Travis wrote:
Running around in barefeet, I stubbed my toe. As I looked around for some sympathy from my pops, my 6 year old voice began to quiver and tears began to well up in my eyes. Once I made eye contact with Dad, I would let out a real cry so that he would pick me up and make it all right. But, that isn't how it would play out.

My dad reached down and rubbed my blond head and said, "shake it off Big T." Trying to live up to that name, I would stick my toe in the warm dirt to make the pain go away. At six years old, I was learning the how-to's of manhood from a man who grew up in the era of John Wayne, Charlton Heston, Warren Spahn, and Ted Williams.

Somewhere in the span between that time and this, the John Waynes have become interior decorators and the MySpace message board for my alma mater has been over run by guys impersonating gals and dudes who are afraid to eat an egg for fear of damaging the creation of a God they believe does not exist.

Of course, my lament will do nothing but throw the effeminate guys into a tissy. My MySpace account will probably get spammed with electronic color-coordinated cat scratches. But, hopefully, it will cause the dudes who are in doubt about the gender given to them at birth by their Creator or cosmic coincidence (whichever their fully-formed 19 year old minds are fully assured of) to reaffirm that its cool to be a man.

So, gentlemen- change your MySpace layouts from your presently lavender/purple combo and start a campfire, go fishing, shoot something, play basketball, watch some football with your hand tucked conveniently into your waistband, or do something that reaffirms that you are in fact a guy. And, by all means, if these few words on the world wide web are deemed a little bit offensive by you, shake it off and put some dirt on it. Its going to be ok.

Coach Torres wrote:
Yo Travis, I'm here brother. Thank you for your candour. Oh how great it would be to settle matters like in the old days. Imagine a John Wayne and a six shooter versus an interior decorator and his book of fabric samples. Easy to know who would win.

Yes, that is fictional and a stereotypical and chauvinistic. So let's talk reality. Being that I am speaking to Lee Alumni my reality is based upon the Holy Bible whose author is Jehovah, God Almighty, The Creator of the Heavens and the Earth, and yes, Man. As I have read over the Word I have noticed that HE uses many of his children as examples. In these include (but not limited to) are adulterers, prostitutes, military leaders, Kings, prophets, Virgins, shephards, cowards, etc. Yes, none of these people were perfect, but one thing they were not effeminate. The men were men and women were woman. So, to the brother called, "Big Bear" or something like that, I would kindly refer you to The Bible as to a starting point. To make any argument without the Word of God as the foundation is futile. Once one begins to study and observe the men and women in the Bible clarity is revealed.

Another good example of a man would be the kind strong enough to stand upon the Word of God and initiate a Message Board like this one.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dear Sir, I will gladly stand on my previous posting long before I would stand on this heap of abstraction that you try to pass off as being true to fact. That Bible writers may have cast a kind light on some people and a bad light on others is no indication that they were writing any objective truth, and certainly doesn't do much for your so call "Word of God" assertions. Reasons abound that lead us to believe that effeminate men, butch women, and homosexuals have been a normal part of human populations all over the world, and they've contribute well to making life on planet earth easier to enjoy without harm. Your phrase "the men were men and the women were women" is nothing more than an expression of your own prejudice and enslavement to what I have already called socially constructed idiocy.

Incidentally, I have read many Bibles from cover to cover, and I have college transcripts that show that I own an earned degree in Bible. I feel certain you're tempted to say I've "backslidden, " "become liberal, " "strayed from THE TRUTH." Based upon that hunch, I'll simply say that I've judged some opinions more trustworthy than others, and the one you just posted ain't nowhere near one of them.

I would judge that the strenght about which you wrote isn't strength at all. It is nothing more that blind applaud for brown nosing motivated by chronic terror.

Travis wrote:
Ron,

If you reject the same Scriptures you have read from cover to cover so many times, then why the love/hate affair with Lee and the ensuing crusade to point out its intolerance? That doesn't seem very tolerant to me.

You have no logical or Scriptural basis for your argument against the intolerance of Lee.

travis


P.S. Peace to Izzy, Sheila, and others who are not so much offended by people living a gay lifestyle but who definitely notice the hypocrisy of intolerance that is obvious in Ron's and other's bitter and Scripturally unfaithful perspective on Lee University.

Travis wrote:
Ron,

After reading your comments to Coach Israel in reference to Scripture as truth and Scripture as the "Word of God, " you said:

------
(Ron) "That Bible writers may have cast a kind light on some people and a bad light on others is no indication that they were writing any objective truth, and certainly doesn't do much for your so call "Word of God" assertions."

*** There is no rejection of the Bible here. However, an objection to an arguement is being started. I wish you had posted the rest of it. Your judgement call here is false.
-------

I never said you hated the Bible. I did say you rejected it as truth and your previous posts agree strongly. Your previous comments agree with my conclusion. Concerning your disdain for Lee, you said:

*** There is NO equation between what I have posted and your judgement call here.

-------
(Ron) "LU has the inalienable right to shield its pretentiousness, perpetuate stupidity, hold on to errors of knowledge, mix half-truths in with some other truths, celebrate prejudiced thinking, and hang whoever it chooses in support of all that....We're not interested in cultivating logical thinkers. We'd rather produce parrot regurgitaters of words and sentences for the sake of conformity, after all there is power in numbers.""

*** That is NOT an accusation about LU. That is not even a judgement call. It is a proposition. I could have state it about ANY institution, and it would stand, would it not? I am not claiming that LU is actually doing any of these things. I am simply claiming that it has the right to do so. In any case, I've not made a judgement call against LU. Once again, your charge is false. The equation isn't there.
-------

Just be honest about what you are about. You reject the truths of Scripture, condemn students, faculty, almumni, and the school itself for nothing other than affirming a Judeo Christian value system. In your rush to be offended by my call to Lee men to be men oriented toward a woman, capable of producing offspring, and affirming Biblical Christianity, you fail to even produce a legitimate rational argument for your position (a position of intolerance toward the basic tenents of an evangelical Christian university), much less a Biblical foundation as Israel wisely pointed us to.

*** Have I rejected truth? No. Have I condemned anyone? No. Was I offended by anything? Absolutely not. Have I condemned an arguement or two or three? Yes. Do I think many of your statements are an offense against truth? Yes.

*** My rationales are clearly stated and open to everyone's judgement call. Are they true? Let everyone judge them well.


If you want to be gay, I affirm your right to be gay. But, I also affirm my right to point out the weakness of your position as it relates to your complaints about the identity of Lee University.

*** Smokescreen. My being (or not being) Gay has nothing to do with my statements, and does nothing to show my statements to be true or false. You have NOT pointed out any weakness in ANY of my arguements. What you have done is made one false judgement call after another. You've labeled other arguements as "intolerant" when they differed from YOUR perspective of matters. You've labeled others as intolerant when they do not surrender to how YOU wish to frame the issues.

His Big Bear Ron wrote:
Well, to me what you said here wasn't offensive as much as it was a blantant perpetuation of partial truths here and there which, I'll bet, do more to fuel moral depravity than anything else.

The picture you painted here of "masculinity" is nothing more than socially constructed idiocy, and offers nothing to anyone desiring to promote honesty, integrity, facts, and that sort of thing.

The premise of your logical fiasco is that "masculinity" (especially as you have described it) is inherent in nature. Why don't you point out exactly where that is?

Jon Stamos Investigates! wrote:
"So, gentlemen- change your MySpace layouts from your presently lavender/purple combo and start a campfire, go fishing, shoot something, play basketball, watch some football with your hand tucked conveniently into your waistband, or do something that reaffirms that you are in fact a guy. And, by all means, if these few words on the world wide web are deemed a little bit offensive by you, shake it off and put some dirt on it. Its going to be ok."

so because i enjoy art and am not at all interested in hunting, fishing, basketball or cupping my balls as i watch tv, i'm not a real man?

that could be the most closed-minded, idiotic thing i've ever heard.

that's the equivalent of saying HAYGUYS! ALL SOFTBALL PLAYERS ARE DIKES LOL!!

it's guys like you that always had to put other people down to make themselves feel like a man. the football player who thought it'd be funny to give the skinny pale kid a wedgie.

but that's ok. i've loved a woman. i can look you square in the eye without a flinch. i'll protect those i love with my life.

and i'll still do my art without giving a second thought to your ridiculous regulations of maledom.

and your interpretation of scripture is not the benchmark by which we all measure our own interpretations. it's not even close. if i had to rely on man to tell me what the Bible should mean to me, i'd still be an atheist.

take your dirt and put it over your mouth, huge bro nuts. once you've learned what it means to be a real man and not a john wayne clone, feel free to spit.