ladyinred
11-09-2006, 02:11 AM
Ispiezio:
The irony is that most marriages end up in divorce so how sacred can it be for the marriages that are one man and one woman---Flat
-----------------------------------------------------------
Just a simple lesson on how satistics can be manipulated. Whenever numbers like these are given out they are misleading. The reason is that there are a lot of people who have been married and divorced multiple times. These people skew the numbers. I do not know if I am making myself clear. I personnally know several people who have been married 5 times each.The actual number of 1st time marriages that last is far greater than 50% when you factor out the multiples.I’m afraid I have forgotten the true number and I hesitate guessing for fear of being wrong. As for Gays,I truly believe that they do not have a choice as to their sexual orientation.I support civil unions.
Freethinker: The right-wing fundamentalists have their own definition of marriage and that is fine for their individual churches where they can decide who should get married. But the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman is not the definition held by all Christian churches or other some religions or the nonreligious.
We must not allow the radical right to apply by amendment their narrow definition. All human beings are born FREE and EQUAL in dignity and rights, but the right-wing cannot figure that out.
Gays should be allowed to marry as a matter of equal rights. Being gay is neither evil nor odd. Latest estimates suggest that 1 in 10 people are gay. Each ought to have a choice in who they marry.
America is neither a "Christian nation" nor a heterosexual nation. We are far more diverse than that. For right-wingers to call us anything else is an abomination to "liberty and justice for all" and to "all men are created equal".
I might also add that the majority of these people are straight.... But they are getting it from the relgious right..And they are standing up to it.
Mark Taylor: think that what gets the christians all riled up about gay marriage is that , in reality, marriage is a religious rite. I’m kind of old, and putting the words gay and marriage together took quite a bit of accustomizing. Somehow, even for me, the words don’t seem to fit together. So we should allow the christians to retain their rite of marriage. These days, with more than half of marriages ending in divorce, the sanctity is moot.
Civil unions that allow gays the same legal rights should be in the forefront.
But now, on a broader front, if I were to ask a christian what they did in the bedroom, they would be greatly offended , being that it was none of my business. And rightly so. However, we have the American christian puritanical , racist , bigoted, hateful society that condones asking certain individuals what they do in the bedroom. They believe that it is their MORAL right to do so.
Now the captain of this diseased ship, the war criminal w. bush comes out against gay marriage. But , why does he dress exactly like the cowboys in "Brokeback Mountain"? Because most homophobes are latent homosexuals.
Civil unions would solve the problem and leave the christians feeling good about their imaginary friend.
Shersher:Quote: It’s a moral issue plain and simple.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its aready settled. In the Bible its called an abomination and sin.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You believe the Bible says it’s a sin - I do not. But regardless of what you and I believe about the Bible, it is not the law of the land, and it’s not illegal to sin. (Unless, of course, the sin you commit also happens to be against the law of the land) I might be going out on a limb here, but I’d say that there is not one Christian anywhere that follows all of the Bible’s teachings and laws!
Morality and law are not the same thing. An act can be immoral, or illegal, or sometimes it’s both. But just because something is illegal does not always mean it’s immoral, and vice versa. For example, it’s illegal to ride your bike on the sidewalk, but most people would not consider this to be immoral. On the other hand, lying to your parents is not illegal, but most people would consider this to be immoral.
And you do not have to be religious to be moral. There are many non-religious people who behave quite decently and who have good moral values, often many of the same moral values of their religious neighbors. How can you say you are acting from a moral sense if you obey a rule or follow a principle out of fear of eternal darnation or alienation from God?
If you want to follow some of the Bible’s teachings in addition to the laws of the land, that’s fine for you, but it isn’t necessary for everyone. Morality should be left to individual freedom and practice.
-----------------
Duck
I just got fed up with the many quotes concerning Thomas Jefferson and religion making him out to be such a great man. It seemed to be the right time and place to expose the man and the practices of that time.
All those claims about how Christain our founding fathers were just about all I could take.
Yes it was common practice to marry off little girls to older men in those days. Many girls were having babies at age l3 which permanently stunted their growth. No matter how common the practice, it was still immoral and would be considered today to be pedophilia..
Slave men and women had no rights of any kind. It was also common practice for good Christain men who were also slave owners, to rape their slave women in order to breed more slaves. These moral men sold their own chilren as slaves. That was very Christain of them don’t you think????
I posted that statement as a reaction to your hypocrisy.
The founding fathers were a real bunch of ......fill in the blanks for yourself. Most of them were lawyers or businessmen. All of them were landowners. You do realize that in order to vote back in those days, a man had to be a landowner. The right to vote was not extended to anyone else. Hardly an example of representational government. Women did not get the right to vote until the 1920’s. A war had to be fought to free the slaves. The original inhabitants of this country were being slaughtered by the Army and driven into concentration camps. etc. etc. etc.
I promise to post more historial facts if ever I see another post about the Christain morality of our founding fathers on this or any other forum available.
State your case and your opinions freely as it is your right to do so. But spare me the lies and hypocrisy about how this nation was founded on Christain principles and morals.
Carpe diem from Henrietta
Henirietta:Civil rights insure that all citizens will have an equal opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The Consitution has been amended as the need arises.
In this case, no ammendment is needed because it is already illegal to discriminate against any group on the basis of sex, race, or religion.
The religious right believes that God will punish a nation of sinners. They keep mentioning the two Biblical cities that were supposed to have been destroyed because of homosexuality. Completly ignoring the reasons stated in the Bible for the destruction of those two cities. Look it up in your Bible and read the entire story from the time that the Angels visit Abraham right on through Lot’s wife.
If you are living in fear of a repetetion of the Old Testament days, then continue to enjoy your right to do so.
If you are so righteous, then what do you have to fear when God destroys sinners? Unless you are a sinner, this will not affect you, will it? Remember that according to the Christian belief system God is a Just God. Would a Just God destroy his loyal servants? If so, then He can’t be a Just God can he?
If/when such destruction does occur, then all of you good Christians will be rid of all of us bad people who do not agree with you. Wouldn’t that make you happy?
In the meantime, the right to be married regardless of your sexual orientation is still a civil right. The denial of this civil right is discrimination.
In the past, the courts have upheld many discriminatory practices until someone wins a case putting those actions aside. That is the future in this case as well.
It may takes years to finally obtain this right for the gay community, but it will happen eventually.
Obstruct justice if you will. Enjoy spreading hatred, intolerance and discrimination to your heart’s content.
But live in the knowledge that right prevails over time.
If you are not able to believe that, then just read history. And realize that there are many injustices that still need to be set right, in the future. This is only one of many.
Greenslime:You have all missed the point!
There have been many laws passed in this country by the "majority" that were discriminatory to the minority, and subsequently, they were stricken down by courts or in the case of slavery - a war.
My point is that in future years, when the religious right is no longer in the white house, these stupid illegal laws will be stricken down as well.
Marriage began as a religious issue, but that has been changed by the lawmakers of this country when they made it a financial issue. What is really at stake here is our existing tax structure - if the right of marriage is given to homosexuals, what happens to our present tax laws, insurance laws, inheritance laws, etc.
Much the same as the large changes that were needed when women and blacks were given the right to vote. The big question to White America was - how do we stay in control if we give these people the same rights as us? We are still fighting that fight today - although through education, protests, and a lot of determination, the lot of women and blacks are much improved in our country. In ten years, we will look back upn this time and say,"I can’t believe that we were so intolerant to change."
At least, I hope so.
The hardest thing to open is a closed mind.
Flatlanddogs:
What is this obsession with gay marriage? Get a life.
Freethinker:Heroes are those who run into burning buildings to save lives, like Father Mychal Judge. Heroes are those like Mark Bingham who joined fellow passengers on United Flight 93 to prevent terrorists from crashing into the White House or Capitol Building. Heroes are the one million LGBT Americans and veterans that have served and are serving our country even when denied our own basic liberty we so valiantly fight to uphold.
To all of our heroes, thank you. To the families and friends of those who lost loved ones during 9/11, our salt tears, our wounded hearts, our firm embrace goes out to you.
Today, we ask all who read this to see each other for our commonality, not our division. We challenge us all to understand, support, love, and respect each other as equals. Those who kill, diminish, alienate and devalue are not part of a civilized world. The world’s future, as well as America’s, remains bright and full of hope. We will continue to join hands across the borders and politics and histories that try to keep us apart, united in the bold dream that peace and prosperity and possibility are within our grasp.
--- Source: Servicemembers Legal Defense Network
Henirietta:Radio
Yep, that is probably all you can see. Your selective vision seems to focus on the perverse, the negative and anything contrary to the celebration of human life on this planet.
The disease known as AIDS originated in the heterosexual communities in Africa. It has been spread there and elsewhere through sexual promiscuity by both homosexual and heterosexual contact. It has been further spread through contact with AIDS infected blood through injury, accident or even blood transfusions. Blood transfusions no longer present the danger of infection because of better screening practices.
The homosexual community is not the only source of AIDS infection. If you practice safe sex with all partners, you will probably not be infected. Of course the practice of safe sex does require the use of barrier contraceptive devices. It is my understanding that the Christian community is trying to prevent the sale and use of barrier contraceptive devices in the USA. If the Christians succeed in making these devices unavailable, then we can all look forward to an increase of people, of both sexes, being infected with AIDS.
The next epidemic may well be caused through the efforts of the religious extremists among us.
Keep on doing all that good work!
Carpe diem from Henrietta
PS You still can’t admit that you ever made a mistake, can you?
aggiecwby:Radio
Yep, that is probably all you can see. Your selective vision seems to focus on the perverse, the negative and anything contrary to the celebration of human life on this planet.
The disease known as AIDS originated in the heterosexual communities in Africa. It has been spread there and elsewhere through sexual promiscuity by both homosexual and heterosexual contact. It has been further spread through contact with AIDS infected blood through injury, accident or even blood transfusions. Blood transfusions no longer present the danger of infection because of better screening practices.
The homosexual community is not the only source of AIDS infection. If you practice safe sex with all partners, you will probably not be infected. Of course the practice of safe sex does require the use of barrier contraceptive devices. It is my understanding that the Christian community is trying to prevent the sale and use of barrier contraceptive devices in the USA. If the Christians succeed in making these devices unavailable, then we can all look forward to an increase of people, of both sexes, being infected with AIDS.
The next epidemic may well be caused through the efforts of the religious extremists among us.
Keep on doing all that good work!
Carpe diem from Henrietta
PS You still can’t admit that you ever made a mistake, can you?
aggiecwby: Quote: Originally posted by rayno3 on 27 October 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The pink triangle sounds like a good idea. See, even Hitler was not ALL bad-------
Ray
You either have a bad sense of humor, or you are a sick puppy.
aggiecwby:
Quote: Originally posted by otis25pig on 26 October 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When you start giving benefits to gay couples you run into alot of problems. First they will want family health coverage. And they will also attempt to get medical assistance through govt. programs that is now only available to single mothers. I can see it now, adopt a child and say, give me the coverage the single mother gets.
this will add to the pool of people getting this assistance and will probably cause someone to say, "Lets raise taxes to continue to support this program"
There will be a flood of people attempting to get these coverages because they can’t get it on their right now because of the current healthcare situation, and right now, this will only make it worse.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t think your assessment is quite right. First, gays already pay into the system and they should get whatever benefits other straight folks get. Or, let them be exempt from taxes that go for these benefits.
Next, some gays may choose to adopt children...but it wouldn’t be for tax benefits--that would be just stupid. Generallly, people who can afford to adopt don’t need government assistance.
Gays pay WAY more into the system than those who would use the system the way you portray. Besides, what if a gay man married a gay woman (it DOES happen). Now, suddenly they deserve family healthcare, that others don’t? No, if you pay for a healthcare plan as an individual, you get that coverage. If you pay the family rate, it costs more, and you get family coverage. I would guess most straight family rates cover the Father, Mother, and at least one child...probably more. Most gay couples would not have children at all. Which is more of a drain on the system?
Quote: Originally posted by rayno3 on 06 September 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from aggiecwby: There is no proof that it would morally decay our society.
****History says you are wrong about that. Look at all the defunct societies of which we have such records. If we have records of their societal mores, we find that the decay of morals preceeded their decline and downfall. The first that comes to my mind is ancient Rome. Remember Caligula? Of course, you will probably say there is no connection, but many historians say there was.
Ray
oh, there was moral decay alright. but two guy boinking didn’t cause it. how about greed and wars and invasions.
Aggiecwby
The irony is that most marriages end up in divorce so how sacred can it be for the marriages that are one man and one woman---Flat
-----------------------------------------------------------
Just a simple lesson on how satistics can be manipulated. Whenever numbers like these are given out they are misleading. The reason is that there are a lot of people who have been married and divorced multiple times. These people skew the numbers. I do not know if I am making myself clear. I personnally know several people who have been married 5 times each.The actual number of 1st time marriages that last is far greater than 50% when you factor out the multiples.I’m afraid I have forgotten the true number and I hesitate guessing for fear of being wrong. As for Gays,I truly believe that they do not have a choice as to their sexual orientation.I support civil unions.
Freethinker: The right-wing fundamentalists have their own definition of marriage and that is fine for their individual churches where they can decide who should get married. But the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman is not the definition held by all Christian churches or other some religions or the nonreligious.
We must not allow the radical right to apply by amendment their narrow definition. All human beings are born FREE and EQUAL in dignity and rights, but the right-wing cannot figure that out.
Gays should be allowed to marry as a matter of equal rights. Being gay is neither evil nor odd. Latest estimates suggest that 1 in 10 people are gay. Each ought to have a choice in who they marry.
America is neither a "Christian nation" nor a heterosexual nation. We are far more diverse than that. For right-wingers to call us anything else is an abomination to "liberty and justice for all" and to "all men are created equal".
I might also add that the majority of these people are straight.... But they are getting it from the relgious right..And they are standing up to it.
Mark Taylor: think that what gets the christians all riled up about gay marriage is that , in reality, marriage is a religious rite. I’m kind of old, and putting the words gay and marriage together took quite a bit of accustomizing. Somehow, even for me, the words don’t seem to fit together. So we should allow the christians to retain their rite of marriage. These days, with more than half of marriages ending in divorce, the sanctity is moot.
Civil unions that allow gays the same legal rights should be in the forefront.
But now, on a broader front, if I were to ask a christian what they did in the bedroom, they would be greatly offended , being that it was none of my business. And rightly so. However, we have the American christian puritanical , racist , bigoted, hateful society that condones asking certain individuals what they do in the bedroom. They believe that it is their MORAL right to do so.
Now the captain of this diseased ship, the war criminal w. bush comes out against gay marriage. But , why does he dress exactly like the cowboys in "Brokeback Mountain"? Because most homophobes are latent homosexuals.
Civil unions would solve the problem and leave the christians feeling good about their imaginary friend.
Shersher:Quote: It’s a moral issue plain and simple.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its aready settled. In the Bible its called an abomination and sin.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You believe the Bible says it’s a sin - I do not. But regardless of what you and I believe about the Bible, it is not the law of the land, and it’s not illegal to sin. (Unless, of course, the sin you commit also happens to be against the law of the land) I might be going out on a limb here, but I’d say that there is not one Christian anywhere that follows all of the Bible’s teachings and laws!
Morality and law are not the same thing. An act can be immoral, or illegal, or sometimes it’s both. But just because something is illegal does not always mean it’s immoral, and vice versa. For example, it’s illegal to ride your bike on the sidewalk, but most people would not consider this to be immoral. On the other hand, lying to your parents is not illegal, but most people would consider this to be immoral.
And you do not have to be religious to be moral. There are many non-religious people who behave quite decently and who have good moral values, often many of the same moral values of their religious neighbors. How can you say you are acting from a moral sense if you obey a rule or follow a principle out of fear of eternal darnation or alienation from God?
If you want to follow some of the Bible’s teachings in addition to the laws of the land, that’s fine for you, but it isn’t necessary for everyone. Morality should be left to individual freedom and practice.
-----------------
Duck
I just got fed up with the many quotes concerning Thomas Jefferson and religion making him out to be such a great man. It seemed to be the right time and place to expose the man and the practices of that time.
All those claims about how Christain our founding fathers were just about all I could take.
Yes it was common practice to marry off little girls to older men in those days. Many girls were having babies at age l3 which permanently stunted their growth. No matter how common the practice, it was still immoral and would be considered today to be pedophilia..
Slave men and women had no rights of any kind. It was also common practice for good Christain men who were also slave owners, to rape their slave women in order to breed more slaves. These moral men sold their own chilren as slaves. That was very Christain of them don’t you think????
I posted that statement as a reaction to your hypocrisy.
The founding fathers were a real bunch of ......fill in the blanks for yourself. Most of them were lawyers or businessmen. All of them were landowners. You do realize that in order to vote back in those days, a man had to be a landowner. The right to vote was not extended to anyone else. Hardly an example of representational government. Women did not get the right to vote until the 1920’s. A war had to be fought to free the slaves. The original inhabitants of this country were being slaughtered by the Army and driven into concentration camps. etc. etc. etc.
I promise to post more historial facts if ever I see another post about the Christain morality of our founding fathers on this or any other forum available.
State your case and your opinions freely as it is your right to do so. But spare me the lies and hypocrisy about how this nation was founded on Christain principles and morals.
Carpe diem from Henrietta
Henirietta:Civil rights insure that all citizens will have an equal opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The Consitution has been amended as the need arises.
In this case, no ammendment is needed because it is already illegal to discriminate against any group on the basis of sex, race, or religion.
The religious right believes that God will punish a nation of sinners. They keep mentioning the two Biblical cities that were supposed to have been destroyed because of homosexuality. Completly ignoring the reasons stated in the Bible for the destruction of those two cities. Look it up in your Bible and read the entire story from the time that the Angels visit Abraham right on through Lot’s wife.
If you are living in fear of a repetetion of the Old Testament days, then continue to enjoy your right to do so.
If you are so righteous, then what do you have to fear when God destroys sinners? Unless you are a sinner, this will not affect you, will it? Remember that according to the Christian belief system God is a Just God. Would a Just God destroy his loyal servants? If so, then He can’t be a Just God can he?
If/when such destruction does occur, then all of you good Christians will be rid of all of us bad people who do not agree with you. Wouldn’t that make you happy?
In the meantime, the right to be married regardless of your sexual orientation is still a civil right. The denial of this civil right is discrimination.
In the past, the courts have upheld many discriminatory practices until someone wins a case putting those actions aside. That is the future in this case as well.
It may takes years to finally obtain this right for the gay community, but it will happen eventually.
Obstruct justice if you will. Enjoy spreading hatred, intolerance and discrimination to your heart’s content.
But live in the knowledge that right prevails over time.
If you are not able to believe that, then just read history. And realize that there are many injustices that still need to be set right, in the future. This is only one of many.
Greenslime:You have all missed the point!
There have been many laws passed in this country by the "majority" that were discriminatory to the minority, and subsequently, they were stricken down by courts or in the case of slavery - a war.
My point is that in future years, when the religious right is no longer in the white house, these stupid illegal laws will be stricken down as well.
Marriage began as a religious issue, but that has been changed by the lawmakers of this country when they made it a financial issue. What is really at stake here is our existing tax structure - if the right of marriage is given to homosexuals, what happens to our present tax laws, insurance laws, inheritance laws, etc.
Much the same as the large changes that were needed when women and blacks were given the right to vote. The big question to White America was - how do we stay in control if we give these people the same rights as us? We are still fighting that fight today - although through education, protests, and a lot of determination, the lot of women and blacks are much improved in our country. In ten years, we will look back upn this time and say,"I can’t believe that we were so intolerant to change."
At least, I hope so.
The hardest thing to open is a closed mind.
Flatlanddogs:
What is this obsession with gay marriage? Get a life.
Freethinker:Heroes are those who run into burning buildings to save lives, like Father Mychal Judge. Heroes are those like Mark Bingham who joined fellow passengers on United Flight 93 to prevent terrorists from crashing into the White House or Capitol Building. Heroes are the one million LGBT Americans and veterans that have served and are serving our country even when denied our own basic liberty we so valiantly fight to uphold.
To all of our heroes, thank you. To the families and friends of those who lost loved ones during 9/11, our salt tears, our wounded hearts, our firm embrace goes out to you.
Today, we ask all who read this to see each other for our commonality, not our division. We challenge us all to understand, support, love, and respect each other as equals. Those who kill, diminish, alienate and devalue are not part of a civilized world. The world’s future, as well as America’s, remains bright and full of hope. We will continue to join hands across the borders and politics and histories that try to keep us apart, united in the bold dream that peace and prosperity and possibility are within our grasp.
--- Source: Servicemembers Legal Defense Network
Henirietta:Radio
Yep, that is probably all you can see. Your selective vision seems to focus on the perverse, the negative and anything contrary to the celebration of human life on this planet.
The disease known as AIDS originated in the heterosexual communities in Africa. It has been spread there and elsewhere through sexual promiscuity by both homosexual and heterosexual contact. It has been further spread through contact with AIDS infected blood through injury, accident or even blood transfusions. Blood transfusions no longer present the danger of infection because of better screening practices.
The homosexual community is not the only source of AIDS infection. If you practice safe sex with all partners, you will probably not be infected. Of course the practice of safe sex does require the use of barrier contraceptive devices. It is my understanding that the Christian community is trying to prevent the sale and use of barrier contraceptive devices in the USA. If the Christians succeed in making these devices unavailable, then we can all look forward to an increase of people, of both sexes, being infected with AIDS.
The next epidemic may well be caused through the efforts of the religious extremists among us.
Keep on doing all that good work!
Carpe diem from Henrietta
PS You still can’t admit that you ever made a mistake, can you?
aggiecwby:Radio
Yep, that is probably all you can see. Your selective vision seems to focus on the perverse, the negative and anything contrary to the celebration of human life on this planet.
The disease known as AIDS originated in the heterosexual communities in Africa. It has been spread there and elsewhere through sexual promiscuity by both homosexual and heterosexual contact. It has been further spread through contact with AIDS infected blood through injury, accident or even blood transfusions. Blood transfusions no longer present the danger of infection because of better screening practices.
The homosexual community is not the only source of AIDS infection. If you practice safe sex with all partners, you will probably not be infected. Of course the practice of safe sex does require the use of barrier contraceptive devices. It is my understanding that the Christian community is trying to prevent the sale and use of barrier contraceptive devices in the USA. If the Christians succeed in making these devices unavailable, then we can all look forward to an increase of people, of both sexes, being infected with AIDS.
The next epidemic may well be caused through the efforts of the religious extremists among us.
Keep on doing all that good work!
Carpe diem from Henrietta
PS You still can’t admit that you ever made a mistake, can you?
aggiecwby: Quote: Originally posted by rayno3 on 27 October 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The pink triangle sounds like a good idea. See, even Hitler was not ALL bad-------
Ray
You either have a bad sense of humor, or you are a sick puppy.
aggiecwby:
Quote: Originally posted by otis25pig on 26 October 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When you start giving benefits to gay couples you run into alot of problems. First they will want family health coverage. And they will also attempt to get medical assistance through govt. programs that is now only available to single mothers. I can see it now, adopt a child and say, give me the coverage the single mother gets.
this will add to the pool of people getting this assistance and will probably cause someone to say, "Lets raise taxes to continue to support this program"
There will be a flood of people attempting to get these coverages because they can’t get it on their right now because of the current healthcare situation, and right now, this will only make it worse.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t think your assessment is quite right. First, gays already pay into the system and they should get whatever benefits other straight folks get. Or, let them be exempt from taxes that go for these benefits.
Next, some gays may choose to adopt children...but it wouldn’t be for tax benefits--that would be just stupid. Generallly, people who can afford to adopt don’t need government assistance.
Gays pay WAY more into the system than those who would use the system the way you portray. Besides, what if a gay man married a gay woman (it DOES happen). Now, suddenly they deserve family healthcare, that others don’t? No, if you pay for a healthcare plan as an individual, you get that coverage. If you pay the family rate, it costs more, and you get family coverage. I would guess most straight family rates cover the Father, Mother, and at least one child...probably more. Most gay couples would not have children at all. Which is more of a drain on the system?
Quote: Originally posted by rayno3 on 06 September 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from aggiecwby: There is no proof that it would morally decay our society.
****History says you are wrong about that. Look at all the defunct societies of which we have such records. If we have records of their societal mores, we find that the decay of morals preceeded their decline and downfall. The first that comes to my mind is ancient Rome. Remember Caligula? Of course, you will probably say there is no connection, but many historians say there was.
Ray
oh, there was moral decay alright. but two guy boinking didn’t cause it. how about greed and wars and invasions.
Aggiecwby