To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *25856 (-20)
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
Hello! (...) This thread is the reason why a LGBT subgroup is needed now. Because NOW nobody who was involved in this thread has an unbiassed view upon this matter anymore. ;) Bye Jojo (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is LUGNET what you really want? (Was: Re: Lavender Brick Society)
 
(...) Except it'd more likely be lugnet.people.(your country).(your state).(your city).(your street).kyle., just in the unforseen circumstance that there is another Kyle. Don't get me wrong, I reckon lugnet.(incredibly convoluted heirarchy).kyle (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people, lugnet.org, FTX)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
"Jeff Pelletier" <jeff@studio7733.com> wrote in message news:I496JG.Io6@lugnet.com... snipped some old stuff. (...) more and (...) to (...) in (...) No (...) is (...) think (...) would (...) speak (...) ignorant to (...) civil (...) can't (...) (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) I couldn't agree more with what David said. As a gay person, I ask no more and no less than to speak equally with someone. If a straight person I talk to mentions "I went to the Lego store with my wife, blah blah blah" then I do in fact desire (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Is LUGNET what you really want? (Was: Re: Lavender Brick Society)
 
(...) Wow, controversy on LUGNET. Will wonders never cease? ;] Damn I'm going to regret this. Oh well, as long as my post is more coherent than JAL's, I've done good. ;] I have formed a theory. Here's a pictorial representation of part of my theory: (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people, lugnet.org)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) But here, we can discuss and remain largely civil. Chris (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: “family-safe” ? (Re: Lavender Brick Society)
 
(...) Ah! So you're merely incorrect. (...) I think you've confused the sides here. You've described yourself pretty perfectly, as far as I can infer. Chris (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) I thought it was insane asylum inmates. Chris (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) No. (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) No, many people are bi. Gays are gay and straights are straight. Everyone else is bi. Chris (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) overt (...) I'll accept that if you never mention your wife... Or indicate that Ross is your son (since that also comes with pre-conceived baggage about your sexuality - or even firm baggage if some folks have their way and only man-woman (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) I have NO problem with that. It should be the norm. (...) Because to lock it in taboo damages people. I know you get off on people being harmed in various ways, but most of us do not. (...) ??? What a crock. (...) The historical body of (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) The tone of your post fairly well indicates that you're hetero, you're not okay with LGBT lifestyles, and you don't really think it should be completely left to Todd to decide. I'd say you failed on the right parts and succeeded on the wrong (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) Alfred: Name-calling like this just isn't helpful. In theory, the word naturally has one clear definition. In reality, everyone has a different definition of what the word means. --Todd (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) Well, before you snipped it, the particular point being discussed was PDA. (...) The point I was trying to make is that sexuality is private thing and that overt attempts to disclose personal matters is appropriate IMO. (...) ARRRG (not (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) Thank you, Lewis. -Tim (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) I agree James, Lugnet is about lego, it is not about race, creed, politics, or sexual orientation. Like it or not, sexual orientation is a controversial subject. Some people on this group strongly disagree with the lifestyle, some strongly (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX) !! 
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) Not picking on you particularly Jojo, since this has been said several times by several people in different ways in this thread. There are a couple of points here. Firstly, heterosexuals frequently mention their sexual orientation. How? By (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) That's not what's being debated here. The public display of sexual orientation is. There is a hugely vast difference between having an orgy in the nearest intersection and publicly acknowledging that your SO shops in the same section of the (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Lavender Brick Society
 
(...) No, they think it's performance art. Voyeurs think it's a spectator sport. (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR