Dan

Wouldn't spitting on an anti-Semite make you an anti-anti-Semite? How can you be intolerant of intolerants? Wouldn't that make you an intolerant person too? So what's the difference? And what IS the definition of anti-Semetism anyway? Does anti-Semetism mean "not kissing Jews' @sses"? And did you know that Arabs are Semites too? <---- Referring to the comment khodja made on people raised in the Middle East being anti-Semites. Dan

Boys and girls, lemme just ask this: Do you think Christianity is such a better or superior religion? Or that Christian Armenians are any less thieves, criminals, etc (when we take into consideration the population and number of killers among the population, and not compare it at face value with the Chinese)? And how can a nation that has faced so much intolerance due to religion do the same to its own people? I say, leave those two girls be. After all, we couldn't have decided to be Christians before we were born, could we have? Religion has become much like race - it's sort of habitual or traditional now. It has lost its meaning. It's called belief and faith. Accel, I'm sure you decided that you believed in Jesus when you were in your mom's womb, eh? Get over it, accept people for who they are. Muslims are no less people than Christians are. If you're going to compare people, don't do it based on their religion, do it based on their personality and collective value. And by the way, Armenians are Armenians first, then Christians. Christianity is an adjective, not a noun. Do you say "I am an Armenian Christian" or "I'm a Christian Armenian" when referring to yourself? Dan

Three words: Dan

Hello there, Asdghig, Welcome to HyeForum! Ummmmm, by visiting those sites, you're only adding to their counter - i.e. number of people who have visited the site (not necessarily to their site rating). And I mean, I don't think it matters, cos hey, I'm the webmaster of a local site at university, and it gets like 20,000 hits/month, but that doesn't signify anything. People visit, read, and leave - doesn't mean they necessarily agree. Just like I visit Jewish holocaust websites, doesn't mean I agree with what they say. But if you place the link on your website or give it to friends on a forum (thus putting up the hyperlink), it will definitely increase the search engine results if someone did a search on Armenians or the Armenian genocide. By the way, Sasun, thanks for pointing that out, I guess I was a bit swayed by my anger and didn't realize that I had linked to it. Dan

...AND the Canucks kicked some American @ss!!! OK, who thinks the puck was in (and the other goal should've been counted)? I think the refs were fair when they didn't count it, cos it didn't land properly - although, if the Canucks had lost the game, Manny's water bottle thingy should've been investigated and the team should've been penalized...) But all that is not necessary now (although it was a dirty tactic by Manny and his team), cos the CANUCKS won!!!!!!! GO CANUCKS GO! Dan

Man, the Canucks did it again!!!!! They tied the game 3-3 with 1.2 seconds to go!!!!!!! Man, that was great play. WOW, am still shocked. But anyhow, they did deserve it, after having one goal not counted (even though admittedly, the puck did hit the post for the Wilds twice ). I really hope the Canucks would win, at least on their field! Dan

You are wrong, my friend. To some blind men, the world is much much brighter than what those who do see, see... But I guess you're one of those people who "see" but can't discern? Dan

Well, each individual has a way of reacting to it. Did you know that those who have been abused react more strongly to another sexual assault or hints of contact of sexaul nature? Who knows what those kids' background and experiences were? Before going ahead and calling them racists, anti-Semites (which the Jewish community did, even though I believe there were no Jewish kids killed - or maybe one out of 12), we should first take a look at the abuse those kids took from others. Remember, if someone is raped and goes and kills the person who raped him/her, it's called the battered-person syndrome. People have been cleared of charges of murder on that basis. The mind is a weird thing - it has weird ways of functioning and reacting... Sometimes good, sometimes bad... Person 1 might be strong and might be able to tolerate gay-bashing and bullying, Person 2 might not be able to. Remember, many people are bullied (not necessarily for their homosexuality), but not all commit suicide - only some do. For some, it builds character, for some it builds anger and resentment, and for some, it builds despair, which eventually leads to an outburst... And no, bullying is not a fact of life. It can be stopped. If you look at the nature of bullying, you will see that all of it comes from the parents - the way the parents talk at home about homosexuals, Jews, Arabs, blacks, etc. It fills kids with anger and hatred, and because most of them don't have a good judgement at their age, it makes a huge impact on their personality. And yes, it DOES create murderers - murderers who are victims of the system. If those 2 kids were indeed gay and if there was gay-bashing against them and the teachers/supervisors did nothing to stop it, I think those supervisors should be held responsible for it, rather than those 2 kidss. Dan

Yes, and that would also explain why one of the two yelled 'who here is a Catholic?' (if I remember correctly), and when a girl jumped up and said 'I'm a Catholic!', they shot her. Perhaps that has something to do with the views of the Catholic church and community on homosexuality? Believe it or not, I don't view those 2 kids who shot the others as criminals. I think they were all victims of the cruel system we're all living in. We need to view the Columbine shootings in a compassionate manner, not with angry resentment. So that history wouldn't repeat itself. Dan

Sasun, Those who think they're doing a great job by attacking the other side instead of the other side's views, know nothing about what the hell debate is all about. Dan

Thoth, Are you sure you are first Armenian (in ancestry), and THEN American (in citizenship)? Cos you seem to be defending the US government more readily than you are defending Armenians or than you would defend the Armenian government. Dan

Sasun, I couldn't have said it any better. Bush's words (and other presidents' words before him) are like a double edged sword. They soothe and they kill. They soothe those who take it at face value, they kill (not literally) those who can read between the lines... It's like USA is throwing a bone to Armenians, saying, "here, we're commemmorating your great calamity (note that the killing of soldiers during war can be considered a calamity too), and that's good enough. So be happy with it and don't ask for more." Dan

Just one sentence: WHEN, oh WHEN, will the American "president" call it the Armenian GENOCIDE?! Dan

The following Honda ad is a beautiful example of a Rube Goldberg machine. Click here. Note: you need a macromedia Flash player Dan

Hey Accelerated, Check out NHL. Dan

I don't think it was to make it more "appropriate" per se. And I don't think it was to avoid making a "homophobic" remark - I actually think changing "faggoty" to "girly" is more of an insult to gays than it is to just leave it at that. I would understand if someone called me a fag, but I would really be if someone called me a sissy. Cos they need to re-assure themselves from time to time that they've "got the power"? Maybe? At any rate, censorship of any kind makes me sick. Yes, they're both just as bad. Now the question remains, if the scene was indeed inappropriate and they so wanted to remove the inappropriateness, why didn't they just chop off the whole scene - or change a setence or two? Yep. Very true. Dan

Man, is it only me, or does anyone else out there absolutely love those emoticons? They're just toooooo funny. Dan

Yea, I agree.. After all, it IS about money, isn't it... and pride too. American pride - after all it's the national hockey league. Yea, but if it did happen, it would be great - having 2 Canadian teams in the final. In that case, I'd love to see the Sens get crushed by the Canucks. But right now as it stands, I'm cheering for both teams. It's better for the Sens to win than for an American team to win. At least the Sens are Canucks! Dan

LOL @ Leafs. My my. I even paid like 40 bucks for my Leafs shirt. And boy, am I pissed off! Like, congrats to all Leaf fans out there - you've got a brand new golf team. LOL The Leafs are seriously OLD. Man, they need some spirit. The Sens SUCK. They are tooooooooo arrogant. Dan Cloutier is just AWESOME. And the Sedin bros are great. Hell, now, THAT is a HOCKEY team. I'm a new fan of the Canucks. They will kick @ss!! By the way, kudos to the Flyers - they were really good, I must admit - although a weee bit too rough. And the St. Louis Blues put on a great game too at game 7. GO CANUCKS GO!!!!!!! Dan

I would first listen, and then judge. I would ask the person saying that to tell me what has happened, and after that, I would make a judgement based on my views. Of course, there's no way I can be sure whether what he/she is saying has really happened. But I wouldn't dismiss that it has happened either - because abuse by clergy (be it Armenian, American, Greek, etc.) does exist, and it's not an impossible thing to have taken place. OK, I admit - I might be having some shock and disbelief at first (even though I wouldn't express it loudly). I'm sure most (if not all) Armenians have been taught about the sanctity of our Church and the religious devotion of our clergy - great people like Gomidas, and others. The reaction is only natural. It's always easy to see the fault in others and blame them than it is to see the fault in you or your own people. I would, of course, listen to the victim, and be supportive. I would ask questions to see (or at least try to see) the reality of the situation. I definitely wouldn't be angry at the victim. In this case - no priest is better than abusive priest. Priests (especially!) are NOT supposed to be abusive! I would advise the victim to go to the cops first (especially if it's sexual). Remember, priests are citizens too, and they are under the same laws that we are required to respect. Their priesthood does not give them automatic protection from police. I don't know anyone who was abused by an Armenian priest, but I know one person who was abused by a Catholic priest here in Canada. OK, there are two levels of definition of abuse for me: 1) If the act is consented, it should not be called abuse. Abuse means treatment of a person in a way he/she does not want to be treated - i.e. sexual advantages (or sexual abuse - rape). 2) Abuse as defined by the role of the person who is practicing it. That is, if a priest has consented sexual contact with someone, would it still be considered abuse (even though it was consented)? As far as my beliefs go, I consider sexual advances by priests abuse, because priests take the oath of celibacy (not only referring to marriage!)... Having sexual thoughts might be considered only too human, but acting on them is considered a lack of self-control, something the priest should be able to do. But that's just me. This 2nd definition is up to the Church and the community to decide on. But my view is - the priest should not have sex with anyone with the current definition and rules of priesthood. Unless those are changed and priests can get married and practice sex, I think it's wrong for a priest to have sex - after all, if he wanted to have sex, he shouldn't have become a priest anyway. YES, I would. I consider it inappropriate. But maybe I'm a bit insecure. I don't know. I wouldn't feel abused in a personal sense (like I would if it was sexual in nature), but nevertheless, I would feel disappointed, because I and my community and Church trusted that priest, and he who should be more respectful of the commendments (than anyone else) has violated them and brought shame to our Church. Yes, I would. Well, that depends on the situation - if I'm a kid, I'd sure be scared to tell anyone about it. If I'm grown-up, I would definitely speak up, and wouldn't be afraid. I think that's why many of the people who were abused as kids didn't speak up for years, until they grew up and had the ability to do so - and one after the other, encouraged by one of them, they did speak up. Shame and guilt are also part of what make people remain silent. Some never do speak up. I don't know if I'd be one of those. I've been abused more than once, not by a priest, and I know how hard it is to speak up. I wouldn't say I'd feel 100% comfortable, but in case of theft and such acts, I'd feel fairly comfortable. In case of sexual assault or sexual abuse, I'd be quite uncomfortable, first because I'm a male and there are taboos in the Armenian Church respecting male-male sex. And I'm sure if I were a girl who was abused by priests, I would've felt quite uncomfortable too, reporting it to the diocese. Yes, I'd expect to be heard, but my expectations wouldn't be too high. Again, to what length I'd go depends on the degree of abuse and the degree of comfort I have. If it's a friend, I would first advise him/her to go to a walk-in clinic to get medical reports of the abuse. I'd also tell him/her that then they should call the cops. If it's my kid (and has told me that), I'd take him myself. We must all remember that clergy abuse happens everywhere. It's not restricted to Armenians or Americans. Abuse is abuse, and it happens everywhere. I wouldn't let that one event get in the way of me being an Armenian Christian and practicing my religious beliefs, just like I wouldn't let one disappointment or hurdle get in the way of success in education or career. No, I wouldn't ignore the complaints. It's very serious. Just because the respondent of the complaint is a clergy doesn't mean he couldn't have done something wrong. The blame is completely on the clergyman - the victim is a victim cos he/she couldn't prevent it or put an end to it. No. Like I said, not with the current definition of priesthood or clergyhood. Clergymen who are married should not be having any sexual contact with anyone apart from their spouses! And priests should NOT have any sexual contact with anyone... Well, if it's not a consented act, it should be called sexual abuse, and pursued legally. You mean the victim??? Hell no!!! Why would he/she be forced to leave?! It's just like saying someone who has cancer should be forced to leave the Church. You bet I would! I don't know what it feels like to be sexually abused by clergymen, but I know what it feels like to be sexually abused, and I would support and reach out to anyone who has been abused that way. Nope. Abuse takes only one side. If it took two sides, it wouldn't have been abuse - it would've been a consented act of sex. Yes. Clergymen are supposed to know better - they are supposed to know of the temptations and know self-control and what to do in such a case. Dan

Hmmmm... I am guessing that they are putting on a new regime - a worse regime - one that doesn't even allow outsiders to come in and see what's going on in Iraq. And no non-embedded media either - meaning that it's ONLY propaganda that people hear, not real news... I'm not surprised. After all, this war WAS for that reason - not to overthrow Saddam specifically, but to overthrow a sovereign government and install a puppet leader to colonize the country. Did you hear - they have sent people from the States to go to Iraq to change the Iraqi Arabic (to update it with technological words - maybe words for the various chemical and nuclear weapons USA owns and has used on civilians?) Not surprised - after all, THIS IS USA. By the way, dial 011 then the country's code and then the area code if there's any and then the number. That should work - unless they've really frozen all outside calls. Dan

So, any hockey fans in here? Which team do you support? OK, so now that the Maple Leafs have been out (Golf Leafs Golf! ), I have changed my fan status to the Vancouver Canucks who ROCKED in their game against the St. Louis Blues. Man, the Flyers are just playing it rough. So who do you think will go through to the next round? GO CANUCKS GO!!! *keeping fingers crossed* Dan

I came across a website that is ABSOLUTELY WICKED. It's called armenianreality dot com. This is just STUPID. I can't even imagine the wickedness of a nation that would accuse Armenians of raping their women, having no proof at all to support those claims. Dan -Edited link after Sasun's comment.

You are right. VERY well put. Actually, I DO understand sexual love with soemone of the opposite sex, and I respect heterosexuals. But you are right in that many gays don't, and vice-versa. In fact, I really hate the fact that ALL gays are branded as "heterophobic." Because, hey, there are homosexuals who are not heterophobic, just like there are heterosexuals who are not homophobic! It's all a big mess. And I DO understand bisexuals, and I really feel that they have a hard time, because they are shunned by both the gay and straight communities - because most gays don't understand heterosexual love and most straights don't understand homosexual love. So it's like being stuck in the middle, when they gay community is pushing you towards the straight community, and the straight community is pushing you towards the gay community, OR when each community tries to get you to their side, thus causing confusion and a feeling of guilt to those bisexuals... Dan