The 50 Greatest Singles in Rock and Roll

[melon1]

Oh yeah, I never got around to this:

Thorny said:

Let me just say for the record that oral sex rocks. It is one of the greatest things in creation m'k.

And then:

Melon have you ever been full & truly blown? Ever felt what it was like to have all your built up tensions lovingly worked off into someone's eagerly devoted, practiced mouth? You oughta try it out sometime. . . it'll do ya loads of good.

And then Ken chimed in:

I'm with Thorny on this, too. Oral sex is a great thing. If (and this is a big IF) it has in fact increased in frequency in the recent past, well, I think that's just people wising up to a good thing.


I'm sitting back doing this constantly: When, fellas, when did I ever say that oral sex was a bad thing. If I remember right I said that it was going on between young teens and this is how you responded. And what's more, nobody called you on it. You just continued to attempt to rip everything I said to shreds ignoring that I never said it was bad in the first place, only that I didn't like the fact that young teens were doing it. And for your info, they're most likely doing it moreso than having intercourse which is one of the reasons I brought it up. Not that that's a bad thing of course, because they might not use a rubber. But I will add that Clinton might have made it a little bit popular to them, ya know?

[frag]

According to my parents and some older friends, they had to get their porno the good ol' fashion way...by peaking over into the drive-in.

I think the reason that there may be an increase in sexual activity among younger and younger kids is because of where we stand in an advanced world. I think technological advances have a lot to do with it. Cell phones (and every kid's got one, it seems) make it incredibly easy to not only get ahold of people but to keep it hidden from parents. Our dependence on convenience has steadily been decreasing the attention spans of many. Couldn't this, perhaps, be having an effect on youth? They get bored more easily...and that boredom can sometimes lead to drug use and sexual activity. It worked that way for me, at least.
I could be, and probably am, wrong. But I've been of the long-standing opinion that technology, not entertainment, is to blame for the downfall of youth...if there is one. Personally, I think people are just getting dumber. For the same reasons I outlined above. Really, what necessity does intelligence have anymore?

...just my two cents.

Jac - Thank you! I love "Secret Garden," and for the longest time have held onto the belief that it should've been a guilty pleasure. It does bring pangs of guilt, but maybe that's the sappiness. Still love the song, though. It is intoxicating, as you say.

and for the record, I enjoyed Human Touch, enjoyed being the operative word there. But as I said before, I'm such a fan of Springsteen, I'm clearly biased and have no room to offer any advice on the matter.

[Galactus]

I'd still rather the kids go down then get kocked up.

[frag]

I'd rather get coked up.

[melon1]

Our dependence on convenience has steadily been decreasing the attention spans of many. Couldn't this, perhaps, be having an effect on youth? They get bored more easily...and that boredom can sometimes lead to drug use and sexual activity. It worked that way for me, at least.
I could be, and probably am, wrong.

You're not wrong at all, frag. Good observation on your part, mate. The problem with the new technologies is that they came about at a time when we are all more lax concerning morality. Therefore, all the perversion in its many forms jumped on each opportunity with full force and, for the most part, we sat back and watched as our national morale declined. The time to react or responde was right when it started. Allow me to give an example:

They didn't stop pornography on the internet at the library until a law was passed a year or even a few years(I don't remember) after they started putting computers for public use in the libraries. After they saw that young kids were pulling up obscene material, they finally put the law in place, entirely to late, I might add. People, for the most part, didn't take a stand against all the terrible things kids were being exposed to. Thus the Jerry Springer airing at 3pm thing that I mentioned. At least they took a few steps toward decency, but not enough is being done. The parents are responsible for shielding their kids from filth, but like I said many parents don't. Some parents allow their kids to watch BET and the sort. And it gets raunchier by the day until almost nothing is banned from TV except for complete nudity. Hell, they can even be nude as long as they make the private parts blurry.

[melon1]

Ok, now I'm finally responding to something Ken wrote earlier in February. I've wanted to respond to this for some time and today I finally have the time.

I hold American society only up to its own ideals, our fundamental founding myths, our own Noble Lie, as it were. The most central of these is the notion that all men are created equal, and that all men have certain rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. For me, American society "improves" to the extent that its citizen's rights are better protected and more freely exercised. Also, I (like the Declaration of Independence) cannot know what will make another person truly happy. Therefore, I don't think it is the role of our government, or our society in general, to dictate how people are to pursue their happiness. To the extent that we, as individuals, have more freedom to pursue what we (hope?) think will make us happy, American society is improved. Rather than emphasizing adherence to God's law, I emphasize the individual freedom to choose what constitutes the best life for that person. Therefore, I see the role of American government as primarily that of providing a framework whereby individual rights are secured, and which maximizes individual freedoms.

So, what you're getting at here is that my view is one that demands adherence to God's law given us in the Bible and your view is held strictly to the Constitution. Fine. I've no problem with that. You claim that you believe in the Constitution fully but do you really? Where does affirmative action and radical egalitarianism fit into the whole right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness phrase? Isn't that what many people from your leftist perspective believe in? Throw one part of the Constitution out and you might as well throw out all of it.

Many say the 2nd Amendment is outdated while anything and everything is protected under the 1st Amendment. I even saw that this nudist camp that wanted to have "Weekend Camp" for teens but wasn't granted it was defended by the ACLU who claimed, when they lost, that their "freedom of speech" was violated. NAMBLA(North America Man Boy Love Association) was also defended by the ACLU on grounds of the 1st Amendment. So is porn, which I don't see as speech in any way. And the 2nd Amendment is out of date? It only pertained to militias and such, right? If we're going to go with "original intent", should we really conclude that the founding fathers knew and meant that pornography and such should be defended by the 1st Amendment? I'm pretty sure not. But original intent should only be held to the 2nd and not 1st Amendment, eh? Don't touch the sacred 1st Amendment under ANY circumstances or we'll surely be Hitler's Germany. Hell, why not say that planting a bomb somewhere and blowing a building up that produces something you don't approve of, even an abortion clinic, is a First Amendment right as long as nobody gets hurt? Isn't that form of Freedom of Speech? No? Well, then neither is pornography. But that's another subject that I've gotten into before and really don't want to go into again. Isn't it against the law to scream "fire" in a theatre if there isn't one? I do believe so. Couldn't we consider that a violation of freedom of speech? No. Why not? Does anyone actually get physically hurt by someone yelling "fire" in a theatre? No. Neither does burning a flag but people fought and died for that flag and whether you or I think so or not, they'd much rather someone yell "fire" in a theatre than see that. Please don't anyone conclude here that I'm suggesting that the 1st Amendment is "out of date". I don't believe that, nor will I ever. I just think it's been stretched WAAAAAAY beyond it's meaning.



What you see as the spiraling road to hell, I see as the proverbial promised land -- where everyone is free to pursue their own bliss, and accepting of the choices of others.


Yeah, my whole problem with this, obviously, is that I don't believe that "accepting the choices of others" entails letting them shove their perversion or obscenities down my throat. And for some, pursuing "their own bliss" means hurting others in many ways other than just physically, that is unless they are rich people who don't bother anybody. In that case, half of what they make is taken from them in taxes. They are punished for succeeding which is really Constitutional if you think about it. Yeah.

Also, Ken, I went looking for something you said that went something like this:

"If hearing Mick Jagger sing 'You make a dead man come' is the price we have to pay for a free society then then it's worth it to me."

That's not word for word, but close to it, I guess. I couldn't find where you wrote that for some reason. But anyway, I suppose I could say the same about egalitarianism and affirmative action, couldn't I? Some people will be very rich, and some very poor because of our Constitution, correct? They will be poor and not have things that other people have. Is that fair? Not necessarily but that's the price we pay for having a free market. The strong survive. That's how capitalism works. Not the best form of government there is, but surely the best this world has to offer. So some win and some lose. It's still the best country on earth. That's the price you pay for a free society, right? Oh no, the leftists want to make everything equal, even if it means ripping the Constitution to shreds. But it's all in good will, right? It's for the right reasons, correct? So why do you get to pick and choose what we go by in the Constitution and what we ignore?

[melon1]

Oh, and Thorny. I'll get to some of the things he said tomorrow.

[Galactus]

So you're seriously comparing porn with bombing abortion clinics?If one is so's the other? Man that's fucked up.

[strat-0]

Now, there's an identical topic to this one at the new RS boards. Well, it's a common topic, I suppose... Hey, primixed, who do you like for the top 10?

[Weeping_Guitar]

Man, where did all that come from? I think all that anyone can ask of one another is to be let alone to live their own law abiding lives. But what do I know in my little midwestern world sheltered from the big bad evils of the world.

[frag]

Amen brother weeping.
...to "Company in my Back" as well

I thought the constitution was intentionally vague, at times, to allow for amendments and for certain things to be viewed in context.

I just have a hard time thinking that role models are any worse now than they were 50 - 100 - 200 years ago. Seems like we've always had some pretty bad apples setting the examples.
Oh well, like the King said, (The Rodney one...) "C-can't we all just get along?"

probably not

[kmc]

We're all going to hell.

[phil]

We're all going to hell.


Fuck ! I'll be damned ...

[kmc]

Not only do I not believe in any downfall of youth, but I sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that there is no better time than right now. Constantly developing and changing societies require tweaks in accepted moraility to move forward...to stifle thinking, even controversial thinking, is the antithesis of progress.

Melon, I am surprised at you. As a Republican adherent, you must see that American society is moved (in large part) by market demand for the very things you deem evil.

[kmc]

I mean hell, while Melon sits in judgment of our increasingly lax morality, any internet search will provide many credible links (read planned parenthood) assertaining that abortion and teen pregnancy rates fell during the nineties (and continue to fall during the current Bush administration, though at smaller rates).

I find it interesting that while Republicans are completely ok preaching less government and more personal responsibility (all the while grossly outspending Democrats in every administration since Kennedy) still they are all for government measures to uphold their version of morality. Give me a break. Would that they might curb corporate excess and let people deal with their moral issues.

But yeah, this should be in CE. Fifty greatest singles? I know "Take on Me" is trite and overplayed, but it's in my personal top 50.