Friday, May 24, 2013
Comment Archives: stories: Columns: Letters
Re: “Council election, two faces of the military”
siggie...everything is filtered through a lens that defines the self...you are writing as a straight person that gays are different than you, they label differences of opinion as hate, etc. I do not care if you are straight, married, or whatever,as long as you don't try to take away the equality of the law. I get the same rights under the constitution as anyone else.My relationship is as valid under the law as any you might have. My religion that says my god loves gays is just as valid as any other. This isn't hard.
Posted by
carolyncathey
on 03/20/2013 at 4:56 PM
Re: “Council election, two faces of the military”
K: I believe you just described people who see things through a religious lens not a sexual lens. But hey, thanks for trying and continuing to play the game. One of these days you may get one right.
tooth, well "bub" if you think my credibility is shot, I just don't know how I can go on. Oh, and by the way, I don't listen to the radio, in any capacity.
Posted by
siggie
on 03/20/2013 at 12:19 PM
Re: “Council election, two faces of the military”
K--we are are opposed to perverting a God established institution that is the foundation and central building block of civilization...it is that simple.
It is the gays who have forced the issue, not us. But once on the table we need to standup against the destruction of society that they are advocating.
Homosexuality is a bizarre disorder that needs empathy and understanding like any disorder, but also it needs boundaries, treatment, and to be recognized for what it truly is...disordered and pathetic affection.
Posted by
TejonTech
on 03/20/2013 at 12:12 PM
Re: “Council election, two faces of the military”
siggie, you write, "Straight people do not filter through a lens dominated by their sexual preference." Really? Is that why so many straight people are so vehemently opposed to gay marriage? Is that why so many straight people go out of their way to let everyone in the world know, "God hates fags!"
Have you ever considered that the person pointing out your opinions as "phobic" might actually have a point, but the problem is that you dismiss it out of hand, without so much as a second thought, and blithely continue to voice your phobic opinions loudly and often.
Posted by
Mr. K--
on 03/20/2013 at 11:05 AM
Re: “Council election, two faces of the military”
So, Sig, It's all or never with you. Is that it? Why is it you ALWAYS say always to those things and folks you wish to label or ALWAYS say NEVER to those who might disagree. See what I mean, Bub? This black and white world just doesn't exist. Turn off your right wing radio and get to know people for who they really are. Your credibility is shot.
Posted by
longtooth
on 03/20/2013 at 10:16 AM
Re: “Council election, two faces of the military”
Mr. Lloyd: If only people would listen.
Posted by
siggie
on 03/20/2013 at 7:01 AM
Re: “Council election, two faces of the military”
Miz Cathey: I personally couldn't care less if someone is gay or even if they get married. As long as you do not interfere with my rights or the rights of others. However, here is something to consider. Gays only see things through a gay lens. Everything they do, every decision they make, everything they say is filtered through that lens. For example if someone would happen to disagree with you and your opinions they are automatically dubbed "hateful" or "phobic".
Straight people do not filter through a lens dominated by their sexual preference. Why do gays?
Posted by
siggie
on 03/20/2013 at 6:57 AM
Re: “Campaign contributions, the city attorney and gun law”
So, Erik, if we gave you the raise, would you take the job?
Posted by
siggie
on 03/13/2013 at 4:03 PM
Re: “Campaign contributions, the city attorney and gun law”
stigma, i believe the point is that money should not be poured into an election in an attempt to buy the outcome. this was seen in the last election due to the citizens united supreme court of activists ruling. millions and millions of dollars used to mis-inform the low info voters... thankfully unsuccessfully. the republiklans around here don't seem to care because it has come only from their side. elections shouldn't be determined by who has the most money.
Posted by
happyfew
on 03/13/2013 at 3:49 PM
Re: “Campaign contributions, the city attorney and gun law”
Well gosh darn it Mr. Heimsoth, who could have ever imagined that an entity would contribute to a political candidate that had their interests at heart. It is simply unheard of. How dare they.
Posted by
siggie
on 03/13/2013 at 8:44 AM
Re: “Coy Mathis, gun rights and Tosches on Magpul”
Off Topic: I think the Independent should consider allowing anonymous letters and posting. Yes, I am aware of the down side to that; all of it (including accusations of cowardice). I've debated it extensively elsewhere. However, I also think the threat of boycotts, threats to innocent family members, being ostracized, and adverse government action certainly chills my willingness to speak freely. Our founding fathers were in accord. Some of their more persuasive arguments were submitted under pseudonyms or anonymously due to fear of Loyalist intimidation, loss of business, hostility in the community and the threat posed by King George's troops. Comments could be moderated for persuasion just to keep the trolls out. Food for thought.
Posted by
Huck Mucus
on 03/12/2013 at 4:50 PM
Re: “Coy Mathis, gun rights and Tosches on Magpul”
I think that boys and girls know that they are boys and girls as soon as they know other things about themselves, but the age when a child becomes self-aware varies from child to child. Current science seems to indicate that gender-differentiation is one of the first things babies learn, I see no reason why gender self-awareness would not also be one of the first things babies learn. In my case, the issue didn't come up until I was 3 years old, when my parents and grandparents found it necessary to tell me that I was a boy, and I did not agree. However, it is also family lore, from before I remember, that as soon as I could talk, I was expressing desire for my very own purse. Nonetheless, what may have been the case when Coy was 18 months old is a moot point. The pertinent issue regards a 6 year-old girl, and flagrant violation of clear law.
Posted by
Gina Douglas
on 03/08/2013 at 1:41 PM
Re: “Coy Mathis, gun rights and Tosches on Magpul”
siggie...I would add entitled government employees as being on the top of the list...and so careless about how they treat those of whose taxes pay them.
Posted by
TejonTech
on 03/08/2013 at 10:26 AM
Re: “Coy Mathis, gun rights and Tosches on Magpul”
native: the sequester was no more than a reduction in the increase in spending over several years. It was not a direct cut. If you are effected directly, blame Obama. You chose the field that would make you dependent on the government and taxpayers for your well being. I'm sure you liked the guarantees, the retirement package, the high wages, and all other perks that go with being a government worker. Things are tough right now? Too bad - stop your whining.
If we are to survive as a country, all of us need to be willing to take a cut. A big problem in this country is people that only care about themselves.
Posted by
siggie
on 03/08/2013 at 9:53 AM
Re: “Coy Mathis, gun rights and Tosches on Magpul”
Golly gina, aren't we sensitive. I don't care what you are or what you aspire to be. Your rights stop when they conflict with the rights of others. You are NOT special and deserve no special consideration. When you accept yourself as just like everybody else, your perception of persecution might just end.
Most rational folks would agree that an 18 month old toddler can hardly determine what sex he is. If you don't believe that, look inward for your problem.
Posted by
siggie
on 03/08/2013 at 8:47 AM
Re: “Coy Mathis, gun rights and Tosches on Magpul”
It's my understanding that Coy herself determined that she was female. It's also my understanding that Coy does not understand the concept of transgenderism, she only understands that she is a girl. The irreparable harm will come from not treating Coy as a normal girl. And if you continue using wrong gender references with regard to me, I am sure I can have your posts taken down.
Posted by
Gina Douglas
on 03/08/2013 at 8:31 AM
Re: “Coy Mathis, gun rights and Tosches on Magpul”
@siggie: "The hysteria created by Obama and his toadies was a complete sham..." I am a federal employee in Colo Spgs and have been for many, many years. It's no sham that I have had my pay "frozen" for the last 2-1/2 years. It's no sham that I am about to be placed on 22 unpaid furlough days resulting in a pay decrease of 23%. It's no sham that the car I was looking to purchase this spring, the home and yard improvements I was about to undertake, and any other discretionary spending I was contemplating has been indefinitely put on hold. This affects our local economy in drastic ways when you consider how many other federal employees work and live in our area. Not a sham... it affects real people, real budgets, and real spending right here at home! Congress has not, did not, and won't do their jobs. It wasn't Obama's job to send a balanced budget to himself for his own signature. The Super Committee failed us, and Congress has failed us -- put the blame where it belongs!
Posted by
COnative59
on 03/08/2013 at 7:26 AM
Re: “Coy Mathis, gun rights and Tosches on Magpul”
Mr/Mz Davis/Douglas - your confusion is confusing.
Based on your answer, it would appear that you believe a child of 18 months can make the determination as to which gender would be appropriate? Wow!
So, when my high school football coach asked "are you girls ready to practice", that was a hate crime because it was a boy's football team? Gee, I think I'm going to sue my parents, my hometown, my highschool, my head coach, all the assistant coaches, and all the teachers in the school and, oh yeah, the school janitor. Is that the appropriate action to take? I'm so confused.
Posted by
siggie
on 03/08/2013 at 7:03 AM
Re: “Coy Mathis, gun rights and Tosches on Magpul”
Christy LeLait is sure, she says, that Tosches is getting threats for telling it like it is. The fact is that Tosches is not telling anything like it is. Not only that he can tell it like it isn't under The First Amendment and while hiding behind the CSIndy. He is obviously baiting in hopes of threats so that he can "prove" that Americans do not need The Second Amendment.
I have challenged him to a debate on the subject of "gun control" 3 or 4 times without a response. Perhaps he's afraid or perhaps he knows he is wrong but it is typical of liberals to spew out nonsense such as his while high on whatever it is liberal ingest these days. (See I can stereotype also, hippie) And no, we all do not want be like you liberals mostly because you are not liberal and secondly you are all airheads. I have noticed that Tosches writes about his heavy drinking quite often so that must be what is stopping him. When he is let go from this job he will write about The Indy in unflattering terms but we all know now why he will be let go and why The Gazette did. Cheers! Here's to courage in a bottle...
Posted by
Robert Wyman
on 03/07/2013 at 11:10 PM
Re: “Council election, two faces of the military”
Miz Cathey: I agree with everything you said. My question is based more on an observation than a value judgment. It seems that gays filter everything through a gay lens. Name another (relatively normal) group that does that. Fanatics aside.
If you don't care to answer, I understand. It is just that I have found you to be more reasonable and pragmatic than many of your counterparts. Therefore, I presume you have a more comfortable sense of self.