1. Free International Singles Dating Agency, Online Internet
Dating ...
2. Hardcore sex and adult dating with sexy hot girls ... HOT DATING.
3. Hot Singles Online.
4. Meet Beach Babes.
5. Live Web Cams with NUDE Girls.
6. Hardcore Dating Tips For Men
7. Live Hot Dating With Web Cam.

For More Details :-----
Log on to :- http://urlit.net/7B

lusiabond64@gmail.com wrote:
> 1. Free International Singles Dating Agency, Online Internet
> Dating ...
> 2. Hardcore sex and adult dating with sexy hot girls ... HOT DATING.
> 3. Hot Singles Online.
> 4. Meet Beach Babes.
> 5. Live Web Cams with NUDE Girls.
> 6. Hardcore Dating Tips For Men
> 7. Live Hot Dating With Web Cam.
>
> For More Details :-----
> Log on to :- http://urlit.net/7B

I hope this wasn't posted for Dimwit's benefit; he prefers the boys.

-- 
http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
Personalised Desktop Computers

In article ,
 "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$" <femail@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> 
> I hope this wasn't posted for Dimwit's benefit; he prefers the boys.

And that matters, why?

It would be nice to think that the regulars of this forum were mature 
enough not to care about other people's sexuality. Let's leave 
homophobia to the religious believers, where it belongs.

It would also be nice if we could find positive things to talk about 
rather than always be talking about Dave. He gets far more attention 
than he's worth.

Alwyn

On Jul 2, 10:46 am, Alwyn  wrote:
> In article ,
>
>  "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$" <fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
> > I hope this wasn't posted for Dimwit's benefit; he prefers the boys.
>
> And that matters, why?
>
> It would be nice to think that the regulars of this forum were mature
> enough not to care about other people's sexuality. Let's leave
> homophobia to the religious believers, where it belongs.

Dimwit regularly brings up the subject of other people's sex lives so
a little light shined on his own perverse desires is more than
appropriate,


> It would also be nice if we could find positive things to talk about
> rather than always be talking about Dave. He gets far more attention
> than he's worth.
>
> Alwyn

Fine
Go ahead, suggest a subject and we should all avoid replying to any of
Dimwit's comments

X-No-Archive: yes

"Alwyn"  wrote in message 
news:alwyn-016ED7.18462502072008@news.virginmedia.com...
> In article ,
> "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$" <femail@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> I hope this wasn't posted for Dimwit's benefit; he prefers the boys.
>
> And that matters, why?

> It would be nice to think that the regulars of this forum were mature
> enough not to care about other people's sexuality. Let's leave
> homophobia to the religious believers, where it belongs.

In the context of dilv, he asserts very frequently the *immorality*  of 
living an atheist lifestyle together with the pre-requisite sexual mores!
Personally, I could care less if he is homosexual or not but I'm not 
entirely convinced that the comment amounts to homophobia frankly.
However, there is a context to 'his' sexuality when he purports to live a 
completely moral life (...perfectly acceptable as a homosexual) due to his 
religious beliefs but carries a message of sexual intolerance also towards 
those who do not hold his religious views.
The same tolerance needs extending both ways, in my view....


> It would also be nice if we could find positive things to talk about
> rather than always be talking about Dave. He gets far more attention
> than he's worth.


I did try with a post just above this thread but no-one seems 
interested......


Mark

In article ,
 "mark"  wrote:
> 
> "Alwyn"  wrote in message 
> news:alwyn-016ED7.18462502072008@news.virginmedia.com...
> > In article ,
> > "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$" <femail@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> I hope this wasn't posted for Dimwit's benefit; he prefers the boys.
> >
> > And that matters, why?
> 
> > It would be nice to think that the regulars of this forum were mature
> > enough not to care about other people's sexuality. Let's leave
> > homophobia to the religious believers, where it belongs.
> 
> In the context of dilv, he asserts very frequently the *immorality*  of 
> living an atheist lifestyle together with the pre-requisite sexual mores!
> Personally, I could care less if he is homosexual or not but I'm not 
> entirely convinced that the comment amounts to homophobia frankly.
> However, there is a context to 'his' sexuality when he purports to live a 
> completely moral life (...perfectly acceptable as a homosexual) due to his 
> religious beliefs but carries a message of sexual intolerance also towards 
> those who do not hold his religious views.
> The same tolerance needs extending both ways, in my view....

He claims to have reformed and that no longer does the things he did 
when he was younger. Perhaps we should give him the benefit of the doubt 
on this, if nothing else.

I think it's OK to castigate DiLV for the stupid way he posts to this 
forum and his refusal to answer questions or engage in meaningful 
dialogue, but not for what he can't help of what he may have done in the 
past.

Alwyn

X-No-Archive: yes

"Alwyn"  wrote in message 
news:alwyn-A9161E.20315802072008@news.virginmedia.com...
> In article ,
> "mark"  wrote:
>>
>> "Alwyn"  wrote in message
>> news:alwyn-016ED7.18462502072008@news.virginmedia.com...
>> > In article ,
>> > "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$" <femail@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I hope this wasn't posted for Dimwit's benefit; he prefers the boys.
>> >
>> > And that matters, why?
>>
>> > It would be nice to think that the regulars of this forum were mature
>> > enough not to care about other people's sexuality. Let's leave
>> > homophobia to the religious believers, where it belongs.
>>
>> In the context of dilv, he asserts very frequently the *immorality*  of
>> living an atheist lifestyle together with the pre-requisite sexual mores!
>> Personally, I could care less if he is homosexual or not but I'm not
>> entirely convinced that the comment amounts to homophobia frankly.
>> However, there is a context to 'his' sexuality when he purports to live a
>> completely moral life (...perfectly acceptable as a homosexual) due to 
>> his
>> religious beliefs but carries a message of sexual intolerance also 
>> towards
>> those who do not hold his religious views.
>> The same tolerance needs extending both ways, in my view....


> He claims to have reformed and that no longer does the things he did
> when he was younger. Perhaps we should give him the benefit of the doubt
> on this, if nothing else.

> I think it's OK to castigate DiLV for the stupid way he posts to this
> forum and his refusal to answer questions or engage in meaningful
> dialogue, but not for what he can't help of what he may have done in the
> past.


Of course........ but my point was that he still levels sexual intolerance 
at those who do not carry his religious morality...  yet you ask for 
tolerance towards his *sexuality*...
As I said, I am truly disinterested in his, or any one else for that matter, 
sexual orientation but the level of tolerance needs to be balanced out here.
Frankly, I'd prefer sexuality to be no part of these atheist discussions but 
dilv seems obsessed (mistakenly, in my view) with the sexual practice and 
preferences of atheists - bundled  up in a *morality wrapper* - that 
reaction is probably inevitable...

Mark

The message 
from "mark"  contains these words:

> As I said, I am truly disinterested in his, or any one else for that
> matter, 
> sexual orientation but the level of tolerance needs to be balanced out here.
> Frankly, I'd prefer sexuality to be no part of these atheist
> discussions but 
> dilv seems obsessed (mistakenly, in my view) with the sexual practice and 
> preferences of atheists - bundled  up in a *morality wrapper* - that 
> reaction is probably inevitable...

I agree!  I do not think any of us has the remotest interest in his
sexuality.  Transvestites, homosexuals and bisexuals exist in every part
of society and are present in church congregations.  Their presence is a
concern to very few people.  There is as far as I am aware no connection
between sexuality and being an atheist and it was not the reason anyone
became one.  It is curious that he forever bangs on about his obsession
that we all became atheists in order to indulge in sexual perversions.  
 Why has he this hang up about other people's sex lives?  . 

-- 
********
DavidWG
********

On Jul 2, 4:02 pm, David Wynne-Griffiths  wrote:

> It is curious that he forever bangs on about his obsession
> that we all became atheists in order to indulge in sexual perversions.  >  Why has he this hang up about other people's sex lives?  .

> ********
> DavidWG
> ********

Dave is merely projecting his own sexual identity crisis and hangups
onto anyone who doesn't accept his delusional religious views (i.e.us
atheists) because that's the only way to assuage his deeply hidden
guilt from those past "sexual indiscretions" which he blames not on
himself but for his being an atheist

Some enterprising PhD candidate should take him on as a study in
evangelical psycho-sexual characteristics

On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 18:14:59 -0700 (PDT), Ken 
wrote:

>On Jul 2, 4:02 pm, David Wynne-Griffiths  wrote:
>
>> It is curious that he forever bangs on about his obsession
>> that we all became atheists in order to indulge in sexual perversions.  
>>  Why has he this hang up about other people's sex lives?  .
>
>> ********
>> DavidWG
>> ********
>
>Dave is merely projecting his own sexual identity crisis and hangups
>onto anyone who doesn't accept his delusional religious views (i.e.us
>atheists) because that's the only way to assuage his deeply hidden
>guilt from those past "sexual indiscretions" which he blames not on
>himself but for his being an atheist
>
>Some enterprising PhD candidate should take him on as a study in
>evangelical psycho-sexual characteristics

One of the British tabloids would psychologise people they didn't
like. They'd have a psychologist who analyzed them without ever
meeting them let alone talking with them.

One issue they described General Gaddafi as a megalomaniac, as
evidenced by his wearing ornate uniforms for all sorts of military
ranks he wasn't entitled to.

And when you turned the page there was a photo of one of the Royals,
possibly Prince Phillip, wearing the uniform of honourary colonel in
chief of some army regiment, with lots of gold braid, medals he wasn't
entitled to, etc.

On Jul 2, 6:32 pm, Christopher A. Lee  wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 18:14:59 -0700 (PDT), Ken 
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jul 2, 4:02 pm, David Wynne-Griffiths  wrote:
>
> >> It is curious that he forever bangs on about his obsession
> >> that we all became atheists in order to indulge in sexual perversions.  
> >>  Why has he this hang up about other people's sex lives?  .
>
> >> ********
> >> DavidWG
> >> ********
>
> >Dave is merely projecting his own sexual identity crisis and hangups
> >onto anyone who doesn't accept his delusional religious views (i.e.us
> >atheists) because that's the only way to assuage his deeply hidden
> >guilt from those past "sexual indiscretions" which he blames not on
> >himself but for his being an atheist
>
> >Some enterprising PhD candidate should take him on as a study in
> >evangelical psycho-sexual characteristics
>
> One of the British tabloids would psychologise people they didn't
> like. They'd have a psychologist who analyzed them without ever
> meeting them let alone talking with them.
>
> One issue they described General Gaddafi as a megalomaniac, as
> evidenced by his wearing ornate uniforms for all sorts of military
> ranks he wasn't entitled to.
>
> And when you turned the page there was a photo of one of the Royals,
> possibly Prince Phillip, wearing the uniform of honourary colonel in
> chief of some army regiment, with lots of gold braid, medals he wasn't
> entitled to, etc.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

hee hee hee

His name wasn't Dr Phil by any remote chance?
http://www.drphil.com/

In article ,
 "mark"  wrote:
> 
> Of course........ but my point was that he still levels sexual intolerance 
> at those who do not carry his religious morality...  yet you ask for 
> tolerance towards his *sexuality*...
> As I said, I am truly disinterested in his, or any one else for that matter, 
> sexual orientation but the level of tolerance needs to be balanced out here.
> Frankly, I'd prefer sexuality to be no part of these atheist discussions but 
> dilv seems obsessed (mistakenly, in my view) with the sexual practice and 
> preferences of atheists - bundled  up in a *morality wrapper* - that 
> reaction is probably inevitable...

According to William James in *The Varieties of Religious Experience*, 
when you have had a religious conversion, you come to reject and despise 
everything about your past life after you embrace the new. For reasons 
best known to himself, Dave associates his past atheism with sexual 
licentiousness and moreover projects this attribute onto all atheists. 
Pathological and wrong-headed to be sure, but it's my contention that 
mocking him in this forum by alluding to the alleged debauchery of his 
previous existence is counterproductive, since it only confirms his 
current thoughts and feelings.

Alwyn

On Jul 2, 8:51 pm, Alwyn  wrote:
it's my contention that
> mocking him in this forum by alluding to the alleged debauchery of his
> previous existence is counterproductive

> Alwyn

True, but what else should he expect when holding up a sigh
proclaiming: "KICK ME, AGAIN & AGAIN"?

The message 
from Alwyn  contains these words:

> but it's my contention that 
> mocking him in this forum by alluding to the alleged debauchery of his 
> previous existence is counterproductive, since it only confirms his 
> current thoughts and feelings.

And feeds his masochistic desire for abuse and punishment?

-- 
********
DavidWG
********

On Jul 3, 8:40 am, Ken  wrote:

> True, but what else should he expect when holding up a sigh
> proclaiming: "KICK ME, AGAIN & AGAIN"?

Oops
Please read as "sign"