a matter of principle, to be worthy of the label of "denial".
To what points of agreement do you refer, specifically? Your turn. Have some fun.
>

[Mark Isaak]

On 3/13/21 10:39 PM, Joe Cummings wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:52:53 -0800 (PST), Glenn
> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> [...]

>> You *are* accusing me of "queer bashing",
>
> Total bullshit. Just look four lines up from here.
>
>> and also of being "hostile" to sexual deviancy.

> This is true.
> As you said, sexual deviancy is not a disability. By implication, this
> must mean sexual deviancy is a conscious decision taken by the deviant
> and therefore is sinful.

Being six feet tall is not a disability. By implication, this must mean
being six feet tall is a conscious decision taken by the tall and
therefore sinful. No, I don't think so.

That said, Glenn was of course being hostile to sexual deviancy. He is
hostile to everyone.

--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) curioustaxonomy (dot) net
"If one day, my words are against science, choose science."
- Mustafa Kemal Ataturk

[Oxyaena]

On 3/14/2021 1:24 PM, Mark Isaak wrote:
> On 3/13/21 10:39 PM, Joe Cummings wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:52:53 -0800 (PST), Glenn
>> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>> You *are* accusing me of "queer bashing",
>>
>> Total bullshit. Just look four lines up from here.
>>
>>> and also of being "hostile" to sexual deviancy.
>
>> This is true.
>> As you said, sexual deviancy is not a disability. By implication, this
>> must mean sexual deviancy is a conscious decision taken by the deviant
>> and therefore is sinful.
>
> Being six feet tall is not a disability.  By implication, this must mean
> being six feet tall is a conscious decision taken by the tall and
> therefore sinful.  No, I don't think so.
>
> That said, Glenn was of course being hostile to sexual deviancy.  He is
> hostile to everyone.
>

I have a question: by what measure are we qualifying "sexual deviancy,"
and how does being transgendered count as sexual deviancy? I'm just curious.

[Robert Carnegie]

Can we just accept that Glenn wants to stick in
his penis where it isn't wanted, and leave him and it
with each other?

[Mark Isaak]

I'm not quantifying it. As for what Glenn deems to count as deviant or
not, you would need to look into Glenn's head, and I don't think anyone
wants to do that, not even Glenn.

[Glenn]

On Sunday, March 14, 2021 at 6:10:47 PM UTC-7, Mark Isaak wrote:
> On 3/14/21 11:34 AM, Oxyaena wrote:
> > On 3/14/2021 1:24 PM, Mark Isaak wrote:
> >> On 3/13/21 10:39 PM, Joe Cummings wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:52:53 -0800 (PST), Glenn
> >>> <glenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> [...]
> >>>> You *are* accusing me of "queer bashing",
> >>>
> >>> Total bullshit. Just look four lines up from here.
> >>>
> >>>> and also of being "hostile" to sexual deviancy.
> >>
> >>> This is true.
> >>> As you said, sexual deviancy is not a disability. By implication, this
> >>> must mean sexual deviancy is a conscious decision taken by the deviant
> >>> and therefore is sinful.
> >>
> >> Being six feet tall is not a disability. By implication, this must
> >> mean being six feet tall is a conscious decision taken by the tall and
> >> therefore sinful. No, I don't think so.
> >>
> >> That said, Glenn was of course being hostile to sexual deviancy. He
> >> is hostile to everyone.
> >
> > I have a question: by what measure are we qualifying "sexual deviancy,"
> > and how does being transgendered count as sexual deviancy? I'm just
> > curious.

You aren't transgendered. If you are a male, you are a male, not a female.

> I'm not quantifying it. As for what Glenn deems to count as deviant or
> not, you would need to look into Glenn's head, and I don't think anyone
> wants to do that, not even Glenn.
> --

Or one could simply open the reference Glenn gave earlier to what counts as sexual deviancy.

You and others seem fixated on me, bound and determined to making assumptions and characterizations of me from your imaginations. Perhaps you, as well as Oxy, are actually homophobes and transphobes.
Those that claim to be homosexual or transsexual could very well experience fear and doubt of their behavior.
Those that claim to support homosexuality and transexuality could very well experience fear and doubt of themselves, and wish to dispel those feelings by legitimizing such behaviors.

And so, to a complete unknown stranger with known problems, you all say "Congratulations" on
"Oxyaena's" life choice.

[Joe Cummings]

Actually, it seems the other way round, Glen. Those who condemn
homosexuality are in a large number of cases people who are uncertain
of their own sexuality.

Joe Cummings.