Bwahahahahaha!

Thanks, Sting...laughter IS the best medicine.

These liberals just don't get it....the LAST thing I want is for any harm to come to 0bama. I want him to live a long, long life of basking in his discredited policies, instead of becoming a martyr to promote them.

I think he was simply agreeing that they have the right to hate whomever they choose.

Hmmm....so, was there already a rule in place that says a forfeit results in a ban, instead of merely a loss? Can't someone just forfeit, whatever the reason?

Well, you said it a little better than you did on the other site.

Just understand: I'm not saying Jack COULDN'T do something like this, because ALL people are sinners, and you can't completely know what someone is capable of. I also agree that you should always do your utmost to avoid placing yourself in any situation where your own weaknesses can prevail - or give anyone the impression that it could.

However, there is a big difference between "acknowledging the possbility", and "expecting this outcome". I place myself in the first category...shame on anyone who has silently been in the second category for any length of time. To see SOME of the posters (not necessarily you), they have been waiting a long time for a big "I TOLD YOU SO" moment.

I'm just curious - did you make the complaints?

Well, folks needn't worry about accountability in this case...I'm sure he has already been placed on administrative leave and kept from contact with the youth, and will be fired if convicted, regardless of jail time. If he is found innocent, though (which occasionally happens), I doubt that will matter much to the folks who have already made up their minds.

Charles,

I very much appreciate your perspective on this. Reasonable Christian conservatives like myself recognize the difference between philosophical arguments about homosexuality, and legal strictures against/for it. (Realize that the nurture or nature arguments about homosexuality don't hold much relevance with me, since society seems to have little problem judging other behaviors that may have genetic roots - but interesting that they all deal with various appetites: sexual, nutritional, chemical, material...)

While I obviously disagree with many of your views, we do seem to share the viewpoint that the overt focus by the left fringe on promoting radically promiscuous agendas helps NOBODY. It's hard to have an elevated discussion on the larger rights questions while those issues are dangling in our faces (pardon the expression).

(We probably diverge on the gay marriage issue, but likely mainly on which way to follow the logic argument. My thoughts are simply "Either we follow the thousands of years of tradition WRT state sanctioning of marriage - or get the state out of the marriage business altogether - which would seem to be the more libertarian approach. Meanwhile, for benefits purposes, we expand the legal definition of a household to include more than just one narrow additional slice of the population.")

A bigger cause of heart attacks, impotence and strokes is stressing out over useless things - like which animals are eating which animals (be that bears eating fish, tigers eating antelope, or People Eating Tasty Animals). Try not to negate all your healthy tofu.

Generalize, much?