PDA

View Full Version : Kalifornia pushing the gay agenda on school children


Pages : [1] 2 3

vailpass
05-12-2006, 11:52 AM
Why is this necessary? How far will the gay agenda have to push before the majority pushes back? Is it morally acceptable to wish for a tectonic shift that would break off and submerge the whole damn show?

California might honor gays in textbooks
State Senate passes bill that would also bar negative portrayals

The Associated Press
Updated: 9:12 a.m. ET May 12, 2006


SACRAMENTO - California children would read about homosexuals' contributions to history under a bill approved by state senators who often drew on their own childhood experiences in supporting the measure.

The bill would require California's social science textbooks to include the contributions of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people to the state and nation's history. California is the United States' largest buyer of textbooks, with annual spending topping $400 million.

The measure passed Thursday 22-15, with no Republican votes. It heads to the Assembly, where opponents vowed another fight.

The bill — introduced by Democratic Sen. Sheila Kuehl, the state's first openly gay legislator — also would bar textbooks and other instructional material that portrayed gays in a negative light.

Two of three gay students are verbally harassed and one of six is physically harassed, said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, which sponsored the legislation. "The invisibility that currently exists (in textbooks) contributes to that," he added.


Other women senators drew parallels to the lack of female or minority role models they saw in history books as children.

Sen. Bill Morrow disputed the comparison. "If you are a black American, you can't help it, you were born that way," he said. "There is not one scintilla of credible scientific evidence that suggests that homosexuality is biological in origin..... It is behavioral; it is not racial."

Sen. Richard Alarcon disagreed. "This is the way ... God made people," said Alarcon. "Let's stop trying to hide this reality."

Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has not taken a position on the bill.

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

© 2006 MSNBC.com

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12754481/

StcChief
05-12-2006, 11:56 AM
Arnold hasn't decided. bet he won't sign it.

beer bacon
05-12-2006, 11:58 AM
Kalifornia and gay agenda you say? Vailpass is the OP you say? Preemptive "this is a shitty thread" post by beer bacon you say?

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 11:59 AM
I dont see why gays need to push their rights into schools. Whats gonna happen when eventually the gays are gonna complain how theres no sexual education regarding homosexual acts, then comes a discrimination lawsuit and the next thing you know, teachers are gonna have to teach people how to act like fags in the classroom through sexual education. God doesnt like gay people. Im gonna get reamed for this in which I dont give 2 shits. Its not right to be gay.

Inspector
05-12-2006, 12:01 PM
When I was in school I never knew whether Daniel Boone wanted to butt**** his neighbor or make babies with the nice girl in the cabin next door.

I guess my education was lacking.

el borracho
05-12-2006, 12:01 PM
Countdown to Kotter...

nychief
05-12-2006, 12:03 PM
california

Baby Lee
05-12-2006, 12:04 PM
OK kids, George Washington was our first president, he had wooden teeth, he was the general of American forces in the Revolutionary war, . . . Oh and he enjoyed f@cking his wife.

Basileus777
05-12-2006, 12:06 PM
The bill would require California's social science textbooks to include the contributions of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people to the state and nation's history.


And what pray tell, are these contributions? This is stupid, there is no need to alter history to make it politically correct. I am defintely left of center and in general support gay rights, but this is absurd.

beer bacon
05-12-2006, 12:06 PM
OK kids, George Washington was our first president, he had wooden teeth, he was the general of American forces in the Revolutionary war, . . . Oh and he enjoyed f@cking his wife.

I really doubt all that. Have you seen his wife? I am sure as the King of the United States he got lots of tavern wench ass on the side.

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 12:07 PM
God doesnt like gay people.

If this is true, why do I have several gay neighbors that make in excess of $1 million a year and live in 2+million homes and drive Ferrari's and Roll Royce's?

pikesome
05-12-2006, 12:08 PM
OK kids, George Washington was our first president, he had wooden teeth, he was the general of American forces in the Revolutionary war, . . . Oh and he enjoyed f@cking his wife.

We don't like to mention degenerates like him in schools anymore. White and heterosexual, what are you thinking?

StcChief
05-12-2006, 12:10 PM
And what pray tell, are these contributions? This is stupid, there is no need to alter history to make it politically correct. I am defintely left of center and in general support gay rights, but this is absurd.

Yeah let's see all the worthwhile contributions made by admitted Gays that should be added to the history books.
I thought they didn't want to be singled out, but accepted, why even mention your gay. ??? :harumph:

Iowanian
05-12-2006, 12:11 PM
So you drive a Rolls eh Dane....


"now children, Benjamin Franklin really invented electricty when he noticed the static sparks between his pickle fur and John Hancock's butt hair as they loved one another, just as any normal loving couple, capable of raising wholesome children and deserving of equal status and special privilege would."


My general idea, as to education and fact should include the persons name, their contribution to history/invention/physics et al and how it affected the world. The contribution and your name.....race et al really shouldn't have much weight unless there is an extraordinary reason.

I don't care what they ate for breakfast the day they split the atom....I sure as hell don't care whose swolen cheeto was in their arse the night before he invented a better chemical sollution for a hair highlight.

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 12:11 PM
If this is true, why do I have several gay neighbors that make in excess of $1 million a year and live in 2+million homes and drive Ferrari's and Roll Royce's?


You have several gay neighbors because you live in California where everything and anything is legal and where they are all hairstylists for big time Hollywood actors. Not exactly a profession you would brag to dad about if you were a man.

FAX
05-12-2006, 12:12 PM
I'm pretty sure that most of the CA legislature think that little gay children are cute.

FAX

Donger
05-12-2006, 12:15 PM
Do the existing textbooks allow children to read about heterosexuals' contributions to history?

Rausch
05-12-2006, 12:18 PM
49 States: addition by subtraction...

vailpass
05-12-2006, 12:24 PM
Kalifornia and gay agenda you say? Vailpass is the OP you say? Preemptive "this is a shitty thread" post by beer bacon you say?


What is OP?

Why do you say this is a shitty thread? Do you refer to the material Dane's lover wipes on the curtain when he is done giving him a San Franciso treat?

BigMeatballDave
05-12-2006, 12:24 PM
This is a ****ing farce. Why should I, or anyone else
give a rats ass if Thomas Jefferson smoked pole?! Sexual orientation has shit to do with history.

BIG_DADDY
05-12-2006, 12:25 PM
Do the existing textbooks allow children to read about heterosexuals' contributions to history?

Why do we need to bring up people's sexual orientation when we talk about their contributions? If they contributed something great.. The fact that they like taking it up the ass has absolutely nothing to do with said contribution. Like I have said before the gay agenda will not be happy until they are teaching 5 year olds how to smoke a mean pole. One more reason to privatize schools.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 12:25 PM
While I can not figure out what the sexual preference of certain idividuals would have on the impact of the history lesson, and I don't believe it should be brought up either way, just because it has no bearing. I do not see anything wrong with including homosexuals in the history books. Hypotheticaly if Ben Franklin was gay, some of you are saying he shouldn't be in the books? Thats a retarded statement if you ask me.


God doesnt like gay people. Im gonna get reamed for this in which I dont give 2 shits. Its not right to be gay

...

You have several gay neighbors because you live in California where everything and anything is legal and where they are all hairstylists for big time Hollywood actors. Not exactly a profession you would brag to dad about if you were a man.


Yup you're right, I'm gonna rip you. This is a very closed minded aproach to life. I imagine your not much better the Phelps Fire and Brimestone Baptists. What's not right is "good christians" hating on people because they are compfortable with their lifestyles. How does what two guys or gals do in the privacy of their own bedroom affect you? Who are you to say God hates gays, if he is all knowing and has the master plan, isn't it reasonable to believe that homosexuals are part of his plan? Or is it, that you can't fathom it, so you fear it, and put your own feelings and words into God's mouth?

Open your mind, and shut your mouth!!!

Donger
05-12-2006, 12:28 PM
Why do we need to bring up people's sexual orientation when we talk about their contributions?

That was my point.

vailpass
05-12-2006, 12:31 PM
While I can not figure out what the sexual preference of certain idividuals would have on the impact of the history lesson, and I don't believe it should be brought up either way, just because it has no bearing. I do not see anything wrong with including homosexuals in the history books. Hypotheticaly if Ben Franklin was gay, some of you are saying he shouldn't be in the books? Thats a retarded statement if you ask me.

Nobody is saying that if Ben Franklin was gay he shouldn't be in textbooks. However, if Ben Franklin was gay the FACT THAT HE WAS GAY should not be in textbooks unless it somehow was relevant to the subject at hand.
Baby Lee pointed out the absurdity of unecessarily mentioning someone's sexual orientation in his George Washington post.

The Governator has to strike this one down.

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 12:33 PM
While I can not figure out what the sexual preference of certain idividuals would have on the impact of the history lesson, and I don't believe it should be brought up either way, just because it has no bearing. I do not see anything wrong with including homosexuals in the history books. Hypotheticaly if Ben Franklin was gay, some of you are saying he shouldn't be in the books? Thats a retarded statement if you ask me.





Yup you're right, I'm gonna rip you. This is a very closed minded aproach to life. I imagine your not much better the Phelps Fire and Brimestone Baptists. What's not right is "good christians" hating on people because they are compfortable with their lifestyles. How does what two guys or gals do in the privacy of their own bedroom affect you? Who are you to say God hates gays, if he is all knowing and has the master plan, isn't it reasonable to believe that homosexuals are part of his plan? Or is it, that you can't fathom it, so you fear it, and put your own feelings and words into God's mouth?

Open your mind, and shut your mouth!!!


Maybe the fact that God put us all on this earth to pro-create, and that is the basis for our exsistence. Let me be the first to say that queering doesn't work in society. If you think its okay to be gay and to do things inside the privacy of your home, then when is it gonna be okay for people to say that its okay to **** animals? Its just not right. I also dont think gays should adopt children.

ChiefsFanatic
05-12-2006, 12:33 PM
If we could just round up all those gay and lesbian bastards, we might be safe. We will throw their asses into "work" camps, and cut down on their diets [we all know they eat too much] and just to make it easier to identify them, we will make them wear a bright yellow star. Wait, I know, we can also tattoo a barcode directly onto their forearms.

Wake the F**K up people. So what if children learn about gay people who made significant contributions to history. When a bill passes that allows "Gays" to inject pregnant women with gene therapy that guarantees the child will be born homosexual, then you should get upset.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 12:33 PM
Nobody is saying that if Ben Franklin was gay he shouldn't be in textbooks. However, if Ben Franklin was gay the FACT THAT HE WAS GAY should not be in textbooks unless it somehow was relevant to the subject at hand.
Baby Lee pointed out the absurdity of unecessarily mentioning someone's sexual orientation in his George Washington post.

The Governator has to strike this one down.


I totally agree that a persons sexuality has no bearing what so ever on the things that made them notable enough to be in the history books.

mcan
05-12-2006, 12:34 PM
It really depends on the specifics. For the most part, I agree that sexual orientation should have nothing to do with accomplishments. But I do think that history should remember how homosexuals have been persecuted and have fought for their rights, the same way other minorities have.

Obviously I'm not talking about elementary school kids though. Not because it's about gays, but because it's about sex in general. Let them go through a couple health classes and learn about sex in a reproductive sense before we start in with the sexual orientation stuff.

Iowanian
05-12-2006, 12:34 PM
Hypotheticaly if Ben Franklin was gay, some of you are saying he shouldn't be in the books? Thats a retarded statement if you ask me.!!!


If that was directed at my comment, you need to wipe the frosting from your Retinas.

I said that if Benjamin(thats what he'd go by if he were you know....) Franklin were a ghey, but still had his long list of accomplishments, given his propensity of being one of the greatest Americans ever...All I need to know is his name, dates of birth, accomplishments and death and how is contribution affected our nation/world.

Accomplishments, contributions of significance and the people who made them all belong in the text. George Washington carver's race is probably significant, because of the Time period of his successes.

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 12:35 PM
So you drive a Rolls eh Dane....


"now children, Benjamin Franklin really invented electricty when he noticed the static sparks between his pickle fur and John Hancock's butt hair as they loved one another, just as any normal loving couple, capable of raising wholesome children and deserving of equal status and special privilege would."


My general idea, as to education and fact should include the persons name, their contribution to history/invention/physics et al and how it affected the world. The contribution and your name.....race et al really shouldn't have much weight unless there is an extraordinary reason.

I don't care what they ate for breakfast the day they split the atom....I sure as hell don't care whose swolen cheeto was in their arse the night before he invented a better chemical sollution for a hair highlight.


ROFL No, no Rolls here ROFL

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 12:39 PM
Maybe the fact that God put us all on this earth to pro-create, and that is the basis for our exsistence. Let me be the first to say that queering doesn't work in society. If you think its okay to be gay and to do things inside the privacy of your home, then when is it gonna be okay for people to say that its okay to **** animals? Its just not right. I also dont think gays should adopt children.

Don't you think that is just a little bit of a stretch. Gay is not a choice, its who people are, beastiality is a choice. I think you're reaching, on this one big time just to justify yourself.

As for the adoption thing. You would rather an orphin be raised in and out of orphinges, and foster homes, never knowing stability or family, more than likely be abused and molested than have this orphin raised by a loving gay couple that would raise the child properly? Is that what your belief is?

mcan
05-12-2006, 12:39 PM
Maybe the fact that God put us all on this earth to pro-create, and that is the basis for our exsistence. Let me be the first to say that queering doesn't work in society. If you think its okay to be gay and to do things inside the privacy of your home, then when is it gonna be okay for people to say that its okay to **** animals? Its just not right. I also dont think gays should adopt children.


Tread carefully, less you draw the ire of some of the more aggressive lefties.

For my own part though, I think that your opinion is short sited and insensitive at best and at worst, pretty homophobic. But, I say that knowing that maybe you're right. Maybe the God that created us thinks it's evil. Maybe it's even more severe than you say, maybe Fred Phelps is right... Maybe...

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 12:40 PM
You have several gay neighbors because you live in California where everything and anything is legal and where they are all hairstylists for big time Hollywood actors. Not exactly a profession you would brag to dad about if you were a man.

I read a quote the other day that totally sums up the attitude that you and other people have about people that are different about them, whether it religion, sexual preference or skin color.

"I find it hard to believe that someone could create this huge, expansive Universe that includes galaxies and stars and sub-atomic particles, planets, rivers, oceans, hundreds of thousands of species of life, flora, fauna, mammals and sea creatures, and that Creator when then chose sides as to who he/she likes better".

mcan
05-12-2006, 12:40 PM
If that was directed at my comment, you need to wipe the frosting from your Retinas.

I said that if Benjamin(thats what he'd go by if he were you know....) Franklin were a ghey, but still had his long list of accomplishments, given his propensity of being one of the greatest Americans ever...All I need to know is his name, dates of birth, accomplishments and death and how is contribution affected our nation/world.

Accomplishments, contributions of significance and the people who made them all belong in the text. George Washington carver's race is probably significant, because of the Time period of his successes.


Sure, that's all you NEED to know, but why is it bad if you also know he was gay? Sounds like a judgement bias to me...

ChiefFripp
05-12-2006, 12:40 PM
It's not like kids growing up in California don't already have an 85% chance of being gay anyways. they are agressively going after that elusive 15% aren't they?

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 12:42 PM
If that was directed at my comment, you need to wipe the frosting from your Retinas.

I said that if Benjamin(thats what he'd go by if he were you know....) Franklin were a ghey, but still had his long list of accomplishments, given his propensity of being one of the greatest Americans ever...All I need to know is his name, dates of birth, accomplishments and death and how is contribution affected our nation/world.

Accomplishments, contributions of significance and the people who made them all belong in the text. George Washington carver's race is probably significant, because of the Time period of his successes.


I had not seen your comment when I wrote mine. My comment was more addressed to BSPimpDude. I totally agree with what you have said.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 12:43 PM
Sure, that's all you NEED to know, but why is it bad if you also know he was gay? Sounds like a judgement bias to me...


Not opposed to knowing, but it doesnt need to be said or mentioned because it has no bearing on what he did to make the world a better place.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 12:45 PM
It's not like kids growing up in California don't already have an 85% chance of being gay anyways. they are agressively going after that elusive 15% aren't they?


Please quit while you still have brain cells enough to coordinate proper breathing functions.

Iowanian
05-12-2006, 12:47 PM
Sure, that's all you NEED to know, but why is it bad if you also know he was gay? Sounds like a judgement bias to me...

I know you run with alot of men who wear Pinky rings, so I'm sure you have some sophisicated insight on the topic.

You tell me WHY its a necessary issue to include. Give me an example of a relevant contribution, where the bedroom lifestyle of an individual is of historical importance enough to use limited space in a kids' text book.

Mathematics?
Physics?...unless its something like "the first man to fit an oil drum in his rectum"
Science?
literature?
computer technology?
History?

I'm trying to find a reason WHY its relevant in any way, shape or form...other than pushing an agenda on students.

Educate me.

How in the hell is it a "judgemental bias" that I don't think the facts of an inventor's contributions have nothing to do with where he places his reproductive organ outside of the workshop?

It has NO bearing on the significance of the contribution. It has no more relevance than if he was a vegetarian, a Protestant, prefered blue over green and liked Hotdogs with Mustard and relish.

Inspector
05-12-2006, 12:50 PM
If this is true, why do I have several gay neighbors that make in excess of $1 million a year and live in 2+million homes and drive Ferrari's and Roll Royce's?

My guess is because you are just so cool.

But that's just a guess.

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 12:52 PM
If we could just round up all those gay and lesbian bastards, we might be safe. We will throw their asses into "work" camps, and cut down on their diets [we all know they eat too much] and just to make it easier to identify them, we will make them wear a bright yellow star. Wait, I know, we can also tattoo a barcode directly onto their forearms.


ALRIGHT THATS WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT!!!!! :clap:

Braincase
05-12-2006, 12:53 PM
I thought there were already books about Alexander the Great, Oscar Wilde and Allan Turing.

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 12:55 PM
I read a quote the other day that totally sums up the attitude that you and other people have about people that are different about them, whether it religion, sexual preference or skin color.

"I find it hard to believe that someone could create this huge, expansive Universe that includes galaxies and stars and sub-atomic particles, planets, rivers, oceans, hundreds of thousands of species of life, flora, fauna, mammals and sea creatures, and that Creator when then chose sides as to who he/she likes better".


Go tell your several gay neighbors I said hello.

BIG_DADDY
05-12-2006, 01:00 PM
I thought there were already books about Alexander the Great, Oscar Wilde and Allan Turing.

There is a lot famous pole amokers in history I am just not sure why pointing out their sexual orientation to young kids is important.

Simplex3
05-12-2006, 01:00 PM
If this is true, why do I have several gay neighbors that make in excess of $1 million a year and live in 2+million homes and drive Ferrari's and Roll Royce's?
If you believe in God do you really think he gives two squirts about someone having a bunch of material wealth? As a matter of fact wouldn't their excesses be setting them up for damnation?

Simplex3
05-12-2006, 01:03 PM
Sure, that's all you NEED to know, but why is it bad if you also know he was gay? Sounds like a judgement bias to me...
...because if I'm going to point out every gay then I have to point out every straight person, too. Then maybe we have to point out if they were black, white, latino, etc. Maybe their country of origin becomes important, too.

Here's my take. There is no room for hyphenated Americanism. You either are an American or you're not. If you're not then get the hell out and leave the rest of us alone. You want to perpetuate racism, sexism, and all the rest? Keep feeding the fire by demanding special treatment.

pikesome
05-12-2006, 01:03 PM
Maybe the fact that God put us all on this earth to pro-create, and that is the basis for our exsistence. Let me be the first to say that queering doesn't work in society. If you think its okay to be gay and to do things inside the privacy of your home, then when is it gonna be okay for people to say that its okay to **** animals? Its just not right. I also dont think gays should adopt children.

Don't you think that is just a little bit of a stretch. Gay is not a choice, its who people are, beastiality is a choice. I think you're reaching, on this one big time just to justify yourself.

As for the adoption thing. You would rather an orphin be raised in and out of orphinges, and foster homes, never knowing stability or family, more than likely be abused and molested than have this orphin raised by a loving gay couple that would raise the child properly? Is that what your belief is?

The problem here is I'm not sure what the logical reason is for dismissing BSP's comparison between sex w/animals and sex w/ same sex. Neither one seems "normal" (no homosexuality is not normal). If its a matter of love, is it all right to have sex with Fido who would die for you without question? If its a matter of consent, Fido sure seems to get friendly at times. This instant assumption that homosexuality has nothing in common with other sexual deviancy (defined as a difference from normal) is a self-serving and dishonest stance.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 01:06 PM
...because if I'm going to point out every gay then I have to point out every straight person, too. Then maybe we have to point out if they were black, white, latino, etc. Maybe their country of origin becomes important, too.

Here's my take. There is no room for hyphenated Americanism. You either are an American or you're not. If you're not then get the hell out and leave the rest of us alone. You want to perpetuate racism, sexism, and all the rest? Keep feeding the fire by demanding special treatment.


Hooo Fcking Raw!!!!

Equal means Equal, then end, no special treatment, no special day, no parades, no special month nothing. It means your just another face in the crowd

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 01:06 PM
Don't you think that is just a little bit of a stretch. Gay is not a choice, its who people are, beastiality is a choice. I think you're reaching, on this one big time just to justify yourself.

As for the adoption thing. You would rather an orphin be raised in and out of orphinges, and foster homes, never knowing stability or family, more than likely be abused and molested than have this orphin raised by a loving gay couple that would raise the child properly? Is that what your belief is?


What are the others in school gonna say about his parents? It looks horrible in the community they live in. The child will have a terrible childhood from his peers. Would they influence the child to be gay? And if not then why are they gay themselves? Society looks down upon gays and lesbians.

Being gay IS a choice by the way.

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 01:07 PM
There is a lot famous pole amokers in history I am just not sure why pointing out their sexual orientation to young kids is important.


I'm with you. I don't run around telling everyone that I'm Hetero. I don't have a problems with gays or gay lifestyles, but it doesn't need to be advertised.

Rain Man
05-12-2006, 01:09 PM
Two of three gay students are verbally harassed and one of six is physically harassed, said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, which sponsored the legislation. "The invisibility that currently exists (in textbooks) contributes to that," he added.




One in six is physically harassed? That's about 75 percent lower than the average at the schools I went to. Why are they getting special treatment?

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 01:11 PM
I'm with you. I don't run around telling everyone that I'm Hetero. I don't have a problems with gays or gay lifestyles, but it doesn't need to be advertised.


People dont run around saying that theyre hetero because being "hetero" is considered normal and people just assume that you are to begin with.

pikesome
05-12-2006, 01:11 PM
The reason why its important to tell little children that all of these great people were gay is to convince them that there is nothing wrong with being gay before their racist, sexist, homophobic, religious nut parents can teach them otherwise. (yep, there's some sarcasm in there)

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 01:14 PM
If you believe in God do you really think he gives two squirts about someone having a bunch of material wealth? As a matter of fact wouldn't their excesses be setting them up for damnation?

I've always found it odd that we were supposedly put here to flourish, yet according to many Christians, if we flourish too much (i.e. wealth, power, etc.), it's excessive and evil. It makes no sense.

ChiefFripp
05-12-2006, 01:14 PM
Why not just recognize these people for their achievments, why do we need to know they were gay upfront ,IN BOLD TYPE? I mean when you hear about Thomas Edison, Hitler(he actually DID achieve alot), or Henry Ford, history books don't have to preface their historical achievements with their sexual preference. I don't care if the text mentions their sexuality ,but why must that be what their history is boiled down to? It's time we stop dividing Americans with class, race, sexuality and it IS time we start looking at Americans in history as a whole.

Gay History Month is just around the corner...

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 01:16 PM
The problem here is I'm not sure what the logical reason is for dismissing BSP's comparison between sex w/animals and sex w/ same sex. Neither one seems "normal" (no homosexuality is not normal). If its a matter of love, is it all right to have sex with Fido who would die for you without question? If its a matter of consent, Fido sure seems to get friendly at times. This instant assumption that homosexuality has nothing in common with other sexual deviancy (defined as a difference from normal) is a self-serving and dishonest stance.

I already stated that homosexuality was not a choice. You don't wake up Monday and scratch your sack, burp real loud and then go do construction work, and then on Tuesday spring out of bed screaming "I'm Fabulous". You are born gay or straight, period. And for those consenting homosapien adults that wish to experiment there isn't really much wrong with that either. However, even though Fido does get friendly sometimes, you can never really know that he is consenting can you? Say you do the o'le peanut butter on sack trick and let Fido lick it off, he doesn't know what he is actually doing, he just thinks he's getting a tasty snack. That is not exactly consent. Furthermore, I find that our societies version of normal is a best, simple and closed minded. In Roman times it was "normal" to have lovers of both the same and opposite sex.

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 01:16 PM
Being gay IS a choice by the way.

That's my vote for Jackass quote of the year. Your AND Idiot. What are you, 18?

Donger
05-12-2006, 01:17 PM
Gay History Month is just around the corner...

Actually, it's already here and setup in the spare bedroom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_History_Month

ChiefFripp
05-12-2006, 01:18 PM
Indoctrinating youth, always a good thing.(sarcasm)

Donger
05-12-2006, 01:19 PM
Personally, I don't think that homosexuality is a 'choice' any more than being heterosexual is. I think it's hard-coded somewhere. But, engaging in the sexual acts of both are, by definition, choices.

SBK
05-12-2006, 01:22 PM
I've always found it odd that we were supposedly put here to flourish, yet according to many Christians, if we flourish too much (i.e. wealth, power, etc.), it's excessive and evil. It makes no sense.

That's because they don't know what they are talking about.

They will quote "money is the root of all evil," but conveiently leave out all the verses in Proverbs about money.

"a wise man leaves an inheritance for his childrens children."
"fear of the Lord brings wealth."
"a wise man stores up during the summer so that he has provisions during the winter."

Just to name a few. Having money isn't bad, HOARDING money is.

Lurch
05-12-2006, 01:23 PM
:shake:

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 01:23 PM
What are the others in school gonna say about his parents? It looks horrible in the community they live in. The child will have a terrible childhood from his peers. Would they influence the child to be gay? And if not then why are they gay themselves? Society looks down upon gays and lesbians.

Being gay IS a choice by the way.


ROFL

So you wouldn't want a kid to be raised by a loving nurturing gay couple because some people might laugh at him? Is that the best reason you got? Kids get laughed at for all kinds of reasons, gay or not. Maybe the neighborhood is more open minded than you? Could that be possible?



Being gay IS a choice by the way

Let me guess, Intelligent Design that once was creationism right?

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 01:23 PM
People dont run around saying that theyre hetero because being "hetero" is considered normal and people just assume that you are to begin with.

HA! You've obviously never lived in California, New York or Miami. I automatically assume everyone is gay. That way, I don't say anything insulting. I found that out the hard way, unfortunately (after I'd embarrassed myself).

BIG_DADDY
05-12-2006, 01:24 PM
People dont run around saying that theyre hetero because being "hetero" is considered normal and people just assume that you are to begin with.

No it's not that at all it's just one way to promote themself and their lifestyle. Young kids don't need sexual orientation they just need to be kids. One more reason to privatize schools.

ChiefFripp
05-12-2006, 01:24 PM
Personally, I don't think that homosexuality is a 'choice' any more than being heterosexual is. I think it's hard-coded somewhere. But, engaging in the sexual acts of both are, by definition, choices.
I think it just depends on the individual. It could be that alot are actually "hard-wired" to be gay from birth. But I'm sure, for alot of homosexuals, it has to do with what they saw or experienced during their childhood/teen years . I'm sure some(note:not saying all or most), people do in fact "choose" to be gay.

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 01:26 PM
That's because they don't know what they are talking about.

They will quote "money is the root of all evil," but conveiently leave out all the verses in Proverbs about money.

"a wise man leaves an inheritance for his childrens children."
"fear of the Lord brings wealth."
"a wise man stores up during the summer so that he has provisions during the winter."

Just to name a few. Having money isn't bad, HOARDING money is.


Good info. What does hoarding money mean though?

KCChiefsFan88
05-12-2006, 01:28 PM
Why is this necessary? How far will the gay agenda have to push before the majority pushes back? Is it morally acceptable to wish for a tectonic shift that would break off and submerge the whole damn show?


I'd rather my kid learn about gay people's contributions to American history compared to religious/bible propaganda like Creation.

el borracho
05-12-2006, 01:29 PM
Wow. Someone in Columbia, Mo knows what god does and doesn't like, knows the reason for mankind's existence on this planet, has more conclusive evidence about the origins of homosexuality than experts in the field and can predict the future.

Have you even been to California?

SBK
05-12-2006, 01:30 PM
Good info. What does hoarding money mean though?

The guy who works all day just to show how big his bank account is. Doesn't share it, doesn't use it for anything good, doesn't enjoy it, doesn't help those in need. That type of thing.

I always think of that Duck Tales cartoon where the Duck had the huge building full of gold coins that he would swim in. That would be bad.... ROFL

Inspector
05-12-2006, 01:30 PM
I already stated that homosexuality was not a choice. You don't wake up Monday and scratch your sack, burp real loud and then go do construction work, and then on Tuesday spring out of bed screaming "I'm Fabulous". You are born gay or straight, period. And for those consenting homosapien adults that wish to experiment there isn't really much wrong with that either. However, even though Fido does get friendly sometimes, you can never really know that he is consenting can you? Say you do the o'le peanut butter on sack trick and let Fido lick it off, he doesn't know what he is actually doing, he just thinks he's getting a tasty snack. That is not exactly consent. Furthermore, I find that our societies version of normal is a best, simple and closed minded. In Roman times it was "normal" to have lovers of both the same and opposite sex.

I'd be a little concerned that Fido might take a big o bite of that peanut butter.

Probably better to find a hungry hooker with no teeth.

JMO

burt
05-12-2006, 01:30 PM
The WAY left faction here.....

I don't care who is, or who was gay. I also don't think it is something that needs to be mentioned when talking history. This is pure BS. What next..."History: Those that Preferred Doggy Style, and Their Contributions"??.....

pikesome
05-12-2006, 01:46 PM
I already stated that homosexuality was not a choice. You don't wake up Monday and scratch your sack, burp real loud and then go do construction work, and then on Tuesday spring out of bed screaming "I'm Fabulous". You are born gay or straight, period. And for those consenting homosapien adults that wish to experiment there isn't really much wrong with that either. However, even though Fido does get friendly sometimes, you can never really know that he is consenting can you? Say you do the o'le peanut butter on sack trick and let Fido lick it off, he doesn't know what he is actually doing, he just thinks he's getting a tasty snack. That is not exactly consent. Furthermore, I find that our societies version of normal is a best, simple and closed minded. In Roman times it was "normal" to have lovers of both the same and opposite sex.

Is Bestiality a choice? Any other sexual deviancy? Where is the line between them. To the best of my knowledge there has been no determination on whether homosexuality is or isn't "a choice". Unless you have done research that the world isn't privy to yet, I'm going to call BS on your claim that homosexuality isn't a personal choice.

Who decides what is normal? You? Me? Ralph Nader? Darth Vader? Bill Clinton? David Duke? Pat Roberts? I think your view that there is something wrong with societies version of normal is awfully self-centered. You don't agree with it so, therefore, it is wrong? Society moves slowly, we will get to the right place sooner or latter. Its when people wish to hurry it along or change its direction that I get worried. I'm not comfortable trusting a small handful of people to deiced that being gay is "normal"

Donger
05-12-2006, 01:54 PM
Is Bestiality a choice? Any other sexual deviancy? Where is the line between them. To the best of my knowledge there has been no determination on whether homosexuality is or isn't "a choice". Unless you have done research that the world isn't privy to yet, I'm going to call BS on your claim that homosexuality isn't a personal choice.

Who decides what is normal? You? Me? Ralph Nader? Darth Vader? Bill Clinton? David Duke? Pat Roberts? I think your view that there is something wrong with societies version of normal is awfully self-centered. You don't agree with it so, therefore, it is wrong? Society moves slowly, we will get to the right place sooner or latter. Its when people wish to hurry it along or change its direction that I get worried. I'm not comfortable trusting a small handful of people to deiced that being gay is "normal"

Perhaps I'm being overly simplistic, but to me, "normal" is what the vast majority are and "abnormal" is the opposite.

Is it "normal" to have a two legs, eyes, ears, penises? Yes. Are people that do not have those two things "abnormal?" Yes.

Are people that choose to use their respective sex organs in ways other than that which nature intended "abnormal?" Yes. I've said it before, there's only one reason we have male and female.

Lurch
05-12-2006, 02:00 PM
....Is it "normal" to have a two legs, eyes, ears, penises? Yes...

:spock:

BIG_DADDY
05-12-2006, 02:00 PM
Is Bestiality a choice? Any other sexual deviancy? Where is the line between them. To the best of my knowledge there has been no determination on whether homosexuality is or isn't "a choice". Unless you have done research that the world isn't privy to yet, I'm going to call BS on your claim that homosexuality isn't a personal choice.

Who decides what is normal? You? Me? Ralph Nader? Darth Vader? Bill Clinton? David Duke? Pat Roberts? I think your view that there is something wrong with societies version of normal is awfully self-centered. You don't agree with it so, therefore, it is wrong? Society moves slowly, we will get to the right place sooner or latter. Its when people wish to hurry it along or change its direction that I get worried. I'm not comfortable trusting a small handful of people to deiced that being gay is "normal"

My girl is bisexual and I think it's great. That being said do I think they should talk about peoples sexual preferances to young kids, no. There is only one reason the gay agenda wants this taught to young kids and it's not about tolerance. It's about promoting a lifestyle. Young kids simply don't need to deal with this shit until they are older.

mcan
05-12-2006, 02:01 PM
Is it "normal" to have a two legs, eyes, ears, penises? Yes. Are people that do not have those two things "abnormal?" Yes.



I hate to break this to you bro, but if you have TWO penises, YOU'RE the abnormal one... :shake:

jspchief
05-12-2006, 02:02 PM
Perhaps I'm being overly simplistic, but to me, "normal" is what the vast majority are and "abnormal" is the opposite.

Is it "normal" to have a two legs, eyes, ears, penises? Yes. Are people that do not have those two things "abnormal?" Yes.

Are people that choose to use their respective sex organs in ways other than that which nature intended "abnormal?" Yes. I've said it before, there's only one reason we have male and female.Is it "normal" to be white?

I understand what you're saying, but I think sometimes there's a distinction between "abnormal" and simply "different".

Donger
05-12-2006, 02:03 PM
:spock:

Nevermind. I don't want to have to explain why my nickname is "Tommy Two Guns."

stevieray
05-12-2006, 02:04 PM
If everyone knew what doctors knew, there would be no doctors.

If everyone knew what lawyers knew, there would be no lawyers.

If kids knew everything that adults knew, there would be no kids.


:(

Donger
05-12-2006, 02:05 PM
Is it "normal" to be white?

I understand what you're saying, but I think sometimes there's a distinction between "abnormal" and simply "different".

It depends on the cross-section. Is it 'normal' to be white in Johnson County, Kansas? Yes.

Lurch
05-12-2006, 02:05 PM
The WAY left faction here......."History: Those that Preferred Doggy Style, and Their Contributions"??.....'

Exactly. Who gives a shit, and who should care and why? Other possibilities?

History, of those who prefer anal sex.
History, of those who like getting oral sex.
History, of those who like DP.
History, of those who have sensitive breasts.
History, of those who prefer masturbation.
History, of those who like to use "toys."


yadda, yadda, yadda.....:shake:

mcan
05-12-2006, 02:11 PM
My girl is bisexual and I think it's great. That being said do I think they should talk about peoples sexual preferances to young kids, no. There is only one reason the gay agenda wants this taught to young kids and it's not about tolerance. It's about promoting a lifestyle. Young kids simply don't need to deal with this shit until they are older.


yes, there is an agenda... but it's not a promotion agenda. I've never met a single gay person that wants to turn some kid gay. I'm sure there are child molester types out there that might try something like that, but I don't think that's what it's about.

Think about all the racism that exists today. When some of the older people in my family make racist type remarks, the reason I know it's wrong is because I've been given an education. I've been taught to think about the subject from other points of view, and not just my instinct (which is to fear what is different).

Gay people would like for the same kind of education to be given to kids about homosexuals. I can see why too. I just got home from a camping trip where people were ripping gays. It started out innocent enough. A bunch of drunk guys at a camp fire making "brokeback" jokes because they knew we were going to be sleeping in tents. But as the night went on, the jokes got more and more offensive... then, they weren't really joking anymore.

Mr. Kotter
05-12-2006, 02:17 PM
Is it "normal" to be white?

I understand what you're saying, but I think sometimes there's a distinction between "abnormal" and simply "different".

The idea of social norms has become so bastardized by politically motivated groups, most have forgotten what it is.....

http://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.cfm?term=Social%20Norms

Social Norms: Social Norms are the rules for how people should act in a given group or society. Any behavior that is outside these norms is considered abnormal. For example, if you live in a society where it is common for people to wear plates in their lips, not wearing plates in your lips would be considered outside the social norm. Personality disorders as well as mental and psychological disorders are considered abnormal due to their variance from that which is socially acceptable from the social norms


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norm_%28sociology%29

In sociology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology), a norm, or social norm, is a rule that is socially enforced. Social sanctioning is what distinguishes norms from other cultural products (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture) or social constructions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_construction) such as meaning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaning) and values (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_%28personal_and_cultural%29). Norms and normlessness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normlessness) are thought to affect a wide variety of human behavior (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_behavior).



http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/enc3/norm_sociology
Norm (sociology) (Encyclopedia)

Pants
05-12-2006, 02:22 PM
I haven't read this thread, so sorry if it's already been asked, but what exactly is the "gay agenda"?

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 02:22 PM
That's my vote for Jackass quote of the year. Your AND Idiot. What are you, 18?


There have been no tests confirmed to prove that you are born gay. It's nothing more than a theory.

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 02:25 PM
Hopefully I'm speaking for a number of my conservative friends as I tell you all how I feel about this topic - I don't want gays beaten, mistreated, harrassed, or oppressed in any way. I do however object to their/anyone's agenda to push that way of life on me, my family, and especially my children, particulary in a public school setting. You may argue that being gay is not a choice, but accepting their lifestyle to be as valid as heterosexuality is a choice, and it's not mine (for a number of reasons I consider valid) and shouldn't be forced on anyone.

BucEyedPea
05-12-2006, 02:25 PM
Gays have already been in school books for about five years, now.... perhaps longer.

I find it interesting how some want the gov't out of our sex lives or the bedroom, but what sexual preference one is should be publically addressed along with their public contributions.

LMAO at the left.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 02:25 PM
Is Bestiality a choice? Any other sexual deviancy? Where is the line between them. To the best of my knowledge there has been no determination on whether homosexuality is or isn't "a choice". Unless you have done research that the world isn't privy to yet, I'm going to call BS on your claim that homosexuality isn't a personal choice.

Who decides what is normal? You? Me? Ralph Nader? Darth Vader? Bill Clinton? David Duke? Pat Roberts? I think your view that there is something wrong with societies version of normal is awfully self-centered. You don't agree with it so, therefore, it is wrong? Society moves slowly, we will get to the right place sooner or latter. Its when people wish to hurry it along or change its direction that I get worried. I'm not comfortable trusting a small handful of people to deiced that being gay is "normal"


Last I had heard, science had figured out that it was something in the chromosones of a fertilized egg that was the cause of being straight or gay. If I heard wrong, then I will concede my point. You know how you feel when you look at a hot chick, well thats how a gay guy feels when he looks at a hot man. It's not like he has to talk himself into it, its just natural instinct for him.

As for my views being self-centered, what about yours. You don't like my views so they are wrong? When infact I never said our societies views were wrong, who am I to know that? But I did say that I find them simple and close minded.

I'm not comfortable trusting a small handful of people to deiced that being gay is "normal"[/

No worse than having some people believing in a persona that they can neither touch, speak to, hear, see, or prove if it exists or not and then say that this persona disaproves of this or that. At least in your example, people are going on their OWN feelings and not something or someone elses that may or may not exist.

Edit:

As a side note Pike, are you just playing devils advocate with my to toy with someone like Simplex was doing to me a few weeks ago? If so, damn good job of being objective.

BIG_DADDY
05-12-2006, 02:27 PM
yes, there is an agenda... but it's not a promotion agenda. I've never met a single gay person that wants to turn some kid gay. I'm sure there are child molester types out there that might try something like that, but I don't think that's what it's about.

Think about all the racism that exists today. When some of the older people in my family make racist type remarks, the reason I know it's wrong is because I've been given an education. I've been taught to think about the subject from other points of view, and not just my instinct (which is to fear what is different).

Gay people would like for the same kind of education to be given to kids about homosexuals. I can see why too. I just got home from a camping trip where people were ripping gays. It started out innocent enough. A bunch of drunk guys at a camp fire making "brokeback" jokes because they knew we were going to be sleeping in tents. But as the night went on, the jokes got more and more offensive... then, they weren't really joking anymore.

These are still adult issues kids don't need to deal with. Many gays bring some of this down on themselves. If they want to really make a difference and have people be more tolerant then they should quit ****ing each other in all the health clubs out there. I got so sick of dealing with perverse inconsiderate assholes when I was in the business. Everything has become intolerance to many of them. We got some pirate using the blow dryer in the club last week drying his package. My friend told him to knock it off and you know what that makes him, intollerant. These are all adult issues that need to be dealt with as adults, not kids.

BucEyedPea
05-12-2006, 02:28 PM
Is it "normal" to be white?

I understand what you're saying, but I think sometimes there's a distinction between "abnormal" and simply "different".


Yes if you're caucasian.
It is normal that the family of man is divided into different race categories.
If gays are only 5% or whatever percent of man...than that would not be the norm. It would be an exception to the norm. So it is both not the norm and different.

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 02:32 PM
There have been no tests confirmed to prove that you are born gay. It's nothing more than a theory.

Then you've obviously never spent any time at all around gay people. There's absolutely no way that you can't tell if someone's gay and that they've been that way their whole life, unless they're living in massive denial.

On another note, there's a reason that I have a little LOST info which I'm not usually willing to share, but do from time to time. It's because one of my neighbors is a high ranking exec at ABC. The guy is so gay, he practically breaks out in song and dance during any conversation. My wife and I find it highly entertaining (and she has a few gay male friends that do the same). There's just no way that guy (or his partner, for that matter) were EVER straight. I mean ZERO chance. NONE.

So maybe it's not possible to confirm it through DNA at this point, but I'm sure it'll be able to be proven at some point in time. You have to remember, the Human Genome project wasn't completed until 2003. There's not even a cure for baldness yet, so how do you expect there to be a genetic test for homosexuality at this point?

If there were such a test at this time that proved it was genetic (which it most certainly is in 90% of the cases), would it make you feel any better? Would it change your attitude?

Chief Faithful
05-12-2006, 02:34 PM
Can we go ahead and just give California back to Mexico? They seem to want it.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 02:35 PM
Can we go ahead and just give California back to Mexico? They seem to want it.


NO, I live in Cali, and I'm an American and proud to be one.

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 02:37 PM
The major question is why should little kids be taught that all of these accomplishments from gays? Why does the fact that theyre gay even have to be brought up. Most of us would agree on here that we don't want kids in schools to learn about homosexuality. It's not normal, society looks down upon it, and children dont need to be taught how to be gay, period. They need to be taught about the historical significance their impact had, rather than reconizing the fact that their sexual preference is gay. Gay people just want more publicity because their a minority, plain and simple.

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 02:37 PM
Can we go ahead and just give California back to Mexico? They seem to want it.

Now THAT is the most compelling idea I've heard in a helluva long time! Of course that would create a lot more border we'd to patrol...until the next really big quake. Screw the coast; we'll all build water parks.

BIG_DADDY
05-12-2006, 02:38 PM
NO, I live in Cali, and I'm an American and proud to be one.

Besides you can't afford to lose us on more than one level.

Our politics are some of the worst ever. I sympathize with the rest of the country when they look at The People's Republic of California and can understand their sentiment.

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 02:42 PM
ROFL

So you wouldn't want a kid to be raised by a loving nurturing gay couple because some people might laugh at him? Is that the best reason you got? Kids get laughed at for all kinds of reasons, gay or not. Maybe the neighborhood is more open minded than you? Could that be possible?



Being gay IS a choice by the way

Let me guess, Intelligent Design that once was creationism right?

You seem very pro gay agenda. That picture in your signature isn't a she-male, is it?

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 02:43 PM
Can we go ahead and just give California back to Mexico? They seem to want it.

Yeah, great idea. :(

California has the world's 5th largest economy - greater than France and greater than most of the world's nations.

I wish people would do a little research before making such stupid comments.

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 02:45 PM
Then you've obviously never spent any time at all around gay people. There's absolutely no way that you can't tell if someone's gay and that they've been that way their whole life, unless they're living in massive denial.

On another note, there's a reason that I have a little LOST info which I'm not usually willing to share, but do from time to time. It's because one of my neighbors is a high ranking exec at ABC. The guy is so gay, he practically breaks out in song and dance during any conversation. My wife and I find it highly entertaining (and she has a few gay male friends that do the same). There's just no way that guy (or his partner, for that matter) were EVER straight. I mean ZERO chance. NONE.

So maybe it's not possible to confirm it through DNA at this point, but I'm sure it'll be able to be proven at some point in time. You have to remember, the Human Genome project wasn't completed until 2003. There's not even a cure for baldness yet, so how do you expect there to be a genetic test for homosexuality at this point?

If there were such a test at this time that proved it was genetic (which it most certainly is in 90% of the cases), would it make you feel any better? Would it change your attitude?


Does bloating about your entertainment guru gay people you know really make me think that your point is more valid than mine?? Get a clue man. The FACT is that there is NO proven test confirming whether it is genetic or choice. You say that 90% of the cases are genetic, but have you even pointed out the fact that growing up in gay lifestyle home will influence the child to become more gay? In other words if you have 2 gay dads that **** eachother in the ass all the time, it will make the kid to come and think thats okay to do.

Baby Lee
05-12-2006, 02:47 PM
In 1942, Major General Patton, who enjoyed having his balls cupped during fellatio, commanded the Western Task Force of the U.S. Army, which landed on the coast of Morocco in Operation Torch. Patton and his staff arrived in Morocco aboard the heavy cruiser USS Augusta, which came under fire from the French battleship Jean Bart while entering the harbor of Casablanca.

BIG_DADDY
05-12-2006, 02:49 PM
In 1942, Major General Patton, who enjoyed having his balls cupped during fellatio, commanded the Western Task Force of the U.S. Army, which landed on the coast of Morocco in Operation Torch. Patton and his staff arrived in Morocco aboard the heavy cruiser USS Augusta, which came under fire from the French battleship Jean Bart while entering the harbor of Casablanca.


ROFL Exactly!!! ROFL

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 02:49 PM
Yeah, great idea. :(

California has the world's 5th largest economy - greater than France and greater than most of the world's nations.

I wish people would do a little research before making such stupid comments.

Oh common, an obvious joke. If there's such little levity on this thread, I think I probably have some hurt coming.

By the way, all that prosperity gets eaten up in entitlement taxes...

...kidding, just kidding....

Chief Faithful
05-12-2006, 02:50 PM
Now THAT is the most compelling idea I've heard in a helluva long time! Of course that would create a lot more border we'd to patrol...until the next really big quake. Screw the coast; we'll all build water parks.

Maybe there would be less apathy from American citizens on this issue if we were trying to seal the border to keep the gays out.

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 02:51 PM
In 1942, Major General Patton, who enjoyed having his balls cupped during fellatio, commanded the Western Task Force of the U.S. Army, which landed on the coast of Morocco in Operation Torch. Patton and his staff arrived in Morocco aboard the heavy cruiser USS Augusta, which came under fire from the French battleship Jean Bart while entering the harbor of Casablanca.

Y'know I saw the movie but they must have cut that part out; good thing, no desire to see George C. Scott's naughty bits.

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 02:52 PM
Does bloating about your entertainment guru gay people you know really make me think that your point is more valid than mine?? Get a clue man. The FACT is that there is NO proven test confirming whether it is genetic or choice. You say that 90% of the cases are genetic, but have you even pointed out the fact that growing up in gay lifestyle home will influence the child to become more gay? In other words if you have 2 gay dads that **** eachother in the ass all the time, it will make the kid to come and think thats okay to do.

Oh really? How many people do you know that have been raised with two gay dads? Where's your proof? If this is so common, why haven't we seen this on the news and why doesn't child welfare take these kids away? This is a completely baseless accusation.

The fact is that you're some 19 year old kid sitting in a college dorm room with absolutely no life experiences whatsoever, but you're making sweeping statements about over 300 million people on this planet whom you've never met. You're challenging me to "Prove a Negative" by saying that there's no test, so it must not be genetic. Well, I can guarantee that there will be such a test in the future and it will prove that it's genetic. I ask you again: What will you say then?

JBucc
05-12-2006, 02:52 PM
In 1942, Major General Patton, who enjoyed having his balls cupped during fellatio, commanded the Western Task Force of the U.S. Army, which landed on the coast of Morocco in Operation Torch. Patton and his staff arrived in Morocco aboard the heavy cruiser USS Augusta, which came under fire from the French battleship Jean Bart while entering the harbor of Casablanca.WHAAHAHAHROFL

Chief Faithful
05-12-2006, 02:53 PM
In 1942, Major General Patton, who enjoyed having his balls cupped during fellatio, commanded the Western Task Force of the U.S. Army, which landed on the coast of Morocco in Operation Torch. Patton and his staff arrived in Morocco aboard the heavy cruiser USS Augusta, which came under fire from the French battleship Jean Bart while entering the harbor of Casablanca.

Exactly what kind of staff did you say Patton arrived with?

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 02:53 PM
Maybe there would be less apathy from American citizens on this issue if we were trying to seal the border to keep the gays out.

I'm not sure we'd have to build a fence; just strategically placed containers of KY Jelly . . . they would become dehydrated and have to turn back.

Donger
05-12-2006, 02:54 PM
In 1942, Major General Patton, who enjoyed having his balls cupped during fellatio, commanded the Western Task Force of the U.S. Army, which landed on the coast of Morocco in Operation Torch. Patton and his staff arrived in Morocco aboard the heavy cruiser USS Augusta, which came under fire from the French battleship Jean Bart while entering the harbor of Casablanca.

ROFL

I always suspected that he and Gen. Bradley had a thing going on.

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 02:55 PM
Oh common, an obvious joke. If there's such little levity on this thread, I think I probably have some hurt coming.

By the way, all that prosperity gets eaten up in entitlement taxes...

...kidding, just kidding....

My bad. Didn't see the humor through the haze of disinformation previously displayed.

Don't even get me started on taxes. That's something about California that is awful. Property taxes are absolutely INSANE. But that's a different thread, entirely.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 03:02 PM
The major question is why should little kids be taught that all of these accomplishments from gays? Why does the fact that theyre gay even have to be brought up. Most of us would agree on here that we don't want kids in schools to learn about homosexuality. It's not normal, society looks down upon it, and children dont need to be taught how to be gay, period. They need to be taught about the historical significance their impact had, rather than reconizing the fact that their sexual preference is gay. Gay people just want more publicity because their a minority, plain and simple.


Wrong again!! We would agree that someones sexual preference in a history class has nothing to do with the subject of history. There is nothing wrong with kids learning about gay people in school. As long it is in the proper class and subject material.

In other words if you have 2 gay dads that **** eachother in the ass all the time, it will make the kid to come and think thats okay to do.

You have never had consensual anal sex with your wife/ girl friend? I hope not, because by your own words, that would just be wrong.

Whats wrong with a kid learning to be tollerant? He/she might grow up and not be as closed minded as you? They might actually have a some reasonable thought process on things they don't know about, and might not hate something because they don't understand or because they fear it?

Chief Faithful
05-12-2006, 03:03 PM
Oh really? How many people do you know that have been raised with two gay dads? Where's your proof? If this is so common, why haven't we seen this on the news and why doesn't child welfare take these kids away? This is a completely baseless accusation.



Thats right its baseless because it isn't on the evening news.

Elizabeth R. Moberly did an extensive study on this subject while working on here PHd at Cambridge in 1982. The crux of her argument is that the homosexual condition involves legitimate developmental needs, the fulfilment of which has been blocked by an underlying ambivalence to the members of the same sex. This makes more sense to me than the idea there is some latent hidden gene that has survived the forces of evolution and time.

While you are asking for proof in defense of your arguement did you know your position is without proof? It seems you are defending a baseless position from anothers baseless accusation. Sounds like a lot of opinion.

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 03:03 PM
Oh really? How many people do you know that have been raised with two gay dads? Where's your proof? If this is so common, why haven't we seen this on the news and why doesn't child welfare take these kids away? This is a completely baseless accusation.

The fact is that you're some 19 year old kid sitting in a college dorm room with absolutely no life experiences whatsoever, but you're making sweeping statements about over 300 million people on this planet whom you've never met. You're challenging me to "Prove a Negative" by saying that there's no test, so it must not be genetic. Well, I can guarantee that there will be such a test in the future and it will prove that it's genetic. I ask you again: What will you say then?



Out of the 300 million people on this planet, maybe one percent of them are gay. Youre right, its not common having 2 gay dads. In fact being gay isn't common period. Where I'm from, society doesnt accept gay marriage or anything associated with such nature unlike the freakshow community you live in where everything is legal. I guess you have forgotten that you are also the one that is insisting that being gay is genetic. Until there is a test that proves this kinda behavior is associated with genetics, then you and I are both wrong. But you can't sit there and tell me that having two gay/lesbian parents isnt going to influence that child while growing up.

Chief Faithful
05-12-2006, 03:05 PM
I'm not sure we'd have to build a fence; just strategically placed containers of KY Jelly . . . they would become dehydrated and have to turn back.

Maybe some strategically placed walls with waist high knott holes with spring loaded traps on the back side.

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 03:05 PM
Wrong again!! We would agree that someones sexual preference in a history class has nothing to do with the subject of history. There is nothing wrong with kids learning about gay people in school. As long it is in the proper class and subject material.



You have never had consensual anal sex with your wife/ girl friend? I hope not, because by your own words, that would just be wrong.

Whats wrong with a kid learning to be tollerant? He/she might grow up and not be as closed minded as you? They might actually have a some reasonable thought process on things they don't know about, and might not hate something because they don't understand or because they fear it?


Youre right I havent ever had anal sex with my girlfriend and I choose not too I think its gross.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 03:06 PM
You seem very pro gay agenda. That picture in your signature isn't a she-male, is it?


How dare you make such comments about Stacy Kiebler, no internet pron for you tonight.

No I am not gay, but I also don't believe in hate because someone is differant than me. Much like Simplex said earlier, I don't need someone's agenda rammed down my throat, be what you are and thats good enough for me, I will make my own decisions on whether to like you or not based on your actions.

Chief Faithful
05-12-2006, 03:06 PM
ROFL

I always suspected that he and Gen. Bradley had a thing going on.

Then why weren't they welcomed by the French?

Lzen
05-12-2006, 03:07 PM
I just got home from a camping trip where people were ripping gays. It started out innocent enough. A bunch of drunk guys at a camp fire making "brokeback" jokes because they knew we were going to be sleeping in tents. But as the night went on, the jokes got more and more offensive... then, they weren't really joking anymore.

So you're saying someone decided to ride you "rodeo style"?



ROFL

Chief Faithful
05-12-2006, 03:08 PM
You have never had consensual anal sex with your wife/ girl friend?

Ugh...no. :shake:

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 03:09 PM
He/she might grow up and not be as closed minded as you? They might actually have a some reasonable thought process on things they don't know about, and might not hate something because they don't understand or because they fear it?

This is so typical. Number one, you're calling someone close-minded because they don't agree with your viewpoints; isn't that close-minded? Not agreeing with the gay lifestyle doesn't make this person, or myself, hate them or homophobic or what ever term you'd like to use to put this in a nice little box for you. You've made several valid points in your posts, not all that I agree with, but I'm not going to call you names like "homo-lover" because I don't agree with them. That's just weak.

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 03:11 PM
Wrong again!! We would agree that someones sexual preference in a history class has nothing to do with the subject of history. There is nothing wrong with kids learning about gay people in school. As long it is in the proper class and subject material.



What the hell kind of class would that be where it is proper class when being gay isnt accepted by society as a whole.

GAY101

Lzen
05-12-2006, 03:11 PM
No worse than having some people believing in a persona that they can neither touch, speak to, hear, see, or prove if it exists or not and then say that this persona disaproves of this or that. At least in your example, people are going on their OWN feelings and not something or someone elses that may or may not exist.

Read a Bible. That's all the proof anyone needs.

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 03:12 PM
Maybe some strategically placed walls with waist high knott holes with spring loaded traps on the back side.

We've already got a place like that here in Phoenix; it's called the restrooms at Papago Park...no traps though...not that I'd know.

I have a friend who's a Phoenix cop...yeah, that's the ticket.

Taco John
05-12-2006, 03:12 PM
When are people going to learn that when you send your kids to public schools, they learn public values?

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 03:12 PM
Out of the 300 million people on this planet, maybe one percent of them are gay. Youre right, its not common having 2 gay dads. In fact being gay isn't common period. Where I'm from, society doesnt accept gay marriage or anything associated with such nature unlike the freakshow community you live in where everything is legal. I guess you have forgotten that you are also the one that is insisting that being gay is genetic. Until there is a test that proves this kinda behavior is associated with genetics, then you and I are both wrong. But you can't sit there and tell me that having two gay/lesbian pa
rents isnt going to influence that child while growing up.

Dude, there's over 6 BILLION on the planet. If 5% are gay, that's 300 million. What are they teaching you there?

I CAN sit here and tell you because I've witnessed it firsthand. I know several gay couples that have healthy, happy children that show no sign, whatsoever, of being gay. Do you think that gay people don't have values and don't go to church? Do you think they're some sort of wildmen, pillaging and petitioning for others to join in their gaydom? I mean seriously, how misinformed can you be?

And STOP with the "freakshow community" nonsense. I live in AMERICA. Just because the state in which I live is more liberal in terms of tolerance of others rights doesn't mean it's a freakshow.

You're a sad, little man.

Taco John
05-12-2006, 03:14 PM
Read a Bible. That's all the proof anyone needs.


Would you also say the Bible is good proof that 20 foot giants used to roam the lands... considering it says that and all?

Baby Lee
05-12-2006, 03:17 PM
Would you also say the Bible is good proof that 20 foot giants used to roam the lands... considering it says that and all?
Actually, I think the bible was on the metric system.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 03:17 PM
Where I'm from, society doesnt accept gay marriage or anything associated with such nature unlike the freakshow community you live in where everything is legal.

Where you are from is probably also where friday nights dress atire is comprised of white sheets and pillow cases.

Your blind hatred for gay people could very well be the product of where you were raised and the values of your community. But out of curiosity, what did a gay person ever do to you? Where you analy raped by a fearsom gay guy? I will even run with your statement of God hates gay people, and being gay is a sin. If this is really the case, then don't you think God will sort things out and set things right when it comes the "sinners" time. In which case, you still have no reason to hate.

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 03:18 PM
Oh really? How many people do you know that have been raised with two gay dads? Where's your proof? If this is so common, why haven't we seen this on the news and why doesn't child welfare take these kids away? This is a completely baseless accusation.

The fact is that you're some 19 year old kid sitting in a college dorm room with absolutely no life experiences whatsoever, but you're making sweeping statements about over 300 million people on this planet whom you've never met. You're challenging me to "Prove a Negative" by saying that there's no test, so it must not be genetic. Well, I can guarantee that there will be such a test in the future and it will prove that it's genetic. I ask you again: What will you say then?

I believe you also made a reference to 300 million people on the planet.

Taco John
05-12-2006, 03:18 PM
Actually, I think the bible was on the metric system.



Yeah... I converted it from cubits...

Lzen
05-12-2006, 03:20 PM
You have never had consensual anal sex with your wife/ girl friend? I hope not, because by your own words, that would just be wrong.

Even though you weren't talking to me, I'll answer. Absolutely not. That's gross.

Whats wrong with a kid learning to be tollerant? He/she might grow up and not be as closed minded as you? They might actually have a some reasonable thought process on things they don't know about, and might not hate something because they don't understand or because they fear it?

Nothing wrong with learning to be tolerant. However, tolerance does not necessarily equal acceptance. ;)

Lzen
05-12-2006, 03:21 PM
Would you also say the Bible is good proof that 20 foot giants used to roam the lands... considering it says that and all?

Oh boy, Taco John now thinks he's a Bible scholar. ROFL Now I've seen it all.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 03:21 PM
Read a Bible. That's all the proof anyone needs.


As I am horrible at determining what is sarcasim on message boards, please confirm for me that this statement is just that.

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 03:22 PM
Dude, there's over 6 BILLION on the planet. If 5% are gay, that's 300 million. What are they teaching you there?

I CAN sit here and tell you because I've witnessed it firsthand. I know several gay couples that have healthy, happy children that show no sign, whatsoever, of being gay. Do you think that gay people don't have values and don't go to church? Do you think they're some sort of wildmen, pillaging and petitioning for others to join in their gaydom? I mean seriously, how misinformed can you be?

And STOP with the "freakshow community" nonsense. I live in AMERICA. Just because the state in which I live is more liberal in terms of tolerance of others rights doesn't mean it's a freakshow.

You're a sad, little man.

If I can throw my hat in the ring, I'm opposed to gay adoption (yeah, big surprise to some of you) but nothing to do with the parents turning the kid "gay". I'm opposed because I believe that the ying and the yang of the male / female parenting process is a much more balanced approach. I know, there are all sorts of screwed up kids from this environment, but I think your best odds are this one. From the several single parents I know, almost all of them have had major, out of the ordinary issues with their kids, and not because of lack of effort, but simply because of lack of balance. I know gay couples, but none who've adopted. OK, there's my two cents; let it fly. P.S. I'm also against single parent adoption for the same reason. Makes me sick so many in the hollywood crowd are doing that; talk about potentionally screwed up kids...

Mr. Kotter
05-12-2006, 03:22 PM
When are people going to learn that when you send your kids to public schools, they learn public values?
That's the point. Public values in a democracy should be determined by societal norms, NOT the political agenda of a militant and vocal minority dictating it to the rest of us.

Moooo
05-12-2006, 03:23 PM
300 million people on the face of the Earth? OMG...PEOPLE COME ON!

I'm for any sort of policy which helps teach acceptance and helps discourage hate.

I also don't think anyone who isn't a minority in any way shape or form can truely empathise with those who are. It may be flat out sickening to your stomach to see two guys kiss... too f*cking bad. You know 100 years ago there were people who were flat out sickened to see African Americans able to get paid for their hard work, or see women voting. You'll tell me there's a difference, and that may be, but those people would've said the same thing, and IMO intolerance is intolerance, no matter how "wrong" the subject matter is.

Moooo

Taco John
05-12-2006, 03:23 PM
Oh boy, Taco John now thinks he's a Bible scholar. ROFL Now I've seen it all.


I'd put my bible knowledge up against yours any day of the week.

CoMoChief
05-12-2006, 03:24 PM
Where you are from is probably also where friday nights dress atire is comprised of white sheets and pillow cases.

Your blind hatred for gay people could very well be the product of where you were raised and the values of your community. But out of curiosity, what did a gay person ever do to you? Where you analy raped by a fearsom gay guy? I will even run with your statement of God hates gay people, and being gay is a sin. If this is really the case, then don't you think God will sort things out and set things right when it comes the "sinners" time. In which case, you still have no reason to hate.



Okay, I will say that the God hates faggots is over the top and I truly do not mean that. However it is wrong anf being gay challenges acts of God, which in a way is a sin, but Im not gonna get into all this religious talk. I am not racist, however sexual preference is NOT a protected class.

I have to go, bottom line im saying about this is that its wrong to teach young kids at school about gays, period. Theres no reason why it should have any significance on the history. Why do students need to know that Thomas Jefferson liked little boys or George Washington took it in the ass? Theres no reason for that and it has NOTHING to do with history.

Im out.

Taco John
05-12-2006, 03:25 PM
That's the point. Public values in a democracy should be determined by societal norms, NOT the political agenda of a militant and vocal minority dictating it to the rest of us.


It's too bad that you're wrong. Public values are determined by the networks, which translate into societal norms. Politics actually have very little to do with it, other than play a reactionary role.

Lzen
05-12-2006, 03:26 PM
Actually, I think the bible was on the metric system.

Are cubits metric? :hmmm:

Baby Lee
05-12-2006, 03:26 PM
I'd put my bible knowledge up against yours any day of the week.
Except the Sabbath, of course. ;)

JBucc
05-12-2006, 03:27 PM
Public values are determined by the networks, which translate into societal norms. It's showtime isn't it? It should have been obvious with that queer ass folk show...Get out of my schools showtime! :cuss:

Moooo
05-12-2006, 03:27 PM
It's too bad that you're wrong. Public values are determined by the networks, which translate into societal norms. Politics actually have very little to do with it, other than play a reactionary role.

Very true. 9 out of 10 people accept what is put in front of them without even questioning why it is the case, whether it be religion, fashion, laws, etc...

Also, how can you truely justifiably hate something if you aren't educated on what it truely consists of (which a lot of people aren't considering most people still think its not genetic.)

Moooo

Bob Dole
05-12-2006, 03:29 PM
300 million people on the face of the Earth? OMG...PEOPLE COME ON!

I'm for any sort of policy which helps teach acceptance and helps discourage hate.

I also don't think anyone who isn't a minority in any way shape or form can truely empathise with those who are. It may be flat out sickening to your stomach to see two guys kiss... too f*cking bad. You know 100 years ago there were people who were flat out sickened to see African Americans able to get paid for their hard work, or see women voting. You'll tell me there's a difference, and that may be, but those people would've said the same thing, and IMO intolerance is intolerance, no matter how "wrong" the subject matter is.

Moooo

Bob Dole keeps thinking they'll rescind that whole "women get to vote" thing. That's universally recognized as a big mistake.

Lzen
05-12-2006, 03:29 PM
I'd put my bible knowledge up against yours any day of the week.

Since when is it supposed to be a contest? Besides, why would I want to do that? I can't win against someone who always thinks they're right.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 03:29 PM
This is so typical. Number one, you're calling someone close-minded because they don't agree with your viewpoints; isn't that close-minded? Not agreeing with the gay lifestyle doesn't make this person, or myself, hate them or homophobic or what ever term you'd like to use to put this in a nice little box for you. You've made several valid points in your posts, not all that I agree with, but I'm not going to call you names like "homo-lover" because I don't agree with them. That's just weak.


Nope, not calling someone closed minded because they don't share my view points. I am calling some one closed minded because they hate what they fear and don't understand. Up until BSPimpDudes last post, that is exactly the picture he has drawn of himself.

Mr. Kotter
05-12-2006, 03:30 PM
It's too bad that you're wrong. Public values are determined by the networks, which translate into societal norms. Politics actually have very little to do with it, other than play a reactionary role.Only a marketing guy would believe that tripe. Yes, the media can influence values and norms (hence the outcry against "Hollywood" values; and outcry that, IIRC, you have claimed is silly, more or less).....but "determine" them? You wish.

el borracho
05-12-2006, 03:32 PM
I haven't read this thread, so sorry if it's already been asked, but what exactly is the "gay agenda"?
They're in it with the aliens! They're building landing strips for gay martians!

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 03:32 PM
Nothing wrong with learning to be tolerant. However, tolerance does not necessarily equal acceptance. ;)


Excellent point. You don't have to like it, but just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it shouldn't get the same rights as everyone else. Not special rights, just the same rights.


Edit:

spelling > me

Mr. Kotter
05-12-2006, 03:33 PM
Very true. 9 out of 10 people accept what is put in front of them without even questioning why it is the case, whether it be religion, fashion, laws, etc...

Also, how can you truely justifiably hate something if you aren't educated on what it truely consists of (which a lot of people aren't considering most people still think its not genetic.)

Moooo

The networks, and marketing folks, WISH that were true. Too bad, for them, fewer and fewer people are watching the networks every year.....even if they did have the influence you seem to imagine they have.

Taco John
05-12-2006, 03:33 PM
Since when is it supposed to be a contest? Besides, why would I want to do that? I can't win against someone who always thinks they're right.


You also can't win against somone who has actually taken the time to study what's in there, as opposed to having a few verses read to them on Sunday.

Lzen
05-12-2006, 03:36 PM
Excellent point. You don't have to like it, but just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it shouldn't get the same rights as everyone else. Not special rights, just the same rights.


Edit:

spelling > me

I have no problem with that. I don't hate gay people and I don't believe God does, either. I believe that God hates the sin of homosexuality, though. I suppose it doesn't matter what I say here. You're gonna believe what you believe and I"m gonna believe what I believe. But I will agree that teaching kids about who was gay in history is really unneccessary. That's where it starts becoming special rights as far as I'm concerned.

burt
05-12-2006, 03:37 PM
I said it once, I'll say it again....I do not care who is or was gay.

I hve 3 people in my life that are PROBABLY gay. They have NEVER shared the invormation with me, one way or the other. AND I DON"T CARE. They are awesome people, and I am lucky to have them in my life.

The thing is, tolerance does not mean I want my kids history book to be "How the Homesexuals Won the West." Sexual preferences are a moot point and should NOT be an issue.


I DO NOT WANT TO KNOW!!

FAX
05-12-2006, 03:37 PM
It's too dad blamed bad that the goats don't read the NFL rule book as thoroughly as they do the Bible, apparently.

FAX

Lzen
05-12-2006, 03:37 PM
You also can't win against somone who has actually taken the time to study what's in there, as opposed to having a few verses read to them on Sunday.

You have no clue as to what you're talking about. But I suppose that's not so unusual for you. :rolleyes:

ChiefsFanatic
05-12-2006, 03:37 PM
I'd rather my kid learn about gay people's contributions to American history compared to religious/bible propaganda like Creation.

Amen!
:clap:

Taco John
05-12-2006, 03:38 PM
You have no clue as to what you're talking about. But I suppose that's not so unusual for you. :rolleyes:


So answer the question... The Bible says that there were 20 foot giants that roamed the lands. One of them was even king. Is that proof enough for you?

ChiefsFanatic
05-12-2006, 03:38 PM
There have been no tests confirmed to prove that you are born gay. It's nothing more than a theory.

What about the test to determine if you are born stupid? Oh wait....

ChiefsFanatic
05-12-2006, 03:39 PM
Would you also say the Bible is good proof that 20 foot giants used to roam the lands... considering it says that and all?

Amen!
:clap:

ChiefsFanatic
05-12-2006, 03:40 PM
That's the point. Public values in a democracy should be determined by societal norms, NOT the political agenda of a militant and vocal minority dictating it to the rest of us.

Where do you live? Being gay seems to be pretty normal, anymore.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 03:41 PM
Okay, I will say that the God hates pillowbiters is over the top and I truly do not mean that. However it is wrong anf being gay challenges acts of God, which in a way is a sin, but Im not gonna get into all this religious talk. I am not racist, however sexual preference is NOT a protected class.

I have to go, bottom line im saying about this is that its wrong to teach young kids at school about gays, period. Theres no reason why it should have any significance on the history.

Im out.
Just because it's not protected though, doesn't give you the right to discriminate. And thank you for explaining yourself a little better.


Why do students need to know that Thomas Jefferson liked little boys or George Washington took it in the ass? Theres no reason for that and it has NOTHING to do with history.

Couldn't agree with you more. I still say its not a bad thing to learn about homosexuality, but maybe in a Sex Ed class, or a tolerance class, or a class that studies social structures. 20 years ago they didn't have computer classes, now they are required!!

Taco John
05-12-2006, 03:41 PM
My guess, Lzen, is that you didn't even know that it was in there...

Moooo
05-12-2006, 03:41 PM
The networks, and marketing folks, WISH that were true. Too bad, for them, fewer and fewer people are watching the networks every year.....even if they did have the influence you seem to imagine they have.

What would your opinion of the president be, if the papers or CNN or the radio didn't bother to broadcast everything he did? What would your opinion of the activities in the middle east be if there were no media publications of it?

What would your opinion of King Carl be if the Star wasn't there to tell you what options he offered, or whether or not he was the decision maker in a certain aquisition?

Moooo

ChiefsFanatic
05-12-2006, 03:41 PM
So answer the question... The Bible says that there were 20 foot giants that roamed the lands. One of them was even king. Is that proof enough for you?

Wait, you mean the Bible isn't the absolute truth? Shame on you for destroying years brainwashing.

Mr. Kotter
05-12-2006, 03:43 PM
So answer the question... The Bible says that there were 20 foot giants that roamed the lands. One of them was even king. Is that proof enough for you?
Most Christians are not literalists/fundamentalists. You know that. Most accept that a Bible written by men, translated dozens of times....is not, neccesarily, infallible. Most also accept the notion that many of the stories of the Bible involve use of at least some common literary devices. Here's a list, in case you've forgotten:

Allegory: Where every aspect of a story is representative, usually symbolic, of something else, usually a larger abstract concept or important historical/geopolitical event.

Lord of the Flies provides a compelling allegory of human nature, illustrating the three sides of the psyche through its sharply-defined main characters.

Alliteration: The repetition of consonant sounds within close proximity, usually in consecutive words within the same sentence or line.

Antagonist: Counterpart to the main character and source of a story’s main conflict. The person may not be “bad” or “evil” by any conventional moral standard, but he/she opposes the protagonist in a significant way.

Anthropomorphism: Where animals or inanimate objects are portrayed in a story as people, such as by walking, talking, or being given arms, legs and/or facial features. (This technique is often incorrectly called personification.)

The King and Queen of Hearts and their playing-card courtiers comprise only one example of Carroll’s extensive use of anthropomorphism in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.

Blank verse: Non-rhyming poetry, usually written in iambic pentameter.

Most of Shakespeare’s dialogue is written in blank verse, though it does occasionally rhyme.

Characterization: The author’s means of conveying to the reader a character’s personality, life history, values, physical attributes, etc. Also refers directly to a description thereof.

Atticus is characterized as an almost impossibly virtuous man, always doing what is right and imparting impeccable moral values to his children.

Climax: The turning point in a story, at which the end result becomes inevitable, usually where something suddenly goes terribly wrong; the “dramatic high point” of a story.

The story reaches its climax in Act III, when Mercutio and Tybalt are killed and Romeo is banished from Verona.

Conflict: A struggle between opposing forces which is the driving force of a story. The outcome of any story provides a resolution of the conflict(s); this is what keeps the reader reading. Conflicts can exist between individual characters, between groups of characters, between a character and society, etc., and can also be purely abstract (conflicting ideas).

The conflict between the Montagues and Capulets causes Romeo and Juliet to behave irrationally once they fall in love.

Jack’s priorities are in conflict with those of Ralph and Piggy, which causes him to break away from the group.

Man-versus-nature is an important conflict in The Old Man and the Sea.

Context: Facts and conditions surrounding a given situation.

Madame Defarge’s actions seem almost reasonable in the context of the Revolution.

Creative license: Exaggeration or alteration of objective facts or reality, for the purpose of enhancing meaning in a fictional context.

Orwell took some creative license with the historical events of the Russian Revolution, in order to clarify the ideological conflicts.

Dialogue: Where characters speak to one another; may often be used to substitute for exposition.

Since there is so little stage direction in Shakespeare, many of the characters’ thoughts and actions are revealed through dialogue.

Dramatic irony: Where the audience or reader is aware of something important, of which the characters in the story are not aware.

Macbeth responds with disbelief when the weird sisters call him Thane of Cawdor; ironically, unbeknownst to him, he had been granted that title by king Duncan in the previous scene.

Exposition: Where an author interrupts a story in order to explain something, usually to provide important background information.

The first chapter consists mostly of exposition, running down the family’s history and describing their living conditions.

Figurative language: Any use of language where the intended meaning differs from the actual literal meaning of the words themselves. There are many techniques which can rightly be called figurative language, including metaphor, simile, hyperbole, personification, onomatopoeia, verbal irony, and oxymoron. (Related: figure of speech)

The poet makes extensive use of figurative language, presenting the speaker’s feelings as colors, sounds and flavors.

Foil: A character who is meant to represent characteristics, values, ideas, etc. which are directly and diametrically opposed to those of another character, usually the protagonist.

The noble, virtuous father Macduff provides an ideal foil for the villainous, childless Macbeth.

Foreshadowing: Where future events in a story, or perhaps the outcome, are suggested by the author before they happen. Foreshadowing can take many forms and be accomplished in many ways, with varying degrees of subtlety. However, if the outcome is deliberately and explicitly revealed early in a story (such as by the use of a narrator or flashback structure), such information does not constitute foreshadowing.

Willy’s concern for his car foreshadows his eventual means of suicide.

Hyperbole: A description which exaggerates.

The author uses hyperbole to describe Mr. Smith, calling him “the greatest human being ever to walk the earth.”

Iambic pentameter: Poetry written with each line containing ten syllables, in five repetitions of a two-syllable pattern wherein the pronunciation emphasis is on the second syllable.

Shakespeare wrote most of his dialogue in iambic pentameter, often having to adjust the order and nature of words to fit the syllable pattern, thus endowing the language with even greater meaning.

Imagery: Language which describes something in detail, using words to substitute for and create sensory stimulation, including visual imagery and sound imagery. Also refers to specific and recurring types of images, such as food imagery and nature imagery.

The author’s use of visual imagery is impressive; the reader is able to see the island in all its lush, colorful splendor by reading Golding’s detailed descriptions.

Irony (a.k.a. Situational irony): Where an event occurs which is unexpected, and which is in absurd or mocking opposition to what is expected or appropriate. (Note: Most of the situations in the Alanis Morissette song are not ironic at all.) See alsoDramatic irony; Verbal irony.

Jem and Scout are saved by Boo Radley, who had ironically been an object of fear and suspicion to them at the beginning of the novel.

Metaphor: A direct relationship where one thing or idea substitutes for another.

Shakespeare often uses light as a metaphor for Juliet; Romeo refers to her as the sun, as “a rich jewel in an Ethiop’s ear,” and as a solitary dove among crows.

Mood: The atmosphere or emotional condition created by the piece, within the setting.

The mood of Macbeth is dark, murky and mysterious, creating a sense of fear and uncertainty.

Motif: A recurring important idea or image. A motif differs from a theme in that it can be expressed as a single word or fragmentary phrase, while a theme usually must be expressed as a complete sentence.

Blood is an important motif in A Tale of Two Cities, appearing numerous times throughout the novel.

Onomatopoeia: Where sounds are spelled out as words; or, when words describing sounds actually sound like the sounds they describe.

Remarque uses onomatopoeia to suggest the dying soldier’s agony, his last gasp described as a “gurgling rattle.”

Oxymoron: A contradiction in terms.

Romeo describes love using several oxymorons, such as “cold fire,” “feather of lead” and “sick health,” to suggest its contradictory nature.

Paradox: Where a situation is created which cannot possibly exist, because different elements of it cancel each other out.

In 1984, “doublethink” refers to the paradox where history is changed, and then claimed to have never been changed.

A Tale of Two Cities opens with the famous paradox, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.”

Parallelism: Use of similar or identical language, structures, events or ideas in different parts of a text.

Hobbs’ final strikeout parallels the Whammer’s striking out against him at the beginning of the novel.

Personification (I) Where inanimate objects or abstract concepts are seemingly endowed with human self-awareness; where human thoughts, actions and perceptions are directly attributed to inanimate objects or abstract ideas. (Not to be confused with anthropomorphism.)

Malamud personifies Hobbs’ bat, giving it a name, Wonderboy, referring to it using personal pronouns, and stating that “he went hungry” during Hobbs’ batting slump.

Personification (II) Where an abstract concept, such as a particular human behavior or a force of nature, is represented as a person.

The Greeks personified natural forces as gods; for example, the god Poseidon was the personification of the sea and its power over man.

Plot: Sequence of events in a story. Most literary essay tasks will instruct the writer to “avoid plot summary;” the term is therefore rarely useful for response or critical analysis. When discussing plot, it is generally more useful to consider its structure, rather than simply “what happens.”

Point-of-view: The identity of the narrative voice; the person or entity through whom the reader experiences the story. May be third-person (no narrator; omniscient or limited) or first-person (narrated by a character in the story). Point-of-view is a commonly misused term; it does not refer to the author’s (or characters’) feelings, opinions, perspectives, biases, etc.

Though it is written in third-person, Animal Farm is told from the point-of-view of the common animals, unaware of what is really happening as the pigs gradually and secretively take over the farm.

Writing the story in first-person point-of-view enables the reader to experience the soldier’s fear and uncertainty, limiting the narrative to what only he saw, thought and felt during the battle.

Protagonist: The main character in a story, the one with whom the reader is meant to identify. The person is not necessarily “good” by any conventional moral standard, but he/she is the person in whose plight the reader is most invested.

Repetition: Where a specific word, phrase, or structure is repeated several times, to emphasize a particular idea.

The repetition of the words “What if…” at the beginning of each line reinforces the speaker’s confusion and fear.

Setting: The time and place where a story occurs. The setting can be specific (e.g., New York City in 1930) or ambiguous (e.g., a large urban city during economic hard times). Also refers directly to a description thereof.

The novel is set in the South during the racially turbulent 1930’s, when blacks were treated unfairly by the courts.

With the island, Golding creates a pristine, isolated and uncorrupted setting, in order to show that the boys’ actions result from their own essential nature rather than their environment.

Simile: An indirect relationship where one thing or idea is described as being similar to another. Similes usually contain the words “like” or “as,” but not always.

The simile in line 10 describes the lunar eclipse: “The moon appeared crimson, like a drop of blood hanging in the sky.”

The character’s gait is described in the simile: “She hunched and struggled her way down the path, the way an old beggar woman might wander about.”

Speaker: The “voice” of a poem; not to be confused with the poet him/herself. Analogous to the narrator in prose fiction.

Structure: The manner in which the various elements of a story are assembled.

The individual tales are told within the structure of the larger framing story, where the 29 travelers gather at the Inn at Southwark on their journey to Canterbury, telling stories to pass the time.

The play follows the traditional Shakespearean five-act plot structure, with exposition in Act I, development in Act II, the climax or turning point in Act III, falling action in Act IV, and resolution in Act V.

Symbolism: The use of specific objects or images to represent abstract ideas. This term is commonly misused, describing any and all representational relationships, which in fact are more often metaphorical than symbolic. A symbol must be something tangible or visible, while the idea it symbolizes must be something abstract or universal.

Golding uses symbols to represent the various aspects of human nature and civilization as they are revealed in the novel. The conch symbolizes order and authority, while its gradual deterioration and ultimate destruction metaphorically represent the boys’ collective downfall.

Theme: The main idea or message conveyed by the piece. A theme is generally stated as a complete sentence; an idea expressed as a single word or fragmentary phrase is a motif.

Orwell’s theme is that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The idea that human beings are essentially brutal, savage creatures provides the central theme of the novel.

Tone: The apparent emotional state, or “attitude,” of the speaker/narrator/narrative voice, as conveyed through the language of the piece.

The poem has a bitter and sardonic tone, revealing the speaker’s anger and resentment.

The tone of Gulliver’s narration is unusually matter-of-fact, as he seems to regard these bizarre and absurd occurrences as ordinary or commonplace.

Tragedy: Where a story ends with a negative or unfortunate outcome which was essentially avoidable, usually caused by a flaw in the central character’s personality. Tragedy is really more of a dramatic genre than a literary element; a play can be referred to as a tragedy, but tragic events in a story are essentially part of the plot, rather than a literary device in themselves.

Tragic hero/tragic figure: A protagonist who comes to a bad end as a result of his own behavior, usually cased by a specific personality disorder or character flaw.

Willy Loman is one of the best-known tragic figures in American literature, oblivious to and unable to face the reality of his life.

Tragic flaw: The single characteristic (usually negative) or personality disorder which causes the downfall of the protagonist.

Othello’s tragic flaw is his jealousy, which consumes him so thoroughly that he is driven to murder his wife rather than accept, let alone confirm, her infidelity.

Verbal irony: Where the meaning is intended to be the exact opposite of what the words actually mean. (Sarcasm is a tone of voice that often accompanies verbal irony, but they are not the same thing.)

Orwell gives this torture and brainwashing facility the ironic title, “Ministry of Love.”

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 03:46 PM
Nope, not calling someone closed minded because they don't share my view points. I am calling some one closed minded because they hate what they fear and don't understand. Up until BSPimpDudes last post, that is exactly the picture he has drawn of himself.

I read a lot of his posts, and he's definitely non-apologetic about his stances, I'm not sure I'd portray his viewpoints as "hate". I also think remarks like "they hate what they fear and don't understand" is really a poorly veiled way of saying "if you were smart, you'd think as I do". That's pretty elitest. I don't fear gays, and I'll admit, I don't understand them either, but I'm still against it being force fed, especially to my children.

Moooo
05-12-2006, 03:46 PM
Wait, you mean the Bible isn't the absolute truth? Shame on you for destroying years brainwashing.

Keep in mind the Bible doesn't have to be proven in order to be true. As soon as someone can prove that the conditions on earth are similar to the ones produced now.

You forget the great catch all of the bible is that God can do anything. If he wanted to he could remove all fossils, or whatever else he felt like doing. Its quite plausible that he has destroyed all physical evidence of the bible to make his existence more difficult to believe, thus separating the true believers from the non-believers.

Far out, I know, but still not disprovable...

Moooo

Taco John
05-12-2006, 03:46 PM
And there are some, Kotter, who believe that the Bible is the literal Word of God.

I don't need to cut and paste anything for that...

Lzen
05-12-2006, 03:47 PM
See my previous post. I'm not going to get into that with you, TJ. It is my belief that you either know God or you don't know God. You're either walking the path with Him or you're not. It's is not an academic contest. It's about having a personal relationship with him. If you don't understand what I'm saying, I suggest you pray about it.

Believe me when I say that I went through a long period of questioning the Bible. I questioned a lot of what I was being fed. But I do have a relationship with Him now and I know Him. That is all I'm gonna say about that.

ChiefsFanatic
05-12-2006, 03:47 PM
Most Christians are not literalists/fundamentalists. You know that. Most accept that a Bible written by men, translated dozens of times....is not, neccesarily, infallible.

I have never been to a church, or around religious people, where they didn't take the Bible as a literal recording of history. Because if they took anything in the Bible as one of your literary devices, then they would not be able to invest their faith in the truth that Jesus was resurrected.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 03:48 PM
Most Christians are not literalists/fundamentalists. You know that. Most accept that a Bible written by men, translated dozens of times....is not, neccesarily, infallible. Most also accept the notion that many of the stories of the Bible involve use of at least some common literary devices. Here's a list, in case you've forgotten:

So why is it then that when these Christians come up against something they don't like, they start throwing quotes from the bible out right away?

beer bacon
05-12-2006, 03:49 PM
I have never been to a church, or around religious people, where they didn't take the Bible as a literal recording of history. Because if they took anything in the Bible as one of your literary devices, then they would not be able to invest their faith in the truth that Jesus was resurrected.

So uhhh, what churches have you been to, because their are plenty of demoninations that believe that the Bible is not 100% literally true.

beer bacon
05-12-2006, 03:50 PM
So why is it then that when these Christians come up against something they don't like, they start throwing quotes from the bible out right away?

Who exactly are these Christians? Does this apply to all billion+ Christians or just the angry ones on TV and in the media?

Mr. Kotter
05-12-2006, 03:50 PM
I have never been to a church, or around religious people, where they didn't take the Bible as a literal recording of history. Because if they took anything in the Bible as one of your literary devices, then they would not be able to invest their faith in the truth that Jesus was resurrected.
You apparently have not met many of the Christians I know then.....:shrug:

As for the resurrection--that is one event, indeed, a very important and central event. Use of literary devices do not preclude the possibility of miracles. That said, however, there are some Christians who don't believe in the LITERAL resurrection. Does that make them bad Christians? Not from where I sit.

vailpass
05-12-2006, 03:52 PM
In 1942, Major General Patton, who enjoyed having his balls cupped during fellatio, commanded the Western Task Force of the U.S. Army, which landed on the coast of Morocco in Operation Torch. Patton and his staff arrived in Morocco aboard the heavy cruiser USS Augusta, which came under fire from the French battleship Jean Bart while entering the harbor of Casablanca.

ROFL Do you all see the absolute ****ing ABSURDITY this proposed law would bring about as illustrated by the above entry?

Taco John
05-12-2006, 03:54 PM
See my previous post. I'm not going to get into that with you, TJ. It is my belief that you either know God or you don't know God. You're either walking the path with Him or you're not. It's is not an academic contest. It's about having a personal relationship with him. If you don't understand what I'm saying, I suggest you pray about it.

Believe me when I say that I went through a long period of questioning the Bible. I questioned a lot of what I was being fed. But I do have a relationship with Him now and I know Him. That is all I'm gonna say about that.



It's pretty disingenuous, then, to use the Bible as absolute proof on one thing, and then bail out when challenged in another direction.

This has nothing to do with anyone's relationship with God. It has everything to do with cherry picking from the Bible to support your views in one area, and then chickening out when being challenged.

Taco John
05-12-2006, 03:55 PM
I have never been to a church, or around religious people, where they didn't take the Bible as a literal recording of history. Because if they took anything in the Bible as one of your literary devices, then they would not be able to invest their faith in the truth that Jesus was resurrected.



Dude, Kotter lives in his own fantasy land...

beer bacon
05-12-2006, 03:56 PM
ROFL Do you all see the absolute ****ing ABSURDITY this proposed law would bring about as illustrated by the above entry?

I can see why it would absurd, because it could lead to including minor achievements of gay folk just so they will have something from a gay guy in there, but the example you are quoted is completely offbase. That isn't the type of thing that would be included.

The types of things that would be included would be listing the achievements of some gay biology in a biology book, even if his/her achievements weren't that great. The entry would not actually address if said gay biologist preferred to be the catcher or the pitcher or anything sexual like that.

Mr. Kotter
05-12-2006, 03:57 PM
So why is it then that when these Christians come up against something they don't like, they start throwing quotes from the bible out right away?Christians who misuse, or selectively quote scripture, out-of-context are misguided--well-meaning, perhaps, but misguided, nonetheless. IMHO.

However, non-Christians who ridicule Christian values on the basis of the behavior of well-meaning but misguided folks.....are no less misguided then the people whom they are criticizing.

vailpass
05-12-2006, 03:58 PM
Nope, not calling someone closed minded because they don't share my view points. I am calling some one closed minded because they hate what they fear and don't understand. Up until BSPimpDudes last post, that is exactly the picture he has drawn of himself.

Countdown to accusations of that good old homo catch-phrase "homophobia" has now started...

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 03:59 PM
I read a lot of his posts, and he's definitely non-apologetic about his stances, I'm not sure I'd portray his viewpoints as "hate". I also think remarks like "they hate what they fear and don't understand" is really a poorly veiled way of saying "if you were smart, you'd think as I do". That's pretty elitest. I don't fear gays, and I'll admit, I don't understand them either, but I'm still against it being force fed, especially to my children.


Ok, maybe hate is the wrong word, substitute "hate" with "prejudice against". And I think that you are reading too much into what I typed, if I wanted to say that "if you were smart you would think like I do" I would have. But he even mentions in one of his later posts that where he grew up, the community was prejudiced against homosexuality. What does prejudice stem from, misunderstanding and fear could be two possible answers.

Mr. Kotter
05-12-2006, 04:01 PM
Countdown to accusations of that good old homo catch-phrase "homophobia" has now started...

They've resisted....heh. ROFL

But, yeah, it's been out there in everything but precise word, at this point; might as well be candid about it. Heh.

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 04:01 PM
If I can throw my hat in the ring, I'm opposed to gay adoption (yeah, big surprise to some of you) but nothing to do with the parents turning the kid "gay". I'm opposed because I believe that the ying and the yang of the male / female parenting process is a much more balanced approach. I know, there are all sorts of screwed up kids from this environment, but I think your best odds are this one. From the several single parents I know, almost all of them have had major, out of the ordinary issues with their kids, and not because of lack of effort, but simply because of lack of balance. I know gay couples, but none who've adopted. OK, there's my two cents; let it fly. P.S. I'm also against single parent adoption for the same reason. Makes me sick so many in the hollywood crowd are doing that; talk about potentionally screwed up kids...

I'm not opposed to gay adoption and know several couples who have one or more adopted children in their households. All of the gay couples that I know who have adopted are educated, intelligent and very well off financially, have great standing in the community and are loving parents. I think these particular children are very lucky to be in the homes that they're living in because of the love they're receiving. These are all people who are providing a very nice life for the adopted children.

Keep in mind that gay couples have to work much harder to adopt, regardless of income. And the fact that gay couples WANT to be parents is a strong indicator that they have the same "parental" feelings that hetero's feel. I just don't have a problem with an infant going to a loving home.

Would they get the same love through foster or state care? I doubt it. And given the fact that there are so many unwanted children in the US, I think it's awesome that these children go live in such great homes and not feel neglected throughout there lives.

I know that if it were me, I'd rather be raised by a gay couple who loved and provided for me as opposed to the state system.

Baby Lee
05-12-2006, 04:01 PM
I can see why it would absurd, because it could lead to including minor achievements of gay folk just so they will have something from a gay guy in there, but the example you are quoted is completely offbase. That isn't the type of thing that would be included.

The types of things that would be included would be listing the achievements of some gay biology in a biology book, even if his/her achievements weren't that great. The entry would not actually address if said gay biologist preferred to be the catcher or the pitcher or anything sexual like that.
You just aren't cognizant of the growing ball-cuppers lobby who in 50 years will be passing resolutions affirming the civic good of an accurate representation of ball-cup-o-philes throughout history and demanding revisions as the example I provide.

;)

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 04:02 PM
Countdown to accusations of that good old homo catch-phrase "homophobia" has now started...

Why how very presumptious of you.

BIG_DADDY
05-12-2006, 04:02 PM
Gay Agenda won't be happy until:

1. Smoking a mean pole is a class taught to 5 year olds in school.
2. They are allowed to plug their buddy in any public place and you will be arrested on a felony charge of intollerance if you say anything.
3. They are allowed to grab ass all they want and if you do anything about it you will be arrested on a felony charge of intollerance.
4. The high cost of medical attention for Aids carriers is passed onto the rest of the public through the increased cost of insurance premiums.
5. There is a gay character on every show on TV.
6. Giving the gift is a Christmas occasion.
7. Barebacking is a reality TV show.
8. Jiz guzzling is covered by ESPN as a sport.


I wanted at least a top 10 but I am grossing myself out.

JBucc
05-12-2006, 04:03 PM
Man I hate homos

vailpass
05-12-2006, 04:05 PM
They've resisted....heh. ROFL

But, yeah, it's been out there in everything but precise word, at this point; might as well be candid about it. Heh.

You disagree with me therefore you are obviously an ignorant, ill-informed, hateful nazi who very likely picks his nose when no one is looking.

Oh, and you are a homophobe.

It's not your fault. You don't have the good fortune to live in Kalifornia the state of eternal enlightenment and home to the 9th Circus, wherein are passed laws that allow the blessed minority to rule the erudite majority.

Mr. Kotter
05-12-2006, 04:05 PM
Why how very presumptious of you.

Presumptious, in regards to you? Perhaps.

Presumptious, based on past experience with the issue in this forum? Not at all. It's very, very predictable.

Lzen
05-12-2006, 04:06 PM
It's pretty disingenuous, then, to use the Bible as absolute proof on one thing, and then bail out when challenged in another direction.

This has nothing to do with anyone's relationship with God. It has everything to do with cherry picking from the Bible to support your views in one area, and then chickening out when being challenged.

You sure don't comprehend very well. Sheesh, it's no wonder people put you on ignore. I won't do that. I'll just pray for you. Heh, I suppose I better pray for myself, as well, for what I'm thinking about you.

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 04:07 PM
You apparently have not met many of the Christians I know then.....:shrug:

As for the resurrection--that is one event, indeed, a very important and central event. Use of literary devices do not preclude the possibility of miracles. That said, however, there are some Christians who don't believe in the LITERAL ressurection. Does that make them bad Christians? Not from where I sit.

Actually believing in the literal ressurrection couldn't be more important IMHO. It showed that Jesus was who he claimed to be. Considering the panic and betrayal and disbelief the desciples showed at the time of Christ's crucifiction, there is no way they'd have gone on to spread Christianity, some even being brutalized and murdered for it, and not even a single one ever denied Jesus was the son of God, had they not witnessed him rise from the dead. 12 ordinary men, so influenced, changed the world.

Oops, better start a different thread.

vailpass
05-12-2006, 04:07 PM
Why how very presumptious of you.

Have you ever called anyone a homophobe?
Did the word "homphobe" cross your mind at any point during your reading of this thread?
Do you publicly state that you have never and intend to never refer to anyone as a homophobe?

Bob Dole
05-12-2006, 04:07 PM
I can see why it would absurd, because it could lead to including minor achievements of gay folk just so they will have something from a gay guy in there, but the example you are quoted is completely offbase. That isn't the type of thing that would be included.

The types of things that would be included would be listing the achievements of some gay biology in a biology book, even if his/her achievements weren't that great. The entry would not actually address if said gay biologist preferred to be the catcher or the pitcher or anything sexual like that.

So we're going to add stuff to the textbooks that isn't particularly significant on its own merits, but is mentioned simply because the person who discovered it is gay?

Are there seriously some significant historical or scientific discoveries or events that are currently left out because the people involved were gay? Or are we just going to dilute the educational system even more by adding marginally significant things for our kids to memorize and spew out on the next exam?

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 04:08 PM
I'm not opposed to gay adoption and know several couples who have one or more adopted children in their households. All of the gay couples that I know who have adopted are educated, intelligent and very well off financially, have great standing in the community and are loving parents. I think these particular children are very lucky to be in the homes that they're living in because of the love they're receiving. These are all people who are providing a very nice life for the adopted children.

Keep in mind that gay couples have to work much harder to adopt, regardless of income. And the fact that gay couples WANT to be parents is a strong indicator that they have the same "parental" feelings that hetero's feel. I just don't have a problem with an infant going to a loving home.

Would they get the same love through foster or state care? I doubt it. And given the fact that there are so many unwanted children in the US, I think it's awesome that these children go live in such great homes and not feel neglected throughout there lives.

I know that if it were me, I'd rather be raised by a gay couple who loved and provided for me as opposed to the state system.

Creature comforts and love aren't my point; balance was, or course balance would mean nothing without love. And we can always find worse situations (i.e. fostercare) to help validate our point. Are gays selectively adopting kids out of fostercare and state agencies or are they trying to adopt kids like everybody else; mostly newborns?

el borracho
05-12-2006, 04:09 PM
ROFL Do you all see the absolute ****ing ABSURDITY this proposed law would bring about as illustrated by the above entry?
I'm not necessarily advoating the new literature but I have to ask, do you really believe the lessons would be written in such a manner?

I would have to imagine that the authors would present the information in a much more sensible format, such as grouping whatever important historical events/ contributions that have been accomplished by homosexuals into a single lesson.

Lzen
05-12-2006, 04:09 PM
Gay Agenda won't be happy until:

1. Smoking a mean pole is a class taught to 5 year olds in school.
2. They are allowed to plug their buddy in any public place and you will be arrested on a felony charge of intollerance if you say anything.
3. They are allowed to grab ass all they want and if you do anything about it you will be arrested on a felony charge of intollerance.
4. The high cost of medical attention for Aids carriers is passed onto the rest of the public through the increased cost of insurance premiums.
5. There is a gay character on every show on TV.
6. Giving the gift is a Christmas occasion.
7. Barebacking is a reality TV show.
8. Jiz guzzling is covered by ESPN as a sport.


I wanted at least a top 10 but I am grossing myself out.

ROFL Sad but true
:shake:

Baby Lee
05-12-2006, 04:10 PM
Marie Curie (Polish Maria Skłodowska-Curie, November 7, 1867 – July 4, 1934) was a Polish chemist, pioneer in the early field of radiology and a two-time Nobel laureate. She also became the first woman appointed to teach at the Sorbonne. She was born in Warsaw, Poland and spent her early years there, but in 1891 at age 24, moved to France to study science in Paris. While studying, she engaged in a number of passionate affairs with unkempt lotharios, and pioneered the evolution of Hot Karl and the Rusty Trombone. She obtained all her higher degrees and conducted her scientific career there, and became a naturalized French citizen. She founded the Curie Institutes in Paris and in Warsaw.

FAX
05-12-2006, 04:10 PM
I hate to interrupt but, what fabulous new (or historical) things in the field of science have been created or discovered or invented by homosexuals?

Anybody know?

FAX

vailpass
05-12-2006, 04:12 PM
I'm not necessarily advoating the new literature but I have to ask, do you really believe the lessons would be written in such a manner?

I would have to imagine that the authors would present the information in a much more sensible format, such as grouping whatever important historical events/ contributions that have been accomplished by homosexuals into a single lesson.

No matter how it is written how would mentioning teh ghey add value to the child's education in what way?

That's the sad thing here; IMHO the focus of textbooks should always be 100% on achieving the very best education for the child. Tell me how mentioning that a historical figure liked to suck cock and catch balls across the face betters a child's education.

Donger
05-12-2006, 04:13 PM
So we're going to add stuff to the textbooks that isn't particularly significant on its own merits, but is mentioned simply because the person who discovered it is gay?

Are there seriously some significant historical or scientific discoveries or events that are currently left out because the people involved were gay? Or are we just going to dilute the educational system even more by adding marginally significant things for our kids to memorize and spew out on the next exam?

This is apparently the best they can come up with:

I believe we need an LGBT History Month because there are still too many youth who grow up as ignorant as I was. How many students learn that many American Indian cultures honored individuals who loved members of their own genders? How many know that "gays in the military" is not a new issue, but actually began in 1778, when George Washington signed the first expulsion order for a gay soldier (Lt. Gotthold Enslin) at Valley Forge? How many know that the profession of social work was begun by a lesbian, Jane Addams? How many know that the 1963 March on Washington, where Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his famous "I Have A Dream" speech, was organized by an openly gay African-American man, Bayard Rustin? These are but a few facts that show that, indeed, LGBT people have been a part of the America right from the start.

Mr. Kotter
05-12-2006, 04:13 PM
Actually believing in the literal ressurrection couldn't be more important IMHO. It showed that Jesus was who he claimed to be. Considering the panic and betrayal and disbelief the desciples showed at the time of Christ's crucifiction, there is no way they'd have gone on to spread Christianity, some even being brutalized and murdered for it, and not even a single one ever denied Jesus was the son of God, had they not witnessed him rise from the dead. 12 ordinary men, so influenced, changed the world.

Oops, better start a different thread.
Personally, I believe in the resurrection. As a miracle. The giants or 900 yr old men of the Old Testament though.....:hmmm:

All I'm saying is, there ARE Christians for whom a literal resurrection is irrelevant to their beliefs.

el borracho
05-12-2006, 04:15 PM
I'm not opposed to gay adoption and know several couples who have one or more adopted children in their households. All of the gay couples that I know who have adopted are educated, intelligent and very well off financially, have great standing in the community and are loving parents. I think these particular children are very lucky to be in the homes that they're living in because of the love they're receiving. These are all people who are providing a very nice life for the adopted children.

Keep in mind that gay couples have to work much harder to adopt, regardless of income. And the fact that gay couples WANT to be parents is a strong indicator that they have the same "parental" feelings that hetero's feel. I just don't have a problem with an infant going to a loving home.

Would they get the same love through foster or state care? I doubt it. And given the fact that there are so many unwanted children in the US, I think it's awesome that these children go live in such great homes and not feel neglected throughout there lives.

I know that if it were me, I'd rather be raised by a gay couple who loved and provided for me as opposed to the state system.
I know a lesbian couple who flew to Africa to adopt because they were not able to adopt here in the states. These are loving people who wanted a child so bad they flew around the world to get one. When they speak about their son, it is with as much pride, love and care as any mother could have.

burt
05-12-2006, 04:15 PM
I hate to interrupt but, what fabulous new (or historical) things in the field of science have been created or discovered or invented by homosexuals?

Anybody know?

FAX

Probably lots of things...but because some people don't broadcast their sexual preferences....I have no idea....who or what. AND I DON'T CARE.

History with peoples sexual orientation, is not needed. It should not matter what a persons orientation is....just what they contributed...

Donger
05-12-2006, 04:15 PM
I hate to interrupt but, what fabulous new (or historical) things in the field of science have been created or discovered or invented by homosexuals?

Anybody know?

FAX

Leonardo da Vinci
Sir Francis Bacon
Alan Turing

Them's people, not things, but you get the picture.

Lzen
05-12-2006, 04:16 PM
So we're going to add stuff to the textbooks that isn't particularly significant on its own merits, but is mentioned simply because the person who discovered it is gay?

Are there seriously some significant historical or scientific discoveries or events that are currently left out because the people involved were gay? Or are we just going to dilute the educational system even more by adding marginally significant things for our kids to memorize and spew out on the next exam?


:clap:

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 04:16 PM
I hate to interrupt but, what fabulous new (or historical) things in the field of science have been created or discovered or invented by homosexuals?

Anybody know?

FAX

Leonardo Da Vinci was gay, so there's a start. Also, all of the Early Greeks and Romans were at least bi-sexual and it was thought to odd if one weren't bisexual.

I never understood how a man could ever be considered bisexual. Either you do or you don't.

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 04:16 PM
4. The high cost of medical attention for Aids carriers is passed onto the rest of the public through the increased cost of insurance premiums.

You're kidding, right? That happened a very long time ago.

Donger
05-12-2006, 04:17 PM
Hey, why are my feet burning?

Ahhh! DC Forum!!

Lzen
05-12-2006, 04:18 PM
You're kidding, right? That happened a very long time ago.

Perhaps he may be suggesting that married gays would receive health care benefits of a family plan.

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 04:19 PM
Leonardo Da Vinci was gay, so there's a start. Also, all of the Early Greeks and Romans were at least bi-sexual and it was thought to odd if one weren't bisexual.

I never understood how a man could ever be considered bisexual. Either you do or you don't.

No, no, Michealangelo was gay...get your dead gay artists with no credible way to really prove it straight...I mean right...I mean correct.

Thank goodness I've still got Any Warhol.

Lzen
05-12-2006, 04:19 PM
Hey, why are my feet burning?

Ahhh! DC Forum!!

U know a topic such as this is always destined for DC eventually.

BIG_DADDY
05-12-2006, 04:21 PM
You're kidding, right? That happened a very long time ago.

Not at the level they have been trying to take it to by changing the way domestic partnership rules apply to them. It would be WAY worse than it is now and could totally be manipulated. 10x worse at least.

el borracho
05-12-2006, 04:21 PM
No matter how it is written how would mentioning teh ghey add value to the child's education in what way?

That's the sad thing here; IMHO the focus of textbooks should always be 100% on achieving the very best education for the child. Tell me how mentioning that a historical figure liked to suck cock and catch balls across the face betters a child's education.
Public education is not just memorizing facts. It is socialization and, hopefully, teaching children how to digest information and think.

Taco John
05-12-2006, 04:21 PM
If you don't want your kids learning public values, it's simple... Put them in private school.

If you can't afford private school, then demand vouchers from your politicians. And when they never produce, then stop voting for them and put ones in office who are serious about making some real progress in America.

Religion has lost every public school battle in the history of public school battles. You didn't stop them from teaching kids about condoms, you won't be able to stop them from teaching kids that it's ok to accept gays.

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 04:23 PM
Not at the level they have been trying to take it to by changing the way domestic partnership rules apply to them. It would be WAY worse than it is now and could totally be manipulated. 10x worse at least.

OK, gotcha...

Donger
05-12-2006, 04:24 PM
Religion has lost every public school battle in the history of public school battles. You didn't stop them from teaching kids about condoms, you won't be able to stop them from teaching kids that it's ok to accept gays.

What if one's opposition to the attempted "normalization" of homosexuality is not based on religious viewpoints?

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 04:24 PM
No, no, Michealangelo was gay...get your dead gay artists with no credible way to really prove it straight...I mean right...I mean correct.

Thank goodness I've still got Any Warhol.

So Long Duck Dong and I are both wrong? I've always read that Da Vinci was gay. It may have even been brought up in the Da Vinci Code, but I can't remember since it's been a few years since I read it.

mlyonsd
05-12-2006, 04:24 PM
If you don't want your kids learning public values, it's simple... Put them in private school.

If you can't afford private school, then demand vouchers from your politicians. And when they never produce, then stop voting for them and put ones in office who are serious about making some real progress in America.

Religion has lost every public school battle in the history of public school battles. You didn't stop them from teaching kids about condoms, you won't be able to stop them from teaching kids that it's ok to accept gays.

Every once in a while you say something brilliant.

jAZ
05-12-2006, 04:25 PM
How arrogant does someone have to be to think that they rules don't apply to them? How this could belong anywhere but in the DC is beyond me.

Unless they rules are changed, which, 200+ posts later, it seems that's not the case.

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 04:26 PM
If you don't want your kids learning public values, it's simple... Put them in private school.

If you can't afford private school, then demand vouchers from your politicians. And when they never produce, then stop voting for them and put ones in office who are serious about making some real progress in America.

Religion has lost every public school battle in the history of public school battles. You didn't stop them from teaching kids about condoms, you won't be able to stop them from teaching kids that it's ok to accept gays.

You're not going to have much effect against any agenda if you just pull your kids out of public school, turn tail and run. I've stated that I don't want this stuff being pushed on my kid, but in truth is it shouldn't be pushed on anyone IMO.

el borracho
05-12-2006, 04:27 PM
What if one's opposition to the attempted "normalization" of homosexuality is not based on religious viewpoints?
I'm reasonably confident that that is rarely, if ever, the case.

Donger
05-12-2006, 04:27 PM
How arrogant does someone have to be to think that they rules don't apply to them? How this could belong anywhere but in the DC is beyond me.

Unless they rules are changed, which, 200+ posts later, it seems that's not the case.

Yeah, but vailpass is a Broncos fan, so just think of this as CP's version of Affirmative Action. You still support that, right?

Bowser
05-12-2006, 04:27 PM
If you want to teach kids anything, teach them tolerance, not what the personal preferences of historical figures were.


And I'm going to go on a limb and say BSPimpDude has dad issues.

kaplin42
05-12-2006, 04:27 PM
Have you ever called anyone a homophobe?
Did the word "homphobe" cross your mind at any point during your reading of this thread?
Do you publicly state that you have never and intend to never refer to anyone as a homophobe?


Actualy, in this thread, nope homophobe never crossed my mind. In life sure it has.

But be that as it may, unless you have some special esp powers or what not, it is very presumptious of you to think thats what I was thinking. And speaking of thinking, if I was going to say something like that, don't you think that in the last 22 pages of this post, in which I have probably posted over a dozen times, don't you think that I might have already said that?

Just Sayen!!

BIG_DADDY
05-12-2006, 04:27 PM
How arrogant does someone have to be to think that they rules don't apply to them? How this could belong anywhere but in the DC is beyond me.

Unless they rules are changed, which, 200+ posts later, it seems that's not the case.


Yea it's about time they had a decent post over here. It's been awhile since we were trying to figure out what terrorists ate. ROFL

Donger
05-12-2006, 04:27 PM
I'm reasonably confident that that is rarely, if ever, the case.

Hi there. I'm Donger. I oppose the normalization of homosexuality, and I'm not religious in the slightest.

FAX
05-12-2006, 04:28 PM
Leonardo da Vinci
Sir Francis Bacon
Alan Turing

Them's people, not things, but you get the picture.

Thanks, Mr. Donger. You can always be counted on for facts. I appreciate it.

So, they really did accomplish things other than lunching on the occasional danglie.

Here's the deal. I studied each of these gentlemen in high school and university. I can say that I gained a fair appreciation for their accomplishments without the need, nor, in fact, the desire to be informed of their sexual preferences. Did I underestimate the importance and value of these men to humankind because their sexuality was excluded from the curricula? Alternatively, had I been aware of their affinity for taking the posterior road, would I have been less impressed with their contributions?

Nope.

FAX

htismaqe
05-12-2006, 04:28 PM
How arrogant does someone have to be to think that they rules don't apply to them? How this could belong anywhere but in the DC is beyond me.

Unless they rules are changed, which, 200+ posts later, it seems that's not the case.

It was moved the instant I noticed it. I had sinus surgery yesterday, so I'm a little slow today.

el borracho
05-12-2006, 04:29 PM
Hi there. I'm Donger. I oppose the normalization of homosexuality, and I'm not religious in the slightest.
Hi. You are a rare exception.

Mind telling us two things?
1) What do you mean by "the normalization of homosexuality"?
2) Why are you opposed to it?

vailpass
05-12-2006, 04:30 PM
Public education is not just memorizing facts. It is socialization and, hopefully, teaching children how to digest information and think.

Think about what? Reading, Writing, Arithetic. When is it a public school's responsibility to be used as a political vehicle for a minority group seeking public approval for their sexual preferences?

If mentioning the sexual preference of historical figures is scholastically valid do we practice fairness and equality by disclosing the sexual preference all historical figures?

Voltaire the goat focker? Socrates the pedophile? Aristohpanes, lover of scat?

I send my children to private school but I still believe in a decent public education and will fight the take-over of them by private interest groups tooth and nail.

BIG_DADDY
05-12-2006, 04:30 PM
It was moved the instant I noticed it. I had sinus surgery yesterday, so I'm a little slow today.


You gotta lay off the blow Parker.

Donger
05-12-2006, 04:31 PM
Hi. You are a rare exception.

Mind telling us two things?
1) What do you mean by "the normalization of homosexuality"?
2) Why are you opposed to it?

1) Trying to elevate and equate homosexuality with heterosexuality.
2) Because they are not equal.

CHIEF4EVER
05-12-2006, 04:32 PM
If you don't want your kids learning IMMORAL values, it's simple... Put them in private school.

Why in the hell should a taxpaying conservative american be required to pay to place their child in private school to appease a liberal agenda? You seem to think it is OK to FORCE FEED our children to accept something as normal that most think is not only abnormal, but should be a personal and DISCREET choice.

htismaqe
05-12-2006, 04:33 PM
You gotta lay off the blow Parker.

I should have never quit. Good Peruvian flake a couple times a day would have kept me nice and clear. :D

el borracho
05-12-2006, 04:35 PM
Thanks, Mr. Donger. You can always be counted on for facts. I appreciate it.

So, they really did accomplish things other than lunching on the occasional danglie.

Here's the deal. I studied each of these gentlemen in high school and university. I can say that I gained a fair appreciation for their accomplishments without the need, nor, in fact, the desire to be informed of their sexual preferences. Did I underestimate the importance and value of these men to humankind because their sexuality was excluded from the curricula? Alternatively, had I been aware of their affinity for taking the posterior road, would I have been less impressed with their contributions?

Nope.

FAX
Until 5 minutes ago you weren't sure what historical contributions homosexuals had made. Now you know that homosexuals have made significant historical contributions. Usually when one recognizes the accomplishments of others as valuable it elevates the opinion of that person and/ or the group that person is associated with.

vailpass
05-12-2006, 04:35 PM
Actualy, in this thread, nope homophobe never crossed my mind. In life sure it has.

But be that as it may, unless you have some special esp powers or what not, it is very presumptious of you to think thats what I was thinking. And speaking of thinking, if I was going to say something like that, don't you think that in the last 22 pages of this post, in which I have probably posted over a dozen times, don't you think that I might have already said that?

Just Sayen!!

OK I see your beef now.

Clarification: every discussion of homosex on this board degenerates into name calling and,invetiably, someone on the pro-homo side falls back on the old reliable "homophobe".
In your post you implied that anyone who disageed with your pro-homo stance was fearful and hateful,

I quoted your post because it felt we were one step away from someone, not necessarily you, breaking out the "homophobe" label.

Sorry if it seemed I was putting words in your mouth; that is a practice I abhor.

Taco John
05-12-2006, 04:35 PM
Yeah, but vailpass is a Broncos fan, so just think of this as CP's version of Affirmative Action. You still support that, right?



...well in that case...

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 04:36 PM
So Long Duck Dong and I are both wrong? I've always read that Da Vinci was gay. It may have even been brought up in the Da Vinci Code, but I can't remember since it's been a few years since I read it.

Da Vinci Code's fiction (and Hollywood would make him gay no matter what) and I've never heard anything about Da Vinci being gay, but if you want some evidence that doesn't have to do with anyone's opinion, surf the web for some of Michaelangelo's sculptures of female subjects; they are dude anatomy with boobs pasted on, seriously. They look poorly augmented. I don't think he had much interaction with females. I minored in art history, so for once I'm talking about something I'm somewhat educated on.

el borracho
05-12-2006, 04:37 PM
1) Trying to elevate and equate homosexuality with heterosexuality.
2) Because they are not equal.
I want to ask, "How are they not equal?" but I am late for an appointment so it will have to wait.

~cheers for now

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 04:39 PM
Personally, I believe in the resurrection. As a miracle. The giants or 900 yr old men of the Old Testament though.....:hmmm:

All I'm saying is, there ARE Christians for whom a literal resurrection is irrelevant to their beliefs.

I'm sure you're right; it's just hard to fathom since that's the clincher for me.

Donger
05-12-2006, 04:40 PM
I want to ask, "How are they not equal?" but I am late for an appointment so it will have to wait.

~cheers for now

Heterosexuals can propagate the species; homosexuals cannot.

vailpass
05-12-2006, 04:40 PM
How arrogant does someone have to be to think that they rules don't apply to them? How this could belong anywhere but in the DC is beyond me.

Unless they rules are changed, which, 200+ posts later, it seems that's not the case.

I was looking for some decent and diverse discussion on an issue that is not purely political. Posting in the DC forum means I hear from the same 3 or 4 trapped souls stuck in that toilet hole doomed to forever sing the "bush is da debil left is right I can't get an American man so I suck camel cack when I can" blues.

I'm thankful to have heard from the regular kids before this thing got shoved on the short bus.

BTW **** you for being a whiny little tattle-tale bitch. I'd like to take off your "magic shoes" and beat upside the head with them while your billionaire boys club buddies scream "run Forest, run!".

fan4ever
05-12-2006, 04:41 PM
OK, who's self employed? Must be quite a few, or somebody's really screwing their boss. I self employed and I can't believe how much time I've spent on ChiefsPlanet this week. Looks like I'll need to work tomorrow. I need an intervention. It's been fun.

Taco John
05-12-2006, 04:42 PM
Why in the hell should a taxpaying conservative american be required to pay to place their child in private school to appease a liberal agenda? You seem to think it is OK to FORCE FEED our children to accept something as normal that most think is not only abnormal, but should be a personal and DISCREET choice.



That's my point. They shouldn't. A voucher system should be in place to allow parents the freedom to choose.

But most parents are too lazy to do anything about it but whine, while continually voting for people who do nothing about it. I have no empathy.

If you put your kids in public schools, they're going to learn public values, both in the classroom and on the playground. There's no amount of whining that is going to change that.

Kids in public schools today are going to grow up thinking that it's ok to be gay. Like it or not. That's just the way it is.

I'm not making any judgement of what's right or wrong... moral or immoral. I'm just telling you how it is. Point to one battle religion has won in public schools... Just one.

FAX
05-12-2006, 04:44 PM
Until 5 minutes ago you weren't sure what historical contributions homosexuals had made. Now you know that homosexuals have made significant historical contributions. Usually when one recognizes the accomplishments of others as valuable it elevates the opinion of that person and/ or the group that person is associated with.

My point (such as it was) has fallen from a great height into the swamp of useless misunderstanding. My apologies, Mr. el borracho.

First, my original question was rhetorical. Second, I am well aware of the contributions the listed persons have made in the fields of science, art, authorship, reasoning, and the computing sciences. Third, it makes no difference to me whether they were gay or not.

Fourth, and most importantly to me. It is their accomplishments in these disciplines that should merit their inclusion in curricula. Acknowledging their sexual preferences has nothing to do with an appreciation of their deeds. Neither, should knowledge of their sexuality detract from their contributions.

I hope that makes sense, Mr. el borracho.

FAX

CHIEF4EVER
05-12-2006, 04:50 PM
That's my point. They shouldn't. A voucher system should be in place to allow parents the freedom to choose.

But most parents are too lazy to do anything about it but whine, while continually voting for people who do nothing about it. I have no empathy.

If you put your kids in public schools, they're going to learn public values, both in the classroom and on the playground. There's no amount of whining that is going to change that.

Kids in public schools today are going to grow up thinking that it's ok to be gay. Like it or not. That's just the way it is.

I'm not making any judgement of what's right or wrong... moral or immoral. I'm just telling you how it is. Point to one battle religion has won in public schools... Just one.

And that begs the sticky question: Since vouchers are realistically a pipe dream, and since no case (AFAIK) has been brought before the SC concerning the constitutionality of forcing children to accept a LIFESTYLE (not an ethnic or religious group), what do you feel is the correct solution for the MAJORITY of our citizenry (the common good)?

vailpass
05-12-2006, 05:00 PM
And having been banished to the DC shithole this once vibrant and interesting thread will now die a quick death.

DaneMcCloud
05-12-2006, 05:05 PM
Da Vinci Code's fiction (and Hollywood would make him gay no matter what)

Well, Long Duck Dong and I already both posted that Da Vinci was gay, so it's not just me that has read that. And dude, whatever with the "Hollywood would make him gay". Are you that big of a freakin' puppet?

jAZ
05-12-2006, 05:10 PM
It was moved the instant I noticed it. I had sinus surgery yesterday, so I'm a little slow today.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not being critical of you in anyway.