"The same people who believe that a Jewish woman named Mary conceived a child without having sex are now trying to teach us that the only way to not get pregnant is by not having sex."
Really...and the same people who falsely accuse criticize believers of the above try to convince mankind that killing unborn babies for convenience is simply not wrong...they would feel quite comfortable with Dr Mengele.
Arguing with my signature? Lolz.
Except that me having two pitchers of beer last night and telling my wife I only had one is NOT the same ...
No I'm making a statement about you. I would have thought you would have 'comprehended' that.
Does your newspaper not carry a crime section or something?
So you're arguing with my signature? Quit trying to derail this thread. Make another thread to complain about my signature.
I have no complaints about your signature. Nor am I argueing. Simply made an observation.
No complaint, yet you purposely ignored my post - which had - zero... to do with my signature to address my signature. Hahahahah. Keep at'er bud.
When you post something worth a response I'll do so. Have a really great day.
Oh good, you know how to read. Now let's see if you understand what you've read.... I won't hold my breath.
Well, good thing I didAn't hold it. What I said doesn't mean that sexuality translates into social status. They are correlated. Do you know what that means? I'll give you a clue: Correlation =/= Causation. I said that they are generally far more educated, well paid etc than straight men which may be the reason as to why there is so much envy and falsehood being spread about them. Not that they are more educated, well paid etc because they're gay. See why reading comprehension is important?
This is supported if one considers that the overwhelming majority of those opposed to homosexuality tend to be found in lower education social groups, less money etc. Protestant blacks, Social conservatives, evangelicals etc. You don't find well off conservatives rattling their sabers against gay marriage unless they're trying to sell a book.
The only absurd thing here is that you failed to comprehend such a simple statement. No child left behind truly was a failure.
Compensating? No. I'm arguing homophobes are seeking to bring attention for their failed lives. Not compensating for it. Compensating would mean you're actually replacing it with something of remote equivalency. However, seeking attention is definitely not equivalent to living a failed life.
Spare me the big words buddy. You failed to comprehend a simple statement. It's too late to pretend you do now.
Wow, more blowhard-ish nonsense wrapped in theasaurus.com. So if someone disagrees with the gay cause, that correlates, in your internet-intensive lifestyle, to certain evidence of an empty and failed lifestyle. What a desperately hopeless example of deductive reasoning that is.
We can't compare investment portfolios, check stubs, and life resumes - an act which would be perfectly on par with your ridiculous argument - but I've got a pretty good idea who I'm bantering with, and leave it at we don't live in the same neighborhood or attend the same church.
Lol. Now go ahead and make wild assumptions about church-going people. I can't wait.
Among same-sex couples with both partners in the labor force, median household income is significantly higher ($94,000) than among heterosexual couples ($86,000). That's likely due to a number of factors, but education is likely one of them, says Gary Gates, a distinguished scholar at the Williams institute and the study's author. Around 46 percent of people in same-sex couples have college degrees, compared to under one-third of people in heterosexual couples. That higher level of education also likely contributes to higher incomes for same-sex households.
Respondents not only reported significantly higher annual incomes -- $61,500 compared with the national median of $50,054 -- but they also carried about $4,000 less in debt than the average American and had $6,000 more in household savings. They were even slightly more likely to have jobs in the first place, with an unemployment rate of 7% versus the national rate of 7.9%, Prudential found.
A combination of factors play into this, said Michele Meyer-Shipp, chief diversity officer at Prudential. To start, LGBT individuals are generally well-educated, with more than half of respondents receiving at least a bachelor's degree, and tend to live in higher-income areas, she said.
Breaking up with a babe because you can't get her to brush her teeth, or put the toilet seat down when she's done is one thing, breaking up with her after lying to her for 7 years makes him a scum bag! The distinction is worth exploring.
Tim-
Exactly like that except different in every meaningful way.
Nobody ever killed themselves because they were afraid to post in an internet thread.
1.) so there will be a change based on this :shrug:
3.) "I" dont want it to be anything more than what i think it is and that is possible the first openly gay pro-athlete and thats awesome.
1.)What change? What is it going to be?
2.)Being first does not make one great. Someone had to be first at murder and theft too. So just being first in and of itself proves nothing, nor is it indication of ground breaking impact on a dying sport.
1.) you already defined some of them/
"some will make noise, others will accept, others won't care."
"There wasn't really anything to "break" here other than random people's attitudes that being gay is icky. "
and it will be easier for others for multiple reasons, many in the league have praised him. Him coming out and getting praise is a big deal.
2.) LMAO there you go again i didnt say it "makes him great" you say you arent emotional but your post definitely suggest otherwise.
being first is an groundbreaking in this case :shrug:
as far as impact on the sport NO, impact on the its landscape YES. because to make the landscape more gay friendly.
1.)No, what I listed is what is and what will nominally occur over time. You are saying he's making a change, I'm trying to get from you what that change will be. You have never addressed it, instead falling to lame "LMAO" dismiss comments. Some people said "good job!", well duh. To be expected, and not ground breaking change. Some percentage already supported gay athletes and would of course say "good for you!". So what's new? What's earth shattering? Can you at least give an actual response instead of juvenile "LAMO" responses?
anyway now things are already changed and IF he finds a homes things will be forever changed cause he'll be the first pro-athlete in major american sports to come out.
You're touting him for being first, yes? Or did you not write ""I" dont want it to be anything more than what i think it is and that is possible the first openly gay pro-athlete and thats awesome.". So it's great, yes? It's awesome that this guy could be the first. It's like you don't even know the words that are coming out of your mouth. And before you say "LMAO...I didn't say it, I wrote it"; I already understand, don't make stupid retorts.
That's just your supposition on the matter. But it's not going to be any more or less "gay friendly" than it is now, nor will it impact how "gay friendly" sports would ultimately become if left to their own devices. Nothing in this story, in this brouhaha suggests that there will be anything of substance to come from this.
What's especially annoying to me is that we have a "war" going on in Afghanistan, we have problems with NK, Iran, etc., children are abducted, missing, abused, killed, yet THIS is one of the top stories on the news? Really? :roll:
A.)"some will make noise, others will accept, others won't care." (the acceptance part is impacted)
b.) "There wasn't really anything to "break" here other than random people's attitudes that being gay is icky. " (yes now it wont be so icky, that was impacted)
c.) it will be easier for others to come out for multiple reasons (impact)
d.) many in the league have praised him. Him coming out and getting praise is a big deal. because it lets people know you have supports, REAL PUBLIC support which would have never been known without this move (impact)
What's especially annoying to me is that we have a "war" going on in Afghanistan, we have problems with NK, Iran, etc., children are abducted, missing, abused, killed, yet THIS is one of the top stories on the news? Really? :roll:
1.)Any proof beyond "because I said so"? Because it's really just you saying so.
2.)Assumption. This was already a decaying model, you offer no additional time rate changes.
Depends on reaction, and not at the beginning. Again, decaying trends so it will be easier regardless as time increases.
Assumption. Many probably do praise, I already addressed this. Real Public support effects have been assumed by you
1.) its happening NOW lmao
the articles in the OP are proof LMAO
2.) wrong again, the people in support disagree and then theres the stories, books, interviews and documentary that show how there was an icky factor. One link to one of the stories of an explayer and how he and others felt it wouldnt be safe to come out is in this thread.
4.) another lie, theres nothign assumed im going but those peoples owns words WOW dude you are desperate.
How greatly or how little, who knows but the impact is factual.
1.)It's been happening for a good long time now as public opinion has been swinging in favor of accepting the gay community. So....nothing new. Do you have any metric to claim that this dude coming out has led to an INCREASE in that already established trend?
2.)LMAO, LMAO, LMAO.....measured increase in rate? Got it? Or do you just have supposition and assumption and are pretending that an already existing trend is due to this new thing right now? Cause it seems the latter
3.)Indeed, of course in the 70's there was a lot less acceptance, even less going further back. As we've progressed, we've seen opinion and consciousness change. So how is this case, this guy coming out now, increased that rate of acceptance? I understand the trend, I know it's easier to come out now than in the past, and that in the future it will be even easier. Didn't take this guy to make it true. Thus if this is a notable event, there must be an effect, and thus you can show me an INCREASE. Did the time rate of decay increase, and can you show it; or is all you have "I said so!"? Cause at this point, LMAO, it seems to be the latter.
4.)No, I'm trying to get you to understand you're talking out of your ass. "because it lets people know you have supports, REAL PUBLIC support which would have never been known without this move". The assumption here is that his coming out CREATED REAL PUBLIC SUPPORT. The reality is that it's been there all along in the representative statistics and dynamics. This guy coming out does nothing to impact these numbers. If this is such a great and notable event, there will be affects on numbers. Did more people all of a sudden come out in support of the gay community? Public mind you, you claimed public. Where are the stats to prove the point? No...didn't think you had. So you want to call me a liar because I called out your assumptions, but you can do nothing to prove your assumptions any more than assumptions
5.)LMAO, and I think you just messed up. Cause this is what I've been saying to accurate degree. You're trying to claim this as some great event, that we should stand up and look at it, that because of it public opinion is swinging and demonstrated and blah blah blah blah. But here's the truth. You do not know. You've assumed the whole dynamic, you've supposed the entire effect. You have no idea, and no analysis to show any increase over baseline. But here's a remarkable event, yes? Redefining the sport or sport's world or whatever other BS you want to throw out there. And end of the day....YOU DO NOT KNOW. You say it's "factual", but only as cover for your ignorance on the data set. You have no proof of factual. You have no measurement of increase from baseline, you have nothing but your supposition and assumption. Thank you for admitting you've done nothing but suppose and assume the greatness of this event.
1.) reality disagrees with you. Nothing new? nah only players, owners, coaches, ex players, other sports players presidents ex presidents and movie stars all tweeting and face booking etc etc their approval and telling the player they are proud of him.
yep that happens all the time, nothing new at all LMAO
again REALITY anf facts prove you wrong, if you disagree just provide an example when this happened to another active NBA player that came out?
2.) see answer one, the articles prove you wrong unless you have an example of this happening to some other NAB player before for coming out. Reality trumps you again LMAO
3.) there you go again MAKING STUFF UP and arguing things nobody said, this type of dishonesty will never work on me or honest posters. Can you point where I said it isnt easier NOW than the 70S????
THe facts being discussed is IMPACT, your strawman loses and you fail again LMAO
4.)HHAHAHAHA here comes more emotional temper tantrums. ANother made up failed argument that doesnt change the fact it had an impact. But please feel freee to argue all the meaningless angry feelings you have and i will continue to point out the facts that it had an impact. Are all the players, coaches, articles, owners, president of the sport lying????? :lamo
didnt call you a liar i said you lied which you 100% did in fact lie :shrug:
I have zero assumptions im going by the people in the league that said so, but feel freet to tell them they are wrong and all liars :laughat: you fail again
5.) nice try ive been saying the impact is factual and you said it wasnt, wow another lie and back pedal LMAO it wont work dude. like ive been saying the impact is factual. The rest that you want to make up that YOU THINK i am saying based on your biased emotion is a completely failure because its your ASSUMPTIONS and nothin else. Meaningless exaggeration to deflect but the fact still remains it is a factual impact and the league says so, so does reality.
sorry this bothers you but this has impacted the NBA, period.
the proof is the league and people in it and whats happening, you lose.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?