OK, fair enough, but I still think you're implying something ridiculous 
here...I noticed you didn't respond to the marriage comment, either.  I 
mean, you put a reference to marriage in the subject, then played th 
passive-aggressive card (or actually, in this case it would be 
aggressive-passive), saying "I didn't make any statements".  But that's 
not really what I wanted to know about anyways.

To put it bluntly: Are you saying that if we let two Homosexshuls get 
married, we should let Fifi and her owner get married, too?

Chesty Puller wrote:
> I didn't make any statements, I asked why was it harmful to the dog. It 
> probably is harmful, but I don't know why it is, and I was asking Gel to 
> explain why it was since he seemed to know about the research.  Sometimes 
> questions are meant to be answered as they are asked.
> 
> - Matt
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ray Champagne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 2:52 PM
> Subject: Re: Maybe one day we'll allow them to get married.
> 
> 
> 
>>Dude, are you serious?  Are you asking why sexually assaulting a dog is
>>harmful to the dog?  Would you like it?
>>
>>And I'm sorry, but if you're fishing at comparing homosexual marriage to
>>man and dog, it just is not comparable.  One's the conscious decision of
>>two willing persons, the other is abuse of an animal, plain and simple.
>> They just aren't the same, and I get tried of hearing that argument...
>>
>>Chesty Puller wrote:
>>
>>>Does this research exist? How would you get it?  Why is it harmful?
>>>
>>>- Matt
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>>From: "Vivec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>To: "CF-Community" <[email protected]>
>>>Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 2:40 PM
>>>Subject: Re: Maybe one day we'll allow them to get married.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Yup.
>>>>Soon people will be marrying their dogs.
>>>>*smirk*
>>>>Why should ANYTHING be seen as immoral after all?
>>>>
>>>>The fact that the writer didn't touch on the research which says such
>>>>interactions are harmful to the animal and should fall under Cruelty
>>>>to animals is interesting.
>>>>
>>>>On 12/28/05, Chesty Puller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>http://www.slate.com/id/103801/
>>>>>
>>>>>- Matt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support 
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:189972
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to