How did things go this crazy so quickly?

[Nephew]

Tell me, has anyone else noticed this?
When I was a young boy, about 30-35 years ago, hunting was just pretty much something a fair few men did and no-one questioned it or abused them for it. Men with traditional values were generally seen as good and decent and hardly anyone questioned their motives or their sincerity. Homosexuals on the other hand ("Not that there's anything wrong with that!!"-"Seinfeld" ) , were regularly derided and treated with a certain disdain and were NEVER left alone with children. Maybe this was just the area and culture of where I grew up, but I don't think that's the case.
Now I find myself living in a world where men with traditional values are vilified and lampooned for them, yet homosexuals get an annual street parade and would probably have a better chance of adoption than a man who openly loves his hunting, and makes no secret of his traditional values!
Make sense of THAT...if you can!

[Steven J]

Wow Moreton, you start all the good threads. I might just sit back and see where this one goes.

[Nephew]

C'mon now Steve, you must have an opinion, mate?

[nimrod]

mate you are so right but I can not comment as there are not enough words in the english language that are not swear words that I could use

[longbowinfected]

Putting political correctness to one side......
We have a parade and festival in Katoomba or Winter Magic, loclly called feral fest.
Solution???? have a parade????
nahhhhhhh......although I could dress up in my medieval archer's outfit...oh I already do at Ironfest.

Mate leave it alone. We are all different. Never likely that hunters will be understood by those who love eating meat yet pay others to kill the beast.

Kev
What rattled your chain?

[Steven J]

Of course I have an opinion Craig

What I would like to know is what tells you that 'batting for the other team' is wrong. Why not flaunt homosexuality for our kids to see. They tell us that it teaches them to be more tollerant. Isn't that a good thing?

You say it is wrong, others say it is right - sound logic and reasoning tells me that both parties can't be right at the same time, so who wins and by what basis do they win their argument?

Steve

[Nephew]

Onya Nimrod. You've articulated your point very well indeed!
No,No, Fellas I'm not saying anyone is wrong, the rolling eyes in my post was for the use of the cliché! I'm just wondering how it all changed so quickly. How is it that a nation can change it's culture so quickly, that's all. What just seemed like common sense to the WW2 generation has now reversed. This is only one example, the most obvious one I could think of, but there are more I'm certain.
Kev, mate the parade was not the main point, just an illustration of how much things have changed. I was just curious to see if anyone else had noticed this phenomenon.

What made me think of this, is that two doors down from me two of these gentlemen moved in, destroyed the last bit of remnant bush we had here, then set about turning their backyard into "Nero's garden" complete with fountains (in these times of cutting back on water!) and statues of nude children! You can put wings on them and call them "angels" or "Putti" but they are still naked children! Yet, I can't seem to get anyone else to understand these are NOT folk we should be making feel welcome as we have lots of kids here and these men are too big a risk. Somehow, things have changed so much I'm the bad guy in this, and that makes me very nervous. I imagine this is the level of decadence and complacency about that decadence most great civilisations of history reached... just before they fell.
Now, although I've met hardly anyone from here, I get a general feel for the values held by most here and trust you blokes to tell me the truth even if it's not what I expected or wanted to hear. I just want to know... Is it me? Am I wrong and overreacting? Really, I'm very confused by the reaction to this I get from a lot of folk on this island so I've come to you blokes for some clarity on the issue, 'cos lately I'm beginning to feel like an alien in my own country/culture!
Someone once told me that white, middle aged men who hold blue collar jobs are the most discriminated against sector of modern society and I disagreed with him, now I'm beginning to wonder if he was right.

[GrahameA]

Hi Craig.

Your answer:

30-35 years ago,

Essentially that is one generation which is the time it take for generational change. IMHO you are wrong in your time estimation. It has actually occurred over 50 years - ie two generations. Consider you have the people who went to WWII - who are the people who formed the social norms of what you are talking about, the Baby Boomers - who started the change, then the next generation - who just accelerated it. And the change is not instantaneous but a continual ongoing thing - you just do not notice the gradual change until you suddenly look back at what has happened.

Not also - that not all of society needs to have a consistent value set. 80% of the population will do nothing and 20% will be active for change. So something a simple as 4/5 being active in something equates to a rapid shift in social opinion. That 20% will also hold view that are at the extreme. The fall back will be something less but still a dramatic change for the rest of the population.

[Steven J]

Craig, If there is nothing wrong, then why make these gentlemen unwelcome in your neighbourhood? On one hand you say that it is fine to be gay then on the other you say that these men are dangerous. Which is it?

As for change, I would have an educated guess and say that changes of this type are exponential. It doesn't matter what part of the curve you are on, the change seems to be rapid. This practice was not generally acceptable a couple of generations ago, then became marginally acceptable. Now it seems to be accepted by many people.

You are throwing your hat in the ring to some deep and ethical discussions at the moment. You are obviously a thinking man.

Steve

[Roadie]

Aternoon All. I was born and brought up in a loving Anglo / Saxon Family with christian views, I tried to bring my family with these family ideals. What I see and Hear I do not like, but I am told this is the 21st centuary, and I must learn to be more tolerant and accepting of other peoples cultures and views, OK, but hey peoples, let me live my way, Let me go hunting, eating meat, let me have a drink if I want. My wife of 38 years plus and I seem to be in a minority, why can't we live our lives the way we want to. Fine the goverment tells us we have to accept these changes, But, we don't have to have these changes thrown at us via TV, Radio, & Newsprint, ETC. Live and let live, stay on their side of the fence, I stay on mine. Change is Here,I know, and a lot of it dosn't sit well with this old Dinosaur. I hope I haven't offended to many people, I grew up in the Sixties, and wasn't life grouse, Great music, Mini skirts. Cheers All Roadie

[Brumbies Country]

I reckon not much happened re action against hunting started in Australia beforethe 1980s and attitutes then in this country were 90 odd percent pro-hunting. Peter Singer's book, "Animal Liberation" caused some unification of animal rights people when it was published in 1975. In saying that, I reckon Singer is not the root cause of this and is a great philosopher in his own right. Hunting continued in it's various forms here fairly unimpeded in the 80's and the 90's, though the anti movement re British hunting with hounds was obviously pretty well established at that stage in the UK. Animal rights groups targeted animal experimentation fairly heavily, certainly in the UK, but to some extent here, and also moved here to target battery hens and the live animal export trade in Australia in the 90's. They started getting more heavily into duck shooting here about that time also.

Grahame, I think your estimate of 20% holding views that are extreme is way above what is actually the case. The extreme element are less than 5% but are extremely active and vocal, and they have the ability to influence fringe dwellers, maybe another 5%, but they can influence an increasingly urbanised society, and hence influence legislation, and that is where the biggest potential problem lies. One good thing is that animal rights groups war amongst themselves, struggle to present a united front, and this has impeded their battle, which is a good thing.

Against that however increased urbanisation is our biggest worry, with more that 85% of Australians living in 5 cities. As we become more urbanised much collective perception of our hunter gatherer origins goes out the window. The majority of the population, not at all extreme, doesn't really want to know how meat arrives on their table, and can't relate at all to hunting animals.

The increased urbanised society killed hunting with hounds in Britain under the Blair Government. Many of us likely identify foxhunting with a bunch of silvertails (who were in fact the minority), but when the Blair Govt banned that sort of hunting with the backing of a majority of urban voters they killed the sport of alot of ordinary small farmers, rural trades people, housewives etc.

We need to look at what is happening across the Tasman. There is an extremely vocal group of animal rights protestors in NZ and yet I don't know of any form of hunting that is threatened there. We need to take note of what pro-active hunter counter groups are doing there. One central Government certainly helps but I get the feeling that a strong feeling that there is a hunting heritage in New Zealand and it needs to be maintained.

[GrahameA]

Hi Simon.

Grahame, I think your estimate of 20% holding views that are extreme is way above what is actually the case. The extreme element are less than 5% but are extremely active and vocal, and they have the ability to influence fringe dwellers, maybe another 5%, but they can influence an increasingly urbanised society,

Let me explain. Based on a simple Pareto approach.

80% of the population will do nothing and 20% will be active for change. ... That 20% will also hold view that are at the extreme.

And the extremists who are small part of the overall population would be contained within that 20%. Poor writing on my part. The 20% is the set of all those who seek change.

[Nephew]

Craig, If there is nothing wrong, then why make these gentlemen unwelcome in your neighbourhood? On one hand you say that it is fine to be gay then on the other you say that these men are dangerous. Which is it?

As for change, I would have an educated guess and say that changes of this type are exponential. It doesn't matter what part of the curve you are on, the change seems to be rapid. This practice was not generally acceptable a couple of generations ago, then became marginally acceptable. Now it seems to be accepted by many people.

You are throwing your hat in the ring to some deep and ethical discussions at the moment. You are obviously a thinking man.

Steve

Fair point Steve, but matey I was saying that I had not used the cliché in sarcasm, and that in THAT post I had not said there was anything wrong about it. Trusting them around our boys on this island is a whole different issue. I don't think there is anything wrong, per se, with gay folk as long as they keep it to themselves and stop DEMANDING that we all see it their way, much the way we are expected to keep our pursuits to ourselves ( I never mention my desire to hunt in non hunting company, unless something said is so silly I just can't remain compliant with expectations any longer.) Having said that I see no reason I should have to tolerate a CELEBRATION of what in my mind is debauchery.
Don't get me wrong, I'm in no way suggesting anything as abhorrent as some kind of "Final Solution" or anything crazy like that, I'm just asking why we are expected to tolerate a week-long street parade and party, when you can be sure that if we asked for a festival of men with trad values we would be laughed out of existence. Whats good for the goose, y'know?
25 years ago they took the inner Brisbane suburbs off the financially disadvantaged with their money, why can't they be content with that and stay there and leave the mid to outer ring suburbs to decent, family oriented folk?

Also, in this particular case it was their choice of garden decoration that alerted me to the fact that these particular men are too big a risk to have around our kids. You should see it, I said "Neros garden" before , but I really should have said "Caligulas playground" It's decadent, debauched, and has no place in a family oriented place like Coochiemudlo...and neither do they. These statues are of NAKED CHILDREN people!!!

Must be middle age, Steve, but yes, these ethical issues are what's occupying my mind a lot lately.

Grahame, I take your point on the time frame, but I was just talking about what I had seen as a kid myself with my uncles, cousins, mates dads etc, 30-35 years ago. They don't seem to make 'em like those blokes anymore.

[Mick Smith]

It hasn't gone crazy very quickly Craig. It's been a slow process that started straight after WW2. It's not just the homosexual thing either, it's far more widespread than that. To put it into one neat container, it could be labeled political correctness.

As has been said here already, the baby boomers started the ball rolling and the following generations have run with it.

In my view, which is probably very over simplfied, it all comes down to people having too much time on their hands. Back in the pre-war years and right back to the times of our early pioneers, it had always been a struggle just to survive for most people. People just didn't have the time or the energy to devote it to thinking about anything other than day to day things, or to the more important things in life.

People tend to lose sight of the fundimental things that matter, when everything is laid on and so easy to achieve.

Australia has one of the highest rates of people living in cities, as opposed to living in the countryside. For many, the lifestyle of city living doesn't reinforce good common sense values.

What would change this whole new 'crazy' order? I think it would only change if people were forced to return to a harder and more elementry lifestyle, for whatever reason. You only see this distorted view of the world in developed countries. The people in developing countries don't have the time or the inclination to think up such silly ideas. People in developing countries know exactly where their meat comes from and they're not that stupid to believe that animals have human attributes, like Disneyland characters.

It's going to get worse.

Mick

[Mububban]

I've never hunted, and have no interest in killing a living animal, although if someone offered to take my hunting ferals, that might be different as it's doing our country a favour.

Anyway. Growing up, my uncle in York did regularly take us to visit sheep stations, so for city kids, we got a bit more of an insight into the realities of where things come from. I'm 31 and I work with 2 girls in their 20's who cannot even eat a drumstick, because it has a bone in it. They're not vegoes, they eat meat, but not if it in any way looks like it came from an actual animal. Give me a break.

Hunting is a valuable survival skill that humans should not lose. You can buy food, clothing, anything you want these days, but should we stop learning to cook? Should we stop learning how to sew?

I don't plan on hunting anything in my lifetime, but humanity would lose a vital part of itself if all knowledge of how to hunt and forage beyond Coles and Woolworths was lost.

I'm going to avoid the gay issue, but will point out that "winding the clock back" would also unwind women's rights and other changes in societal vlaues. Sidestepping wider issues, remember that a mere ~40 years ago, Aboriginals weren't classed as humans, but "fauna and flora."
Societal progress is usually a mix of the good, the bad and the (at the time) controversial.

[kerrille]

craig pm sent

...nev...

[matt_d]

Now I find myself living in a world where men with traditional values are vilified and lampooned for them, yet homosexuals get an annual street parade and would probably have a better chance of adoption than a man who openly loves his hunting, and makes no secret of his traditional values!

What utter rubbish! I don't know what world you've been living in mate!

You say it is wrong, others say it is right - sound logic and reasoning tells me that both parties can't be right at the same time, so who wins and by what basis do they win their argument?

I don't think it's a question of either party being "right or wrong" Steve.. Although in my logic it is entirely possible for them both to be right. Both these views when taken to the extreme aren't driven by the truth, they seem to be driven by fear of change, or fear of their lifestyle and what they are comfortable with being taken away from them.

complete with fountains (in these times of cutting back on water!) and statues of nude children! You can put wings on them and call them "angels" or "Putti" but they are still naked children! Yet, I can't seem to get anyone else to understand these are NOT folk we should be making feel welcome as we have lots of kids here and these men are too big a risk.

Tell me Craig, what is wrong with a statue of a nude child?? Unless you yourself are having improper thoughts about these images of children, I cannot see at all how they could be interpreted as offensive!
What exactly makes these men living in your neighbourhood a "risk"? At risk of what? These are homosexuals in a committed and (I assume) loving relationship, their choice of sexuality does not make them a criminal or to have criminal tendencies. What makes their relationship any less valid or respectable than yours? And what is the risk? Are you scared that in being in proximity to your children it might turn them gay too?

25 years ago they took the inner Brisbane suburbs off the financially disadvantaged with their money, why can't they be content with that and stay there and leave the mid to outer ring suburbs to decent, family oriented folk?

They did not "take" anything away from anybody. Shouldn't these people be allowed to want and to appreciate a more rural lifestyle? Or should they be condemned to a life of city squalor because they make you uncomfortable?
These people are born this way and have natural feelings for the same sex.. they cannot help who they are!! They don't have much choice in the matter.. The only choice they do have is to suppress it. So what is it that makes them any less capable of common decency and to be a family oriented person? For your information my own mother came out several years ago, is in a same sex relationship, and is still really great mates with Dad. She cannot "help" her feelings. Our family relationship is fantastic, never been better!

For the most part Craig, I agree with your general argument especially your views on hunting. Although I do think there is a lot of hysteria generated by hunters that our persuit is going to be taken away from us, and I believe most of it is unfounded.
With all due respect to you though, I think it would do you good to get out off your island and out into the real world for a while and actually make an attempt to learn about other people who are different from you.

Cheers,
Matt

[matt_d]

I'm going to avoid the gay issue, but will point out that "winding the clock back" would also unwind women's rights and other changes in societal vlaues. Sidestepping wider issues, remember that a mere ~40 years ago, Aboriginals weren't classed as humans, but "fauna and flora." Societal progress is usually a mix of the good, the bad and the (at the time) controversial.

Very well said

[kerrille]

so if i said i was a politicly incorrect homophobic sexest racist redneck who belives in capital punishment id get into trouble.

...nev...

[alaninoz]

We seem to have two distinct threads here, but I'm going to confine myself to the one about hunting.

What Simon said pretty much rings true with my own experience. I've lived in cities all my life (pretty much the only place I can use my skills and training) as did most people even then - fifites & sixies - but at that stage most of us at least knew someone who was on the land - uncle, cousin, whatever.

That connection is now thinning. Many people in the cities these days have never lived anywhere else, don't know anyone who has been on the land, and none of their friends or relations do either. Hence they know nothing of farming, ferals, or the bush, and the only people they've been exposed to who use weapons are criminals and cops.

As a result they fall easy prey to the half-truths of the animal-rights people and others of similar ilk, and it's easier for them to accept the emotional animal-rights arguments than to think things through.

[Roadie]

Hi Nev,
Not from me, we think alike. We were brought up in a farming community where we Killed our meat to survive, there where no Coles or Woolworths with in 100klm of us. Cheers Roadie.

[Mububban]

As a result they fall easy prey to the half-truths of the animal-rights people and others of similar ilk, and it's easier for them to accept the emotional animal-rights arguments than to think things through.

I think it's a bit the same with "conscientious objectors" who refuse to immunise their kids. The Aussie immunisation program is becoming a victim of its own success. People have grown up never seeing a friend die of measles, or seeing the neighbourhood kid with polio. They only worry about side effects and forget that DEATH is the main side effect that immunisation is trying to prevent!

For similar reasons of society's short memory, we now have people who believe meat comes from a supermarket, not an animal on a farm. And why we must protect the elements that made man the success he is. Camping, hunting, fishing, bush tucker etc - if you don't use it, you lose it.

[Stephen Georgiou]

So it sounds to me that there is no place for a gay hunter who likes statues of young children?

Strange world indeed!

[Steven J]

Mubbuban you offer some great insights into the changing world. It is so true that not all changes have been for the worse in the past century. Your points on immunisation is also a good point. You have a clear way of explaining these things.

I love your story about the girls who can't eat chicken with a bone in it. I suppose if the found a stray feather they would just about fall of their seat!

Matt, I agree that much of what we feel as persecution as hunters (and although I don't hunt, I still associate with those that do) is hysteria. Maybe I just don't get out much, but I don't see a lot of evidence to show that this will be taken away from us anytime soon. If someone has evidence to the contrary I would like to see it please.

I don't think it's a question of either party being "right or wrong" Steve.. Although in my logic it is entirely possible for them both to be right. Both these views when taken to the extreme aren't driven by the truth, they seem to be driven by fear of change, or fear of their lifestyle and what they are comfortable with being taken away from them.

I can't seem to make sense of your comment quoted above. How can two parties with opposing views be both right. How can your logic lead to to the conclusion that we are both right, especially when you profess to be concerned about the truth. Knowing which is true is different from knowing that logically only one position can be right. We can argue to determine which is position is true, however arguing that both positions are right defies logic.

Mick, I think you are right with the political correctness thing. Political correctness is what has allowed us to leave logic behind and has led us down the road of allowing two opposing ideas to be right. Rather than staring your mate in the face and telling him he is just plain wrong and should get his act together. We pat him on the back and passively tell him that he can go about his business and that we will change our standards to make it all OK.

I thought that this was an archery forum. Maybe I should start a topic on arrow spine or similar

Steve

[Hamish]

Your'e not the only one to have noticed it. It seems to me the people that lived in Australia and fought freedom during WWII, had more in common with the way of life that Adolph Hitler wanted than the kind of society we live in today. Take away the "final solution" and the aggressive need to conconquer foreign countries, and they were pretty similar. Law and morality based, championed the healthy lifestyle, strong society. (no I'm not suggesting Hitler or the Nazi's were a good thing)Things are different now and I wonder how many of these people that fought for Australia would be turning in their graves at the type of Australia we live in today.
I'm sure they didn't fight for a Gay Mardi Gras, or Immigration that leads to a housing crisis, congestion of roads, and a lessening of a standard of living for all those citizens that already live here. Hell we barely have an on shore manufacturing industry. Most Australian companies get every thing manufactured by third world labour, don't employ many Australians, so why do we need all these extra people coming into the country driving up real estate prices, driving down our wages and standard of living. Its only companies that want more nsumers to by another unit of their product.The majority of our GP's don't seem to have been trained in Australia, let alone born here. Most are quite good, but we already have plenty of talent here and the instituions to train our own. Same thing with the trades. Various govts on both sides have neglected the training and taken the import option.
I could go on and on but I will spare you all.
Hamish.

[Nephew]

Matt, I understand what you're saying, but I see nothing funny about these folk getting their hands on kids and turning them into playthings for creatures like this- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Ferguson or this- http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2181275.htm or this- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Family_Murders . There are many more examples, and you will note that the monsters that committed the "family" murders had those amongst them that identified as "gay" but NONE who would identify themselves as the paedophiles they are. Some have the hide to try to claim legitimacy- http://www.narth.com/docs/arguecase.html ,lo and behold, under the guise of "homosexuals"!
I wonder how many poor kids these animals have got their claws on that have spent a good part of their adolescence confused and thinking they must be "gay"... "after all why else did this man think I wanted him to do these awful things to me? Must be something about me..."...this is a conversation I have had with a very confused and messed up teen. There was very little humour in the idea that this poor kid had been "turned" by these predators. "Turned Gay"...a nice way of saying "raped", if you ask me. So, no mate, I don't fear any kid of mine being "turned" (I only have one girl anyway) by these "men", but I do fear them being RAPED by them, yes.
I sometimes wonder if we don't inadvertently become a little naive in our endeavours to be "right on" and "with it" as far as societal values go in modern "P.C." Australia. I don't mean that personally, Matt, but as a collective. I have no intention of disparaging your beliefs, I understand they are just as real, valid and important to you as mine are to me.
Matey, I have been laughed at time and again for voicing the traditional beliefs and values my grandmother raised me with (She raised my Dad and his siblings, on her own, in the thirties & early forties and raised me exactly the same way, and taught me exactly the same values as she taught them), the last time when I suggested it would be better to familiarise boys with firearms and firearms safety rather than just try to deny the existence of weaponry. Before that I was told I was "too much" when I suggested that a 13 year old boy could do worse than to kill, gut, skin and eat a rabbit... here on this Island, within the last month. Sneered at when I suggested that a night sleeping on the beach wouldn't do the kids any harm, might even do 'em some good! Laughed at when I said I preferred to be introduced to kids as "Mr MacPherson" and suggested it stay that way until I tell them it's ok to call me "Craig"
So, that's the world I live in, how about you?
As for the statues, well I see no need for nude children to be in ANY art. I just can't understand why anyone would want to see anyone else's naked child?! It's just plain creepy, Matt!! If they're gay, why not nude men? Why pick on kids? It's worth noting that those renaissance artists who like to paint and sculpt nude kids were almost all, to a man, what we today would recognise for what they were, paedophiles! Maybe it was more acceptable back then, or maybe they had rich and powerful patrons, but you can't deny the likes of Carravagio or Da Vinci, or Michelangelo were predatory paedophiles- http://www.worldlingo.com/ma/enwiki/en/ ... enaissance. Great artists, of course, and that I don't deny, but predators and paedophiles all the same. I wonder, had you been able to ask them, how many would have identified as merely "gay"?
Sorry Matt, I respect your views and opinions, and the obvious fact that you have thought them through from many perspectives and not just reacted to something you didn't like, but you've not convinced me that our kids on this island (and anywhere for that matter) are so safe around these "men" that it is worth risking the above examples of what can happen. Even if it is a rare occurrence (and I don't believe it is, I just think most boys unfortunate enough to have this kind of nightmare visit upon them are too scared or ashamed to tell anyone) the risk of the molestation of ONE boy is too much for my likings. This is only how I feel, though, and I'm not asking anyone to agree or join me. It's great to see lots do, though, I must say. I was beginning to worry. Maybe it's time that more folk who feel this way made themselves heard? After all, it worked for the gay community!

[Mububban]

So it sounds to me that there is no place for a gay hunter who likes statues of young children?

Ahahahaha

Things are different now and I wonder how many of these people that fought for Australia would be turning in their graves at the type of Australia we live in today.

Would the armies that fought at Agincourt be turning in their graves that nowadays women can vote, and that we don't all attend Mass on Sunday any more? They'd be horrified at our decadent sinful godless lives, even those of us who consider ourselves to have "old fashioned values."

Whereas we look back at some changes and think of past generations as ignorant cavemen compared to our "enlightened modernity." I'm sure that every generation of humans who ever lived have thought the same about their own time. What will our grandkids think of us when they are adults?

I'm half asian, which my fiance's grandmother failed to notice when she made a "those asians" comment in my presence one time She's oblivious to my heritage to this day, to her I'm just the nice man who loves her granddaughter and gave her a great grandchild. Perhaps 20-30 years ago if she saw me she'd have spat on me like happened to my mum when she moved to Australia.
Personally, I do enjoy being told less often to "go back to my own country" in the year 2010 compared to growing up in the 80's.

Things change. Not always good, but not always bad either.

Back to hunting specifically.....it wouldn't surprise me if some bleeding heart born after the year 2000 and is so far removed from the realities of where food comes from campaigns for hunting to be abolished on animal cruelty grounds. They'll ignore the damage to native fauna and flora, the cost to farmers, any any other valid reason because all they see is a cute fluffy bunny or Babe the pig. People have such short memories.

[Steven J]

I'll say it again Mububban, I like the way you write. You pen your thoughts clearly and use sound reasoning.

Steve

[Hamish]

Yes those Agincourt vet's, I can here them turning too. The difference being many hundreds of years vs 65, still in the living memory. People are more likely to accept change incrementally, whether the change is good or bad. The thin edge of the wedge, or give them an inch and they take a mile cliches are as vaild as ever. Most of the biggest changes occur without a direct referendum, you or I don't really get a say no matter what our opinions.
Hamish.

[Antonio]

I think its important to mind you're own business to a point it can work .especially when things are really not you're business .I belive we are all made by one source .
as free as the birds are and as free that nature is .you have a choice you're life you're choice .if someone want to abuse some one because they make a choice then .its their choice to follow that road if they so choose to abuse people for living they're life the way they see fit .

I think it comes down to self love .if you love yourself you wont care what people think or even do .as long as you love yourself you live you're life as you see fit .
you can rant and rave all you want Craig but unless you decide to take the law in you're own hands .and be careful some times people can see you coming .
you will probably notice that those people will live they're life the way they want to .

and I do agree 2 party with different views can be right .because people can try what ever they want but if some one is dead set decides to live they're life in a certain way you cant change them .
you will see that with you're kids you will see that with you're wife and people around you .

A little wile ago some one I knew saw regular basis but did not talk to much suicided. and that person was a very popular person hundreds of people went to his funeral .
every body loved him but he did not love himself enough to stay around and live .

the reason i see why 2 people can be right in an argument is that there are two different people .simple with two different point of views two different life with different histories .
they may have came into this planet in two different places .and if you value human beings you value both they're existences .

for some reason they are moving into that place it wouldn't have been an accident .if you think about they both probably came from a heterosexual couple .so they where probably brought up like you and me probably went to school in any normal suburb .

I had a friend who was gay he died of aids 1997. went to his funeral .I would say its not my cup of tea and not my business really .
its their life and they can live it the way they want to .

you're not to well Craig if you are pointing fingers at them accusing them of pedophilia .
what I would do if I was you Craig is.keep an eye on yourself see what going on with you .
and think think think before doing some thing stupid .

Remember its you're problem not theres .they are Happy the way they are . and so far they have not problem that they are up to something .
to be alert is normal .to jump to conclusions is dangerous .

for some stupid reason I will put it this way .if for some unseen reason I was brought up in a Gay world where every body had Gay parents .
and for some reason I came out heterosexual would I follow who I am or follow the gay world .

well they have the same right that I do .

on a different note as far as anybody touching kids .kids are trusting something like that I see as a sin .and on that one I would argue with people .
kids are innocent and pure and to be respected and they count on us for protection .and any one thats being in this planet long enough should never drop theyre gard on that one .
but thats not just with the gays but the whole community until the kid is 16 .then kids have theyre brains developed and can start to deal with life .

any way this has gone of topic but just for me live a good life