# Mississippi School does the right thing: Bans prom due to Lesbian couple attending.



## US Army Retired (Mar 10, 2010)

This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.  

Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper

JACKSON, Miss. &#8212; 
A northern Mississippi school district decided Wednesday not to host a high school prom after a lesbian student demanded she be able to attend with her girlfriend and wear a tuxedo.

The Itawamba County school district's policy requires that senior prom dates be of the opposite sex. The American Civil Liberties Union of Mississippi had given the district until Wednesday to change that policy and allow 18-year-old Constance McMillen to escort her girlfriend, who is also a student, to the dance on April 2.

Instead, the school board met and issued a statement announcing it wouldn't host the event at Itawamba County Agricultural High School in Fulton, "due to the distractions to the educational process caused by recent events."

The statement didn't mention McMillen or the ACLU. When asked by The Associated Press if McMillen's demand led to the cancellation, school board attorney Michele Floyd said she could only reference the statement.

"It is our hope that private citizens will organize an event for the juniors and seniors," district officials said in the statement. "However, at this time, we feel that it is in the best interest of the Itawamba County School District, after taking into consideration the education, safety and well being of our students."


----------



## bodecea (Mar 10, 2010)

My mom used to call that "Cutting off your nose to spite your face."


----------



## bodecea (Mar 10, 2010)

A MacMillan....proud of her.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 10, 2010)

I bet this district would end their prom over guys showing up in kilts too...talk about stuck in the 19th century.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 10, 2010)

US Army Retard is afraid he may "Catch the Gay"


----------



## bodecea (Mar 10, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> US Army Retard is afraid he may "Catch the Gay"



He's afraid he may become a Lesbian.  Aat least I might be able to get a toaster oven out of this.


----------



## Ragnar (Mar 10, 2010)

Is it unPC to call the original post flame bait?


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> JACKSON, Miss. 
> A northern Mississippi school district decided Wednesday not to host a high school prom after a lesbian student demanded she be able to attend with her girlfriend and wear a tuxedo.
> ...




I couldn't help but wonder why the Seattle (Washington) Times would publish News about the happenings in Itawamba County, MS. I also wonder why they stated that the school board's statement didn't mention McMillen _*or the ACLU*_. Why not also print that the board's statement didn't mention President Obama, or Elvis?

One of the reasons people may want to live in MS is the strength in traditional values that oppose open displays of Homosexuality. The greatest strength of American School Systems is that they adhere to LOCAL customs, not the fucking customs of the Seattle Times.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 10, 2010)

And, just when you thought that gay people (and even straight children related to gay people) had no problems with being treated as 2nd class citizens in this country...here's another story:

Archdiocese defends decision to deny children because of lesbian parents - CNN.com

_*Archdiocese defends decision to deny children because of lesbian parents*

 The archdiocese of Denver, Colorado, is defending its decision not to re-enroll two children in a Catholic school in Boulder next year because their parents are lesbians._

and more to the article.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 10, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > US Army Retard is afraid he may "Catch the Gay"
> ...



Maybe that explains his obsession with Sarah Palin?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 10, 2010)

bodecea said:


> And, just when you thought that gay people (and even straight children related to gay people) had no problems with being treated as 2nd class citizens in this country...here's another story:
> 
> Archdiocese defends decision to deny children because of lesbian parents - CNN.com
> 
> ...



Isn't it charming what religious organizations do to children these days?  Maybe it's all for the best...those children have a lesser chance of being diddled by a Catholic priest.


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

bodecea said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > And, just when you thought that gay people (and even straight children related to gay people) had no problems with being treated as 2nd class citizens in this country...here's another story:
> ...



Yes, a charming reminder that everyone doesn't except deviant homosexual behaviour, nor will they be compelled to tolerate it.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Have you seen anything suggesting they be compelled to "except" homosexual "behaviour"?   And we ARE talking about young kids being rejected because of what their parents are.   BTW, if this Diocese is taking no federal/state money, they have every right to take students as they see fit....and we have every right to call them assholes for it.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Kind of like parents who are into Octoporn with  school girls?


----------



## random3434 (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



So you think 2 lesbians raising a child are deviants, and that their kids should be punished for it?

Of course, it's a Catholic School, meaning private, so they have that right to reject the children because of the parents sexual orientations. Of course we all know all straight parents never do anything sexually "deviant" right Samson?


----------



## uscitizen (Mar 10, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



That had to leave a mark


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Fortunately, it has no relevance, except in EZ's overactive little imagination.

Ironically, while she may disagree with the decisions of the archdiocese of Denver, or Itawamba County School District, she's quite comfortable enforcing her own intolerance.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Echeaux Zulu said:
> ...



    


Intolerance of Bestiality? Yeah, I guess I am. I must be a Conservative after all!


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



I'm not Catholic, but I'm guessing that Rome doesn't embrase Homosexuality, and considers it "deviant," as in "Behaviour that deviates from that which The Pope finds acceptable."

If I say, belonged to a church that found Octoerotic Art heretical, then I wouldn't expect them to embrase my beliefs.


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Echeaux Zulu said:
> ...



The day that this site allows octoporn to be posted is the day we lose a large chunk of our membership and prolly a mod or two.


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...



Like I said: Overactive Imagination.


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

Article 15 said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...



And as well you should be concerned: That's my point

The same could be said for the Catrholic Church, or Itawamba County: The day they support Queers, is the day they "lose a large chunk of their membership."


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...




Isn't this thread about a _public_ school district?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Echeaux Zulu said:
> ...



What has she "enforced" again?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Yeah...because there's no safer minority group to bash than gays....everyone hates the gays.


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

Article 15 said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Article 15 said:
> ...



Well, Bod had to use it as an opportuntity to throw poo at the Catholic church, but yes, the OP is about a public school district. As a public school, they cannot prohibit the student's attendence to a school sponsored function, so they simply cancelled the function.

When I say Itawamba County would "lose a large chunk of their membership," I mean people might decide not to live there, or send their kids to other school districts.


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...




Where are they going to move to or send their kids?  Itawamba County residents seem to be already scraping the bottom of the barrel.


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Article 15 said:
> ...



<<<<sigh>>>>

Everyone does not Hate gays, bo. 

I don't hate gays, but I think a church, and a school district, has rights to exclude individuals whose behavior conflicts with their moral beliefs. I wouldn't know why these individuals would WANT to be included in organizations or events in which their behaviour is so clearly unacceptable.


----------



## elvis (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...


if the school is private, then yes they do.  if they are public, then no they do not.


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

Article 15 said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Article 15 said:
> ...



Where would "a large chunk" of USMB membership go if you allowed Octoerotic Art postings?

Free Message Board Membership isn't terribly exclusive, ya know.


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

elvis said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



You're correct. The district cannot exclude the gay students from a school sponsored event.

I should have said that the school district can decide not to sponsor a prom if a queer couple want to attend.


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Apples and oranges.  

USMB member would probably to some other _private_ message board. Where ever the residents of Itawaba County go (in the US, of course) they will still be subject to the same discrimination laws because we are talking about their _public_ school system.


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

Article 15 said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Article 15 said:
> ...



I'm not sure I understand you.

Yes the Feds prohibit EVERY school district from sponsoring events that ALL students cannot attend.

But each school district can decide for itself whether or not to sponsor a prom.

In Itawaba Co, MS, the parents (who elected the school board) have decided not to sponsor the prom, thus making attendance of gay students a mute point.

Parents who want gay participation in the prom would do well not to live in Itawaba Co, just as if I insisted on posting Octoerotic Art would do well to find another Board on which to post.


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...




I interpretted your post as saying that if gays were allowed to attend a prom there then the residents would find someplace else to live.  That's where the confusion came from, I think.


----------



## JW Frogen (Mar 10, 2010)

Please tell this is no myth. This board where octopussys float upon the tide of orgy?


----------



## Samson (Mar 10, 2010)

Article 15 said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Article 15 said:
> ...



Yes, I said that also. I don't mean to imply that everyone in the county would immediately abandon their homes, but, given the chance to live inside the district or outside the district (which is a major consideration for home buyers and renters with kids) they may decide to live outside the district boundries.

This is the whole point of having localised control of school districts vs state or federal administration: Parents have a HUGE amount of power and input over school administration in the USA.


----------



## jillian (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



so people are supposed to pander to people's biases?

there will always be racists. there will always be homophobes. there will always be anti-semitics.

i'm pretty sure that we shouldn't be allowing schools to formulate policy to feed those hatreds.

we're not supposed to be tolerant of people's hatred.


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 10, 2010)

Samson said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...






I see your point but cannot support that kind of discrimation in the public domain.


----------



## elvis (Mar 10, 2010)

jillian said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Article 15 said:
> ...


I wonder if they'd have been allowed to cancel the dance on the basis of a black couple attending?


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 10, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> 
> Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> ...



She wanted to attend the event and wear a tuxedo, I just have one question..."Would they have banned the prom if the girl had agreed to wear a dress like all the other girls?"


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 11, 2010)

elvis said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



For some reason I doubt the people of that county are a big fan of the coloreds or especially interacial dating.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 11, 2010)

elvis said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Again, she wanted to wear a tux....I think that was entirely inappropriate.  If they would have banned it anyway, then they are wrong, but if they banned it because they wanted to uphold the dress code, more power to them.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > And, just when you thought that gay people (and even straight children related to gay people) had no problems with being treated as 2nd class citizens in this country...here's another story:
> ...



It is a PRIVATE SCHOOL. They have EVERY right to deny enrollment to ANYONE they want, for ANY reason. Get back to us when a Public school does so.


----------



## CrimsonWhite (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



RGS is right on this one.


----------



## Luissa (Mar 11, 2010)

Who here thinks US Retired and Bass are one in the same?


----------



## Luissa (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



But do they get public funds through programs like vouchers?


----------



## JW Frogen (Mar 11, 2010)

Not the same but I think they might make a good couple?


----------



## Brubricker (Mar 11, 2010)

The very first response to this thread is the best one. It is definitely cutting off your nose to spite your face.


----------



## chanel (Mar 11, 2010)

My son goes to Catholic University and he said there are a significant number of gays there.  He said it's kinda like "Don't ask, don't tell".  Everyone gets along and no one pushes their sexual orientation on anyone else.  What does "being a lesbian" have to do with the prom or being parents?  How would anyone know unless they made a fucking issue out of it?

From the CNN article:


> "The issue is not about our not accepting 'sinners,' " he said. "It is not about punishing the child for the sins of his or her parents. It is simply that t*he lesbian couple is saying that their relationship is a good one that should be accepted by everyon*e; and the Church cannot agree to that."



The church does not ask if anyone's relationship is a "good one".  Yet it seems that this couple wanted that special recognition.  There's always more to the story folks.


----------



## strollingbones (Mar 11, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event.* Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region*. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> 
> Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> ...



where the fuck do you live in the south?




Bible Belt Leads U.S. In Divorces 

Aside from the quickie-divorce Mecca of Nevada, no region of the United States has a higher divorce rate than the Bible Belt. Nearly half of all marriages break up, but the divorce rates in these southern states are roughly 50 percent above the national average. 

According to federal figures: 

Nationally, there were about 4.2 divorces for every thousand people in 1998. 
The rate was 8.5 per thousand in Nevada, 6.4 in Tennessee, 6.1 in Arkansas, 6.0 in Alabama and Oklahoma. 
Of southeastern states, only South Carolina's rate of 3.8 was below the national average. 
By contrast, the divorce rate is less than 3.0 in Connecticut, Massachusetts and New York. 
Why so many divorces in the Bible Belt? 

(mal left out due to copy right rules) 

Religion may play a role, since some of the lowest divorce rates are in northeastern states with relatively high household incomes and large numbers of Roman Catholics whose church doesn't recognize divorce. 

Bible Belt states, in contrast, are dominated by fundamentalist Protestant denominations that proclaim the sanctity of marriage but generally do not want to estrange churchgoers who do divorce. 

No state has been more embarrassed by the divorce problem than Oklahoma. Over the past few months, Gov. Frank Keating has enlisted clergymen, academics, lawyers and psychologists in a campaign to reduce the divorce rate by a third within 10 years. In neighboring Arkansas, state officials hope to halve the divorce rate by 2010. 

Bible Belt Leads U.S. In Divorces


----------



## strollingbones (Mar 11, 2010)

you dont strike me as the sharpest tool in the shed...so let me give you an url with a graph...pictures may make it easier for ya

Divorce Rates by State, 1990?2005 &mdash; Infoplease.com


----------



## goldcatt (Mar 11, 2010)

Anyone else reading this thread think "Footloose"?


----------



## chanel (Mar 11, 2010)

My younger son's Catholic HS is now allowing "same sex couples" Not because they are recognizing gays in high school; they are recognizing same sex FRIENDSHIPS. There is simply too much pressure on kids to find a date. That's the way it should be handled. Win/win.


----------



## asaratis (Mar 11, 2010)

Brubricker said:


> The very first response to this thread is the best one. It is definitely cutting off your nose to spite your face.


More like cutting off the student's noses to spite the parent's faces.  This is an uneducated move.  When children grow up, they will have to deal with the fact that lesbians exist and contribute to society.  Shielding them from such "horrors" while within the public "learning center" is lunacy.

It takes the mindset of a Neanderthal to reject reality in keeping with ridiculous beliefs.  The school board has done damage to all the students, created animosity among students and reinforced the prejudices of the bible-thumping, fire and brimstone numbnuts that apparently occupy the district.

It was an extremely bad decision.


----------



## xotoxi (Mar 11, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event.


 
We don't want two girls dancing together!!!

YUCK!!!  COOTIES!!!


----------



## goldcatt (Mar 11, 2010)

xotoxi said:


> US Army Retired said:
> 
> 
> > This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event.
> ...



Next those damn libruls will want gubmint to force all the kids to get cootie shots.


----------



## xotoxi (Mar 11, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Another example of why the Bible Belt is a Constitutional noose.


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 11, 2010)

It really kills two birds with one stone at that Mississippi school

They don't have to worry about lesbians dating

and they don't have to worry about white girls dancing with black boys

For them, they call it win-win


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> elvis said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...




What's wrong with a tux?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



You are right (as I already said earlier on in this thread)...and we have EVERY right to call them assholes for punishing innocent children because they don't like the parents.


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

Probably not that many students would go anyway.  Don't they have like a 60% drop out rate?  It's embarrassing that lesbians are among the smartest students.  Especially for those "Christians" who are both "moral" and "uneducated".


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> Probably not that many students would go anyway.  Don't they have like a 60% drop out rate?  It's embarrassing that lesbians are among the smartest students.  Especially for those "Christians" who are both "moral" and "uneducated".



Links to each of your assertions being supported by actual facts?

Stop posting til  you actually produce them, please


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Probably not that many students would go anyway. * Don't they have like a 60% drop out rate?*  It's embarrassing that lesbians are among the smartest students.  Especially for those "Christians" who are both "moral" and "uneducated".
> ...



Assertions?   Didn't she ask it as a question?


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



Do you have reading comprehension problems??



> It's embarrassing that lesbians are among the smartest students.  Especially for those "Christians" who are both "moral" and "uneducated".


Waiting for the proof that lesbians are among the smartest and that Christians are both moral and uneducated


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Probably not that many students would go anyway.  Don't they have like a 60% drop out rate?  It's embarrassing that lesbians are among the smartest students.  Especially for those "Christians" who are both "moral" and "uneducated".
> ...



According to the 2000 census, Mississippi ranks 47th in the rate of high school dropouts and was 50th for American College Test (ACT) scores.

Mississippi plans to decrease high school dropout rate - News

That was back in 2000.  Wanna bet it's worse now?

Worrying about "gays" and "lesbians".  What a bunch of dumbasses.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> Probably not that many students would go anyway.  *Don't they have like a 60% drop out rate*?  It's embarrassing that lesbians are among the smartest students.  Especially for those "Christians" who are both "moral" and "uneducated".


Close enough.



> Miss. Gov. Haley Barbour's office, the Legislature, the state Department of Education and the Dropout Prevention Task Force are working together to implement a new plan to decrease the state's number of high school dropouts.
> 
> According to the 2000 census, Mississippi ranks 47th in the rate of high school dropouts and was 50th for American College Test (ACT) scores.
> 
> Director of the Office of Dropout Prevention Sheril Smith said the current graduation rate for the state is 61.1 percent.


Mississippi plans to decrease high school dropout rate - News


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



Shut up til you support  your other assertions with facts...

Don't try and cherry pick and slink off


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

Oh.. btw

from your own link

_The plan is not only meant to reduce the *state's dropout rate* from its current *26.6 percent* but is also meant to help better prepare high school students to move forward into college, Smith said.
_

You have problems with reading comprehension, memory, and numbers?? 60%... LMAO... idiot


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Gay people are in the upper echelon of education, creativitiy, and money making.   Sorry you don't like to hear that.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Link


----------



## Mr Natural (Mar 11, 2010)

This is no surprise considering Mississippi is probably the most backward state in the country.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Chink


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> Oh.. btw
> 
> from your own link
> 
> ...



Do I have to do everything?

US high school graduation rate climbs to 69.2 percent / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

The high school graduation rate for the entire US is only 69.2% and Mississippi is 47th.

States fudging high school dropout rates

The report found that *most states exaggerated their graduation rates* by ignoring students who dropped out of high school before their senior year. Nationally, states reported an average graduation rate of 83 percent, far higher than independent measures, which estimate that at least *30 percent of public high school students nationwide fail to graduate *in four years. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/education/20graduation.html

One team of statisticians working at the state education headquarters here recently calculated the official graduation rate at a respectable 87 percent, which Mississippi reported to Washington. But in another office piled with computer printouts, a second team of number crunchers came up with a different rate: a more sobering 63 percent.

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

You can't just believe the "first thing you read".  You have to do a little research.  It's fun.  Try it some time.  Get more facts than just the slanted "right".


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Oh.. btw
> ...



Go away, you motherfucking idiot

YOU stated the DROPOUT rate was 'like 60%'... not the graduation rate.... nice try....

And still waiting for you to give backing to the assertions you made.... please go busy yourself and stop posting until you have some cold hard facts to back it up


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

I'm a 'conservative christian', and I think it was a stupid move.  Why take the fun away from all of the students?  What does that accomplish really?  Kids today have the gay lifestyle crammed down their throats via the media and television every day anyway, they know what it is and what it's all about.  There isn't a television show on today that doesn't have gay characters on it. There's no point in denying them, nor any point in denying the two girls from attending together.  I feel bad for the kids, you only get one prom.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



You made the assertions.. I'm calling your hand... link proof of your assertions


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> Oh.. btw
> 
> from your own link
> 
> ...



Only a dumbass would be more concerned about an error in a claim than the drop out rate.  I'm sure there can be a way blame that on gays as well.


----------



## Mr Natural (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> I'm a 'conservative christian', and I think it was a stupid move.  Why take the fun away from all of the students?  What does that accomplish really?  Kids today have the gay lifestyle crammed down their throats via the media and television every day anyway, they know what it is and what it's all about.  There isn't a television show on today that doesn't have gay characters on it. There's no point in denying them, nor any point in denying the two girls from attending together.  I feel bad for the kids, you only get one prom.



Why?

Probably because they're ignorant red-neck assholes.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Blink, Clink, Mink


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> I'm a 'conservative christian', and I think it was a stupid move.  Why take the fun away from all of the students?  What does that accomplish really?  Kids today have the gay lifestyle crammed down their throats via the media and television every day anyway, they know what it is and what it's all about.  There isn't a television show on today that doesn't have gay characters on it. There's no point in denying them, nor any point in denying the two girls from attending together.  I feel bad for the kids, you only get one prom.




The flinstones are on.  Who is the gay character?


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



So you are admitting you have nothing to back up your assertions?.. understood....


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Oh.. btw
> ...



Not to mention the other assertions the moron made...

Hardly think his 'mistake' was a typo... little leftist asshole trying to exaggerate in a feeble attempt to make a point, hoping nobody would call them on it


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Well, if that makes you sleep better at nite, rock on....


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



I think Mississippi's new motto should be:

MISSISSIPPI EDUCATION...we don't suck as much as you may think!  And, at least we don't have gays at proms!!!!!


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



I've pointed out the problem with "your kind" several times before.  Once you are "schooled", you begin name calling.  So predictable.

What I said was, "Don't they have like a 60% drop out rate?".  It was a question.  Turns out that 60% is closer to the graduation rate.  But that's certainly nothing to be proud of.

You lie, you name call, and then you say "go away, you motherfucking idiot".  Seriously, do you have any clue how pathetic you are?

Well, at least, for today only, you can say you were "schooled".  And remember, don't believe the first thing you read.


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

Mr Clean said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > I'm a 'conservative christian', and I think it was a stupid move.  Why take the fun away from all of the students?  What does that accomplish really?  Kids today have the gay lifestyle crammed down their throats via the media and television every day anyway, they know what it is and what it's all about.  There isn't a television show on today that doesn't have gay characters on it. There's no point in denying them, nor any point in denying the two girls from attending together.  I feel bad for the kids, you only get one prom.
> ...



I think they're doing it because they think they're doing what's right.  I just don't think it's serving any purpose, it's not going to change anything.  From a personal perspective, I don't believe that people choose to be gay, it's always going to exist as long as human kind exists.  Christianity is about love and forgiveness and not judgment, so I try not to judge and it's between each person and God as to how they have lived their life.  Homosexuality is a fact of life, and ignoring isn't going to change it or make it go away.  I understand not embracing it, but I think it should be a 'live and let live' attitude and these people obviously are not doing that either.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



I showed you from your own link what the dropout rate was

Still waiting for you to post the proof of your other assertions... please stoop posting til you have those supporting facts... or just admit you pulled the shit out of your ass and you really have no clue... .either is fine


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > I'm a 'conservative christian', and I think it was a stupid move.  Why take the fun away from all of the students?  What does that accomplish really?  Kids today have the gay lifestyle crammed down their throats via the media and television every day anyway, they know what it is and what it's all about.  There isn't a television show on today that doesn't have gay characters on it. There's no point in denying them, nor any point in denying the two girls from attending together.  I feel bad for the kids, you only get one prom.
> ...



I think I made my point.  Why don't we go into typical evening shows on mainstream television.  What do you think?  At least 50% or more have gay characters.  Every reality show has a 'diverse' cast, etc..  You're denying this?  If so, you don't get out much.


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Oh.. btw
> ...



The only "error" was Double Ds wild accusations.


----------



## del (Mar 11, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> 
> Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> ...



is this what  comes up when you google keyword *stupid*?


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



So, if a show has a black character on it, does that mean their "race" is being "shoved down your throat?"

How about a Hispanic?
Or a Jew?
Or a Muslim?
Or someone with Downs Syndrome?


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...





DiamondDave said:


> Oh.. btw
> 
> from your own link
> 
> ...





DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Probably not that many students would go anyway.  Don't they have like a 60% drop out rate?  It's embarrassing that lesbians are among the smartest students.  Especially for those "Christians" who are both "moral" and "uneducated".
> ...



Um... no... it is you, you idiot, that made the wild and unsubstantiated accusations and bogus claims


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



It's you that's equating being of a different ethnicity to being gay, not me.  I really don't see the similarity.  Is being black, hispanic, jewish, etc... going against perceived societal morals?


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



Yea, it's a choice.  So I woke up this morning and said to myself, "Self, today, I think I will "choose" to fall in love with another guy".  NOT!

When you have Gawd on your side, the obvious is never obvious.


----------



## del (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



some are and some post sweeping generalizations on message boards.


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



TV shows also have characters who are murderers, rapists, wife beaters

Doesn't that also go against societal morals?

People in our society are gay. Some are nice, upstanding citizens...some are not. If you don't want to watch something with a gay character, then change the channel


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Well, look at it this way....if this were YOUR message board, you could do like that Mississippi School Dist and shut the boards down just to keep rdean from posting.   That'll show 'em!


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

del said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Yeah....so, can we say that those who post sweeping generalizations on message boards are gay?

I could have some real fun with that one, you know.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



If the asshole would put as much effort into actually backing up the claims with facts as they do making up unsubstantiated bullshit (you should know, you posted some as well), they would actually be credible

Or, like you, they could just admit the pulled shit out of their ass and have no real clue


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 11, 2010)

Hate to bring it up, but chicks dance together at every High School dance


----------



## del (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



you could say it. i won't.



some gay people are also in the lower echelons of education, creativity, and money making.. 
some gay people are addicts, some are alcoholics, some are sex offenders, murderers, thieves, liars and all around assholes.

just like *straight* people.

go figure.


----------



## del (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Still waiting for your proof of your other assertions...
> ...



damn, you're stupid.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



Idiot... you can not pass in 4 years and still not be a dropout.. yet not be in the official graduation rate numbers... 

As for your assertions


> It's embarrassing that lesbians are among the smartest students. Especially for those "Christians" who are both "moral" and "uneducated".


Please post the cold hard facts behind lesbians being among the smartest students and that christians are statistically 'moral and uneducated'

Or just admit, like with everything else... you simply were pulling shit out of your ass in a feeble attempt to give your stance some apparent credibility


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Mar 11, 2010)

Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request - Yahoo! News

The School District solved the problem they had with the attendance of the gay students. Leaving the ACLU with nothing to do.

Ohh and by the way? High School students do NOT have all the rights of adults. This has been legislated and approved by the Supreme Court on more then one occasion.

As to the specific claim the gay students have no Constitutional right to violate school board rules and regulations.  I would agree with the school board. Their constituents do NOT want gays at sponsored events like this. The Board is elected. By canceling official participation they leave the ACLU with no where to go. And they meet the demands of their electorate.


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 11, 2010)

> Their constituents do NOT want gays at sponsored events like this. The Board is elected. By canceling official participation they leave the ACLU with no where to go. And they meet the demands of their electorate.



This same electorate does not want blacks attending the same prom as whites either.


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

del said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people: A - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are organizations of gay scientists, but I couldn't find a single one of Christian or Conservative scientists.

Remember, gays are only about 3% of the US population.

Then, probably the most startling indicator is the "Crystal Cathedral".  Considered by many to be one of the greatest Evangelical monuments in the US.  You know they looked and looked for a "Christian" to design it.  I'm sure they were perturbed to have to settle for a gay guy, Philip Johnson.  

Crystal Cathedral, beautiful and remarkable:


----------



## Gunny (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Which idiot parrot in particular commands you to breathe so you'll know you're supposed to?


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



So, you're saying they're similar in not having a choice?  As I said, last time I looked being black did not go against perceived societal morals, so it's not the same at all.  And God has nothing to do with it, other than He made every one of us with our differences.  It's up to each individual to live their lives as they choose.  It's why you have free will, and as I believe, only you will have to answer for your actions, not anyone else.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

and rdean tries to deflect again...

game, set, match, championship


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

del said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



Yea, "some", or they could also be called, "few".


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



You can add that assertion to the list of things you need to back up with facts

You're just digging yourself deeper and deeper... quit while you are behind


----------



## Gunny (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Because marginalizing the truth works for you.


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



You see, that's where we're different.  I have no mystical or supernatural beliefs.  I don't believe in "ghosts",  neither friendly or otherwise.  Nothing occult.  To me, it's all about as real as "Marvel Comics".  But if other people want to believe that stuff, more power to them.  Just don't attempt to cram that silliness down MY throat.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

still waiting for your supporting facts or the admission that you simply pulled shit out of your ass and you have no clue, rdean


----------



## Gunny (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



Proper behavior is cramming some "mystical belief" down your throat?  Who fucking cares what a moron hack like you believes?  You're a perfect example of what NOT to be.  I've not ONCE seen anything come out of your mouth I would emulate if I was even pretending to be stupid as a stick.


----------



## del (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...







did you eat a lot of lead paint when you were a kid?


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



You're welcome to your beliefs or non beliefs, but others have different views, and it's not up to you to be judgmental about them, or you are no better than you're saying they are for being judgmental of gays.  It's called hypocrisy.  I was simply stating my POV as a Christian that I don't think it accomplishes anything to deny the kids their prom because of two girls who want to go together as a couple.  I would have not taken that action, and I think the Christian community needs to be more vocal whenever this type of thing happens. I don't think we should be judging other people's behavior, unless of course they're hurting or violating the rights of others.  Every person will have to answer for their behavior, at least that's what I believe, so what good does it do for me to judge them, I have my own behavior to worry about.  It doesn't matter how immoral society becomes, it does not give you an excuse for your own behavior in the end.


----------



## Gunny (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



Geez ... you probably just messed his brain up with logic ......


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request - Yahoo! News
> 
> The School District solved the problem they had with the attendance of the gay students. Leaving the ACLU with nothing to do.
> 
> ...




It's a public school.  This directly violates the Constitution.  But since you love hating the Constitution you love the decision.


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Idiot... you can not pass in 4 years and still not be a dropout.. yet not be in the official graduation rate numbers...  

I guess I am slow.   What does that mean exactly?


----------



## SpidermanTuba (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> I also wonder why they stated that the school board's statement didn't mention McMillen _*or the ACLU*_. Why not also print that the board's statement didn't mention President Obama, or Elvis?




Uhh, because Elvis wasn't Constance's lawyer? Duh? Are you stupid or something?



> One of the reasons people may want to live in MS is the strength in traditional values that oppose open displays of Homosexuality.



That's fine if bigots want to live in Mississippi but the Constitution still applies there.




> The greatest strength of American School Systems is that they adhere to LOCAL customs, not the fucking customs of the Seattle Times.



In the past, the south has had a lot of "local customs" in its schools that turned out to require a court order and federal marshalls to fix.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Article 15 said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Article 15 said:
> ...



I'm not supporting discrimination as much as I am Local Rights of Parents.

If the girl wanted to wear an Octopuss to the Prom as her "date," then you'd find every reason to support THAT kind of discrimination in the public domain.

The only reason you cannot support this kind of discrimination is because it doesn't feel comfortable to you. Ironically, the comfort level of the Parents of Ibawaba Co means less than the comfort level of the Seattle Times. The paper's readers, of course, will unlikely ever set foot in MS, let alone Ibawaba Co, much less ever send their kids to school there. 

Obviously the Seattle Times thought the story would interest their readers, particularly if they pointed out that the district's statement omitted any address to the ACLU. Why? No Civil liberties were denied since the Prom was cancelled for EVERYONE.

The answer is plain: The readers of the Seattle Times are being encouraged to mobilize a national effort to DISCRIMINATE against the parents of Ibawaba Co, and any other local government, no matter how picayune, that might dare to refuse to embrase PC morality.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > *Idiot... you can not pass in 4 years and still not be a dropout.. yet not be in the official graduation rate numbers... *
> ...



You can pass in 5 years... and not be a positive statistic in the graduation rate.. and that does not up the dropout rate

And still waiting for you to post the cold hard facts backing up your assertions... or for you to simply admit you were pulling shit out of your ass


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



And perhaps, the Muslim community should be more vocal when they allow girls to expose their arms and legs at school...or even go to school.

Or maybe, religious groups should not be dictating what public schools do....just a thought.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...




I'll give you another opportunity to change your claim again.  This time I suggest you support it with facts instead guesswork.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Great point!  I bet tomorrow morning those Seattle readers won't serve one cup of coffee to those parents in Mississippi.


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



I don't think 'religious groups' are dictating what public schools do, the 'pubic' is made up of Christians, Muslims, etc...   I think people dictate what the schools should do or not do, and most people happen to be religious to some extent.  Just how it goes.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



At one time in mississippi, YES.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Article 15 said:
> ...



Yeah, if I'm from MS visiting Seattle, I'm drinking my coffee Black: 

NO CREAM, TY!


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Gee, guess it must only be the shows that I watch then.  And the statistics only count 'main' characters, not characters that don't appear regularly.  To deny that they don't get broad exposure on mainstream television is ridiculous.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...


I wish to congratulate you on finding something you can beat like a dead horse.   Beats debating.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...




Because historically Christianity in the South has never been used as a catalyst to try and justify slavery, misogyny, homophobic policies, and a general disregard for basic Constitutional principles.

The Board knows what they did is wrong which is why they could not be honest in announcing the cancellation.  Cowardice and Bigotry have always been best friends.


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



So, you're asserting that it was immoral to be black?


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



And yet, the ONLY reason for the discrimination is because of those same Christian beliefs.  No one believes it's the "atheists" who demanded that Prom Night be canceled to stop children they don't "approve of" from attending.  Nice people.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request - Yahoo! News
> ...



The Itawamba County school district's policy requires that senior prom dates be of the opposite sex. What part of that is hard to understand? It should also be noted that a public school is not obligated to host a high school prom. Fact is, this is just another lame attempt by homosexuals to validate an abominable lifestyle which is rejected by most fair minded Americans. When a liberal state such as California strikes down homosexual marriage, that ought to be a sign that most folks don't agree with such a lifestyle. The only weapon you homosexuals have is to call someone that doesn't agree with you homophobic. That label as well as the "racist" label is quickly losing it's effectiveness.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



You and rdean are trying to 'debate' with unsubstantiated bullshit... you just don't like being called on it


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Or maybe, religious groups should not be dictating what public schools do....just a thought.



Oh I'm certain the Public School Administrators would absolutely LOVE to remove Religion from the Public. 

They would like to remove Sex from the Public.

In fact, in a perfect setting, a Public School would have nothing to do with Parents, who would all be sent to a different planet until their offspring graduated.



These hopes are equally probable.


----------



## Mr.Fitnah (Mar 11, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> 
> Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> ...



idiocy .


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



I think it was a cruel thing for the school administration to do. They essentially said "We are cancelling your prom because of these two girls"


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> And yet, the ONLY reason for the discrimination is because of those same Christian beliefs.  No one believes it's the "atheists" who demanded that Prom Night be canceled to stop children they don't "approve of" from attending.  Nice people.



Not letting you off the hook... still waiting for you to post the cold hard facts supporting your assertions.. or for you to finally admit you were pulling shit out of your ass


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...




So....when you can't support a claim you translate that into accusing others of denial?


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



Not MY christian beliefs, nor many other christians that I know, as a matter of fact, my entire church, nor a lot of mainstream christians today.  You can feel free to use a minority to continue a stereo type if you like though.


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



You can pass in 5 years... and not be a positive statistic in the graduation rate.. and that does not up the dropout rate

Now THAT'S funny.  What is that statistic?  About 1 in 500,000?


----------



## Dr Gregg (Mar 11, 2010)

US Army retard troll strikes again. Please change you name asshole, you are a disgrace to all the honorable retired and current US Army people out there.


----------



## Dr Gregg (Mar 11, 2010)

Ragnar said:


> Is it unPC to call the original post flame bait?



every post from this asshole is flame bait


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



It is part of it.. as are kids who have to finish up in summer school... as are kids who GED it for whatever reason... I know you can say it... there are differences between the 'dropout rate' and the negative side of the 'graduation rate'

Now... still calling you out for your supporting facts for your assertions... or are you going to admit to pulling shit out of your ass?


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Betty and Wilma were gay.

There are cartoon websites that prove it


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> I think it was a cruel thing for the school administration to do. They essentially said "We are cancelling your prom because of these two girls"



Meh.

No Pain, No Gain.

The Public School has no business being in the freakin' Prom Business.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



Please PM URL's.


----------



## Mr Natural (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > I think it was a cruel thing for the school administration to do. They essentially said "We are cancelling your prom because of these two girls"
> ...



I'll have to agree with you there.  Kids learn about sex all too soon and there's no need for the school to be one of the enablers.


----------



## paperview (Mar 11, 2010)

Dr Gregg said:


> US Army retard troll strikes again. Please change you name asshole, you are a disgrace to all the honorable retired and current US Army people out there.


And he duplicates near every thread on another board or two and rarely sticks around to post.

I'm convinced he's a paid troll.

And yes, what a disgrace.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



Who caused the problems here?  I'm guessing if the whiny bigots didn't complain the prom would have happened, more out-of-wedlock pregnancies would have occurred, and none of us would be discussing some backwater shithole living in the 18th century with electricity. 

The Board went out of their way to specifically avoid being honest because what they did is a clear Constitutional violation.  Homphobes are the problem.  Tell us, if you all stopped whining like little bitches, what tangible harms would be caused?  All of these threads boil down to the same damn thing:

Bigots with a persecution complex whining about gays.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



again, at one time yes.  did I stutter?  Shall we ignore the history of the south in order to forget how the same excuses by the same people have been used historically?


don't let the sun set on you in this town, ******.... right?


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > I think it was a cruel thing for the school administration to do. They essentially said "We are cancelling your prom because of these two girls"
> ...




yea.. you know.. since PROM it usually associated with anything other than school.


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > And yet, the ONLY reason for the discrimination is because of those same Christian beliefs.  No one believes it's the "atheists" who demanded that Prom Night be canceled to stop children they don't "approve of" from attending.  Nice people.
> ...



That Southern Christians are "moral and uneducated"?  

They are "moral" because they say they are.  Unless you disagree with that?

Uneducated.  Wow, it's not like you have to look really hard.  

6% of scientists are Republican and only 9% conservative.  As in "conservative Christian".

Like I said, I can find organizations of "gay" scientists and engineers, but I haven't been able to find a "single one" for Evangelical or Conservative Christians.  Find one for me.  And please, NOT the Discovery Institute or the "ID Museum".

Beyond Red vs. Blue: Profiles of the Typology Groups - Pew Research Center for the People & the Press

One thing that surprises me, you never, ever have any kind of "proof" yourself.  When you are show "proof", you shout "liar".  If Christians are so well educated, "Prove it". 

But like I said, if they could have found someone qualifed to build the Crystal Cathedral, they would never have hired a gay.  Call that a lie.


----------



## rdean (Mar 11, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



Fair minded Americans call gays "abominable".  Uh, hate to break the news to you sparky, but gays come from those same "American" families who didn't raise their children to be gay.  They just ARE.  You might as well discriminate against a genius or a Downs syndrome, makes equal sense.


----------



## Liability (Mar 11, 2010)

Who gives a damn if a lesbian high school girl wants to have a lesbian date with her for the prom?

That's one of the things in life that the Miss. school district considers especially important?  

And not only is it "important" to the school district, it's important enough to screw around with all the other high school kids who cannot have their prom, now?  

There are some cultural aspects, still, of Mississippi that I wish they'd leave behind in the dark recesses of the past.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Are you kidding?   Some DO discriminate against geniuses....we are told that smart, educated people are Elitists...that Colleges are bastions of Communist indoctrination...that having a Haarvard degree is bad.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



Membership in a group or 'organization' does not prove your assertion....

Nice try... please give cold hard factual statistics

Or just admit you generalized and pulled shit out of your ass


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

Oh.. and I did not make any assertion that Christians are any 'smarter' or more 'educated' than gays or jews or atheists or little people or any other group... but nice try and twist this around... not gonna work though


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...




You called it, rdean.    And for Diamond Dave.....  on the :beatingdeadhorse:


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



Nah, Betty and Wilma were bi....   Fred, Wilma, Betty, and Barney were all swingers...


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



The asshole gave no statistics to quantify the position that Christians are less educated nor that lesbians are 'among the top educated groups'

Nice try


----------



## SpidermanTuba (Mar 11, 2010)

> "It is our hope that private citizens will organize an event for the juniors and seniors," district officials said in the statement.



Translation - "we're turning prom into a private party that way it will be legal for us to keep out fags and anyone else we hate."


----------



## del (Mar 11, 2010)

SpidermanTuba said:


> > "It is our hope that private citizens will organize an event for the juniors and seniors," district officials said in the statement.
> 
> 
> 
> Translation - "we're turning prom into a private party that way it will be legal for us to keep out fags and anyone else we hate."



how astute of you.


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



Sorry, I don't agree.  I know the history of the US south, and I would say their behavior was immoral, but I don't recall being black as being 'immoral'.  It meant a lot of other things, but not that you were immoral because you were black.


----------



## SpidermanTuba (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> .  It meant a lot of other things, but not that you were immoral because you were black.





Right. You were just immoral if you were black and drinking from a white water fountain. Or married to a white woman. Or trying to eat at a white restaurant.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Those who failed to comply with policy are the ones that caused the problems. 

All You have is a strawman argument? You may as well concede now.


----------



## Vast LWC (Mar 11, 2010)

Discrimination is discrimination.  And to stop the prom altogether in order to discriminate against two students is the worst kind of discrimination.

Nice of that school district to turn the entire student populace against the couple just because they wanted to go to the Prom.  Perhaps next time they'll just host a public stoning.

Neg rep to you "US Army Retired", but there's nothing new there.

As for the students themselves, there should certainly be a lawsuit against the school district appearing in short order for such a blatant attempt at ostricizing these two individuals from the community.


----------



## Vast LWC (Mar 11, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Those who failed to comply with policy are the ones that caused the problems.
> 
> All You have is a strawman argument? You may as well concede now.



Yeah, so I guess in your opinion, Rosa Parks was the problem, not institutionalized racism.

Right?


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



First off Nancy, I didn't call you homosexuals abominable, just your lifestyle. I understand reading comprehension isn't a homosexuals best attribute, as you have clearly demonstrated, so I won't state the obvious. 

Aww, fuck it, I'll state the obvious, you're a stupid fuck!

If you're trying to suggest people are born homosexual, then you'll have to prove that claim.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 11, 2010)

Vast LWC said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Those who failed to comply with policy are the ones that caused the problems.
> ...



Another strawman? Damn you're getting desperate.


----------



## manifold (Mar 11, 2010)

You queers need to ease up just a bit.

These school officials are still trying to come to grips with the fact that they have to allow inter-racial couples to attend the prom.

Piling this shit on them at this juncture is just plain mean and insensitive.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



Let me introduce you to a kid named Emmet Till


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

del said:


> SpidermanTuba said:
> 
> 
> > > "It is our hope that private citizens will organize an event for the juniors and seniors," district officials said in the statement.
> ...



In other news: 
_*
Sun Rises in East, Sets in West!!!*_


----------



## Mr Natural (Mar 11, 2010)

manifold said:


> You queers need to ease up just a bit.
> 
> These school officials are still trying to come to grips with the fact that they have to allow inter-racial couples to attend the prom.
> 
> Piling this shit on them at this juncture is just plain mean and insensitive.



Imagine if they had to deal with an inter-racial gay couple.

Yikes, their inbred little heads would explode.


----------



## del (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > SpidermanTuba said:
> ...



link?


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



Um, there's probably a point here that has something to do with the OP.

Can I also increase my postcount with irrelevant posts?


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

del said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...




Why does the Sun rise in the east and set in the west?

 

Now.... if only rdean would have the ability to post supporting factual data on the assertion made....


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



sure, if you would rather not expend the energy to scroll up and discover what I replied to with that picture.  Would it be easier to use said energy to shoot something in the head after whistling at a white woman in Mississippi?  Maybe you'll catch this ball if I duct tape it with Styrofoam and spray paint it dayglo orange.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...




Tic...Toc....Tic...Toc....Tic...Toc....

Still haven't bothered reading the OP huh?

No matter.

Another Post for MEEEEEeeee!!!


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



I expect he's digging up some blog that blames Republicans for Night-Time.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Vast LWC said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...




Someone please teach this dumb fuck a new term.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Vast LWC said:
> ...



Maybe if vast winger would stop using the strawman argument, it would not be continually pointed out


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request - Yahoo! News
> ...



Actually retard, the school board canceled the prom , it is no longer a school function. But hey you keep on being stupid.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



Being black was a crime in itself.  Your hairsplitting of the term "immoral" ignores how blacks were viewed and treated as sub-human.  But I'm sure I don't have to tell that to someone who knows at least 3/5ths of history in the South.


----------



## SpidermanTuba (Mar 11, 2010)

Canceling a prom to keep gay couples from attending = Whiny bitches. Sort of like the Mardi Gras Krewes that disbanded after they were ordered to integrate.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Uber :deadhorse:-ism.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Yep... because both you and rdean will admit to pulling shit out of your collective asses.... but you'll certainly keep trying to congratulate him for sidestepping and attempting to pull the wool over the eyes of others...

All both of you have to do it put up or just state that you posted unsubstantiated generalization bullshit


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



There used to be two Biblical explanations for Black people  used in the South...
1.  Blacks were the descendants of Cain and had his "mark" on them and carried his sibling murder guilt

2.  Blacks were the descendants of Ham..."guilt", etc. etc. etc.

And the stereotypes were Blacks as lazy, drunken, womanising, loose, argumentative, murderers, thieves, cowards, unintelligent, dirty.....lots of immoral tags right there.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



We already knew you were not a candidate but thanks for vocal affirmation. 

(RW didn't use a strawman.  It's called an analogy.)


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



More :deadhorse:-ism.   I wonder if  you can keep this going all day...all week...maybe it can become the Centerpiece of your posting genre.


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

SpidermanTuba said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > .  It meant a lot of other things, but not that you were immoral because you were black.
> ...



You're talking about other people's views, perceived morals, not absolute morals.  Those were black people doing things that were perceived as immoral by a certain group of people, not that they were inherently immoral because of their skin color.  Are you saying that the white woman married to a black man wouldn't be perceived as immoral?  Is she immoral simply because she is white then, or because she decided to do something considered unacceptable to society at that time?


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

SpidermanTuba said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > .  It meant a lot of other things, but not that you were immoral because you were black.
> ...



And those are examples of them being seen as not equal to their peers, not immoral.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



I'll drive both of you nuts til you admit or put up the supportive facts... just keeps going to further expose you and discredit you


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

_The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern:

   1. Person A has position X.
   2. Person B disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the superficially-similar position Y. Thus, Y is a resulting distorted version of X...
   3. Person B attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious, because attacking a distorted version of a position fails to constitute an attack on the actual position._

Yes... you are a dumb fuck.. and yes, a strawman argument was used


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Of course I read the OP.  I see you didn't bother scrolling up.  One handed typing feels so good, right buddy?


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



The Policy is discriminatory and as much as you hate the Constitution it still needs to be pointed out that a school Policy does not trump the Constitution.  The school failed to comply with current law and it knows this which is why the cowards could not honestly state why they moved the prom.  I can't wait for one of the teachers or admins to get Haggertized.   I'm sure you'd find a way to blame that on one of these two students as well.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



Indeed.  I'm sure Samson will remind you of the OP though.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Mar 11, 2010)

Vast LWC said:


> Discrimination is discrimination.  And to stop the prom altogether in order to discriminate against two students is the worst kind of discrimination.
> 
> Nice of that school district to turn the entire student populace against the couple just because they wanted to go to the Prom.  Perhaps next time they'll just host a public stoning.
> 
> ...



Go ahead. Won't fly. You can not hold the school district responsible for discrimination if they did not actually discriminate against anyone. By canceling the Prom they solved ALL the legal problems.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...




A c + p job does not explain the supposed strawman you fuxxing moron.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> SpidermanTuba said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...




You don't even realize how the bolded sentence sinks your entire position, do you?  Perceived as immoral.. hmmm.. yup... SURE DOESN'T APPLY HERE.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Vast LWC said:
> 
> 
> > Discrimination is discrimination.  And to stop the prom altogether in order to discriminate against two students is the worst kind of discrimination.
> ...



They're fuxxing cowards.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



Then I can only surmise you read, but couldn't understand the OP.

The Thread has nothing to do with anyone being shot for whistling at white women.

I look forward to making 25,000+ posts pointing out the obvious to Shogun!!!


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Vast LWC said:
> ...



You keep throwing out strawman arguments, I'll keep calling you out on them. Fact is Rosa Parks was born black, the same isn't true in the lesbians case.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Yes.. the definition of the strawman argument, in addition to the fact that a strawman argument was used in bring up Rosa Parks.. attacking a more extreme position in a feeble attempt to go against the more moderate position that was out there in the first place... also known as substituting in the strawman.. a demonetization argument


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Where in the constitution does it state that you can't descriminate due to sexual preference. Are current sodomy laws unconstitutional?


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



You are free to assume whatever you need to in order to miss the point I made about the same excuses made by the same people in the same area.  Indeed, that seems easier on your cognitive abilities than admitting you have no rebuttal.

After all, it must take a real brainiac to find a correlation between the "immoral" act of a black kid chirping at a white woman and a few dykes trying to dyke it up at a prom given the behaviour of both being weighed against the cultural backdrop in which they happen.




a REAL rocket scientist!


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > SpidermanTuba said:
> ...



I said their ACTIONS were perceived as immoral, not that they were thought immoral simply because of their skin color alone.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Vast LWC said:
> ...



They were smart enough to not fall into the trap.


----------



## Contumacious (Mar 11, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



*Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution*

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; *nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws*

.


----------



## Vast LWC (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> Maybe if vast winger would stop using the strawman argument, it would not be continually pointed out



Maybe if it was a "Straw Man" argument, I would stop using it.

These two ladies are simply trying to go to their high school prom with their significant other, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.

They're not asking to be allowed to be legally married, they're only trying to have a normal fucking adolescence, and along come some self-righteous assholes who decide to discriminate against them by turning the entire student body of their school against them.

And then you turn around and say *it's their fault*.

Well, it's not "their fault", they are victims of discrimination, pure and simple.  They are not asking for special rights, they are simply asking to be allowed to do what all their other classmates do.

When Rosa Parks sat in the front of the bus to stand against discrimination, people also said it was "her fault", and that she was "just being stubborn", or that she was "uppity".

People just like you.

Now, I'm not gay, but there's nothing wrong with two girls who are involved in a relationship wanting to attend their own prom* without being publicly stoned for it*.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

Contumacious said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Both gay or straight can be prosecuted under sodomy laws... that is equal

Law's against necrophilia as a sexual preference or choice does not discriminate either


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...




Lol....you obviously don't know what "strawman" means. Let's break this down as much as possible:

1. The lesbian students did not violate any school policy.

2. Discrimination based on sexual orientation is as much against the law as discrimination based on skin color.

3.  It does not matter if people are born gay or not.  It does not justify discrimination against them.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Vast LWC said:
> 
> 
> > Discrimination is discrimination.  And to stop the prom altogether in order to discriminate against two students is the worst kind of discrimination.
> ...



Correct.

But let's address the interesting point: "to stop the prom altogether in order to discriminate against two students is the _*worst*_ kind of discrimination."

So, a "better" discrimination would have been to have the prom and simply asked gays to stay home? Or have a "seperate-but-equal" gay prom?

But this would contravene Federal Law.

What about simply ignoring the parents that oppose homosexual behaviour? How about allowing gays to piss off the majority, who would simply boycott the prom, and no doubt use this to justify their increased prejudice and perhaps a wider intolerance?

This would all be lawful, but it would hardly change the opinion of "the entire student populace against the couple just because they wanted to go to the Prom."


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

Vast LWC said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe if vast winger would stop using the strawman argument, it would not be continually pointed out
> ...



I did not argue against a gay couple being allowed into the prom.. I did not argue for it either...

And if there is no prom there is no discrimination

But nice try


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



Nobody said cowards are dumb.  They're just American hating cowards.


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 11, 2010)

Vast LWC said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe if vast winger would stop using the strawman argument, it would not be continually pointed out
> ...




Valid analogy and not a strawman since it relates to a blame the victim situation.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



the action was a direct result of race.  if it were a white kid whistling there would have been no issue.

check mate.


----------



## Vast LWC (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Go ahead. Won't fly. You can not hold the school district responsible for discrimination if they did not actually discriminate against anyone. By canceling the Prom they solved ALL the legal problems.



Yeah, they solved all their legal problems alright.

And now they just have to be responsible for the possibility of a lynching of these poor girls by the rest of the student body due to the fact that they are now being denied a prom too.

I was in the military and so were you, we both know this tactic well, and this school board is a bunch of nasty fucks for using it.

And the OP is just as nasty for publicly approving of this decision.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...





I think you've almost grasped the topic of the thread.....but

keep trying.


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> Contumacious said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



Borderline moot since most sodomy laws have been thrown out.

One reason is that they were unequally applied to gay sex


----------



## Contumacious (Mar 11, 2010)

*Constance McMillen*

She is a pretty girl. 

To each her own.

.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Contumacious said:
> ...



Not all have though.. and none have been declared unconstitutional... same with other laws revolving around actions dealing with sexual choice


----------



## Vast LWC (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> Correct.
> 
> But let's address the interesting point: "to stop the prom altogether in order to discriminate against two students is the _*worst*_ kind of discrimination."
> 
> ...



It would, but it would also stop the rest of the student body and all of their friends and neighbors from resenting them for the rest of their lives.



> What about simply ignoring the parents that oppose homosexual behaviour? How about allowing gays to piss off the majority, who would simply boycott the prom, and no doubt use this to justify their increased prejudice and perhaps a wider intolerance?
> 
> This would all be lawful, but it would hardly change the opinion of "the entire student populace against the couple just because they wanted to go to the Prom."



How about not discriminating against them in the first place and allowing them to go to their own PROM???

How about that?


----------



## Barb (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Oh, HELL no.

That's kind of the same reasoning used to excuse redlining. Nope, it's exactly the same reasoning. Why would black people,or Hispanic people, or pick your despised group, WANT to live in a neighborhood where they'd feel unwelcome (insert sickly sweet innocent expression here)? They'd be MUCH more comfortable in the bricks, where most of "their people" already are, no matter the substandard housing, ecological degradation, and distance from decent jobs, and no matter they worked their asses off to afford better. Same with people, whose sexual preference, a protected right under federal law, are not the majority of the population they live within.  Why don't they just MOVE to friendlier climes? Hell, after this the families of these kids may have to. But so what...what's the harm? 

The harm is in these little bigoted enclaves becoming more powerful than the law they are supposed to operate under. It flies in the face of what America holds up as its standard when it pokes its nose in other parts of the world for reasons far removed from that standard: equal protection under the law.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> Vast LWC said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



There will still be a prom.  Either some parents will "rent" the school for a private "Spring Formal" or the local K of C will rent their hall to the parents.  I wonder who will provide the Gay Detectors at the door?  Is Haggert still looking for a job?


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Yes, the People of Ibwataba Co should care more about the feelings of Queers in Seattle.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Vast LWC said:
> ...



That's neither here nor there.... you can invite whomever you want or not invite whomever you want to your own private function

There is no prom being held by the school... hence the school is not discriminating


----------



## actsnoblemartin (Mar 11, 2010)

im confused, a prom is to take your date to a social event.

Other then some people not liking, or feeling a bit uncomfortable. why cant a girltake a girl to a prom?



US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> 
> Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> ...


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Vast LWC said:
> ...



You are Terminally stupid. So long as the School does not host or run it, they are not discriminating against anyone.


----------



## Vast LWC (Mar 11, 2010)

And besides, at the risk of sounding like a complete pig...

Two teenage girls, together, after the prom???  Sounds pretty hot to me.  LOL.

Why is anyone arguing against this?


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



You're missing the point you dumb fuxxing bitch.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Barb said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



My question really was less rhetorically based than you assume: I really cannot imagine why Queers whould really care about being accepted in Ibawata Co, MS.

You've proven my worst fear: That some centralized authority will claim to know more about "what America holds up as its standard" than "these little bigoted enclaves." 

Happily, in the USA, local people still have the right to determine how they will live. I applaud the Ibawata Co board for illustrating this fact.


----------



## actsnoblemartin (Mar 11, 2010)

im not a lawyer, but discriminating against people based on race, religion, or even sexual orientation

doesnt seem that um ethical to me 



CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...


----------



## actsnoblemartin (Mar 11, 2010)

imagine, if everyone thought you were an abolmination, going to hell, should die or aids, or were not acceptible simply for who you are/what you cannot change



Samson said:


> Barb said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



This is a strawman.  I didn't say anything about Seattle.

My position is:  the school should respect the Constitution.

You change that to: the school should care what gay Seattleians think.  

Thanks for the timely example!


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



And you grasp the point that discrimination is bad, as long as its discrimination with which you don't agree.

Discriminating against the beliefs of the parents, of course, is perfectly OK.


----------



## actsnoblemartin (Mar 11, 2010)

a religious organization, should have the right to decide who they let into their social functions/membership I completely agree with you there.

I believe most people against homosexuality are not bad people or biggots, though some are, but most i believe just have a moral or religious objection to it, the same as with abortion or any other sin

I refuse to condemn or throw under the bus people with moral convictions i dont agree with



Samson said:


> Barb said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



The school has no Constitutional problem. They canceled the prom. No one got discriminated against. Isn't it great how 2 abnormal people ruined the evening for everyone?


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



I don't think so.  Your little example of whistling is what does you in.  A black person seen whistling wouldn't have caused any problems, and would not have been thought of as immoral.  I'll give you that certain ACTIONS were thought immoral because of their skin color.  I hardly think people thought them immoral simply because they were black, that's ridiculous.  Perhaps rabidly racist people thought so, but normal people would certainly not.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



You can't keep up. At. All.  This is another strawman.  I didn't say the school would be guilty of discrimination if parents paid for the prom directly.  Thanks for another timely example.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Um.....article in the OP was written by the Seattle Times.

The school is respecting federal law: If they had banned any students from the prom, then this would have been unlawful. Instead, they simply cancelled the prom, making the sexual preference of any student a lawfully mute point.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



It is impossible to practice bigotry against bigots you dumbass.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



No.. YOU are missing the point, fartknocker

There is indeed no prom, as a prom being defined as a dance hosted by the school for the student body

The school cannot be discriminating when it is not hosting any prom at all... everyone has been equally denied the school sponsored dance/function

Even if there is a private party for the rest of the school kids that does not wish to have attended come with same sex dates, that is the right of the person hosting the private event

There are no other points to be made on the argument.. whether you are for or against kids having gay dates or whatever other position on whatever other sub-argument revolving around homosexuality or rules against chosen sexual behaviors/actions


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 11, 2010)

Contumacious said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Then why aren't sodomy laws unconstitutional? Why is polygamy illegal and why aren't cohabitation laws unconstitutional?


----------



## Liability (Mar 11, 2010)

Vast LWC said:


> And besides, at the risk of sounding like a complete pig...
> 
> Two teenage girls, together, after the prom???  Sounds pretty hot to me.  LOL.
> 
> Why is anyone arguing against this?



I don't know.

I had the same thought.

Does that fact offend you more than it offends me?  Or vice versa?  

(BTW, if I recall those bye gone days well enough, I suspect it is possible that there MIGHT be some heterosexual relations involving sexual contact going on in that school district after a Prom.  Is that ok with the school district?  Or is it just the risk that lesbians might choose to use Prom night as a reason to "get it on" that bothers them so much?)


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



I'm guessing there are more than just two abnormal bigots on the Board who wanted to cancel.  

I would argue the students have been discriminated against.  The class of 2010 of that high school has been unlawfully discriminated against by the Board because every class before them for the past several decades has enjoyed a Prom.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Actually we should really thank the Queers.

School Budgets are tight: There's absolutely no reason for school's to be using any resources to support anything like a "prom."

If we're lucky, the Seattle Times will screech loudly enough about Itawaba Co, MS that every school in the country will ban all proms and use the savings to buy another computer, or books for the library, or pay a teacher to instuct math an extra hour a month.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



1.The Itawamba County school district's policy requires that senior prom dates be of the opposite sex. So they did in fact seek to violate policy.

2. tell that to the citixens of California who struck down same sex marriage.

3. Choice has a lot to do with it. They chose to be lesbians and they chose to attempt to violate policy.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 11, 2010)

chanel said:


> My younger son's Catholic HS is now allowing "same sex couples" Not because they are recognizing gays in high school; they are recognizing same sex FRIENDSHIPS. There is simply too much pressure on kids to find a date. That's the way it should be handled. Win/win.



I agree, but the girl went too far in demanding to be able to wear a tux.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...




Where did you study the history of the South? A Mississippi KKKamp?


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



oh you don't THINK that it would have been a total non-issue had it been a white boy whistling rather than a black kid?

oh well THATS convincing.



do I need to pull out the post-trial quotes from the men who killed Emmet or are you going to refrain from giving me a healthy guffaw at the idea that southerners would have reacted similarly to a white kid whistling at a white woman as they did a black kid.  In case you are not familiar, it is EXACTLY the fact that till whistled at a white woman that caused a posse to go seeking him.  The mitigating factor was specifically his skin color and the immorality of a ****** not knowing his place in MS.

rabidly racist people?  HELLO.  MISSISSIPPI doesn't ring a fucking bell here?


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



So, your contention is that all southern white people thought black people immoral simply because they were black?  Seriously?  How did northern people escape this disease exactly?  The northern air?


----------



## Newby (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



You're talking about racist people, not everyone is or was racist.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...




This is a strawman.  I didn't say anything about Seattle.

My position is:  the school should respect the Constitution.

You change that to: the school should care what gay Seattleians think.  

(hint: it doesn't matter where the op article was written.  It has no bearing on my position)


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



My senior year the teachers went on strike, every class before us and every class after us, the seniors were let out a week before the rest of the students.  Add to that, our senior cruise was canceled because a high school that went previous to our scheduled senior cruise, trashed the ship.  Sometimes things happen, should we have sued the school district or the cruise ship for being discriminated against?

Things change....maybe it's time to stop having proms.


----------



## Contumacious (Mar 11, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Contumacious said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...




The SCOTUS ruled in  Lawrence v. Texas that the sodomy laws are unconstitutional and unenforceable. 




> Why is polygamy illegal



Polygamy should not be illegal.

.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



That would be great if there was a law requiring high schools to sponsor proms.

And, if you made such an arguement, and won, then the Itabawa Co School board would no doubt offer to allow the High School Field House to be used, and prom attendees could "enjoy" the scent of Joc Straps and Old Spice wilst listening to Opera.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...




No. It is not my contention that all southern white people held the same views.  Why do people have a problem with reading simple posts?  There was much racism in the North as well but it was not nearly as institutionalized as it was in the South.


----------



## del (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



the article in the OP was a wire story from the associated press.

you should get out more.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



I'm so sick of that argument...blacks can't be racist, etc.   Grow up...bigotry is everywhere and practiced against everyone for whatever reasons the bigots decide.  Same with racism.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



The analogies do not come close to fitting for the school though I would say yes you should have sued the cruise line for age discrimination.  Proms always sucked because they are cheesy training camps.....I was at my senior prom for about 30 minutes....and that was mainly to show off my date who was 21.  So in a way I guess I agree with the notion of all school sponsored proms being cancelled.


----------



## Vast LWC (Mar 11, 2010)

Liability said:


> Vast LWC said:
> 
> 
> > And besides, at the risk of sounding like a complete pig...
> ...



True, true.

And if it's gay PDA they're afraid of, why don't they just set "no PDA" rules for the prom?


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



I didn't say blacks can't be racist.  This is at least the third strawman in the last page or so.  What I did say is it's impossible to practice bigotry against bigots.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 11, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



No it's not....you can be a bigot against a bigot who is a bigot for a completely different reason than you are.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

Contumacious said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Contumacious said:
> ...




I stand corrected on that then... I was unfamiliar with this...

But there are cases that have indeed upheld other laws pertaining to other actions revolving around sexual choice/behavior


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

del said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Aha!  You said "wire."  Gay people are known for being thin. Are you accusing him of being gay?  Then you said "get out more" which means you think he's a closet homosexual!


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



in regards to whistling at white women, yes.

maybe it has to do with an economy which was not based on slavery.  Regardless, your position holds no water.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

del said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



The OP was _printed_ in the Seattle Times.

I'd rather wonder why The Seattle Times prints all of Sheild Byrd's AP releases from Jackson, MS. Odd.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Newby said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



of course not, but that doesn't minimize the FACT of our history with racism in Mississippi and the rationalized bullshit thereof.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > And, just when you thought that gay people (and even straight children related to gay people) had no problems with being treated as 2nd class citizens in this country...here's another story:
> ...


Yeah, you're one to talk!

Look in the fucking mirror, bro!


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Water is Wet.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Newby said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



Bullshit comes from Bulls.


----------



## del (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



the OP was printed/carried by a number of outlets.

JACKSON, Miss.  A northern Mississippi school district decided Wednesday not to host a high school prom after a lesbian student demanded she be able to attend with her girlfriend and wear a tuxedo. - Google Search

it's a gay conspiracy, obviously.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Newby said:
> ...



profound.

*yawn*


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



Another Helpful Post!!


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...




indeed, as opposed to your insightful additions to the thread I am glad you learned something about the history of America today.  Go buy yourself a few gold stars.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 11, 2010)

del said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...






Samson is a deep thinker like that.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

del said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



Yes, it is wider spread than I realized.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



History is Old!!!


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Shogun said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 11, 2010)

Contumacious said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Contumacious said:
> ...



Thanks, I stand corrected. I forgot about the Lawrence v. Texas case. But I'm pretty sure that cohabitation laws are still valid as well as polygamy and bigamy laws.


----------



## Vast LWC (Mar 11, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Contumacious said:
> 
> 
> > The SCOTUS ruled in  Lawrence v. Texas that the sodomy laws are unconstitutional and unenforceable.
> ...




True Libertarians should agree with Contumacious.

Got to say the man sticks to his guns.  "Respect", as they say.


----------



## Contumacious (Mar 11, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian."



WTF

Two girls going at each other is not immoral. They should be encouraged. Is not like you had a chance with either one of them.

.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



My goodness...you really think you matter that much to us, don't you?


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Contumacious said:


> US Army Retired said:
> 
> 
> > This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian."
> ...



Post a pic......I bet it is moderated.........


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Vast LWC said:
> 
> 
> > Discrimination is discrimination.  And to stop the prom altogether in order to discriminate against two students is the worst kind of discrimination.
> ...



I'm sure the hundreds of students who now don't get a prom because the school administrators couldn't handle a girl in a tux are delighted that their moral wellbeing was being looked out for.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Vast LWC said:
> ...



They can still have a "prom."

But the school will not sponsor it.

Don't you think the girls should sponsor their own prom? Have all the guys show up in dresses, and all girls in tux. Serve finger sammiches and Brat on the menue......


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

Vast LWC said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Go ahead. Won't fly. You can not hold the school district responsible for discrimination if they did not actually discriminate against anyone. By canceling the Prom they solved ALL the legal problems.
> ...



Our HS tried something akin to this my graduation year.   It used to be that it was MANDITORY for graduating seniors to attend a religious service at the HS auditorium the nite before graduation.   One of my friends, who happened to be a Quaker, challenged that Manditory rule.  It got to the point that she and her parents threatened a lawsuit under the First Amendment.  The school backed down but....suddenly...we were not going to hold our graduation ceremony outside in the new football stadium as was planned.   Suddenly...we held it in the Auditorium, on the stage, in late June, in 90 degree weather, with no air conditioning.  I think they were hoping for some peer pressure, but we all rallied behind her and gladly sweated out the graduation ceremony.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



What makes you think that only gays would go to such a prom?


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



What makes you think I think only gays would go to such a prom?


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Still showing you are a bullshit artist, not credible, and willing to throw out pure ass-pulled bullshit....


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> vast lwc said:
> 
> 
> > retiredgysgt said:
> ...



waaaaaa!!!


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...




If I stop a white person from racial discrimination I am not practicing bigotry against that racist person.  
If I fight against homophobic bigots I am not practicing bigotry against them.  If you understand then snap your fingers.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



How many horses dead have you beaten so far?


----------



## Sherry (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> And, just when you thought that gay people (and even straight children related to gay people) had no problems with being treated as 2nd class citizens in this country...here's another story:
> 
> Archdiocese defends decision to deny children because of lesbian parents - CNN.com
> 
> ...



I'm not going to weed through all 21 pages, so my apologies in advance if this has already been mentioned, but why would parents want to send their child to a place that preaches and teaches that their lifestyle is not appropriate.


----------



## manifold (Mar 11, 2010)

Sherry said:


> why would parents want to send their child to a place that preaches and teaches that their lifestyle is not appropriate.



To stir up a hornet's nest of course.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Vast LWC said:
> ...



I'd make my own prom and not invite the girl with the tux.


----------



## Samson (Mar 11, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



That's what they'll do.

There will be a prom for homosexuals, and a prom for heterosexuals.

There will be a prom for Star-bellied sneeches and Plain-bellied sneeches

There will be a prom for Liberals and a prom for Conservatives

There will be a prom for cat lovers and a prom for dog lovers

There will even be a prom for those that like OctoErotic Art.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Don't see an admission, nor factual data to back up yours or rdean's assertions yet


----------



## Political Junky (Mar 11, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


Exactly, sex is only for producing kids, and only in the missionary position. Sodomy includes oral sex, folks.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

manifold said:


> Sherry said:
> 
> 
> > why would parents want to send their child to a place that preaches and teaches that their lifestyle is not appropriate.
> ...



I love such posts....it's the old "blame the victims" card....I bet you say that to rape victims and would have said it to Rosa Parks too.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



I've got a running bet now on how long we can keep this going.   Don't disappoint me, Dave....do not let this issue die.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

Nope... that's still not data nor an admission of your bullshit.... so we still have you down as a complete bullshit artist and flat out liar with zero credibility for any of your uncited assertions


----------



## Zoom-boing (Mar 11, 2010)

xotoxi said:


> US Army Retired said:
> 
> 
> > This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event.
> ...



OMG, next thing you know girls will be going to the rest rooms _in groups_!


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

Zoom-boing said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> > US Army Retired said:
> ...


----------



## random3434 (Mar 11, 2010)

Contumacious said:


> US Army Retired said:
> 
> 
> > This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian."
> ...


----------



## mal (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> US Army Retired said:
> 
> 
> > Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> ...





But that's not what they want... They want Validation... From Coast to Coast... And Household to Household... And Church to Church.

If you don't Embrace their Choice, you are the Enemy...

They don't want to be "Catholic"... They want to Change the Catholic Church until it Embraces the Sin...

Same goes for other Churches and Organizations that Refuse to Validate this Deviant Choice.

Let Adult Deviancies be for Adults...

Stay away from the Schools and the Children.



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Aren't there some places in the South where they have White Proms and Black Proms?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 11, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> Nope... that's still not data nor an admission of your bullshit.... so we still have you down as a complete bullshit artist and flat out liar with zero credibility for any of your uncited assertions



Keeping a tally.  YOu are barely into double digits..don't give up now.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Mar 11, 2010)

And yet, that school's sports program probably has wrestling, which is as gay as gay gets.


----------



## EriktheRed (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



You and the OP are dinosaurs....





...thankfully.


----------



## Dr Gregg (Mar 11, 2010)

NYcarbineer said:


> And yet, that school's sports program probably has wrestling, which is as gay as gay gets.



 I always thought that, sweaty men in tights grabbing each other and rubbing their bodies all over each other. I'd hear some wrestlers from my HS say that they would not shower for days so they smelled bad for their opponent


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 11, 2010)

What is wrong with lesbian proms?


----------



## Modbert (Mar 11, 2010)

Do I even want to know how this thread reached this amount of posts?


----------



## Barb (Mar 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> Barb said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Nobody is suggesting they change how "they" live. Its against civil rights law for them to dictate how others live, and that includes preventing those others from participating in "public" school functions.


----------



## Yurt (Mar 11, 2010)

Dogbert said:


> Do I even want to know how this thread reached this amount of posts?



its above obama's pay grade


----------



## rikules (Mar 11, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> 
> Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> ...





the board did the wrong thing.

in this day and age why would anyone even care?

obviously the board  cancelled the prom KNOWING that the lesbians would be blamed for it.

rather mean spirited and dirty politics if you ask me.


----------



## Yurt (Mar 11, 2010)

i have not read all the thread, but my two cents are this....

the school did wrong.  its not a private school, and for them to make rules regarding the sex of one's prom date, IMO, is a constitutional, at most, violation and likely a title 7 or 9 violation....


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Nope... that's still not data nor an admission of your bullshit.... so we still have you down as a complete bullshit artist and flat out liar with zero credibility for any of your uncited assertions
> ...



Still waiting for you to admit your bullshit or post the facts... you disingenuous piece of shit


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 11, 2010)

Dogbert said:


> Do I even want to know how this thread reached this amount of posts?



Calling out people posting bullshit unsubstantiated claims with pure made up information... that's how


----------



## random3434 (Mar 11, 2010)

Anyone else think it's funny and ironic that some of the most "deviant" posters on this board are calling out others for their "deviant" behavior!


----------



## random3434 (Mar 11, 2010)

Yurt said:


> i have not read all the thread, but my two cents are this....
> 
> the school did wrong.  its not a private school, and for them to make rules regarding the sex of one's prom date, IMO, is a constitutional, at most, violation and likely a title 7 or 9 violation....



Yet some on here agree with what they did, I wonder why?


----------



## Modbert (Mar 11, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> Anyone else think it's funny and ironic that some of the most "deviant" posters on this board are calling out others for their "deviant" behavior!



Did someone say deviant?




[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDCYFshhSkQ]YouTube - The Time Warp & Sweet Transvestite the rocky horror picture show[/ame]


----------



## ski87 (Mar 11, 2010)

In a civilian environment, I say let em do what they want as the displayed gayness should not really affect other people or impede their ability to enjoy the prom.  A stupid decision by the school IMO as they are imposing what they determine to be moral and just on all attendees.

Personally, I dont understand the queers but as long as they keep to themselves, why should anyone else ever intervene ?  My .02


----------



## Yurt (Mar 11, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> > i have not read all the thread, but my two cents are this....
> ...



come on EZ, you don't really wonder why....you know.  in their opinions homosexuality is bad.  as such, they don't believe a public school should be forced to allow two homosexuals attend the prom as a couple.  

i have no doubt that on many political issues, these posters and i see eye to eye.   however, for me, discriminating against homosexuality is wrong in a secular government.  it outright violates the constitution.  furthermore, the major reason against homosexuality, not the only reason, but the prominent one, is religion.  i don't believe religious beliefs should be forced upon public schools.  what if the majority in this country were islamic?  

let's look at this sans religion.  what then is the justification?  one could argue state's interest in promoting the family unit, man/woman, make babies, create a more populace state.  deviant sexual behavior....ah....problem with this train of thought is....homosexual behavior is not illegal in this country and laws that made such behavior illegal have been struck down by scotus.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Mar 11, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> What is wrong with lesbian proms?



It's the slippery slope to gay casual Fridays:


----------



## ski87 (Mar 11, 2010)

Yeah, the dykes get a waiver...OK, but they gotta be hot, no Rosie O'Donell types...lol.


----------



## casper4020322 (Mar 11, 2010)

In my day ('60-'70's) going to the prom with your same sex significant other would not have happened. Back then if you liked the same sex it was not out in the open, just like if you were pregnant you kept it hidden. The only thing back then that was OUT THERE was alcohol and drugs. The world has changed and not in the right way. Parents are told not to discipline their children like we were...spanked on the behind (with whatever the parent could get a hold of!). Children were taught to respect their elders...and now curse at adults as if cursing to one of their friends. At the same time, who are we to judge? Our Beholder is the one who is going to hold us accountable for all of our sins, so how do we know that he is against what that young woman wanted to do? WE DON'T. We are taught that God does not condone that type of behavior BUT how do we truly know that he does not forgive people who practice that lifestyle? WE DON'T.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 11, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



1.  First you said they violated the policy then change it saying they sought to violate.  Is that your final answer?

2. Tyranny by the majority is why the Constitution was created, and it is illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation.  Every state that denies same sex couples is guilty of violating the Constitution.

3.  Choice is completely irrelevant.  An adult American Citizen should not be punished for choosing a sexual orientation some do not agree with.  By your logic if the majority disapproved of christian churches they would be good Americans if they sought to stop church services.


----------



## L.K.Eder (Mar 12, 2010)

what? a girl wearing a tux?

what's next? girls wearing pants?


----------



## froggy (Mar 12, 2010)

Lesbian teen sues to force school to hold prom - Yahoo! News  Schools continue to go down hill.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 12, 2010)

I think they should have just bought their tickets and gone to the prom. Then the school board could call the cops and had them arrested...it would have made a stronger statement. And how awesome to have such drama at a prom...usually a boring dance full of drunks.


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 12, 2010)

casper4020322 said:


> In my day ('60-'70's) going to the prom with your same sex significant other would not have happened. Back then if you liked the same sex it was not out in the open, just like if you were pregnant you kept it hidden. The only thing back then that was OUT THERE was alcohol and drugs. The world has changed and not in the right way. Parents are told not to discipline their children like we were...spanked on the behind (with whatever the parent could get a hold of!). Children were taught to respect their elders...and now curse at adults as if cursing to one of their friends. At the same time, who are we to judge? Our Beholder is the one who is going to hold us accountable for all of our sins, so how do we know that he is against what that young woman wanted to do? WE DON'T. We are taught that God does not condone that type of behavior BUT how do we truly know that he does not forgive people who practice that lifestyle? WE DON'T.



Yea...I grew up in the "Good ole' days" of the 60s and 70s. I saw friends beaten and bruised by their fathers. Domestic violence was a family issue. I saw women abused and unable to get out of a marriage because they couldn't work.
Gay kids were endlessly taunted and beaten up and nothing was done about it. After all...."They were asking for it"


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

froggy said:


> Lesbian teen sues to force school to hold prom - Yahoo! News  Schools continue to go down hill.




Gee.....do you think there are any links to the 26% drop-out rate and outright bigotry?  Stoopid is as Stoopid does.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

L.K.Eder said:


> what? a girl wearing a tux?
> 
> what's next? girls wearing pants?




300 years from now some high school kids are going to be digging through archives of the Paradox Age and juxtapose people complaining about a female wearing a tux to people discussing all the dead in iraq and afghanistan.  Their entire term paper will consist of that comparison followed by:

WTF?

No wonder the American Empire collapsed.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 12, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



1. Fact is dumbass they intended to violate policy, however since the prom was canceled no policy was violated. Why is that you liberal idiots need to have every little thing explained to you? I'm beginning to think I'm dealing with fucking children.

2. Are you saying a majority vote in this country is akin to tyanny? 

3. Your analogy is lame. Does the 1st amendment mean anything to you?  Choice is very relevant, when you chose an abominable lifestyle then you accepted all that goes with it. No matter what you clowns do to validate your sick twisted perversions, right minded people will reject it every time and it has clearly been demonstrated in California.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 12, 2010)

Ravi said:


> I think they should have just bought their tickets and gone to the prom. Then the school board could call the cops and had them arrested...it would have made a stronger statement. And how awesome to have such drama at a prom...usually a boring dance full of drunks.



You're an idiot.


----------



## manifold (Mar 12, 2010)

bodecea said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Sherry said:
> ...



You'd lose that bet.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...




1.  Haha....you completely fucked up by claiming they violated the policy so when I point out they didn't you want to spin it to you explaining something? Rotfl!  Pay attention you logic allergic parasite: the policy is illegal.  That is the whole point.  Even the Board knows it is illegal and that is why they cancelled prom.

2.  In terms of civil rights yes, a vote by majority is tyranny.  The Constitution was designed specifically to avoid majority rule.  

3.  Holy fireballs!  I need a new irony meter!  You are the one pissing all over the 1st Amendment with your tears of bigotry.  It does not matter if you personally find a choice morally acceptable.  The 1st Amendment was designed to afford people freedom from punishment by dickheads like you who think you have some God given authority to be on the Crotch Watch and get to dictate personal choices for other consenting adults.

It's too bad you don't have access to the internet so you could learn Constitutional basics.


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 12, 2010)

> 2. In terms of civil rights yes, a vote by majority is tyranny. The Constitution was designed specifically to avoid majority rule.



Its like the old saying:

_Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for supper_


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 12, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



1. I'm not sure I did claim they violated policy, but if I did, so what? You never err? Prove the policy is illegal. 

2. Isn't Presidents as well as most politicians elected by the majority of votes? And you call that tyranny? I think you should read Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution before you make a complete and utter fool out of yourself.

3. Freedom of association

Although it is not explicitly protected in the First Amendment, the Supreme Court ruled, in NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 (1958), freedom of association to be a fundamental right protected by it. In Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984), the Supreme Court held that associations may not exclude people for reasons unrelated to the group's expression. However,* in Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston, 515 U.S. 557 (1995), the Court ruled that a group may exclude people from membership if their presence would affect the group's ability to advocate a particular point of view. Likewise, in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000), the Supreme Court ruled that a New Jersey law, which forced the Boy Scouts of America to admit an openly gay member, to be an unconstitutional abridgment of the Boy Scouts' right to free association.*


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> > 2. In terms of civil rights yes, a vote by majority is tyranny. The Constitution was designed specifically to avoid majority rule.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Dumbasses like lonestar would respond by saying:

"How do you know the wolves aren't vegetarians?"


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...




1. The obvious evidence it's illegal is how the Board cancelled prom and went out of their way to not mention the gay students. If it was legal they would have had the prom then placed barney fife at the door to make sure all entering tuxedos were breast free.

2.  Try to pay attention.  I said: IN TERMS OF CIVIL RIGHTS.

3.  You cannot compare a public school to either of those cases.  A public school is not Free Association you dumbass.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Mar 12, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



1. Sheer speculation on your part.

2. Pay attention - Proposition 8 nuff said.

3. Sure you can, and I did.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



Wow.


----------



## del (Mar 12, 2010)

At least one supporter has offered to help McMillen and her classmates hold an alternate prom.

New Orleans hotel owner Sean Cummings told The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson he was so disappointed with the school board's decision he offered to transport the students in buses to the city and host a free prom at one of his properties.

"New Orleans, we're a joyful culture and a creative culture here and, if the school doesn't change its mind, we'd be delighted to offer them a prom in New Orleans," he told the newspaper. "Concluding your high school experience should be a joyful one. One shouldn't conclude that experience with all their friends on a negative note."

Lesbian teen sues to force school to hold prom - Yahoo! News


----------



## bodecea (Mar 12, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...




What does Prop 8 in California have to do with a prom in Mississippi???????


----------



## Ravi (Mar 12, 2010)

del said:


> At least one supporter has offered to help McMillen and her classmates hold an alternate prom.
> 
> New Orleans hotel owner Sean Cummings told The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson he was so disappointed with the school board's decision he offered to transport the students in buses to the city and host a free prom at one of his properties.
> 
> ...


uh oh, they'll really be exposed to gaydom in NO.


----------



## Gadawg73 (Mar 12, 2010)

Let me give another perspective of the "southern morals" perspective that was spoken about by this thread writer.
I am 55 having lived in the deep south all of my life.
We first saw this when wealthy white families had boys that asked girls to the prom from the other side of the tracks. They claimed that was immoral and threatened the families of those girls if they accepted.
We next saw blacks wanting to be a part of the white proms and they claimed that was immoral and threatened the blacks for wanting to change the status quo.
Then we saw blacks and whites wanting to ask each other as interracial couples at the proms and they claimed that was immoral. Black boys were threatened for asking white girls to go.
Now we see gay kids wanting to be included in the prom and they claim that is immoral.
What is immoral and outrageous is once again stupid dumbass know it all adults have ruined it for the kids. Where were the higher than thou moral crusaders when those threats were made for decades?
Real men are not afraid of gays or lesbians.


----------



## AquaAthena (Mar 12, 2010)

_Punish everybody who earned that event_, for one couple who were not breaking any laws? Talk about miscarriage of justice.


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 12, 2010)

AquaAthena said:


> _Punish everybody who earned that event_, for one couple who were not breaking any laws? Talk about miscarriage of justice.



They are doing worse than that.

They are singling out one student and pointing at her as the reason nobody else could have a prom


----------



## Barb (Mar 12, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



:
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to CurveLight again.


----------



## Cal (Mar 12, 2010)

US. Barney Retard,
You're dispicable..You really think it was "the right thing to do?!" What if it was *you're* daughter?!
I seriously don't get you right wingers..You say 'If you don't like Christianity, Don't be a Christian" but do not hold the same standard for Gays. If you don't like Gay people, Don't be Gay. But why should we deny them equal rights?!


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

del said:


> At least one supporter has offered to help McMillen and her classmates hold an alternate prom.
> 
> New Orleans hotel owner Sean Cummings told The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson he was so disappointed with the school board's decision he offered to transport the students in buses to the city and host a free prom at one of his properties.
> 
> ...



I saw that and laughed and hoped it would happen because then her classmates would thank her for the free prom trip to NOLA and the plan by the Board would completely blow up in their faces.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 12, 2010)

Political Junky said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...




Everyone knows oral sex isn't sex, Clinton taught us that.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> > Echeaux Zulu said:
> ...




I'm disappointed.  Couldn't you find a way to squeeze in Kennedy and Chappaquiddick?


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 12, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



Unfortunately yes.  My reason for not inviting the girl who wanted to wear the tux was because it was her fault the school canceled the prom.  She had to ruin it for everybody else.  I don't care what she is, had she worn a dress and gone with her girlfriend, no one would have said anything.  In fact, I don't understand at all why she had to even mention what she was going to do before the prom except that she wanted the school to make a big fuss.  Some people just have to ruin it for everyone... and she's one of them.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 12, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Political Junky said:
> ...



don't think it's relevant, but give me some time, maybe I'll come up with something...


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 12, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > At least one supporter has offered to help McMillen and her classmates hold an alternate prom.
> ...


 
Actually I see it as a win win.  The plan by the school board was to avoid a lawsuit, they succeeded by canceling the prom.  She's now suing to force the school to hold the prom.  She didn't want to go to school after they canceled the prom, even SHE knew she was responsible.  Going to New Orleans would be fun for everybody and she could wear what she wants without breaking the school's rules.

Again, why the tux?  Why even mention what she want's to do before the prom?  If she didn't have any agenda, she just would have shown up at the prom with her date and let things fall where they may, but she wanted to create a problem and she succeeded.


----------



## del (Mar 12, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



say what? the people who ruined are the eunuchs on the school board who didn't even have the stones to stand up for their bigotry and put it all on some 17 year old kid.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 12, 2010)

del said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



How did the people on the school board even know her plans?  Hmm?  You think they are mind readers?


----------



## del (Mar 12, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



i didn't realize that one's prom date was a state secret, nor did i know that a female wearing a tux was a sign of the apocalypse. so if she'd stayed in the closet and worn a party dress everything would have been hunky-dory, huh?

thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 12, 2010)

del said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



I don't know what would have happened, but the prom definitely would have taken place had she kept her mouth shut.  She wanted to cause a fuss and she succeeded.  So glad you back her up in this.

As my son just said "If I want to go to my prom in a dress, I'm going to my prom in a dress" and I said "But you're not going to tell the school board first" and he said "Hell no, I don't want them stopping me."

Face it, this is all a trap for the school board set by a person who wanted to create a problem and she succeeded.  That you fell for it as well, tells us something about you too.


----------



## L.K.Eder (Mar 12, 2010)

Sheila, you have to be very strong now.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 12, 2010)

L.K.Eder said:


> Sheila, you have to be very strong now.



nice try.  Again, had she just showed up at the prom wearing her tux and they wouldn't let her in, then I'd be backing her 100%.  At the moment, she wanted to create a problem and she succeeded.  IMO she should be shunned by her classmates, not because she's a lesbian, not because she wanted to wear a tux to the prom, but because she made a big deal out of it and got the prom canceled for everybody.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 12, 2010)

L.K.Eder said:


> Sheila, you have to be very strong now.


OMFG! Stop trying to turn us all into lesbians!


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



She handled it very maturely.  She knew the school's policy and was mature enough to inform administrators of her intentions to do a really crazy thing and live by the Constitution.  Since she and her partner go to the same school I'm guessing the homophobes around them have been buzzing about what they would do on prom night.  

If she and her partner kept quiet and just showed up at prom there would have been altercations that could have lead to bigger problems.  If she had done that then your camp would be crying conspiracy and she planned to ruin prom night for everyone so no matter what she did, short of suicide or a quiet disappearance from existence, your camp would be crying foul.

The school's policy is anti-American so it would not be a Win/Win for a NOLA prom.  The only possible win is if this school and all public schools wake up to the Constitutional coffee and realize their policies that contradict the very Freedoms kids are taught should be removed.  Do you realize how heavily military recruiters focus on high school kids?  Think about it....they entice young Americans to fight and possibly die for America on the basis America is one of the greatest nations in the world because of personal Freedom yet these ancient theological hacks want to impose islamic extremist type rules onto these very same young Americans.

And what the fuck is up with bitching about her wanting to wear a tux?  If that is the kind of place you want to live in then why be in America?  Renounce your citizenship and move to Saudi Arabia where male/female dress codes have been streamlined.  It would be paradise for you because you wouldn't have to worry about brave Americans, like this high school senior, encroaching on your extremist beliefs.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> > Sheila, you have to be very strong now.
> ...




!BULLSHIT!

If she had just shown up in a tux you'd be saying:

"She did it on purpose to ruin prom for everyone.  She knew the school's Policy so she planned on 'sticking' it to them by dressing like that unannounced.  She should have approached the school before Prom night to inform them she would not follow the School's Policy because it violated her Constitutional Rights."

How close is that?


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 12, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



I wouldn't survive in Saudi Arabia, I look every man I meet right in the eyes.  

What exactly is "my camp"????  Is that like my "ilk"?

She caused this problem and she did so intentionally.  If she'd just shown up at the prom in her tux, I seriously doubt such a fuss would have been made.  She did it because she wanted a fuss, she wanted the ACLU to  join her and she wanted to sue the school.  This spoiled brat got her way.  Congratulations....your "camp" won.

In college, we voted in a man to be homecoming queen.  We didn't announce it beforehand, and no one tried to stop us.  Nobody made a big deal about it, at least not the school and this was more than 30 years ago.  No, this girl wanted this fuss and thanks to your "camp" she got it.  Congrats.


----------



## froggy (Mar 12, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



They like to push their selves to the limit


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 12, 2010)

bodecea's Avatar 	
bodecea bodecea is online now
Back by Popular Demand
Member #20112

Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 6,711
Thanks: 248
Thanked 485 Times in 389 Posts
Rep Power: 66
bodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddha
bodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddhabodecea could be the buddha
New reputation!
Hi, you have received -33 reputation points from bodecea.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
Comparing your college with a southern HS? Really?

Regards,
bodecea

Note: This is an automated message. 

Bodecea neg repped me for comparing my college 30 years ago to a southern hs today?????  Really....grow up.  I didn't even mention where I attended college.  Could have been down south.  My daddy was a southern gentleman.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> bodecea's Avatar
> bodecea bodecea is online now
> Back by Popular Demand
> Member #20112
> ...




I thought it was your sly way of telling everyone you were voted HC queen.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 12, 2010)

I still say they should have just bought their tickets, gone to the prom, and let the school board have them arrested.

But they were certainly within their rights to bait the bigots at the school, if that's what they even did. It is unclear how the school found out that they were planning to attend.

And I think Del made a good point...the school was too cowardly to express their bigotry so they took the easy way out and canceled the prom.


----------



## Contumacious (Mar 12, 2010)

"And the Lord saith unto you, two pretty females going at each other is not an abomination. Actually , it should be encouraged"

Mathew 69:69


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

Ravi said:


> I still say they should have just bought their tickets, gone to the prom, and let the school board have them arrested.
> 
> But they were certainly within their rights to bait the bigots at the school, if that's what they even did. It is unclear how the school found out that they were planning to attend.
> 
> And I think Del made a good point...the school was too cowardly to express their bigotry so they took the easy way out and canceled the prom.



It's not unclear how the school found out:

"Constance McMillen, an 18-year-old senior at Itawamba, recently challenged a school policy prohibiting her from bringing her girlfriend as her date to the April 2 prom. McMillen, who is a lesbian, and the Mississippi chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union urged school officials to reverse the policy both on McMillen's choice of date and attire. She also wanted to wear a tuxedo to the dance."
Http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-03-10-noprom_N.htm


----------



## Contessa_Sharra (Mar 12, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> 
> Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> ...


 
I guess the private citizens can "organise" their event by races, too... LMOAO.. dang those 'ssipps are DUMB...  bunch that can't fix their state, they barely speak intelligible English, and they are still into only with dates, only with opposite sex dates....


----------



## bodecea (Mar 12, 2010)

I hope they go to New Orleans.   The guy and club making the offer gets great free advertising, worth the cost.  The kids all have fun.   No discrimination.  The School Board doesn't have to run screaming from a girl in a tux (obviously they never saw Marlene Deitrich....yeowza!!!!)   Bummer that Americans everywhere will see what petty little shits that School District is.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

That dumbfucking school even banned her from the yearbook because she wore a tux on picture.  I'm not a fan of brunettes but she is cute.

And stoopid religious fundamentalists aren't limited to the bible noose. 

A kid got suspended from his private school for attending a public school's prom:
'Footloose' revisited: Ohio teen suspended for going to a prom - USATODAY.com


----------



## Queen (Mar 12, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> US Army Retard is afraid he may "Catch the Gay"



Maybe they can pray the gay away after he catches it.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 12, 2010)

I hear ted haggert tried to pray away the gay while spending a lot of time on his knees......


----------



## uptownlivin90 (Mar 12, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> *Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values* region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.





Yeah, I know a little bit about those Mississippi "family values".

Proms in Mississippi don't look like this anymore:






I went to a prom in Yazoo City not to long ago with this girl I grew up with down there. Hell of a party. Some of the freakiest chicks I've ever seen in my life, don't think I've seen girls booty bounce that good before. I think I've still got the videos.

To break it down for you: Mississippi "family values" equals teenage girls with three children going to prom, while lesbians with no kids minding their own business make the schools close prom down.

Schools enforcing "family values" is a f-ing joke. Hell, Mississippi is a f-ing joke. If they'd spend less time preaching about their concept of Jesus and "christian values" and more time teaching the kids to read and talk like intelligent members of society, the state wouldn't look like a damn car impound lot. People go to school to learn ABCs and one two threes not morality... they go to church for that. If you want your kids to learn morals TEACH THEM YOU MORALS AT HOME and stop being such lazy bastards. Stop sending your children to school to be raised by their teachers, that's not their job. That's YOURS.


----------



## uptownlivin90 (Mar 12, 2010)

Contumacious said:


> "And the Lord saith unto you, two pretty females going at each other is not an abomination. Actually , it should be encouraged"
> 
> Mathew 69:69



Jesus is my nigga!


----------



## Vast LWC (Mar 12, 2010)

Samson said:


> That's what they'll do.
> 
> There will be a prom for homosexuals, and a prom for heterosexuals.
> 
> ...



Though I certainly appreciate your reference to "Sneeches", I think that perhaps they could just have one Prom and not be so judgemental and self-righteous.

Of course, I guess that's just me...


----------



## Toro (Mar 12, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> 
> Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> ...



And 50 years from now, people will look back at that and wonder what all the fuss was about.  Kind of like how people look at Bull Connor today.


----------



## paperview (Mar 13, 2010)

With all the frikkin problems in the world, and two people loving each other is where conservatives want to fight their battles.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 13, 2010)

paperview said:


> With all the frikkin problems in the world, and two people loving each other is where conservatives want to fight their battles.



It just gives them another thing to bitch about. 

I've noticed the more miserable someone is with their life, the more they want to make sure others are too.


----------



## paperview (Mar 13, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> paperview said:
> 
> 
> > With all the frikkin problems in the world, and two people loving each other is where conservatives want to fight their battles.
> ...


Yep.

I think it bothers some that people are able to live a life without living a lie.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 13, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> paperview said:
> 
> 
> > With all the frikkin problems in the world, and two people loving each other is where conservatives want to fight their battles.
> ...




That may apply to some but my pet theory is they focus on homosexuality out of a combination of our patriarchal structure and the more pressing need to justify their life styles.  Focusing on homosexuality, much like abortion, gives them the illusion of following Jesus without the pesky troubles associated with helping the elderly, poor, and sick.  It doesn't matter Jesus never mentioned homosexuality.  They only care about maintaining their illusions.


----------



## paperview (Mar 13, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > paperview said:
> ...


Excellent observation.


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 13, 2010)

I don't see what the problem is with this Mississippi school board......its not like she wanted to date a black man


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 13, 2010)

My concern in the south where I live is that the social values gang have the idea they are the ones who get to judge the wheat and the tares.  Bad, bad mistake on their part.  I invite them to reconsider Matthew 13: 25 - 30.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 13, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > paperview said:
> ...



Come off it..this girl is a brat that wanted to make a scene so she'd have something to sue about.....again, had she showed up at the prom in her tux, I doubt anything would have been said, but at that point, if they hadn't let her in, I'd be backing her 100%.  She made sure that there was a big deal about this and she got her attention and sadly, she got her lawsuit.  

When I was in highschool, we would have solved the problem a different way, she would have showed up with her date and everyone would have said "cool" and that would be that.  Unfortunately today there are people that feel they have a right to sue for anything....this girl ruined it for everyone and now she's suing.  She's a brat.

Oh and when I said I'd hold my own prom and not invite her, that's not quite the truth.  I would have invited her because I've always felt bad not inviting anyone....just she deserved not to be invited, this whole mess is her fault and no one else's.


----------



## paperview (Mar 13, 2010)

I see. She should have broken the rules wantonly instead of asking permission first.

Interesting con thinking.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 13, 2010)

I think back in the good 'ole' days if she would have showed up in a tux with her lesbian lover they would have gotten the shit beat out of them.


Oh wait, that stuff still happens now too.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 13, 2010)

paperview said:


> I see. She should have broken the rules wantonly instead of asking permission first.
> 
> Interesting con thinking.



Isn't it?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 13, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> I think back in the good 'ole' days if she would have showed up in a tux with her lesbian lover they would have gotten the shit beat out of them.
> 
> 
> Oh wait, that stuff still happens now too.



You have to wonder if Sheila would have been holding a torch or a pitchfork....


----------



## L.K.Eder (Mar 13, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > I think back in the good 'ole' days if she would have showed up in a tux with her lesbian lover they would have gotten the shit beat out of them.
> ...



i hope the torch. pitchforks are reserved for men.


----------



## Samson (Mar 13, 2010)

Ravi said:


> I still say they should have just bought their tickets, gone to the prom, and let the school board have them arrested.
> 
> But they were certainly within their rights to bait the bigots at the school, if that's what they even did. It is unclear how the school found out that they were planning to attend.
> 
> And I think Del made a good point...the school was too cowardly to express their bigotry so they took the easy way out and canceled the prom.



Yes damn those school board members!! Imagine: Elected officials actually acting to satisfy their constituants!!! Cowardly!!!  UnAmerican!!!!


----------



## Wicked Jester (Mar 13, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Echeaux Zulu said:
> ...


More than likely her parents put her up to it.

Saw a report yesterday that they are in severe financial trouble.

As far as the school district goes, they were wrong. If the girl wanted to expose herself as being a freak who CHOOSES to live that disgusting lifestyle, so be it!

It's a good thing. As those kids grow to be adults and have children of their own, they'll know who to keep their children away from in the neighborhood. Particularly their lil' girls.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 13, 2010)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^



As I was saying................................................


----------



## Modbert (Mar 13, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> More than likely her parents put her up to it.
> 
> Saw a report yesterday that they are in severe financial trouble.
> 
> ...



Is it difficult to be that stupid or do you have to work at it?


----------



## Samson (Mar 13, 2010)

Dogbert said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > More than likely her parents put her up to it.
> ...



I cannot imagine it was easy.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 13, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > I think back in the good 'ole' days if she would have showed up in a tux with her lesbian lover they would have gotten the shit beat out of them.
> ...



yeah, right...can't beat them with facts, beat them with insults and neg reps.....


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 13, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



You know, some people just shouldn't have kids.

This was all a set up for a lawsuit.  The brat gets her way.


----------



## uptownlivin90 (Mar 13, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



OMG... it's freaking Mississippi who in that state isn't in financial trouble?


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 13, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Must have been a secret plan by the parents to have a lesbian daughter and then program her to initiate a lesbian prom.......all to tick off some Mississippi rednecks


----------



## bodecea (Mar 13, 2010)

Dogbert said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > More than likely her parents put her up to it.
> ...



Read all his posting history...it comes naturally.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 13, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



Well, this from the same type of people who say that Obama's mom plotted him becoming president ever since they secretly moved his birth from Kenya to Hawaii.


----------



## Liability (Mar 13, 2010)

Nobody has said that the Obama Mama ever plotted for him to become President.

But it remains a possibility that for a number of other reasons a mom might want to claim that a child born of a foreign father was born in the United States even though he was born outside of the United States.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Mar 13, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Dogbert said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


Hey Butch!....I see Chastity, er, I mean "CHAZ" Bono took your lead. Now she's at the point where she's shaving her face too.

You must feel so proud, eh bro?

Fuckin' freaks!


----------



## Oscar Wao (Mar 13, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Dogbert said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


C'mon, the s/n of that person is JESTER...IOW, entertainment.


----------



## froggy (Mar 13, 2010)

And meet butch tinkerbell


----------



## bodecea (Mar 13, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



Yeah...she's a brat for not wanting the school to treat her like she's a second class citizen.     Rosa Parks was a Brat too.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 13, 2010)

Oscar Wao said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Dogbert said:
> ...



He IS entertaining, you are right.   Laughing at him is an easy thing to do.


----------



## Anguille (Mar 13, 2010)

I think all proms should be banned.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 13, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...



How dare you?  Comparing a lady like Rosa Parks to that brat in Mississippi?  Rosa Parks took a stand, or rather a sit.  She was tired and she refused to stand for the white man.  She was right.  Because of her, things changed.  This girl hasn't taken any stand, she's only advanced a lawsuit.  Had she actually taken a stand, I would have supported her.  So far the only thing that's changed because of this brat is the school's prom was canceled.  I'm sure you'll feel very justified if and when she wins her lawsuit and gets big bucks..her plan from the start.

Oh and BTW, Rosa didn't make a dime from her stand.  She didn't sue anyone.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 13, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Echeaux Zulu said:
> ...




!BULLSHIT!

If she had just shown up in a tux you'd be saying:

"She did it on purpose to ruin prom for everyone.  She knew the school's Policy so she planned on 'sticking' it to them by dressing like that unannounced.  She should have approached the school before Prom night to inform them she would not follow the School's Policy because it violated her Constitutional Rights."

How close is that?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 13, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



Rosa Parks was a test case for the NCAAP whom she worked for.  You did not know that?  She was fighting against an unjust law...The girl has the law on her side.  It is the school district trying to circumvent her rights and the law.   She DID take a stand...and you are condemning her and calling her a "brat" for it.  She's very brave and you don't like that one bit.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 13, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...




!BULLSHIT!

If she had just shown up in a tux you'd be saying:

"She did it on purpose to ruin prom for everyone.  She knew the school's Policy so she planned on 'sticking' it to them by dressing like that unannounced.  She should have approached the school before Prom night to inform them she would not follow the School's Policy because it violated her Constitutional Rights."

How close is that?


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 13, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



No where near....I was in high school once.  I know all about doing things without informing the powers that be FIRST.  In high school, it was us (the students) against them (the establishment)....we fought them at every turn.  This girl started a lawsuit she had every intention of starting from the beginning this is all about money and not about rights at all.  

We even got a woman's football game lined up and when the school-board found out, they canceled it.  I don't know how they found out but the captains of the schools football teams for both TJ and Federal Way went to the school-board and announced that if we girls couldn't have our football game, the guys wouldn't be playing football until we were allowed our game.  We not only got our game, we got to play at night, with the lights in memorial field.

We didn't sue the school-board.  I wasn't allowed to take shop in junior high and I didn't sue the school.  Today's litigious society is criminal, no pun intended.  This girl is a brat that made her stand so she could make money and for no other reason.  

Comparing her to Rosa Parks is an insult.  Rosa certainly didn't call the newspapers and say "I'm gonna stay seated on the bus today."


----------



## bodecea (Mar 13, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



So...what I get from this is that you condemn this girl for following the rules and asking permission beforehand.   Nice.



> We even got a woman's football game lined up and when the school-board found out, they canceled it.  I don't know how they found out but the captains of the schools football teams for both TJ and Federal Way went to the school-board and announced that if we girls couldn't have our football game, the guys wouldn't be playing football until we were allowed our game.  We not only got our game, we got to play at night, with the lights in memorial field.



So you should know what it's like...and yet you selfishly do not.



> We didn't sue the school-board.



Cause.....You got your football game.  Geesh...everyone can see that.



> I wasn't allowed to take shop in junior high and I didn't sue the school.



Guess it didn't mean much to you then...my old school, a family DID have to threaten to sue in order to de-genderfy the Shop/Home Ec classes.



> Today's litigious society is criminal, no pun intended.



So, you seem to be of the frame of mind that you will let people roll over you and want others to let people roll over them...anything to avoid a law suit.



> This girl is a brat that made her stand so she could make money and for no other reason.



No, she is a brave soul and worth 10 of you.  I applaud her.




> Comparing her to Rosa Parks is an insult.  Rosa certainly didn't call the newspapers and say "I'm gonna stay seated on the bus today."



And the girl did not call the newspapers and say..."I'm gonna aske the school for permission today" either.   You don't seem to know much about the Rosa Parks case do you...the NCAAP was all set for their test case...it was just a matter of the right moment.

I bet you call the Freedom Riders brats too.  They had the law on their side and they still got the crap beat out of them.  And yes, there were lawsuits over that too.


----------



## Anguille (Mar 13, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...


 AgainSheila thinks that kids who refuse to say the Pledge of Allegiance and who sit through it the way Rosa Parks sat in her seat on the bus are also brats. I think AgainSheila just thinks any kid who stands up for her rights is a brat.


----------



## Anguille (Mar 13, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...


 You have absolutely no proof of that. Pure supposition on your part. People do not always sue for financial gain. I think this girl is trying to make a point and to put an end to discrimination against gays.


----------



## froggy (Mar 13, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> US Army Retard is afraid he may "Catch the Gay"



No. us Army is (like many other Americans) afraid the morals of this country keep getting run down till their won't be anything moral in America. Then we'll be back like europe all over again. If we broke away from them over 200 years ago why do we want some here want to follow them so bad.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 13, 2010)

froggy said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > US Army Retard is afraid he may "Catch the Gay"
> ...



Morals like:   Blacks should know their place...women should know their place...gays should know their place...children should know their place...workers should know their place...hispanics should know their place...non-Christians should know their place....


Those morals.


----------



## Political Junky (Mar 14, 2010)

froggy said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > US Army Retard is afraid he may "Catch the Gay"
> ...


My God, you're so scary.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Mar 14, 2010)

bodecea said:


> froggy said:
> 
> 
> > Echeaux Zulu said:
> ...


Oh shut up Butch, and get back in the fucking closet where you belong.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Mar 14, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


2 lesbians raisng a child is akin to child abuse. The child shouldn't be punished for their disgusting lesbian parents engaging in the mental abuse of said child. The parents of said child, the 2 lesbian freaks, are punishing the child enough as it is.

Imagine what it does to a childs psyche to have to introduce their parents as "here's my mommy and mommy"

It's fucking disgusting!


----------



## L.K.Eder (Mar 14, 2010)

rosa parks did not wear a tux, and that's why she was not a brat.


----------



## manifold (Mar 14, 2010)

Anguille said:
			
		

> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You have absolutely no proof of that.  Pure supposition on your part.  People do not always sue to make a point.  Maybe she's just an attention whore.  One of your cousins perhaps?


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 14, 2010)

manifold said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Obviously an ingenius strategy to make money. Set yourself up in front of the whole school as the reason the prom was cancelled. Subject yourself to hate and ridicule.

Why didn't I think of that?


----------



## critter (Mar 14, 2010)

people like you need to go die in a cave.  First off she fighting for her rights, second this is agasint the law. never mind the school rules. this is discrimination and against the law. period.

I look forward to her winning her case. there no reason a school needs to cancel a prom cause of her. than tell evryone it was her fault. it was the school board fault. since they don't like her views.

she not forcing her beliefs on you. your forcing your beliefs on her.  this is 21 century i can grantee you when you guys all pass away. it be much better more younger people don't care if you gay straight or whatever else you are.

these peopel are sick indeed including topic poster and whoever else agrees with his or her nonsese.

i knew a couple people were gay and well guess what there are not bad people there like us. strangely is that odd?


----------



## critter (Mar 14, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...




just like your doing the same thing without exclude them cause you don't like there views but forcing them to do something there uncomfortable with?  double standard right there you saying its not for there belifes as long as they follow you its ok.

this is called a hate hypocrite and discrimination  this all goes back to slavery.


----------



## critter (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> elvis said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



acutally not its not and she would of been denied if she brought her gf to the prom and thrown out. before hte memo came out cause according to her the policy stated that you can only bring the opposite sex. she went to talk to them about it, and they said no

i had some teachers who said they watch the prom said that normal for girls not to were dress. its not a guy... dressing up in a dress is a girl were a tux there nothing wrong with it.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

manifold said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And people don't always sue to make money.   Please do not project.


----------



## Political Junky (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...


One can only hope the kids don't become as fucked up as you.


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Allowing Wicked Jester around children is child abuse

Its just fucking disgusting!!


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > froggy said:
> ...





  Sorry...I no longer fear Segregationists like you.  You are a dying breed and 20-50 years from now, you will be considered the George Wallaces, the Lester Maddox's, the Bull Conner's of this generation.   You will be on the ashheap of history.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 14, 2010)

I feel sorry for the conservative people I like on here for having to claim "Wicked Jester" as one of theirs.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...




You're ignorant, full of shit, and a liar.  If you would have supported her if she "had just shown up" then you should support her now.  If you truly agreed the policy is unethical it wouldn't matter how she protested it.  That is what reveals your lying statements.  You agree with the policy but since you don't have the guts to admit it you make up this bullshit of "she should have just shown up."  Don't keep embarrassing yourself or insulting us.

As for Rosa Parks, she had already been an official member of the NAACP for twelve fucking years before her move to not move to the back of the bus.  By your stated standards on this case you should be upset with Rosa for obviously planning the move to get arrested and challenge the law.  
Http://www.www.africanaonline.com/rosa_parks.htm

So you now have a choice to be honest or keep practicing your hypocrisy and painfully transparent dishonesty.


----------



## midcan5 (Mar 14, 2010)

A quick look at these stats and you know Mississippi should be worrying about important topics and not sexual orientation. Seems they have their values a bit skewed towards backward. Gays have the same right as straights in a sane world. 


State Profiles | The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy


"There are confessable agonies, sufferings of which one can positively be proud. Of bereavement, of parting, of the sense of sin and the fear of death the poets have eloquently spoken. They command the world's sympathy. But there are also discreditable anguishes, no less excruciating than the others, but of which the sufferer dare not, cannot speak. The anguish of thwarted desire, for example." Aldous Huxley


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...




Bigots like you are the only reason children of same sex couples endure abuse.  If you really cared about the children you would be fighting to stop the harassment they receive instead of promoting it then scapegoating others to justify your bigotry.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 14, 2010)

Has anyone else noticed the Birthers are also the ones who are anti-gay? I wonder what the correlation is.....................


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 14, 2010)

Anguille said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...




It doesn't matter if she's doing it for money or not. Don't feed into the petty distractions of the homophobes.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Okay, again, I've read the reports.  Children need two parents.  Heterosexual couples would be preferable, one mommy, one daddy, but next is gay parents because two parents are better than one, then comes single parents because one parent is better than none.  IMO, that's the order adoption should go in, and it's based on facts and what's best for the child. 

It's my guess the child may introduce one as mommy and the other by their name and it doesn't harm their psyche one iota.

I seem to remember introducing my mom to my 2nd grade teacher and I accidentally called my 2nd grade teacher "mom".  It was embarrassing, but I survived it.

Besides, just because two people of the same sex are raising a child doesn't necessarily mean they are gay...are you checking into their bedroom to make sure?


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 14, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



Yes of course, anybody who doesn't agree with this girls actions is afraid of homosexuals.....do I really strike you as a coward?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Anguille said:
> ...



No...not everyone who disagrees with her...but those who call her a "brat" for exercising her rights.  Those who encourage the pettiness of a school district afraid of a...gasp...tux.   Those...you have to wonder.


----------



## Samson (Mar 14, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Interesting:

Elected officials that implement the desires of their constituants are "petty."

18 year old girls who defy school policy are "exercising their rights."

And we wonder why there is no discipline in school.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Mar 14, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> I feel sorry for the conservative people I like on here for having to claim "Wicked Jester" as one of theirs.


You just don't like the fact that I have the guts to state what so many people feel in this country.

All you fucking nimrods and your PC BS is just plain laughable.

And then we have Butch up here constantly bringing up Rosa Parks, and trying to equate people who CHOOSE to be disgusting immoral freaks, with that of a hero like Rosa Parks.

You don't like what I have to say, too fucking bad!...I'm not going away. And my opinions will be duly noted whether you like it or not.

2 lesbians, or 2 faggots raising a child is mental abuse. It's fucking wrong!


----------



## L.K.Eder (Mar 14, 2010)




----------



## Againsheila (Mar 14, 2010)

L.K.Eder said:


>



Awww...

I like the picture but I'm  not sure it's appropriate in this thread.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



How do you know that they are exercising the "desires" of their constituents?   You DO know the law is on her side, right?


----------



## L.K.Eder (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



you want to throw the tux-wearing dog out of this thread?

that's not gonna happen.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



You will have members of that Mississippi Board of Ed passing out or throwing up with that pic.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > I feel sorry for the conservative people I like on here for having to claim "Wicked Jester" as one of theirs.
> ...



Is the girl in the OP raising a child with her girlfriend?    Have they gone that far in their relationship?   Is one of them pregnant?


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 14, 2010)

L.K.Eder said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > L.K.Eder said:
> ...



  no, I just don't want people to associate a tux wearing dog with the girl we are talking about...seems to me that's going a little over the top in insulting the girl.

Yes, I called her a brat...being a brat is a behavior you can change.  Calling her a dog "ugly" is not something you can change and should therefor be off limits.  Besides, who decides what's beautiful and what's ugly?


----------



## L.K.Eder (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



nah, i think if you were the bouncer at that prom, you'd let the tux-wearing dog in, the tux-wearing girl however, would give you a seizure.

and for the record, you compared the girl and the dog.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 14, 2010)

L.K.Eder said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > L.K.Eder said:
> ...



The thread is about the girl, it wasn't a leap.  That's why I said I wasn't sure the pic belonged in this thread.

If I were the bouncer, I'd let them both in, of course I've already stated that.  Her mistake was in announcing her intentions.  She should have just showed up in her tux with her friend and then if they didn't let them in (which I'm guessing they would have) I'd have backed her lawsuit 100%.  This was all about a lawsuit.


----------



## del (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > I feel sorry for the conservative people I like on here for having to claim "Wicked Jester" as one of theirs.
> ...




nothing says *guts* like posting tough guy bullshit on an anonymous message board.



blow it out your ass, tough guy


----------



## L.K.Eder (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



hey, your posts made it all about the suit, in this case the tux. you wanted her to wear a dress like the other girls.



Againsheila said:


> ..
> She wanted to attend the event and wear a tuxedo, I just have one question..."Would they have banned the prom if the girl had agreed to wear a dress like all the other girls?"





Againsheila said:


> Again, she wanted to wear a tux....I think that was entirely inappropriate. If they would have banned it anyway, then they are wrong, but if they banned it because they wanted to uphold the dress code, more power to them.





Againsheila said:


> I agree, but the girl went too far in demanding to be able to wear a tux.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Mar 14, 2010)

del said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Echeaux Zulu said:
> ...


Aaaaaaaaaaah!.....I'm soooooooooo Hurt del!

LMAO!

You faggots are a funny lot. Twisted in the head indeed, but funny just the same!


----------



## del (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...



more tough guy bullshit from the nancyboy.

keep it coming, sweetie.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...



Hey Del!   You gay?   Jester seems to think you are.   He must have "gaydar".


----------



## L.K.Eder (Mar 14, 2010)




----------



## Againsheila (Mar 14, 2010)

L.K.Eder said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > L.K.Eder said:
> ...



You're right, and since then I changed my mind on the tux.  I talked to my son.  He said "If I want to wear a dress to the prom, I'm damn well gonna wear a dress to the prom."  I said "Are you going to tell the school board first?"  he said "Hell, no, I don't want them stopping  me."

She announced not only was she going to the prom with another girl, but she was gonna wear a tux.  She made it as "in your face" as possible.  The only reason I can think of is the lawsuit she's now filed.

I'm not unreasonable, I'm in these debates for the debate.  When someone makes a point, I concede that point.  I give you the point on the tux, I do not give you the point on her announcing it ahead of time.


----------



## L.K.Eder (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...




ok, thanks for saying that.

i was making fun of your "anti-tux for girls"-stance.

i have since then evolved to posting tux-on animal pics.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 14, 2010)

L.K.Eder said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > L.K.Eder said:
> ...



I'm here because I like to debate, not because I like to argue (though sometimes a good argument gets my blood going too )  I do listen to opposing opinions and have been known to actually change mine on occasion.  (not very many occasions, I'll admit)


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 14, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Women look hot in a tuxedo


----------



## Wicked Jester (Mar 14, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...


Then put up a hot one, dammit!


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



I know some guys who have gotten shit for wearing kilts to proms and they look awesome.  Would you call them "brats" too?


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Anguille said:
> ...




Oh, nice to see your cowardice continue feeding the booger brain juice of dishonesty.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Mar 14, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > L.K.Eder said:
> ...


No, PUSSIES!


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



Judging by the school's reaction it's quite clear they would not ha......

Never mind.

You're a fuxxing lying coward.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > I feel sorry for the conservative people I like on here for having to claim "Wicked Jester" as one of theirs.
> ...



Your grandfather said rosa parks chose to be a disgusting immoral beast by not moving to the back of the bus.  

You cry homosexuals should not raise kids but you never provide evidence.  (heads up-your whiny bitching is not evidence of anything other than you being a whiny bitch.)

The only thing you have to bitch about is your bitching about gays.  It doesn't take guys to say the stoopid shit you do.  It takes time and useless energy.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



 Oh we all know who the pussie is around here.   You are too much of a coward to step away from what you consider the norm....to be an individual, or even to be proud of your heritage frightens you too much.  That's why you hide behind your keyboard.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 14, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



I tried to hide behind my keyboard but it was too entertaining.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Wicked Jester said:
> ...


----------



## Gadawg73 (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Echeaux Zulu said:
> ...



What does she gain by suing? A little more research on this will show you that publicity is the last thing they wanted. You do not know Mississippi. 
Blame the victim is all you are doing.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

Gadawg73 said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Which is exactly what that cowardly School District wanted...they seem to know their clientele well.


----------



## Wicked Jester (Mar 14, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...


Seriously, you can't possibly be that fucking stupid.

Oh, wait a minute, never mind!


----------



## manifold (Mar 14, 2010)

I don't understand the assertion that the school acted cowardly.

How else were they supposed to legally express their bigotry?


----------



## Gadawg73 (Mar 14, 2010)

Wicked Jester said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Gadawg73 said:
> ...



The School Board, not the girl, wanted the publicity. 
They get elected in Hicksville for doing such things.

Wake up America.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

manifold said:


> I don't understand the assertion that the school acted cowardly.
> 
> How else were they supposed to legally express their bigotry?



Pawned it on the girl.  Cowards.


----------



## manifold (Mar 14, 2010)

bodecea said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > I don't understand the assertion that the school acted cowardly.
> ...



Call me old fashioned, but I don't consider it cowardice to merely obey the law.


----------



## Againsheila (Mar 14, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> > L.K.Eder said:
> ...



only if they told the school ahead of time and then sued........


----------



## Gadawg73 (Mar 14, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



Do you have high school kids that go to proms?
I am on my third. You HAVE to tell the school if you are going, pay for it ahyead of time and announce WHO you aregoing with.
Let me explain why: Many kids used to change their minds at the last minute and leave the other side out. They were left with no date having spent big $ on preperations.
My oldest was FORCED to take his ex girlfriend his senior year because of this.
You have to tell the school who you are taking.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 14, 2010)

manifold said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



She's the one obeying the law, you know....


----------



## Anguille (Mar 14, 2010)

manifold said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 No family.


----------



## critter (Mar 15, 2010)

Anguille said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Anguille said:
> ...



i see why you have no family...


----------



## Luissa (Mar 15, 2010)

critter said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Um... she meant you can't talk about family.


----------



## Dr Grump (Mar 15, 2010)

Another stupid rule IMO...;O)


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...




Clueless isn't just a movie.

(the school is the one breaking the law)


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

Againsheila said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...




Why are you still trying to sell this bullshit?  Did you ever address the facts about Rosa or is that wrinkle too big for your barbie doll iron of denial to smooth out?


----------



## Wry Catcher (Mar 15, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> 
> Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> ...



One more example of traditional conservative values - bigotry and censorship.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Can you point me to the statute that requires they sponsor a prom?


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Wry Catcher said:


> One more example of traditional conservative values - bigotry and censorship.



I agree.

But the school still managed to express their bigotry without breaking the law.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > One more example of traditional conservative values - bigotry and censorship.
> ...



Criminal law yes...but we will have to see if depriving an entire group of people of a tradition in order to avoid allowing someone they don't approve of participating is sue-able.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



And you think it should be?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



I think they are scum for doing it....however, I am not a civil rights lawyer...don't know what the criteria is.   If it is sue-able...sure.   This was a deliberate act to do two things:  1) deprive this girl of her right to go to the prom with the date of her choice and 2) turn the rest of the students against her.


Do you think this would have been sue-able if she was asking to bring a black student as her date and the school district did the same thing?


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > One more example of traditional conservative values - bigotry and censorship.
> ...



Then what law were you referencing when you said it wasn't cowardly to follow the law?


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

Uhhhhhhhhhh... nobody has a 'right' to go to a prom


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Never said there is a statute stating the school must have a prom.  What else you got strawman?


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



They didn't break ANY laws nitwit.  Pick any law you want, they didn't break it.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Again, cite the law they broke.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> Uhhhhhhhhhh... nobody has a 'right' to go to a prom



True...but when a school district cancels an entire prom for an entire class in order to avoid allowing one couple to go....there is intent to discriminate.

Of course, a court of law has to make determination as to intent to discriminate.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Uhhhhhhhhhh... nobody has a 'right' to go to a prom
> ...





I say the exact opposite.  They took action to explicitly NOT discriminate.

I agree that they're douchers for doing what they did, but they certainly didn't discriminate.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> Uhhhhhhhhhh... nobody has a 'right' to go to a prom



Try to keep up.  If a public school sponsors a prom they cannot discriminate by sex.  That is against the Constitution.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Uhhhhhhhhhh... nobody has a 'right' to go to a prom
> ...



And they didn't.


Thanks for your invaluable contributions to this discussion.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



It doesn't matter they cancelled this particular prom.  The school policy is still on the books and it's still against the law to discriminate based on sex.


----------



## Dis (Mar 15, 2010)

What a complete load of shit.  It's a school dance.  If someone is *that* offended, they don't really need to go.  My guess is 99% of people would have gone anyway.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...




It's always sad when a britney spears quality brainiac like you tries to pounce on others' posts.  The school's policy discriminates on the basis of sex by saying a female cannot wear a tux and by stating all dates must be of the opposite sex.  What you do not understand is that policy transcends the fact they cancelled prom for this year.  There are two ways the school can be in compliance with the law:  permanently cancel all proms in the future thus removing the policy altogether or amend the policy to bring it into America where equality is paramount.  You Crotch Watchers are the parasites of the American Dream.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > Uhhhhhhhhhh... nobody has a 'right' to go to a prom
> ...



Or the district is doing it because they are mitigating risk... they are under no requirement to make it a feel good experience for all.... just because things are tolerated does not mean that everyone, including a school system, needs to accept or coddle to choices

Oh... and BTW.. this is not discriminating because of 'sex'... there are only 2 sexes, male and female... nobody is being excluded because they are a male or because they are a female... not allowing certain behaviors, is not covered as 'discrimination'


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Yet we have appropriateness in dress rules everywhere from work to school to public establishments... girls are not discriminated against because they are told they must wear appropriate formal wear, nor because they are told not to wear something too revealing... it is not discrimination when boys have been instructed they cannot wear dresses, etc....


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...




How is a tuxedo not appropriate formal attire at a prom you dumbass?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...


What 'certain behavior' is  not being allowed, Diamond?


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



If there is a Crotch Watcher at the door who turns someone away based on sex that is discrimination based on sex.  You are no where near intelligent enough to be a wordsmith worthy of the suave moves it would require to sell the policy as anything but discrimination.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Having a same sex date is a behavior, a choice... it is not discrimination because of sex.... as stated, there are indeed only 2 sexes... male and female... as determined by genetic make up

Just as other behaviors are not tolerated by students according to school rules... whether it be based on how they dress, how they act, shocking or disruptive behavior, etc


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

Still Arguing about Forcing the Homosexual Agenda on Children in Schools?... 



peace...


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Again.. you fucking idiot.. you are confusing discrimination based on sex with rules based on chosen behavior


there are indeed only 2 sexes, and there was no decision made for keeping anyone out because they were a male or because they were a female


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Just as boys are not allowed to wear mini-skirts, etc.....

There are precedents for dress codes and those dress codes having standards for both boys and girls that are not exactly identical


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...




First of all you say it's certain behavior and now it's a dress code thing.  Can you show us where that school's dress code says that girls cannot wear tuxes?   I understand their dress code is available on line.

Here is the ACLU complaint...I believe you can find the dress code from the district near the last few pages:

http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/McM...aint_final.pdf


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



No... Curve is making an argument based on the dress code thing.. I am stating that there are precedents for separate standards in dress for boys and girls in school... I am unsure if there was a specific rules against girls in tuxes..  but do know my daughters school does not allow boys to wear skirts or dresses... where in the past that rule was to prevent joking behavior, but it is still enforced and IMHO rightfully so


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Ok, i'm laying 10-1 odds that Curveball is never going to back up the claim that the school broke the law.

Any takers?


----------



## critter (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Acutally its not a choice, it just happens so don't twist that up and it is discrimination against gays and lezbines they have no right to cancel prom cause of these two young ladies.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Still Arguing about Forcing the Homosexual Agenda on Children in Schools?...
> 
> 
> 
> peace...




Still trying to sell your pathetic strawmen?  When women fought for the right to vote were they forcing men to get pregnant?  When there was a fight to let blacks vote were they forcing whites to go get a really deep suntan?  

Affirming equal rights as guaranteed by the Constitution isn't forcing anything on anyone.  It's preventing discrimination.  You homophobes are so fukkked up you actually cry persecution when you are prevented from sticking your over controlling hands in other peoples' pants.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

critter said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



As Shogun would say, your opinion about the rights they have means exactly two things, jack and shit.

They have every legal right to cancel a prom.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

critter said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...




Show the gay gene as proven thru science and accepted widely as being biological and not behavior in nature


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...




She wore a tux on picture day so the school banned her picture from the yearbook.  She is also 18 so as an adult in a government funded and run institution she is entitled to all Constitutional protections.  Minors are protected as well although some technicalities provide loopholes.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Just as a picture would be banned of a boy in a dress.... or a female trying to wear a male swimsuit

Dress codes having differing standards for males and females has been around and should be around

Nice try


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Ok, i'm laying 10-1 odds that Curveball is never going to back up the claim that the school broke the law.
> 
> Any takers?



What law were you talking about when you said it wasn't cowardly to obey the law?

The school's policy violates the 1st Amendment.  Since you are obviously ignorant of this I will provide a link to help you understand that here in America discrimination based on sex is unacceptable.
Http://www.topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights



Here you can see the flyer put out by the school explicitly forbidding same sex dates.  If you prohibit a date based on sex that is discrimination based on sex.  You can also read other documents and see Constance give a thank you to Americans.  People like you have a social security number but you're about as American in character and principle as the saudi islamic clerics who let school girls burn to death.
Fulton, MS Prom Discrimination - School Flyer | American Civil Liberties Union


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, i'm laying 10-1 odds that Curveball is never going to back up the claim that the school broke the law.
> ...



Right.

So they scrapped the illegal policy in favor of a legal one... no prom.

you lose


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 15, 2010)

Please allow me to apologize on behalf of the South for the original poster. Not all of us are this backward, I promise.

I love the people that say being gay is a choice. If that's what you think...are you CHOOSING to be straight? Every time you see Manifold's avatar do you stop...choose whether you're straight or gay...then act accordingly? No. Of course you dont. Gay = choice = retarded.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Remember earlier when I said you lack the ability to argue your position?  That was my polite way of suggesting you bow out before revealing the depths of your idiocy.  The policy regarding this case has absolutely nothing to do with behavior.  It is based purely on the sex of the students you fuxxing reject. 

You are trying to be slick by replacing the word "sex" with "behavior" thus avoiding the problem of how you can justify supporting a policy that is discriminatory based purely on the Crotch Watch.  You aren't that slick and you truly stink at trying to be a silver tongue taser.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Would they kick guys out for wearing kilts?   Those are some of the best looking guys' suits out there.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Thank you for showing the only way you can defend bigotry is by pointing to.....bigotry.  That is known as circular logic.  Tuxedos are obviously appropriate for a prom yet you are trying to claim who can or cannot wear one based on.......sex.  (now you just have to figure out how to slide in your "behavior" red herring.....)


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...




They did not scrap the policy you apple diddling cockroach.  The policy is still in place.

You keep ignoring this simple question:

What law were you talking about when you said it wasn't cowardly to obey the law?

Go ahead and ignore it again you butt slime sucking weasel.  I love it when bigots dodge because it reinforces how your position is based on shit.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> critter said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



It doesn't matter if it's natural or a choice.  We don't know if you choose to be as fuxxing stoopid as you are or if it's natural but either way, it would not retard your Constitutional right to keep celebrating the announcements of your bigotry.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



All laws nitwit.

Now go ahead and tell me what law they broke when the cancelled the prom.

Of course you can't, because they didn't break any.

I already said I agree that they're assholes for doing what they did, but pretending they broke the law when the facts clearly show they did not, makes you look like a retarded fucking lunatic.  Heck, even rainbow-bode conceded that point.


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Againsheila said:
> ...



I don't consider washington DC "the South" but it does have a "Black Caucus."


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



did you major in stupid?


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

I often mistake dis for del.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



I never said they broke the law when they cancelled the prom you fuxxing idiot.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

I can see the lawyer questioning the head of the School Dist. now:

ACLU Lawyer:  "So, Mr Jones, how long has your school district sponsored a Senior Prom?"

Mr Jones:  "For the last ___ years, ever since we've had a high school."

ACLU Lawyer: "So, you would say that this is a tradition, a yearly expectation?"

Mr. Jones:  "Er...yes"

ACLU Lawyer:  "And is it also true, Mr Jones, that this year's prom was being planned as was all other years all the way up to....when was that, Mr. Jones?"

Mr Jones:  "Um...up to early March."

ACLU Lawyer:  "And what happened then?"

Mr. Jones:  "We cancelled it."

ACLU Lawyer:  "Have you ever cancelled it before?"

Mr. Jones:  "No"

ACLU Lawyer:  "Never before?  Ever?"

Mr. Jones:  "No."

ACLU Lawyer:  "And...why did you cancel your prom this year?"

Mr. Jones:  "We wanted to avoid a law suit."

ACLU Lawyer:  "A lawsuit?  Over what?"

Mr. Jones:  "We had a girl...a, er, avowed homesexual, who asked permission to bring her girlfriend to the prom.  She wanted to wear a tux...and that is against our dress code."

ACLU Lawyer:  "Wearing a tux is against your dress code?"

Mr. Jones:  "Yes"

ACLU Lawyer:  "Well, why didn't you tell her to wear a dress instead just like you would tell others that their clothing is inappropriate?"

Mr. Jones:  "Well..um"

ACLU Lawyer:  "Not to interrupt, Mr Jones...but I have a copy of your dress code here.  I can't seem to find the part that says that girls cannot wear tuxes.  Could you point that out for us?

Mr. Jones:  "Well...um"


----------



## PatekPhilippe (Mar 15, 2010)

> Since you are obviously ignorant of this I will provide a link to help you understand that here in America discrimination based on sex is unacceptable.
> Http://www.topics.law.cornell.edu/co...n/billofrights



The discrimination "based on sex" argument you're making here based on this law is BOGUS!!!!  If it in any way applied to the incident, your argument or gay rights this thread and this controversy would never have happened.

Are you saying now that there is a third sex....male...female...and "what the fuck?"


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> I never said they broke the law when they cancelled the prom you fuxxing idiot.



Fine.  So when did they break the law and what law did they break?


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Bottom line is that being an asshole bigot alone isn't against the law.

Sure, there are specific expressions of bigotry that have been outlawed, but cancelling a prom because you're an asshole bigot isn't among them.

Not yet anyway.


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> I can see the lawyer questioning the head of the School Dist. now:
> 
> ACLU Lawyer:  "So, Mr Jones, how long has your school district sponsored a Senior Prom?"
> 
> ...



Which would all be relevant if courts heard cases that were not based on any exitising law.

Wierd thing about Courts: They don't bother with people who don't break any law!!

I suggest that you sponsor a bill that would prohibit banning proms.

I'm certain US legislatures have nothing better to do than to coddle to The Sexually Deviant who would like to parade themselves and their Octopii, Inflateables, Dildos, etc. etc. around in a tux.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Bullshit... either her or her date could attend.. THAT was not in question... what was not allowed was them having the BEHAVIOR of attending as each other's DATE..... I know simple logic is difficult for you to understand... but try and keep up


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 15, 2010)

Someone needs to go read the complaint that the ACLU filed. It's easily downloadable from the site with the article.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...




Unknown on that in the school... if it would be deemed as a 'skirt' it could be.... 

But you also have traditional dress of men from other cultures that would not be suitable for women

I do know that unless it is a day revolving around a cultural celebration sponsored by the employer I currently have, men are not allowed to weak kilts.. and that is indeed laid out in the policy, and was gone over in the orientation

The idea around equal treatment of both sexes is not to make us androgynous... like it or not, there are differences between men and women... so just as a woman will not be allowed in a men's speedo at the next school swim meet, and a man will not be allowed in a mini-skirt and tube top at the next dance at my daughter's school... and the next time someone goes against the norm to wear something purposely shocking for a yearbook picture and it gets left out by the editors...  does not mean it is discrimination


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> Someone needs to go read the complaint that the ACLU filed. It's easily downloadable from the site with the article.



Whats the link to the complaint?

The link to the article doesn't have a sublink that I found.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Male speedos are appropriate for a swim meet too.. for males.... like i just said to bod, there are indeed differences between men and women...

Now.. would I personally be offended by some girl trying to wear a tux for a school picture for shock value?? No... but once you cross the line in allowing kids to dictate what is and is not acceptable in school, it can all go downhill very quickly


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > I never said they broke the law when they cancelled the prom you fuxxing idiot.
> ...



Their Policy is illegal you dummass. I've only stated that about ten times and provided the 1st Amen. link as well.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

del said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



I tried but they said you were unavailable you fucking shitweed.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Do you mean the policy they didn't enforce?


Massive FAIL!


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Thank you for pointing out another area that violates the First Amendment.  Like I said, you can't justify discrimination by pointing to discrimination.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Holy snotballs of pudding patties you are one seriously stoopid bitch.  This has already been explained and you have ignored it.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):

If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds.  But they didn't.

Instead, they simply cancelled the prom for everyone and in doing so retained a firm legal footing.

It might have been a douche move, but of the two, it was the only one that is CLEARLY legal.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLezbo said:
			
		

>


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):
> 
> If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds.  But they didn't.
> 
> ...



Children in Schools don't Enjoy the Same Rights in this Regard as Adults, but I Agree, the School was Covering it's Ass.



peace...


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



First amendment does not prevent dress code rules.. First Amendment does not go for rules about behavior...

While you may every right to wear a "Fuck 'Insert Teacher Name here'" shirt all up and down the sidewalk and show how you detest that teacher.. you have no first amendment right to wear that in school where there are indeed rules against it.... and those are not going to be struck down in the name of the first amendment

You may have the freedom to express yourself by waving your genitalia over a picture of someone you hate.. the first amendment does not give you the right to do that in a public place or in a private place with rules against decorum and dress and behavior..

Quit while you are behind


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Still Arguing about Forcing the Homosexual Agenda on Children in Schools?...
> ...



A Black Comedian recently Summed it up for you People Attempting to Compare Chosen Sexual Deviancies to his Skin Color...

When he's Pulled over in his Car, he can't Jump back into the Closet....

He's Black, and that's that.

People Choosing to Defy their Natural Design is their Right, but Forcing Society on all Levels, including in Schools with Children, to Embrace that Choice, is NOT their Right.



peace...


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):
> ...



The student is an 18 year old adult and if you looked at the complaint filed you would see federal cases cited showing students have First Amendment protection in school and that mere whining does not justify censorship.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...




Affirming equal rights for gays is not trying to make anyone else gay.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Clearly you weren't paying attention to the bong hits for Jesus case.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



None of this idiotic bullshit addresses the fact the policy is illegal by discriminating based on sex.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):
> 
> If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds.  But they didn't.
> 
> ...



Actually, cancelling a prom that has a tradition and an unspoken expectation in order to avoid allowing a minority from attending may in itself be illegal.  Notice I say "may".


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> CurveLezbo said:
> 
> 
> 
> >




I find your altering of Curvelight's nic rather immature.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):
> ...



Good luck with that.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Unwarrented discrimination against a law-abiding, tax-paying minority is still discrimination regardless of the law-abiding, tax-paying minority.   Women are not blacks, yet...for some strange reason...it is not ok to discriminate against them either.   Handicapped people are not blacks, yet...for some strange reason...it is not ok to discriminate against them either.   Jews are not blacks, yet...for some strange reason...it is not ok to discriminate against them either.


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



I made no such Assertion, you Dingleberry...

Expecting Society to Embrace the Choice is what I was Referring to...

And it's NOT Analagous to Skin Color, and it's Insulting to People of Color for Sexual Deviants to Continue Comparing their Choices to the Honest Civil Rights Struggle in this Country.



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):
> 
> If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds.  But they didn't.
> 
> ...


I think Curvy's point is that even if the rule isn't enforced, just having it on the books is discrimination and therefore illegal.

Though I can't remember if sexual orientation is a protected class...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Thank you...the good wishes are appreciated...I think it has something to do with reasonable and long standing expectations turning into "de facto" rules.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):
> ...


I think the School District has hung themselves by hanging their argument on the dress code, not sexual orientation.   A tux against the dress code?   Really?    I think a judge will be laughing at that one.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):
> ...



If that's CL's point then it's a moot one.

How exactly are you going to sue someone for an illegal policy they abandoned when it came to their attention that it might be illegal?  As long as they never enforced it, what can they be sued for exactly? And by whom?


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...




Hogwash.  It's never going to get to a judge.

There is no case.


----------



## AllieBaba (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Dress codes usually address sex. Boys will wear such and such, and girls will wear such and such....


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



Do you understand how legal cases work?


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...


What makes you so sure they abandoned it? If they did, they'd probably be holding the prom. It should be easy enough to check their written school policy handbook.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Cancelling the prom renders any prom policies moot. 

Again, who is going to sue them and for what exactly?


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):
> ...



That's why I've always said the discrimination is based on "sex."  I've never said it was based on orientation.


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



ACLU will sue (to make headlines, if nothing else)

They will sue to change the policy of exclusion. Of course the board will change the policy before the court hears the case, but this is immaterial. 

Hopefully, the Board will Ban Proms in the New Policy.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...


Apparently the ACLU is going to sue them because the school has a rule, still in place, that says a prom date must be of the opposite sex.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



More semantic bullshit.  Nobody is making anyone "embrace" gays, straights, bisexuals, or stoopid fuks like you when the Constitution gets affirmed.  You know bigotry is unjustifiable so you try to set it up as if opponents are being forced when really it is the bigots saying 

"In public you shall act heterosexual or you shall be excluded."

It bigots like you who are trying to force everyone else to conform to your self righteous and shallow holes of despair.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



So the ACLU is going after precedent then?

It's pretty much a foregone conclusion that the school will throw out the rule before it gets that far.  I mean, why do they need any prom rules if they don't have a prom.

I guess if their goal is to make sure every other school in the country has to allow queers to attend the prom or cancel the prom then they should keep up the great work! 

Since clearly cases like this are doing wonders to improve attitudes toward queers.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...


Don't kid yourself. Proms are one of the schools ways of raising money.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




What am I kidding myself about?


----------



## rdean (Mar 15, 2010)

In the south, they filled in public swimming pools with "dirt" to keep little colored children from swimming with the tidy whities.

They will lose their fingers before letting go all their hates and predjudice.


----------



## PatekPhilippe (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



So how does the Constitution apply to this again?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Isn't holding a prom every year precedent?

And, sorry if I don't really respect your opinion on this, but anyone who calls us derogatory names isn't worth respecting.

If she wanted to bring a black classmate, you'd be talking about *******, wouldn't  you?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

rdean said:


> In the south, they filled in public swimming pools with "dirt" to keep little colored children from swimming with the tidy whities.
> 
> They will lose their fingers before letting go all their hates and predjudice.



Yes, that's the same "cut off my nose to spite my face" attitude....seems rather cultural, doesn't it?


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




I respect your decision to not respect my opinion.

But I'm not aware of any derogatory words that I might have used.  Care to educate me?


----------



## Rinata (Mar 15, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> 
> Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> ...



The right thing??? Your right thing may not be my right thing. It's not something that you can proclaim, as you just did. It cannot be defined. You have no idea if cancelling the prom was the right thing to do. You just think it is. I think it isn't. See how it works???


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Rinata said:


> The right thing??? Your right thing may not be my right thing. It's not something that you can proclaim, as you just did. It cannot be defined. You have no idea if cancelling the prom was the right thing to do. You just think it is. I think it isn't. See how it works???



It was certainly the "right" thing to do more than it was the "left" thing to do.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...




This isn't being done to "improve attitudes" towards gays you shitbag.  It also doesn't matter if she filed a lawsuit or not because you dummasses would still be bigots.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> > The right thing??? Your right thing may not be my right thing. It's not something that you can proclaim, as you just did. It cannot be defined. You have no idea if cancelling the prom was the right thing to do. You just think it is. I think it isn't. See how it works???
> ...




Social Conservatives are political libruls but I'm sure that is way way beyond your scope of comprehension.


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 15, 2010)

I think it's hilarious that some people in this thread think there's no law to sue the school over. 

GO

READ

THE 

COMPLAINT


Until you do...you're talking out of your ass.

Then when you come back...explain how the legal argument in the complaint is wrong. Cite case law if you can.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


 Mani spent most of his high school career face down in the toilet and he was always too afraid to make waves.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Seriously?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



 Mani needs help pointing out his derogatory term for gay people.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> I think it's hilarious that some people in this thread think there's no law to sue the school over.
> 
> GO
> 
> ...


From the OP linked article.



> A Feb. 5 memo to students laid out the criteria for bringing a date to the prom, and one requirement was that the person must be of the opposite sex.
> The ACLU said McMillen approached school officials shortly before the memo went out because she knew same-sex dates had been banned in the past. The ACLU said district officials told McMillen she and her girlfriend wouldn't be allowed to arrive together, that she would not be allowed to wear a tuxedo, and that she and her girlfriend might be asked to leave if their presence made any other students "uncomfortable."



I wonder if the school bully being at the prom made others uncomfortable...would the bully be asked to leave?

Also, from everything I've read about this story, the girl did the right thing in first approaching the school to get permission...when she didn't get it she went to the ACLU. So those in the thread calling her a brat...piss off.


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Vanquish said:
> 
> 
> > I think it's hilarious that some people in this thread think there's no law to sue the school over.
> ...



That's close to being enough..but with people saying there's "no legal basis" they really ought to see the legal basis in much more detail than that article.

I do like your post though. I think the girl did things the right way.


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> I think it's hilarious that some people in this thread think there's no law to sue the school over.
> 
> GO
> 
> ...



What is the link to the complaint.

(2nd request)


----------



## Misty (Mar 15, 2010)

Does Mississippi think that lesbians have no feelings?  

I think it's cruel to treat people like this.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> Vanquish said:
> 
> 
> > I think it's hilarious that some people in this thread think there's no law to sue the school over.
> ...



Fulton, MS Prom Discrimination | American Civil Liberties Union

Fulton, MS Prom Discrimination | American Civil Liberties Union


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



You won't get the Validation you Seek, and your Anger will never go away...



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Vanquish said:
> ...


OMFG! She's asking for $1.00 in damages. Sheila was right, she's only in it for the money!!!


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



*The....the....BRAT!!!!!!*


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

Thank You from Constance McMillen | American Civil Liberties Union

^I bet within 5 Years she's Married to a Man and with at least one Child...

But hey, this is Cute right now.



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



so you were too stupid?


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Vanquish said:
> ...



Thanks Bo!

This seems to be the legal precedent for the ALCU complaint:
Prom Resources for LGBT Students | American Civil Liberties Union



> In Fricke v. Lynch, a federal court ruled that any policy excluding same-sex couples from proms or school dances violates the right to free expression guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  Other decisions have found that enforcing outdated notions that only boys can wear tuxedoes and only girls can wear dresses to Prom is illegal.



Basically the ALCU is trying to have the prom reinstated based on the discriminatory policy of the district, and is hoping that a Federal Judge will agree that cancelling the prom = violating the "right to free expression" guaranteed by the 1st Amendment (which doesn't say anything about a "right to free expression," but I suppose the ACLU will losely define "speech" as the right to dance with a Tuxedo-Wearing-Inflateable Sheep, or a 24 inch Day-Glo Dildo )


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):
> ...



not even close. there's nothing illegal about a school not sponsoring a dance.


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



"In Fricke v. Lynch, a federal court ruled that *any policy excluding same-sex couples from proms or school dances* violates the right to free expression guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  Other decisions have found that enforcing outdated notions that only boys can wear tuxedoes and only girls can wear dresses to Prom is illegal."

If I am not Mistaken, they were Held to a Dress Code, NOT Denied Access...

Correct?



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

rdean said:


> In the south, they filled in public swimming pools with "dirt" to keep little *colored* children from swimming with the tidy whities.
> 
> They will lose their fingers before letting go all their hates and predjudice.



what color were they?


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Rinata said:
> ...



are you positive you didn't major in stupid?


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



I suppose the ACLU will argue that by banning the prom, they were denied access.



I'm sorta hoping the ALCU wins so there will be a proliferation of Prom-Related-Erotic-OctoArt Pics.


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Thank You from Constance McMillen | American Civil Liberties Union
> 
> ^I bet within 5 Years she's Married to a Man and with at least one Child...
> 
> ...



i bet within 5 years you're married to a man with 3 children, but you'll never be cute.



piss


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

del said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...





I feel superior in my ability to maintain a position above the poo throwing chimps.


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



how nice for you.


----------



## manu1959 (Mar 15, 2010)

immorality the reason....

none of the straight couples are married ...some will have sex....

all proms should be cancelled nationwide ...

ok....who cares....


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

I am not sure about EVERY State in the Union, but I Know that in Colorado, specifically the Largest School District in the State, Jefferson County, that Sex Education begins in the 5th Grade.

It does NOT include Information for the LGBT "Community".

The Claim as I Understand it from that Community is that they Knew they were "Gay" when they VERY Young, some as far back as Kindergarten.

Is it not Discrimination for the "Gay" Children during Sex Ed to only hear about what their Bodies are Designed to do Naturally?

Should "Gay" 5th Graders being Learning Sex Ed that Pertains to them?...

Should ALL 5th Graders be Learning it with them?

The 5th Grade Sex Booklet which is almost 30 Years Old is fairly Explicit on the Issues of Sex and Reproduction, and even Discusses "Love" in Relation to Sex, but it only Describes Heterosexual Acts of Sex.

Is this Unconstitutional Discriminatory?

I am Looking for the Opinions of those who Feel what Happened in Mississippi is Wrong or Unconstitutional.



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...prom-cancelation-a-question-about-rights.html

^Would like some Input from those in this Debate on this Thread...



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Thank You from Constance McMillen | American Civil Liberties Union
> ...



I have Told you No before del, and I will tell you it again...

I Like ya... But I don't like ya like that.

Fish elsewhere, ya Queen.



peace...


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Thank You from Constance McMillen | American Civil Liberties Union
> 
> ^I bet within 5 Years she's Married to a Man and with at least one Child...
> 
> ...



It doesn't matter if she would be or not.  It wouldn't matter if she, her partner, elvis, a Kenya shaman, her parents, her partner's parents, elmer fudd, and a purple tree all conspired for the last 18 years to bring this lawsuit.  The policy is illegal and unConstitutional.  All of your whining and attempted distractions cannot subtract one ounce of that fact away from the issue.


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> The 5th Grade Sex Booklet which is almost 30 Years Old is fairly Explicit on the Issues of Sex and Reproduction, and even Discusses "Love" in Relation to Sex, but it only Describes Heterosexual Acts of Sex....














Why are you reading The 5th Grade Sex Booklet?

Just looking at pics?


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

Go away, mal, you make everyone want to puke and we'll cancel usmb if you do not comply.

Oh, and quit advertising your own retarded threads in the middle of a conversation.


----------



## Dr Gregg (Mar 15, 2010)

dumb poll,for one 5th graders shouldn't be taught sex ed, that should wait until at least HS. Plus, no need to mention homosexual sex in those classes IMO


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



i'm sorry, honey, but i don't swing that way. 

i don't like you at all, in any way, except possibly the past tense.


i'm sure i'll be reading about it when you finally explode out of the closet, mullet, cutesy spelling and all.



toodlez


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



I'm not seeking any validation you dumm fuk.  But it is nice to see you focus on personal fantasies as soon as your cognitive dissonance kicks in to gear.


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



I'm glad someone actually went to read the damn thing.

5. On or about the afternoon of March 10,2010, Defendant Itawamba County School District (the "District") announced the *intent to cancel the prom in order to avoid Defendants' constitutional obligations to Plaintiff. Such actions were taken for the purpose of suppressing the viewpoint of Constance's constitutionally protected speech. *

6. The Defendants' prohibitions and actions against Constance constitute *impermissible viewpoint discrimination under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. *

41. Defendant Itawamba County School District and Defendants McNeece, Wiygul, and Mitchell, in their official capacities, are liable pursuant to 42 U.S.c. § 1983 and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment, *for promulgating, implementing, ratifying, and/or enforcing rules and acts that deprive, and continue to deprive, Plaintiff of her right to freedom of expression. *

I think it's funny/sad that conservatives stand by their own political statements that homosexuality is an abomination...but they won't admit that coming to the prom with a same-sex partner, dressed in a tuxedo is a political statement...especially when they're the ones making an issue out of it.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Go away, mal, you make everyone want to puke and we'll cancel usmb if you do not comply.
> 
> Oh, and quit advertising your own retarded threads in the middle of a conversation.



Thass bowlshit.  Mal, like the rest of us have to rights to express our views without posters attempting censorship. I say let the fuxxing ignorant bigots spew their hatred loudly and proudly.


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Go away, mal, you make everyone want to puke and we'll cancel usmb if you do not comply.
> ...



you're here, as well as mal.
QED


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > The 5th Grade Sex Booklet which is almost 30 Years Old is fairly Explicit on the Issues of Sex and Reproduction, and even Discusses "Love" in Relation to Sex, but it only Describes Heterosexual Acts of Sex....
> ...



Ah... That's Cute.

So you are Option #4 then?...



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

Dr Gregg said:


> dumb poll,for one 5th graders shouldn't be taught sex ed, that should wait until at least HS. Plus, no need to mention homosexual sex in those classes IMO



Irrelevant...

They ARE being Taught it.

And little Gay Children are being Denied their Education, aren't they?...



peace...


----------



## Care4all (Mar 15, 2010)

i'd like to see proof that 5th graders are taught about sex education first!

regardless, it is a State issue....if you don't live in colorado, then it ain't our beeswax.


----------



## Dr Gregg (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Dr Gregg said:
> 
> 
> > dumb poll,for one 5th graders shouldn't be taught sex ed, that should wait until at least HS. Plus, no need to mention homosexual sex in those classes IMO
> ...



Notr really becuase they can still learn about birth control and use of condoms, and what happens if put yourself at risk to the STDs out there, that can be used for homosexual sex also


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



I'm genuinely curious.


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

Care4all said:


> i'd like to see proof that 5th graders are taught about sex education first!
> 
> regardless, it is a State issue....if you don't live in colorado, then it ain't our beeswax.



"beeswax?"


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

Care4all said:


> i'd like to see proof that 5th graders are taught about sex education first!
> 
> regardless, it is a State issue....if you don't live in colorado, then it ain't our beeswax.



It's for Real.

And the Booklet they use called "Growing and Changing" is from 1982.

_"Sexual Intercourse brings sperm and egg together. "Making love" is a term that is often used for sexual intercourse, when a man puts his erect penis into a woman's vagina.

These words are appropriate because when a man and woman have sexual intercourse they are warm and loving toward each other.

When a man's penis is in the woman's vagina, semen is ejaculated into the vagina, enter the uterus, and go into the fallopian tubes. IF there is a mature egg in one of the tubes, a sperm may fertilize it.

One purpose of this union of a man and woman, as for all living things, is the reproduction of their species. But for people, a sexual relationship is an emotional as well as a physical expression of love."_



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > i'd like to see proof that 5th graders are taught about sex education first!
> ...



You've never heard that term before?   "Mind your own beeswax." ?


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



No, I've heard it before, I just thought it was a cute anachronism.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



I guess I'm Old School...I still use it...and "Nacho business".


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > i'd like to see proof that 5th graders are taught about sex education first!
> ...



Well, for Queer 5th Graders we'd definately need to change the first sentence:

From:"Sexual Intercourse brings sperm and egg together."

To: "Sexual Intercourse brings  .......................


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



It ain't Easy Bein' Cheesy.

Que Pasta?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Are you a Pastafarian?


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Leggo My Eggo!!!!


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

Props to those that got my humor.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

del said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Even whiny trolls like you.....iz awl good.


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



i never whine, cupcake. you're projecting again.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Note to the ill-informed:  The ACLU, for all the good work they do, has on occasion had one or seventy of their complaints thrown out.  This one also will not make the cut.  Count on it.

I love how some people assume that just because the ACLU has filed a complaint, that means the complaint must have legitimate legal standing.


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 15, 2010)

I love how some people think that anything the ACLU is liberal bullshit without even discussing the merits. "P


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> I love how some people think that anything the ACLU is liberal bullshit without even discussing the merits. "P



I agree.

Most of what they do is great work.

Even this effort may end up doing some good in the long run.  But they're not going to win this specific case.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Where's the Beef!!??


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Get Mikey: He'll Eat Anything!!!!!


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > US Army Retard is afraid he may "Catch the Gay"
> ...



I was a lesbian in a past life.  Maybe thats why I am so good at......oh wait, wrong venue.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> I was a lesbian in a past life.  Maybe thats why I am so good at......oh wait, wrong venue.



good at what???

Sporting a mullet and finger slapping a dip can?


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Mar 15, 2010)

]





manifold said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> > I was a lesbian in a past life.  Maybe thats why I am so good at......oh wait, wrong venue.
> ...



I told you no more looking at pictures of me in my yearbook you stalker

This is the last one...if you soil this one i'm not giving you another!!!


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

del said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...




Ummmmm....okay.  Maybe in the next six months you can learn a new wors.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



He doesn't wine, he might cheeze sometimes but never whines.

I think you have del confused with someone else.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Vanquish said:
> 
> 
> > I love how some people think that anything the ACLU is liberal bullshit without even discussing the merits. "P
> ...



From a hard legal stance the only hurdle is proving the Board cancelled the prom specifically to prevent two students from attending together.  If they lose the hearing to move forward I would file a complaint against the School Policy itself without using any name of a student.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Vanquish said:
> ...



To what end?

What would you hope to accomplish?

If I'm to believe some of the case law already posted, the policy is unconstitutional and will not be enforced. What more do you want? Do you actually think the school could be forced to hold the prom?


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 15, 2010)

without using the name of a student?

you have to have a justiciable case or controversy that isn't moot - aka - an actual plaintiff being actually harmed

you can't just sue willy nilly. regardless of what people tell you.


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Difficult Subject for my Shadow...

She Opts to Troll and Derail instead...





peace...


----------



## Rinata (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> > The right thing??? Your right thing may not be my right thing. It's not something that you can proclaim, as you just did. It cannot be defined. You have no idea if cancelling the prom was the right thing to do. You just think it is. I think it isn't. See how it works???
> ...



Funny!!!!


----------



## Rinata (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



That is the word in question. Not nice.


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

Bodey, you not gonna Pick 1 of the 4 Options?...

Classic.



peace...


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Rinata said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Really???

How come I haven't heard anyone complain about Queer as Folk or Queer eye for the straight guy?

Is it like ******, as in you have to be one to use it?


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Go away, mal, you make everyone want to puke and we'll cancel usmb if you do not comply.
> 
> Oh, and quit advertising your own retarded threads in the middle of a conversation.



Someone Needs a Hug... 



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



I can't Believe I ate the Whole thing!


----------



## mal (Mar 15, 2010)

Bodey's Ascared to be Honest...

MeThinks I Remember that she Supported Homosexual SexEd being Included with Heterosexual SexEd a few Years ago, but Knows how much that will Blow up in her Face if she Takes that Stand Publically again...

Since she's NOT Courgeous enough to Answer a Simple Question, I will have to Assume that she Feels there are Homosexuals in the 5th Grade who have a Right to Equal SexEd.



peace...


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> without using the name of a student?
> 
> you have to have a justiciable case or controversy that isn't moot - aka - an actual plaintiff being actually harmed
> 
> you can't just sue willy nilly. regardless of what people tell you.




Good point.  If they fail to reinstate the prom that would not mean a failure to have the policy permanently removed.  Her name could probably still be used for that purpose.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Gangs of new york would have been an awesome movie if they would have used someone besides dicaprio.  He totally fukked it all up.


----------



## JScott (Mar 15, 2010)

Im good with the current sex ed booklet. I do believe there should be an "advanced" course in high school though.


----------



## Rinata (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



You get it. Please don't play games. I really hate that. Neither word is appropriate and you know it.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Rinata said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Rinata said:
> ...



I respectfully disagree.

If I said faggot or homo I would agree.  But I've never heard of queer being derogatory.  Why would it be?


----------



## Rinata (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



How often do you hear people use that word (queer)?? Very seldom. It was used a lot in the 50's and 60's. It's funny how it works. People stopped using that word because it was considered offensive and started using, "fruit" and "fag" instead.

Gee, thank goodness they don't say, "queer" anymore.  Isn't that ridiculous???


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...


Queer means not normal.

Since when did you get to decide what others find offensive?

Bottom line...if someone is offended and you continue to be an asshole, you're a bully.

Not that there's anything illegal with that.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Again...

Why is it not offensive in queer eye for the straight guy and queer as folk, but it is when I say it?


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Again...
> 
> Why is it not offensive in queer eye for the straight guy and queer as folk, but it is when I say it?


Intent.

I can joke with my parents that they had too many kids because they're Catholics but if someone else does it I'd punch them in the nose.

Your intent is to belittle. 

Simple as that.


----------



## manifold (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi is a mind reader now.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 15, 2010)

Yep.



99.9% of the time I'm right.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Ravi is a mind reader now.




Wow.  So you're saying you're so shallow reading your posts is the same as reading your mind.  Nice admission.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Mar 15, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> I am not sure about EVERY State in the Union, but I Know that in Colorado, specifically the Largest School District in the State, Jefferson County, that Sex Education begins in the 5th Grade.
> 
> It does NOT include Information for the LGBT "Community".
> 
> ...


Gay is NOT natural!!!!


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Was it Finger Lickin' Good?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Have it Your way.


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

Rinata said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Rinata said:
> ...



_Queer as Folk_ or _Queer Eye for the Straight Guy_ were not shows from the 50's and 60's.

If anything, Rinata, you have it ass backward according to Wikipedia:



> Queer has traditionally meant odd or unusual, though _*modern use often pertains to LGBT*_ (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, intersex and non-normative heterosexual) people. Its usage is considered controversial and underwent substantial changes over the course of the 20th Century with _some LGBT people re-claiming the term as a means of self-empowerment._ The term is still considered by some to be offensive and derisive, and by _others as a re-appropriated term used to describe a sexual orientation and/or gender identity or gender expression that does not conform to heteronormative society_.



Or perhaps you'd like to 





> visit the Queer Alliance and Resource Center (QARC), who we are, what we have done, and what we plan to do! Its a great chance to make some new friends and hang out with some of the greatest queer and ally folks on campus



Queer Berkeley


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Again...
> ...



Now, now...Mani is using the comraderie of a Fellow Traveler.


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



first i have to learn what a wors is.


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



I am the Frito Bandito.


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

del said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



Karma's a bitch.


----------



## Anguille (Mar 15, 2010)

Dr Grump said:


> Another stupid rule IMO...;O)


 I agree. It means we can't tell yo mamma jokes.


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



ay yi yi yi


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

del said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Speedy Gonzales?

Didn't you get caught by INS in Albequerque


----------



## del (Mar 15, 2010)

Samson said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



i took a left and wound up in pizmo beach


----------



## Rinata (Mar 15, 2010)

manifold said:


> Again...
> 
> Why is it not offensive in queer eye for the straight guy and queer as folk, but it is when I say it?



How do you know that word is not offensive to anyone when it is used in queer guy?? Did you take a survey or something??


----------



## Samson (Mar 15, 2010)

Rinata said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Again...
> ...



You could read the Wikipedia definition of Queer, or you could Consult Queer Berkeley's website.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 15, 2010)

del said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



Likey Likey Pizmo


Of course I likey likey Like Like in Oahu also.   

But, this'll date you:

Show us Your Lark!


----------



## Father Time (Mar 16, 2010)

I vote sex ed should not be in 5th grade although if it must a line of 'in rare cases people are attracted to the same sex, this is normal' or something similar is all you need.

Although in all seriousness don't boys and girls still despise each other at that age?

If not I'm fairly certain their libidos are non-existant.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 16, 2010)

AmericanFirst said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > I am not sure about EVERY State in the Union, but I Know that in Colorado, specifically the Largest School District in the State, Jefferson County, that Sex Education begins in the 5th Grade.
> ...



The internet is an example of something not natural.  Would you like to outlaw it based on it being an artificial construction?


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

Who put mal's stupid poll in here


----------



## manifold (Mar 16, 2010)

Rinata said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Again...
> ...



I'll tell you what, if I ever meet you in person I promise not to call you a queer to your face.

We good?


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> AmericanFirst said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



Who has Outlawed Homosexuality aside from Most Arab and Islamic Communities?...

It's Certainly NOT Outlawed here.



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Who put mal's stupid poll in here



Why is the Poll Stupid?, she who Insinuates that by Relation whoever did is also Stupid...



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > i'd like to see proof that 5th graders are taught about sex education first!
> ...



This is for Bodey, since she Decided to Enter this when it was it's own Thread yet Failed to Address the OP because she's a Troll... And Lacking in Courage on this Issue.

Do you Think that Text Discrminates Against you?...



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > i'd like to see proof that 5th graders are taught about sex education first!
> ...


According to this review of the book, you've *ahem* _misrepresented_ its content.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Growing-Changing-Handbook-Preteens-McCoy/dp/061396473X]Amazon.com: Growing And Changing: A Handbook for Preteens (9780613964739): K. McCoy: Books[/ame]


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



I am Willing to Share Documentation with a Mod or Crimson or Gunny... But I will NOT get into Specifics on the Open Boards or with you and your Weak Attempt at Baiting me into Exposing someone that can then be Attack here.

Those are Paragraphs from the Booklet... And that's a Fact.



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

Not according to the link I posted.

I think you are full of shit, but that's nothing new.


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



Here are the only two reviews:



> By A Customer
> 
> This review is from: Growing and changing: a handbook for preteens (Paperback)
> As a health educator, I have used Growing and Changing as the classroom text for Puberty and Human Sexuality units for grades 6-8. The student generated questions reflect similar questions my own students have, making discussion easier. Excellent. - Ph.D. in Maine,
> ...



What about them is different than what Mal claims?

I was surprised that Homosexuality _*does appear*_ in the book: see Index (p. 161)


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Not according to the link I posted.
> 
> I think you are full of shit, but that's nothing new.



You are Wrong, and I can Document Jefferson County's Book of "Growing and Changing" if you would like to be Owned on these Forums in an Official Manner...

Would you Like to Accept the Challenge?...

The Paragraph's above are from the Booklet and that's a Fact.



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> What about them is different than what Mal claims?
> 
> I was surprised that Homosexuality _*does appear*_ in the book: see Index (p. 161)



Here:

*From School Library Journal*

    Grade 3 Up This clearly written handbook on physical and emotional changes in young people fills a real need for material on physical and emotional development which does not, at the same time, get into discussions of sexual activity.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



The Growing and Changing for the 5th Graders in Jefferson County is 62 Pages long...

It was Published in 1988 (1982 earlier was from Memory)... The Foreword by Mabel C. Brelje M.D. starts off as Follows:

_"How I wish I were a fifth grader now"..._



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > What about them is different than what Mal claims?
> ...



Jefferson County's "Growning and Changing" does...

I can Document it, if you are Willing to Accept the Challenge.



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

Go ahead and prove yourself for once, mal.


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Then Bo and you are taking about different books. The copywrite date on the one she references is 2003.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Go ahead and prove yourself for once, mal.



Done it MANY Times... What is your *Specific* Claim about me, Ravi...

Then I will Counter it.



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

Prove that fifth graders in Colorado are taking sex ed.


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



color me stunned.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Prove that fifth graders in Colorado are taking sex ed.



What Form of Prove can I Provide on this Site?...



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

del said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



Not Jeffco's "Growing and Changing" Book, but thanks for being Ignorant of the Discussion and Posting anyway.



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



I'm not talking about ANY book...but you have to wonder about the books on sex ed put out by countries like Uganda, a predominantly Christian country that has made homosexuality itself illegal with the help of American far right christian nuts.


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Prove that fifth graders in Colorado are taking sex ed.
> ...


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



No you were very specific in the book for which you gave the amazon link.

I saw the (MSNBC?) story on Uganda's anti-homosexual movement. Have they enacted the law? The penalties for being queer seem harsh: No Bud-lite Lime for a year, and you gotta shop for jeans at Wal-Mart.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



I gave an Amazon link?   Are you sure you are talking about me?


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Prove that fifth graders in Colorado are taking sex ed.
> ...


None, obviously. Loser.


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



No I'm taking about Ravi, your evul twin.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



She Failed to tell me what she would Require as Proof...

Fail in Deed.



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



I Certainly can... But you have to be Specific, which means you have to Stop Trolling and be Honest for once.



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


 love the pic


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...


Seems rather specific to me. Prove that fifth graders in Colorado are taking sex ed classes.


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Prove that fifth graders in Colorado are taking sex ed.
> ...



For Christssakes.

Denied:1up! Software ()

2007



> In the schools currently, the students are taught about puberty and the human body in fifth grade


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



I have an evul twin???  I've always wanted one of those!!!


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...





yeah, "prove fifth graders are taking sex ed in colorado" certainly is ambiguous in the context of a messageboard. 

weenie


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


Is that in Colorado? If so, you prove mal wrong.


> [FONT=ARIAL, SANS SERIF]In the schools currently, the students are taught about puberty and the human body in fifth grade. This is a science-based curriculum, according to Nancy Costillo, counselor at the middle school. There is no curriculum currently taught in sixth grade.
> 
> Seventh-graders learn about the human body and healthy relationships, *and eighth-graders receive a science-based human-sexuality and STD curriculum.*[/FONT]


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



*Prepare the Goalposts!!!!!*


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



Yes it is in Colorado, but I'm not sure how Mal's assertations about the possibility of homosexuality being taught to 5th graders is at odds with the status quo of teaching "puberty" to 5th graders.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...


Not sure why you'd teach about gays in a class about puberty and the human body. IMO, teaching puberty and the human body is not sex education. In fact when I was in Catholic school we also had a similar class. I'm pretty sure it was in fifth grade because I remember my fifth grade nun teaching it...but it could have been sixth (the last year I went to Catholic school). There was no sex education involved.

They did separate us into boys and girl classes to teach it though, I guess just the thought of puberty could have made us all start banging away on the playground.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



The banging away on the playground I remember in 5th grade was more of the "Our class is gonna kick your class's butt in kickball" variety.


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Well, I don't know why you'd teach about OctoErotica in a class about puberty and the Human Body, however, when I was in the 5th grade I asked about the strange tightness in my pants that Wimmin Holding Squids caused.


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 16, 2010)

OctoErotica?  you mean autoerotica? LOL.

Yeah it's possible to not have "the birds and the bees" explained in a class about the workings of the human body in health class.

health class = the workings of the body (the how)
sex ed = the purpose of the workings of the body (the why)


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Erm.............yeah, well, we don't need to personalize early manifestations of masculine behaviours......

At any rate, preteen pregnancy isn't unheard of:


----------



## Valerie (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...





  Kickball is _masculine behaviouuuur_?


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> OctoErotica?  you mean autoerotica? LOL.
> 
> Yeah it's possible to not have "the birds and the bees" explained in a class about the workings of the human body in health class.
> 
> ...



No, I mean OctoErotica.

(Don't get me started)

Yes, obviously its possible to discuss ANYTHING during a class explaining puberty to 5th graders. 

But the premise of the thread is that many Homosexuals claim to have known about their......"condition" at or before the onset of puberty. Naturally you'd expect these individuals to be confused if presented with puberty as a biological lesson describing it as hormonal changes preparing humans to reproduce. 

They might ask themselves "well, obviously I'm human, and I'm hitting puberty. Will my desire to munch the rugs of other girls prohibit reproduction?"


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

Valerie said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



"gonna kick your class's butt" => agression => masculine => butch => wearing a tux to the prom


----------



## Valerie (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...






Hey Samson, you better cut that long girly hair of yours!


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

Valerie said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Valerie said:
> ...






_I trimmed my nostrils this morning!!!_


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)




----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> Vanquish said:
> 
> 
> > OctoErotica?  you mean autoerotica? LOL.
> ...



Funny, that wasn't what popped into my head....what popped into my head was "Euwwwwwwwwww!"


----------



## Barb (Mar 16, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



Did you fall off the truck, or was there a fire sale? Discrimination based on sexual *preference* is against constitutional law.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



*"Sexual Intercourse brings sperm and egg together. "Making love" is a term that is often used for sexual intercourse, when a man puts his erect penis into a woman's vagina.

These words are appropriate because when a man and woman have sexual intercourse they are warm and loving toward each other.

When a man's penis is in the woman's vagina, semen is ejaculated into the vagina, enter the uterus, and go into the fallopian tubes. IF there is a mature egg in one of the tubes, a sperm may fertilize it.

One purpose of this union of a man and woman, as for all living things, is the reproduction of their species. But for people, a sexual relationship is an emotional as well as a physical expression of love."*

^That's from the 5th Grade Book for Jeffco Students called "Growing and Changing"... Page 35.

So are you now going to tell me that it's NOT SexEd?...

Is this the Technicality that I am going to Watch you Attempt to _Lie_ on?...

*Or how about Page 30, "Attraction to the Opposite Sex"...*

Nothing in this "Growing and Changing" Booklet about "Attraction to the Same Sex"...

Is that Jeffco Discriminating Against Homosexual Children in the 5th Grade?...

Is there such a thing as a "5th Grade Homosexual"?...

A Question that Bodey continues to Evade even as she Posts "Goal Posts" Posts here in her Predictably Trollish and Dumptruck Fashion... 



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Barb said:


> Did you fall off the truck, or was there a fire sale? Discrimination based on sexual *preference* is against constitutional law.



So is the Exclusion of "Attraction to the Opposite Sex" in a SexEd Booklet Discriminating Against Homosexual Children in Education?



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Barb said:
> 
> 
> > Did you fall off the truck, or was there a fire sale? Discrimination based on sexual *preference* is against constitutional law.
> ...



is being stupid painful?


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Vanquish said:
> ...



Then you are a Good Catholic, and St. Peter's Gate will Swing Wide upon your arrival.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Barb said:
> ...



You will have to Answer that for yourself... Apparently your are too Stupid to Realize if it Hurts or not, so I can Help you no further with your Issue.

Thanks for doing what you do best... Trolling. 



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



i'll take that as a no.

thanks


----------



## Barb (Mar 16, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Barb said:
> ...



He seems happy enough...blissful even. 

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to del again.


----------



## Modbert (Mar 16, 2010)

This thread has turned into Frankenstein's monster with a mix of Old Yeller.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...









^Hey Look... The 5th Grade Growing and Changing Book...

Of the 62 Pages, is there one that those who Doubted it Existed want to see?... 



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



just show us the ones that aren't stuck together


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

Dogbert said:


> This thread has turned into Frankenstein's monster with a mix of Old Yeller.



What happens in Mississippi shoud stay in Mississippi.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Not raised Catholic...raised good old East Coast White Anglo-Saxon Protestant....no sex please.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



It's Tragic that you would even go there... Shows what you are though. 

You should be Restricted from Nearing Grade Schools just for Insinuating that.



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



There's More to that Bitterness...

Take it up with God!



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

Dogbert said:


> This thread has turned into Frankenstein's monster with a mix of Old Yeller.



According to J.D. Hayworth, because of legalized gay marriage, Frankenstein's monster would be able to marry Old Yeller.


----------



## Rinata (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



I think you're missing the point. I know the definition in the dictionary. It's the perception of what it means that counts. You don't get that???


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



That seems to contradict what I'd expect to be a more enterprising.......even capitalistic, attitude.


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



yeah, tragic.



poor mal, passive aggression just ain't what it used to be, is it?


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



You are the one with the Sexual Issues... And that Post is a Keeper, Champ...

Nice Fuckin' Job... Stay away from Children... *Seriously.*



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



go fuck yourself.

*vigorously*



piss


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Dogbert said:
> 
> 
> > This thread has turned into Frankenstein's monster with a mix of Old Yeller.
> ...



You don't Look like Frankenstein's Monster... Closer to a Dumptruck with Mullet Envy...

And I Know... Cause someone Made the Mistake of Posting a Pic of you from the Cali Meetup Years ago... 

As for the Dog... I had no Idea.

You are a Freak.



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



ZING!!!!


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



^Projection on Top of it?... You are Worse than I had Imagined, del.

Again, stay away from Children and Schools...

If you Think of those things when Discussing 5th Grade SexEd as a Matter of Policy and Equality for "Homosexual" Children, then you are too much of Risk around Children.

Get Help... Seriously.



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



it's just my latent *mullet envy* shining through....


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



^Exactly what I Expect from a Pervert who Targets Children... Thanks for Verifying it, Bodey.

It's Concerning that there are now (2) Supposed Adults on here who couldn't Avoid this Path...



peace...


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

Rinata said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > Rinata said:
> ...



Yes that's why I quoted from Wikipedia: it discusses the PERCEPTION:



> Queer has traditionally meant odd or unusual, *though modern use often pertains to LGBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, intersex and non-normative heterosexual)* people. Its usage is considered controversial and underwent substantial changes over the course of the 20th Century with _*some LGBT people re-claiming the term as a means of self-empowerment.*_ The term is still considered by some to be offensive and derisive, and _*by others as a re-appropriated term used to describe a sexual orientation and/or gender identity or gender expression that does not conform to heteronormative society.*_




Do _*you*_ get it?

It is _OFTEN USED_: "LGBT people reclaim the term AS A MEANS OF SELF-EMPOWERMENT."

As a result, if you search for Queer websites, you'll find all sorts of Queer Organizations that cater to the LGBT "community."


----------



## manifold (Mar 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...




but but but.....

It's offensive to Rinata, and that's all that should really count.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

Since mal is unable to provide proof, I googled a passage from what he claims is in the book and found exactly two other links to the topic aside from this thread.

Interesting.

http://www.denverradio.net/newforum/viewthread.php?tid=1370&page=1#pid4674

Oh, shoot, I closed the other link...anywho, it was basically the same C&P job from someone called "tha malcontent" and posted in 2003 on a different message board.



One wonders why mal would carry around this handbook and obsess over gays for all these years.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Since mal is unable to provide proof, I googled a passage from what he claims is in the book and found exactly two other links to the topic aside from this thread.
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> ...



I thought that whole schtick sounded familiar.

Oh, you needn't wonder.


----------



## Father Time (Mar 16, 2010)

"This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events."

So much concentrated right wing talking point bullshit can't be good for you.

Do tell me what is immoral about lesbians?


----------



## manifold (Mar 16, 2010)

Father Time said:


> Do tell me what is immoral about lesbians?



Morals are personal and subjective, making this question bogus, irrelevant bait.

You could no sooner objectively explain what is immoral about bank robbery.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Since mal is unable to provide proof, I googled a passage from what he claims is in the book and found exactly two other links to the topic aside from this thread.
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> ...



Ah... That's so Cute... 

Difficult Question for you to be Honest about, isn't it...

Jeffco Teaches 5th Graders from this Booklet...

I would be MORE than Happy to Document this with someone like Crimson or EZ, but I am CERTAINLY NOT Taking your Bait and Exposing my Source on this on the Open Boards so you can Attack...

Go Fuck yourself, Ravi.



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

manifold said:


> Father Time said:
> 
> 
> > Do tell me what is immoral about lesbians?
> ...



Really? 

What is immoral about lesbians?   I don't know...we don't hurt anyone or their rights.  We are not against the law.

What is immoral about bank robbery?   It is stealing and takes the property of other people...and could also be physically dangerous.  It is against the law.


Glad to have cleared up the OBVIOUS differences for  you.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Since mal is unable to provide proof, I googled a passage from what he claims is in the book and found exactly two other links to the topic aside from this thread.
> ...


It's possible the book exists and it's possible some portions of the book are used to instruct fifth graders on puberty. That doesn't mean that the fifth graders are instructed on the ins and outs of intercourse.

You have asserted that sex education is taught to fifth graders in Colorado while offering no proof that it is so.

Until you are able to do so your entire poll is stupid...just like you.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




Pajama-hidin' ?     Anyone else find that as disturbing as I do?


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



Not as Disturbing as your Perverted Ass Targeting Children you Dishonest Hack:

"The Original Gangster of the Pajamahidin"

It's a Variation on this:

Pajamahadeen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Like this:

NOVA Pajamahidin

And you Know it...

Nice Adding the "-" and the "'" in there... Dishonesty Defines you like your Lifestyle Choices do, Bodey.



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> It's possible the book exists



Wow...

What a Waste of Time you are.



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Hey Bodey... Should the Growing and Changing Book in Jeffco be Changed to be Inclusive of Homosexuals?...

Easy Question... It Excludes them now...

Is that UnConstitutional?...

You can do it... Try.



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

Still waiting for your proof, asshole.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Still waiting for your proof, asshole.



Your Denial that the Book even Exists was enough for me to Know that you aren't going to Accept any Proof...

I can give whatever is Needed to an Admin, but I'm not Playing your Trollish Distracting Games any longer, Ravi...



peace...


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 16, 2010)

OctoErotica...you mean like tentacle porn? hahahaha.

As far as the inclination to ask questions about the rug munching, for every kid that's out front and open about sex in an innocent way, I'm betting there are far more that are scared to talk about it.

Add to that that the homosexual ones are being told something that's counter-intuitive and wrong...so I'd cut that question-asking bunch down ....waaaaay down.

I still think that homosexuality isn't a choice. Straight people dont choose to be straight. Every time I see  whats-his-face's avatar I get wicked stiff without thinking


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> OctoErotica...you mean like tentacle porn? hahahaha.
> 
> As far as the inclination to ask questions about the rug munching, for every kid that's out front and open about sex in an innocent way, I'm betting there are far more that are scared to talk about it.
> 
> ...



It's either a Choice or a Defect...

Homosexuals are Designed by Nature and Equipped to Couple with the Opposite Sex.

If their Defiance is NOT a Choice, then NO Defiance is...

In that, you would Advocate for Beastiality... Because "who would Choose that?"... Correct?



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Still waiting for your proof, asshole.
> ...


You're the troll. Provide proof of your assertion that fifth graders are receiving sex ed or stfu. Again, even if the book exists it does not mean intercourse is being taught to fifth graders. 

It really shouldn't be hard for you to prove this, and the fact that you can't speaks volumes about your honesty.

Not to mention that Samson's link proved you wrong.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Without having you in ALL of the Classes in the County, I can NOT Provide the Proof that you Request...

I can tell you that 5th Graders, (who can READ), are Issued this Book...

So they are given the Materials regardless of what may or may not Happen in any given Class by any Given Teacher, or for that Matter in any Given Community in Jeffco...

The Book Excludes Information for "Homosexual" Children, Assuming they Exist, as Bodey Beleives they do.

This is a Fact.

*The Question Remains, is the Exclusion of Homosexuals in this Classroom Text that is Issued to Students in the 5th Grade Discriminatory and UnConstitutional?...*

Yes, I Expanded on it, so that Ravi can Know what this is about without Question after this.

I Quoted the Text, and Ravi took Issue with it's Existence and Access to 5th Graders.

I can Prove it is Given to them, and it says what it says.

I can NOT Prove what Happens in EVERY Class in Jeffco with it.



peace...


----------



## manifold (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Father Time said:
> ...



Laws and morality are two different beasts.  Your attempts to equate the two make you look like an assclown.

What is immoral about stealing?


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



get fucked...repeatedly



piss...


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Since mal is unable to provide proof, I googled a passage from what he claims is in the book and found exactly two other links to the topic aside from this thread.
> ...


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Upset that I didn't say you?... 



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Aside from del's Continued Trolling and Static Running...

*The Question Remains, is the Exclusion of Homosexuals in this Classroom Text that is Issued to Students in the 5th Grade Discriminatory and UnConstitutional?...*



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



not even remotely, i'm actually pretty happy that you've chosen some other mods/admins to PM 40 times a day.

i find the idea of you actually proving anything laughable, hence teh


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 16, 2010)

manifold said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



First of all, dont use the word assclown. It makes everything else you say sound foolish.

Second, laws are ABSOLUTELY a reflection of cultural morality. Murder is immoral and we make it against the law. Stealing is immoral so we make it against the law.

The values and principles we intend to defend MAKE UP OUR LAWS.

Now, in an attempt to be charitable and because I am a lover of the study of language, I will agree that the two are not EXACTLY the same.  There are many shifting values that are not codified. There are transient cultural norms that 

"We hold these truths to be self evident" means "our values dictate that these laws be enacted".

So stop cursing at people when you're debating and realize that laws are a reflection of our values.


----------



## Queen (Mar 16, 2010)

What does the poll have to do with the thread topic? 

5 graders have prom?

When did that start?


----------



## manifold (Mar 16, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



I don't disagree with anything you've said, including the foolish part.

And it's also completely consistent with my initial point that kicked off this tangent: Morals are personal and subjective.

I might not think lesbianism is immoral, but who am I to tell someone else they're wrong to think that it is?  I say that if you think it's immoral, don't do it.

As for the stealing example, it's still an exercise in futility to try to explain why it's _objectively_ immoral.

That is why asking someone who thinks lesbianism is immoral to explain why is a bait filled rat hole.


Oh, and one more thing...


Fuck you!


----------



## Ravi (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> I can Prove it is Given to them, and it says what it says.


Then do it.


----------



## Father Time (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Father Time said:
> ...



Whether or not something is against the law has no bearing on whether or not something is immoral.


----------



## manifold (Mar 16, 2010)

Father Time said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



What, you don't think jay walking is immoral?

You god damned scofflaw!


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 16, 2010)

manifold said:


> Vanquish said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



LOL. If that avatar was you in real life, I'd take you up on that 

As for proof of objective morality...I had enough of that in Catholic school.


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

Queen said:


> What does the poll have to do with the thread topic?
> 
> 5 graders have prom?
> 
> When did that start?



It's my Poll from my Thread... It was Merged...

Now it's a Mess and a Playground for Shitty Dishonest Trolls. 



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

manifold said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Oh my...you don't know, do you?


----------



## manifold (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



I don't understand your question.

IMO, stealing is immoral.  But that doesn't make it an objective truth.

does that clear it up for you?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

manifold said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Stealing is immoral BECAUSE it hurts others.   Glad to have clarified that for you.   I would have thought it was obvious, but maybe that's just me.


----------



## manifold (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Stealing is immoral BECAUSE it hurts others.



Why is it immoral to hurt others?


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

bodecea said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Not Always...



peace...


----------



## actsnoblemartin (Mar 16, 2010)

im confused. if the lesbians were allowed to go to the school prom, did Mississippi think all the women would become lesbian because of allowing a lesbian or bi sexual couple to attend its event?


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 16, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Queen said:
> 
> 
> > What does the poll have to do with the thread topic?
> ...



Manufacturer Suggestion For Removal of Shitty Trolls:

Move your computer out of the room of mirrors.


----------



## actsnoblemartin (Mar 16, 2010)

personally id ban the prom. Not because of gays, but because of the lude and lecivious dancing that goes on, and the pressure to spend money we dont have to look good and have pre marital fornication which especially for teenagers can lead to stds and unwanted pregnancy


----------



## mal (Mar 16, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Queen said:
> ...











peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 16, 2010)

actsnoblemartin said:


> im confused. if the lesbians were allowed to go to the school prom, did Mississippi think all the women would become lesbian because of allowing a lesbian or bi sexual couple to attend its event?



I can understand them thinking that...Concerned Women of America has stated that if we allow gay marriage, women would leave their husbands in droves to marry each other.


----------



## actsnoblemartin (Mar 16, 2010)

I would ban prom, ONLY for a limited time, until we get the lewd dancing under control, and I think gay or straight, we should encourage young people (gay or straight) to be in monogamous relationships before they have sex, so atleast if they wont wait for marriage (which gays should be allowed to have) that atleast they will try to be  safe

it is with regret that I suggested banning prom, but i wouldnt do it forever, and id only do it like a moritorium, state by state, county by county to decide this, to get the prom back to a more romantic setting, which allows a person to bring the partner of their choice, to the event.

is that fair?




bodecea said:


> actsnoblemartin said:
> 
> 
> > im confused. if the lesbians were allowed to go to the school prom, did Mississippi think all the women would become lesbian because of allowing a lesbian or bi sexual couple to attend its event?
> ...


----------



## actsnoblemartin (Mar 16, 2010)

which is ludacris, thats like saying if same sex marriage becomes law, im gonna become gay.

some people are just ass backwards

and i personally apologize that you have to deal with people like that



bodecea said:


> actsnoblemartin said:
> 
> 
> > im confused. if the lesbians were allowed to go to the school prom, did Mississippi think all the women would become lesbian because of allowing a lesbian or bi sexual couple to attend its event?
> ...


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 16, 2010)

actsnoblemartin said:


> im confused. if the lesbians were allowed to go to the school prom, did Mississippi think all the women would become lesbian because of allowing a lesbian or bi sexual couple to attend its event?



I heard it was fear of modernization and if you let two ladies hold hands at dance the internet would be sure to follow.  Then all hell would break loose because people would find out it's not okay to send out invitations titled "Family Reunion/Date Night" and that Jesus never actually said to give all of your money to the old white guys.


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

Queen said:


> What does the poll have to do with the thread topic?
> 
> 5 graders have prom?
> 
> When did that start?





Do you really expect a USMB thread to remain on-topic past page 3?


----------



## Anguille (Mar 16, 2010)

One of the reasons proms are not good for kids is that regardless of whether gay couples are allowed or not, proms promote couple culture. As a society we don't put enough value on people as individuals. We are made to feel we only rate if we have snagged a mate.


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

Anguille said:


> One of the reasons proms are not good for kids is that regardless of whether gay couples are allowed or not, proms promote couple culture._* As a society we don't put enough value on people as individuals. *_We are made to feel we only rate if we have snagged a mate.






Poor Unsnagged Anguille.


----------



## manifold (Mar 16, 2010)

Anguille said:


> One of the reasons proms are not good for kids is that regardless of whether gay couples are allowed or not, proms promote couple culture. *As a society we don't put enough value on people as individuals*. We are made to feel we only rate if we have snagged a mate.



Horsefeathers


----------



## Samson (Mar 16, 2010)

manifold said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> > One of the reasons proms are not good for kids is that regardless of whether gay couples are allowed or not, proms promote couple culture. *As a society we don't put enough value on people as individuals*. We are made to feel we only rate if we have snagged a mate.
> ...



Monty Burns called, and he wants his Expletives back.


----------



## manifold (Mar 16, 2010)

Exxxxcellent!


----------



## actsnoblemartin (Mar 17, 2010)

I dont think thats funny



Samson said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> > One of the reasons proms are not good for kids is that regardless of whether gay couples are allowed or not, proms promote couple culture._* As a society we don't put enough value on people as individuals. *_We are made to feel we only rate if we have snagged a mate.
> ...


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

Anguille said:


> One of the reasons proms are not good for kids is that regardless of whether gay couples are allowed or not, proms promote couple culture. As a society we don't put enough value on people as individuals. We are made to feel we only rate if we have snagged a mate.



I Disagree... I Believe that we have Evolved into a VERY Individualistic Society...

Divorce Rates are only one Indicator among MANY.

This is Probably one of the Most Selfish Times in Man's History.



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

bodecea said:


> actsnoblemartin said:
> 
> 
> > im confused. if the lesbians were allowed to go to the school prom, did Mississippi think all the women would become lesbian because of allowing a lesbian or bi sexual couple to attend its event?
> ...



They are Idiots...

The Concern is Standards and Accepting what is and Teaching Children the same.

(2) Women can't ProCreate and neither can (2) Men...

They NEVER have been Able to, and NEVER will...

Doesn't Mean they should be Stopped from Pairing, but it does Justify NOT Allowing Legal Definitions of things that Reflect our "very Existence" be Changed in a Futile Attempt to give _some_ a False Validation about the Choice they have Made to Defy their Natural Design that they are Incapable of Finding on their own.

Saying that Homosexuals can be "Married" is a Bastardization of Law, Language and what IS.



peace...


----------



## Anguille (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > actsnoblemartin said:
> ...


By that reasoning, women past menopause or men with ED can't marry either.


----------



## Samson (Mar 17, 2010)

Anguille said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...




Yeah, once you cannot reproduce, you oughta just be ground into cattle feed.


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

Anguille said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Nope... Because the Possibility lies ONLY with Opposite Sex Coupling... EVER.

It NEVER Exists with Same Sex, and there is NO Rationalization for Punishing Opposite Sex Couples because they either don't want to have Children at certain Time, or may Possibly be Incapable, just because People who Defy their Natural Design are getting their Feelings Hurt about not being called "Married" in Law Equally to those who can Reflect it.

The Ability to Marry the Flesh ONLY Exists with Man and Woman.



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

Samson said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...







peace...


----------



## Anguille (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



So you agree that denying the right to marry is punishment.


----------



## Samson (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> The Ability to Marry the Flesh ONLY Exists with Man and Woman.
> 
> ...



We need to take you to Juarez, Mexico.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > actsnoblemartin said:
> ...



This is the pinnacle of the homophobic Covenant of Arrogance.  Nobody is trying to "validate" their marriage to you or anyone else.  It is probably shocking but believe or not the purpose is nothing more than equal protection of the law as guaranteed by the Constitution.  When you deny two people laws and rights based on their sex you are guilty of discrimination. Period.  There has never been a single definition of marriage in the US or anywhere else so the appeal to tradition is littered with dishonesty and arbitrary application.


Punks like you are why the Constitution was written.  Take a bow.


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



That Coupling is Equal... Naturally... Hate it all you want, but it's the Truth.

The Defiance of one's Design is a Choice... A Free Choice, but NOT Equal that which is being Defied.

Sorry that makes you Cranky... The Truth is Often Unpleasant for those who are in Denial about Reality. 



peace...


----------



## manifold (Mar 17, 2010)

Mal's well articulated nonsense completely withstanding, I've still never heard of a single legitimate reason to deny marriage to same sex couples.  I simply do not see one lick's worth of harm in it.  Therefore I must conclude that vehement opposition to it is borne out of bigotry, some overt, some latent.


----------



## manifold (Mar 17, 2010)

manifold said:


> Mal's well articulated nonsense completely withstanding, I've still never heard of a single legitimate reason to deny marriage to same sex couples.  I simply do not see one lick's worth of harm in it.  Therefore I must conclude that vehement opposition to it is borne out of bigotry, some overt, some latent.



but for the record this is me being objective and tolerant.

I still firmly believe that homosexuality is a birth defect.


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 17, 2010)

You have no proof of what the purpose of natural design is. You THINK you do..i'm sure based on some religion ...probably Christianity....but you have no proof.

Homosexuality exists in nature. How do you know that nature hasn't incorporated homosexuality as a natural percentage of the population to stop overcrowding or for some other reason. YOU DONT.

I'll ask you again...you dont choose to get a boner when you see a naked women (assuming you do) do you? Do you stop...think about it...then BOING!? Of course not.  You find attractive whomever you find attractive without choosing.

And lets, for a moment, address the issue of turning homosexuals straight. Just because some religion tells you its a perversion and that you should fight the perversion...that doesnt mean that you should impose that on the rest of the country.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 17, 2010)

manifold said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Mal's well articulated nonsense completely withstanding, I've still never heard of a single legitimate reason to deny marriage to same sex couples.  I simply do not see one lick's worth of harm in it.  Therefore I must conclude that vehement opposition to it is borne out of bigotry, some overt, some latent.
> ...




Hypocrisy check:  if someone deemed your existence as a birth defect would you accept being given only half of the Bill of Rights as a response?


----------



## manifold (Mar 17, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



I guess you didn't read my quote within the quote. 

knee-jerk much?


----------



## Samson (Mar 17, 2010)

manifold said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Mal's well articulated nonsense completely withstanding, I've still never heard of a single legitimate reason to deny marriage to same sex couples.  I simply do not see one lick's worth of harm in it.  Therefore I must conclude that vehement opposition to it is borne out of bigotry, some overt, some latent.
> ...



Agreed: like dwarfism, or one of those guys covered with hair.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 17, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...


I'd have to be honest. It would be a struggle for me to want people like mal to have equal rights...his birth defects of extreme homophobia and race baiting frankly make me want to gag.


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

manifold said:


> Mal's well articulated nonsense completely withstanding, I've still never heard of a single legitimate reason to deny marriage to same sex couples.  I simply do not see one lick's worth of harm in it.  Therefore I must conclude that vehement opposition to it is borne out of bigotry, some overt, some latent.



Dismissing my Points don't make them go away, Mani... 

Niether does Employing _Homosexuality as a Pejorative..._
Tire OLD Tactic, that is. 

_"You don't Believe Homosexuals should have Marriage Equal to that of Heterosexuals?... What are you, some kind of Faggot?"..._

^Doesn't Silence me... Bodey's been Trying that one for the better part of a Decade. 

And yes, I Used "Faggot" because what the _Homosexuality as a Pejorative_ Tactic is in a Discussion is an Attack, so it might as well not Dishonestly be Presented as something Polite and Honest, when it Fact it is Calling someone a "Faggot" because they Disagree.

I can Discuss this Issue without Calling Names as I have been...

OR we can Begin the Food Fight.



peace...


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



It doesn't matter if homosexuality is natural or not and basing your position on that conception ultimately leads to a self defeating argument.  Marriage is not natural and is a human invention no different than any of the other millions of inventions.  Clothes are not natural so do you advocate nudism?  Roads and cars are not only not natural but also cause untold amounts of damage to the natural earth.  Are y
ou boycotting those items based on your position of unnatural=unacceptable?  It is not natural for women to wear make-up or shave their pits and legs so do you advocate women cease doing those actions?

Face it, there are countless actions and items you depend on everyday that are not natural yet you use them, like your computer and the internet with great appreciation.  So the natural/unnatural argument is a fail out of pure hypocrisy.  What else you got nancy boy?


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

Ravi said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



And I am NOT for Denying you ANY Rights, Ravi...

That's the Difference between you and I.



peace...


----------



## manifold (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Mal's well articulated nonsense completely withstanding, I've still never heard of a single legitimate reason to deny marriage to same sex couples.  I simply do not see one lick's worth of harm in it.  Therefore I must conclude that vehement opposition to it is borne out of bigotry, some overt, some latent.
> ...





I didn't dismiss your point.  I'm saying it's not a legitimate reason to deny marriage to same sex couples.

As for the rest of your rant, I think it was aimed at someone else.  Or at least I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume as much.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...




Do you support same sex marriage?  Yes or no?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 17, 2010)

Samson said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > The Ability to Marry the Flesh ONLY Exists with Man and Woman.
> ...



Or Singapore.


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



Ah... That way, are ya?... 



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

manifold said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



There is no Reason to Deny Marriage to ANYONE... Regardless of Number, Gender or Relation, if the Standard is Changed at ALL from what it is.



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



No... Redefining Marriage is NOT a Right. 

No Consenting Adult is Denied Marriage in this Country.



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 17, 2010)

manifold said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



probably on his third set of store bought choppers


----------



## del (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Mal's well articulated nonsense completely withstanding, I've still never heard of a single legitimate reason to deny marriage to same sex couples.  I simply do not see one lick's worth of harm in it.  Therefore I must conclude that vehement opposition to it is borne out of bigotry, some overt, some latent.
> ...



when did bigotry become a synonym for *faggot*, asshat?


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...




I didn't ask anything about "redefining marriage."  Do you realize it is impossible to redefine marriage?


But thank you for admitting you favor the Crotch Watch over the Constitution.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Mar 17, 2010)

manifold said:


> Mal's well articulated nonsense completely withstanding, I've still never heard of a single legitimate reason to deny marriage to same sex couples.  I simply do not see one lick's worth of harm in it.  Therefore I must conclude that vehement opposition to it is borne out of bigotry, some overt, some latent.



I've said it before and I'll repeat it again.

Its a STATE issue.  If a state, like mine, decides is cool and legal for same sex couples to marry then its legit.  If another state says no they can't that is legit also.

Its not a federal issue.  The federal government has no constitutional authority to pass a law about marriage one way or the other.

Its pretty simple and I dont get everyone being in 90 pages worth of a tizzy over it.


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Of course you did...

"Same Sex Marriage" would Redefine Marriage to something it's Incapable of being.

"Fundamental to our very Existence and Survival"...

^Marriage as a Right... For One Man and One Woman... As the Court has Ruled.

Amend the Constitution or get the SCOTUS to Vote in your Favor.

Even then, it won't be Marriage...



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Mal's well articulated nonsense completely withstanding, I've still never heard of a single legitimate reason to deny marriage to same sex couples.  I simply do not see one lick's worth of harm in it.  Therefore I must conclude that vehement opposition to it is borne out of bigotry, some overt, some latent.
> ...



Should the Fed NOT have been Involved with States Denying Blacks and Whites to Marry?...

Should it be OK for Alabama to Deny Marriage Based on Race?...



peace...


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...




The amazement never ends.  Bigots are always the least informed.

There are several different legal definitions in the US.

Marriage is no where in the Constitution.


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



All of what you said is Meaningless to what IS.

And Calling me a Bigot doesn't make you any LESS of a Child Molestor... Give that some Thought, Dingleberry... 



peace...


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 17, 2010)

Mal actually makes a good point...about the similarity of race and sexual orientation marriage laws and the authority for both.

Equal Protection is NOT merely a state issue...it's a Federal issue. I could repost my run-down of homosexual marriage and misogenation law...but it'd probably be wasted.

Mal's wrong about everything else, but I'll rep him for acknowledging at least that.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



I'm shocked by your genius.

Ever respond to this post?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 17, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Hey...cut him some slack.  He goes with what he knows.


----------



## manifold (Mar 17, 2010)

bodecea said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



And then some.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 17, 2010)

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2106015-post852.html


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Its not ok but if thats what the state decides is their law then thats the law.   I love this red herring though, it always works like a charm for those who use it.

The feds have no constitutional authority to override state law.  They have however legislated themselves that authority in an unconstitutional way...much like what they are trying to do with the healthcare bill now, legislate themselves to make laws without having to vote on them in both houses.


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 17, 2010)

Plymco...I love you man...but you're wrong.

Go read up on Federal Pre-emption doctrine.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Mar 17, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> Plymco...I love you man...but you're wrong.
> 
> Go read up on Federal Pre-emption doctrine.



Where did that doctrine originate (not in the constitution)


----------



## Samson (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...




Malcontent + Curvelight = Migraine


----------



## Samson (Mar 17, 2010)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Vanquish said:
> 
> 
> > Plymco...I love you man...but you're wrong.
> ...



Plymco + Vanquish = Bicurious


----------



## manifold (Mar 17, 2010)

Ravi + Recherche = Samson


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Mar 17, 2010)

Samson said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> > Vanquish said:
> ...



LOL   I AM from Massachussetts


----------



## Ravi (Mar 17, 2010)

sigh...I miss Recherche


----------



## Samson (Mar 17, 2010)

Ravi said:


> sigh...I miss Recherche




So do I, and I don't know who the fuck it is.


----------



## manifold (Mar 17, 2010)

osd for Recherche


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 17, 2010)

I think Plymkie and I prove that it's possible to really discuss things without all the DARAH-MAH. Well maybe a little is fun 

But seriously though...when you have 2 competing systems, there has to be a rule about which one rules over the other in certain circumstances.

And yes, it's in the constitution  Article VI, section 2 
The Laws of the United States ... shall be the supreme Law of the Land; ... any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding. Solidified even further in Altria Group v. Good.

But then you knew that


----------



## Ravi (Mar 17, 2010)

Oh my, you cannot be serious.


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> ...



It's not a Red Herring... It's a Reality... 



peace...


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Mar 17, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> I think Plymkie and I prove that it's possible to really discuss things without all the DARAH-MAH. Well maybe a little is fun
> 
> But seriously though...when you have 2 competing systems, there has to be a rule about which one rules over the other in certain circumstances.
> 
> ...



 You mean Article 6 Paragraph 2 .

_All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding._

You see they were referring to treaties and debts.  This section states that treaties signed will become the law of the land and those treaties can not violate our constitution.  They even went on at the end of paragraph to to make sure the state laws remained soverign.

Now look to the bill of rights:  "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Under the Constitution, the federal government is a government of express enumerated powers rather than a government of general powers. 

.


----------



## manifold (Mar 17, 2010)

Serious as a vasectomy.


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

manifold said:


> Serious as a vasectomy.



I'd rather have a Bottle in Front of me... 



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Serious as a vasectomy.
> ...



why not?
you've already had the frontal lobotomy


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...





Wasn't meant for you, but I Appreciate the Constant Attention! 



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 17, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



you mistake random acts for attention. 

whatever gets you through the night.


----------



## Modbert (Mar 17, 2010)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-uad6zBG1o]YouTube - Tiny Toon Adventures Theme Song[/ame]


----------



## mal (Mar 17, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



Bitch, you couldn't Ignore me if you Tried... 



peace...


----------



## actsnoblemartin (Mar 17, 2010)

my bottom line, we shouldnt be voting what others can and cant do.

and no marrying is not the same as murder, molestation, or horsies

got it wilber?


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Mar 17, 2010)

actsnoblemartin said:


> my bottom line, we shouldnt be voting what others can and cant do.
> 
> and no marrying is not the same as murder, molestation, or horsies
> 
> got it wilber?



I agree we shouldn't legislate behavior.   hence me being against the health care bill, the government banning fats and salts, the government defining marriage, ect ect ect.


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 17, 2010)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> actsnoblemartin said:
> 
> 
> > my bottom line, we shouldnt be voting what others can and cant do.
> ...



LOL. That's practically 95% of what all laws do...legislate behavior. You can't do this. You can't do that.  You need a more concrete dividing line for your opinion...although there are so many ways that behavior can cross the lines of Equal Protection it's pretty hard to do. Which is why we have the laws we do.

Plymco, as for your reading of the constitution, I have the SCOTUS past and present on my side. I'm fine with that.


----------



## Samson (Mar 17, 2010)

actsnoblemartin said:


> and no marrying is not the same as murder, molestation, or horsies
> 
> got it wilber?


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 18, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



I can't believe tha malcontent would ignore this so I thought a refresher would be helpful since it was missed earlier........just wondering how he addresses the natural problem with his position.


----------



## Father Time (Mar 18, 2010)

Also let's talk about all the unnatural medicine we have in society. Blood transfusions, every type of surgery, artificial limbs and organs, countless drugs, all unnatural.


----------



## mal (Mar 18, 2010)

actsnoblemartin said:


> my bottom line, we shouldnt be voting what others can and cant do.
> 
> and no marrying is not the same as murder, molestation, or horsies
> 
> got it wilber?



My Bottom Line is that a Small Number of People in a Society who Defy their Natural Design of their own Free Will, do NOT have the Right to Insist that 95% of Society Acknowlege this Defiance in Law as Equal to that which it is FACTUALLY and NATURALLY NOT...

Doesn't Mean they should be Kept from Defying it, just that they have no Right to Demand Sanction in Law for their Choice as Equal to that which they Willfully Defy.



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 18, 2010)

Father Time said:


> Also let's talk about all the unnatural medicine we have in society. Blood transfusions, every type of surgery, artificial limbs and organs, countless drugs, all unnatural.



Are you Asking to Marry a Transfusion?...



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 18, 2010)

Father Time said:


> Also let's talk about all the unnatural medicine we have in society. Blood transfusions, every type of surgery, artificial limbs and organs, countless drugs, all unnatural.



And let's not forget that unnatural use of the female breasts.  They are for providing milk for infants only...that is their natural use and should not be used for anything else whatsoever.  It ain't natural.


----------



## L.K.Eder (Mar 18, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Father Time said:
> 
> 
> > Also let's talk about all the unnatural medicine we have in society. Blood transfusions, every type of surgery, artificial limbs and organs, countless drugs, all unnatural.
> ...



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2G5bldFBPY]YouTube - Boob beer can smash[/ame]


----------



## mal (Mar 18, 2010)

bodecea said:


> Father Time said:
> 
> 
> > Also let's talk about all the unnatural medicine we have in society. Blood transfusions, every type of surgery, artificial limbs and organs, countless drugs, all unnatural.
> ...



Idiocy... But I could see you Trying to Marry Breasts... Considering how Abusive God has been.



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 18, 2010)

L.K.Eder said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Father Time said:
> ...



UNNATURAL!!!! That person should NOT be allowed to marry!   Let's create a Constitutional Amendment!


----------



## mal (Mar 18, 2010)

bodecea said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



You want to Marry a Boob that Crush a Can?...



peace...


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 18, 2010)

Can we all just agree that Mal's trolling by now and move on?


----------



## mal (Mar 18, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> Can we all just agree that Mal's trolling by now and move on?



I'M Trolling?... 

Bodey Posts a Video of a Woman Crushing Cans with her Boob and Tries to make an Analogy to Homosexual Marriage and I'M Trolling...

Classic!



peace...


----------



## del (Mar 18, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > L.K.Eder said:
> ...



must.......resist..........obvious.........reply..............

 no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family
 no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family
 no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family, no family

ahh, all better.

carry on


----------



## mal (Mar 18, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Wasn't about her Family, Dingleberry... She'd have to be Married to the Boob for it to be Family...

My God, your Obsessive "Stupid" Screaming IS Projection!

Not to Mention, Family IS Open Game here... I can Show ya!... 



peace...


----------



## manifold (Mar 18, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> Can we all just agree that Mal's trolling by now and move on?



When a thread gets this far, all those keeping it going are trolling.

Get over yourself.


----------



## del (Mar 18, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...





when i think of someone wanting to marry a boob who crushes cans, it's not her.

would you like me to draw you a map or can't you crush cans?


----------



## Samson (Mar 18, 2010)

manifold said:


> Vanquish said:
> 
> 
> > Can we all just agree that Mal's trolling by now and move on?
> ...



YOU'RE TROLLING!!!????


----------



## del (Mar 18, 2010)

Samson said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Vanquish said:
> ...


----------



## Samson (Mar 18, 2010)




----------



## manifold (Mar 18, 2010)

and then some.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 18, 2010)

Vanquish said:


> Can we all just agree that Mal's trolling by now and move on?


Sure. I think this thread is pretty much dead anyway.


----------



## mal (Mar 18, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Vanquish said:
> 
> 
> > Can we all just agree that Mal's trolling by now and move on?
> ...



Well, it would have been... 



peace...


----------



## Anguille (Mar 18, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> > One of the reasons proms are not good for kids is that regardless of whether gay couples are allowed or not, proms promote couple culture. As a society we don't put enough value on people as individuals. We are made to feel we only rate if we have snagged a mate.
> ...



Jesus was single. Was he selfish?


----------



## manifold (Mar 18, 2010)

Anguille said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Anguille said:
> ...



According to some historians he had a family with Mary Magdeline.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 18, 2010)

Anguille said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Anguille said:
> ...


According to some accounts He was gay.


----------



## Anguille (Mar 18, 2010)

manifold said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...


I doubt that a man born of a virgin would be capable of procreation. Sort of the way mules are sterile.


----------



## Anguille (Mar 18, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...


But not allowed to marry.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 18, 2010)

Anguille said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Anguille said:
> ...


Living in sin. But that's kind of a moot point. He was no longer technically Jewish and there were no Christian priests around to perform the ceremony.


----------



## mal (Mar 18, 2010)

Anguille said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Anguille said:
> ...



Yeah, he was on SELFISH Motherfucker!...







As Legend has it... 



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 18, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


Oh good lords....that train left the station a long time ago.   I'm used to it by now.  Just chalk it up to debate inadequacies....or some other kind of inadequacies....


----------



## mal (Mar 18, 2010)

bodecea said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



Your Family wasn't Mentioned, you Dishonest Dumptruck...

Unless a Beer Crushing Boob is what you are Married to. 



peace...


----------



## manifold (Mar 18, 2010)

If this thread was a horse we'd have to shoot it.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 18, 2010)

manifold said:


> If this thread was a horse we'd have to shoot it.



And then grind it up for dog food.


----------



## manifold (Mar 18, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > If this thread was a horse we'd have to shoot it.
> ...



That's all you.

I wouldn't feed this shit to my dog.


----------



## del (Mar 18, 2010)

Echeaux Zulu said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > If this thread was a horse we'd have to shoot it.
> ...



why do you hate dogs?


----------



## del (Mar 18, 2010)

del said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



hmmm, guess it wasn't that obvious.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 18, 2010)

del said:


> Echeaux Zulu said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



I support a pit bull's right to take a poodle to the prom.


----------



## manifold (Mar 18, 2010)

Speaking of pit bulls, did you hear about the 37 yr old from Philly who had her throat ripped out by one of her mother's pit bulls?

Happened about 3 weeks ago.  I was gonna post it, but I didn't want to upset Anguille.  You know how sensitive she is about the subject.


----------



## random3434 (Mar 18, 2010)

This thread is giving PI's meltdown thread a run for it's money.


----------



## Father Time (Mar 18, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> actsnoblemartin said:
> 
> 
> > my bottom line, we shouldnt be voting what others can and cant do.
> ...



Monogamy defies natural design in humans so wouldn't marriage also defy people's natural design (and once again why the hell does being natural count for anything)?


----------



## Terral (Mar 18, 2010)

Hi Army:



US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event ...



I disagree. The entire class did not break the rules, so penalizing everyone for the mistakes of one foolish gay couple is ridiculous IMHO. The gutless cowards running the Mississippi School were willing to listen to the complaints of the entire heterosexual class and their parents to hide their unwillingness to explain things to a pair of gay girls and their parents. 

If heterosexually oriented school leaders are that frightened of a couple of gay girls, then no wonder the homosexual deviants are straying so far from the closet ...

GL,

Terral


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 18, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Father Time said:
> 
> 
> > Also let's talk about all the unnatural medicine we have in society. Blood transfusions, every type of surgery, artificial limbs and organs, countless drugs, all unnatural.
> ...



You have continued to ignore the counterpoints to your naturally false argument so it appears you have no real conviction on this issue.


----------



## mal (Mar 18, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Father Time said:
> ...



I have Ignored Nothing...



peace...


----------



## bodecea (Mar 18, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Father Time said:
> ...



*touches nose, points to Curvelight, and nods.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 18, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...




coughs okay buddy.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 18, 2010)

Father Time said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > actsnoblemartin said:
> ...




I gotta say bullshit.  The terms "nature" and "natural" are designed to mask our collective ignorance of what we are surrounded by yet do not grasp on any level of authority.  I used those terms in response to posts simply to show what is deemed unnatural is insufficient for evidence of condemnation but to me nature does not exist.  

Saying monogamy is not natural is an attempt, albeit not consciously, to assuage the guilt we feel for sexual fantasies with those we are not committed to.  In a healthy relationship both parties should be able to acknowledge physical attractions to others without striking a tsunami of insecurities under the thin veneer of trust.  I too once believed it was natural to want to pierce every rosy garden I walked by but then realized it wasn't about sex as much as it was about affirmation.  The first ten years or so of dating I was never faithful and loved relying on the "natural" inclinations until I manned up and admitted I was really just a selfish asshole seeking a scapegoat.  

Prodigies are said to be "naturally" gifted but what is really being said is:

"Nobody can explain the ability of symphony writing 12 year old."

Our choices are our own but we often lease out the most embarrassing ones.


----------



## Samson (Mar 18, 2010)

Anguille said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Anguille said:
> ...



Well, if he returned from the dead, I'd expect erectile dysfuction was the least of his worries.


----------



## JD_2B (Mar 18, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> 
> Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper
> 
> ...



Technically, it is a felony to discriminate against those girls based on them going as a same gender couple, because they are a state funded school. Federal laws are in place to eradicate this kind of practice. 

PLUS if republicans are hellbent on claiming that underage teenagers cannot consent to SEX then how can any republican take a sexual orientation claim made by ANY minor seriously?? I am not saying that because I want to see the age of consent be lowered, either, I am just saying it because in principle, it is illogical.


----------



## xsited1 (Mar 18, 2010)

US Army Retired said:


> Mississippi School does the right thing: Bans prom due to Lesbian couple attending.



What a great thread title!


----------



## mal (Mar 19, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



You should get that Checked... 



peace...


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 19, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



That was my attempt to be polite so since it was wasted let me say what I should have said.  You're a lying shitbag.


----------



## mal (Mar 19, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...



Wow... You took that Poorly... I even 'd at ya...

You have Issues.



peace...


----------



## Vanquish (Mar 19, 2010)

Samson said:


> Anguille said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



If you believe that bit of untruth. The rising from the dead myth is entirely derivative from other cultures and has been shown to be, at the very least, unlikely.

If you care to read up, here you go: here



JD_2B said:


> US Army Retired said:
> 
> 
> > This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the  same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.
> ...



Sex discrimination gets intermediate scrutiny...not strict scrutiny like race if memory serves. That is to say it must be shown that the law or policy being challenged furthers an important government interest in a way that is substantially related to that interest. This applies to laws of course.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 19, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...




What do my issues have to do with you ignoring posts?


----------



## Ravi (Mar 19, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...


Nothing. Just his weaselly way of getting out of answering you. Notice he still hasn't provide the "proof" he claims he has that 5th graders in Colorado are taking sex ed.

Back on topic...the girl in the story just got a $30,000 scholarship from Ellen Degeneres.


----------



## mal (Mar 19, 2010)

Ravi said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



Fly out to Denver... I will put you up for the Night @ a Nice Hotel, buy you Dinner, and then I can take you to a Jeffco Elementary and Illustrate it for you in Person.

Other than that, I will NOT be Posting a Video that I will NOT make of a Class that is being Instructed from the Jeffco "Growing and Changing" Book.

If you can't Figure this out on your own, Ravi, you are Beyond Help in the Honesty Department.



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 19, 2010)

http://www.jeffcopublicschools.org/academics/grades/documents/Elementary/Grade5_YAAG_09_10.doc

^It's REALLY Not that Hard to Find on your own, Ravi...

Stop Trolling... Try something New. 



peace...


----------



## Samson (Mar 19, 2010)

Regardless of the redundently ridiculous ramblings about the existance of sex-ed, or puberty-ed, or whatever South Park Cartoon Land Mal inhabits, the popular opinion is that Homosexuality shouldn't be 'splained to 5th graders.


----------



## mal (Mar 19, 2010)

Samson said:


> Regardless of the redundently ridiculous ramblings about the existance of sex-ed, or puberty-ed, or whatever South Park Cartoon Land Mal inhabits, the popular opinion is that Homosexuality shouldn't be 'splained to 5th graders.



I Linked Jeffco Directly... 



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 19, 2010)

Samson said:


> Regardless of the redundently ridiculous ramblings about the existance of sex-ed, or puberty-ed, or whatever South Park Cartoon Land Mal inhabits, the popular opinion is that Homosexuality shouldn't be 'splained to 5th graders.


That's fine and that's probably why it isn't taught to fifth graders.

On a side note, my kids knew what "gay" meant when they were in kindergarten. Not because any adult told them about it...just school yard gossip.


----------



## Ravi (Mar 19, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> http://www.jeffcopublicschools.org/academics/grades/documents/Elementary/Grade5_YAAG_09_10.doc
> 
> ^It's REALLY Not that Hard to Find on your own, Ravi...
> 
> ...


All that does, and I found that days ago, is say a course called Growing and Changing is part of the class. It doesn't say that sex ed is...once again you've failed.


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 19, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > CurveLight said:
> ...




You trying to criticize someone else's honesty is like Bush offering his expertise on Foreign Policy to other nations.  Basically, you're so full of shit you fart through your nose.


----------



## mal (Mar 19, 2010)

Ravi said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.jeffcopublicschools.org/academics/grades/documents/Elementary/Grade5_YAAG_09_10.doc
> ...



Again... And you can have this Forum and ANY Mod/Admin Document this Post...

I will put you up in Denver and Feed you WELL, and then have you Sit in on a Class in Jeffco for it.

After this, Ravi... *Shut the FUCK UP, you Dishonest Troll.*

Bet... 

They have my Paypal Account.

*You Suck THAT MUCH...*

You Ruin this Place for More People than you Possibly Entertain.

Won't be the First Time I have Contributed to USMB, either. 



peace...


----------



## Ravi (Mar 20, 2010)




----------



## mal (Mar 20, 2010)

It's your Loss, ya Fuckin' Troll!... 

That was a One Time Offer. 



peace...


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 20, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...



Sounds like a lot of work so you can have an excuse to get close to fifth graders.  Why don't you just become a janitor then resurrect a Nightmare on Elm Street?


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 20, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> It's your Loss, ya Fuckin' Troll!...
> 
> That was a One Time Offer.
> 
> ...



You've ignored quite a few posts that clearly shows your position is bullshit so your calling others a troll is purty stoopid.  At least you are consistent in that area.


----------



## mal (Mar 20, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Ah... That's Sweet...

You don't get much Attention in Real Life, do you... 



peace...


----------



## mal (Mar 20, 2010)

CurveLight said:


> tha malcontent said:
> 
> 
> > It's your Loss, ya Fuckin' Troll!...
> ...



I have NOT...

Link it, or Shut the Fuck up.



peace...


----------



## CurveLight (Mar 20, 2010)

tha malcontent said:


> CurveLight said:
> 
> 
> > tha malcontent said:
> ...




http://www.usmessageboard.com/2106015-post852.html#


----------



## Anguille (Mar 20, 2010)

I think Ravi should call mal's bluff and take him up on the offer.


----------

