"Bakerstreet If you feel like you have to attack me personally then please contact me personally ... let me remind you I am not a persona or character but real person. You see the difference between me and you is that you live your life behind words, and I live my life. I have the balls to stick up for what I believe in, you seem to find it funny to laugh about human suffering. Bakerstreet you remind me of a closet queen who does the beats, but has a carrot stuck so far up his ass that he cant bare to lower himself to understand the viewpoints of those who might be hurt by what others say about them."

To me, that is just as bad as anything I have ever seen Sir Peter post. To me, you are no better than Sir Peter, and you behave in a way that lends far more to banning than he does. I suggest you get a real life, and not try to live one here. You are the one up in arms. Apply your "balls" to something that merits them.

Should I demand that professional wrestling be banned because of the heinous violence I see there? People are assaulted and abused constantly on the WWE, women are abused.

Wasnt it in America that they elected a Wresteling guy to be a governor of a state?? Hmm So doesnt thins beg the question how seriously do people take these people??

Yes, wrestling fans see it for what it is, a farce, played by actors, athletic though they are. Can't you understand how people can be different than parts they play? Aparently not...

If Sir Peter wanted to promote a hateful agenda, he wouldn't be creating the kind of character he has created. On the contrary, I think he portrays those characteristics in a character that no one would want to emulate. I see him no differently than the misanthropic characters from Victorian literature. Sir Peter is a "living" morality tale. I think you are just too blinded by your own sensitivity to "get it".

The hand behind Sir Peter has done a *lot* more to cast a grim shadow on these traits than you have. I think you have done a lot more to polarize people TOWARD Sir Peter, actually. I have seen many, many more people voicing positive messages about him after your recent vendetta. By addressing his right to say what he says, you shift the focus from WHAT HE SAYS to his right to say it. You'd be much better served just to let him do his thing and put a face on all these "evils" that you, yourself would like to cast in a disparaging light.

You are both doing the same thing, but he is doing a much better job.

P.S. If you are going to talk about me on your other thread, un-blacklist me so I can answer. To bash me after you blacklist me is about as asinine and cowardly as it get. I don't like you, and frankly I doubt I'll ever allow you to post on my blogs, but I won't address you on them either. If I ever did you would have the chance to respond.