Judge rules in favor of LGBT and against Parents

[BS Filter]

Naw, I'll just report you to the mods.

Go ahead. I'll stand by my opinion. Go intimidate some naive college kids. Getting banned a few days is worth being honest about filth like you.

 

[JoeB131]

Most kids will never have gay sex.....

Most kids will never use evolution or algebra, or us history, or 95% of what they learn in HS or college.

Actually, about 20% of them will have gay sex and 10% of them will be gay.
What they will have to learn is how to deal with gay people as members of this society. This is why you want to teach them that gay people are a thing and there's nothing wrong with that, as Seinfield used to say.

Almost all of them will have a need to know how to swim, drive, balance a check book, negotiate a car loan, open a bank account, etc etc. Odd the schools dont teach any of that shit.

They taught driver's ed and swimming at my school.
I agree, we do need more practical life skills courses.

One of those practical life skills is "how not to be a bigot even if your parents are."

Irrelevant.

Not at all. The same kinds of arguments were made when sex ed was introduced in the 1950's. Oh, it would lead to immorality. In fact,

Here's the thing. Most parents really don't know how to talk to their kids about sex. Which means they are getting the wrong ideas from other kids who are just as clueless.

Cool story. They shouldnt be allowed to mandate any instruction the parents feel is inappropriate. There's nothing you're going to say that's going to convince me that a parents right to raise their children should be superseded by the Government.

I guess not... thank goodness people like you don't get a say in the matter.

These parents aren't dictating policy for anyone but THEIR KID you moron. The lawsuit didn't ask for the course of instruction to be stopped. It didn't ask for anyone else's kid to be taken out of the class dd it?

No, but that still doesn't make it okay.

 

[JoeB131]

So you're living in the 1600s? Cool.

The only difference between the 1600's and now is that we separated church and state so you guys aren't killing each other over whether or not Jesus was made of wafers.

 

[BS Filter]

The only difference between the 1600's and now is that we separated church and state so you guys aren't killing each other over whether or not Jesus was made of wafers.

Yes, people can be ignorant, even many who call themselves Christians. For example, look at Pelosi and Biden. They claim to be Christians and support abortion. Go figure. What they do and believe doesn't mean Christianity is bad. It means they're deceived. Like you.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, people can be ignorant, even many who call themselves Christians. For example, look at Pelosi and Biden. They claim to be Christians and support abortion. Go figure. What they do and believe doesn't mean Christianity is bad. It means they're deceived. Like you.

Not at all.

Point out to me in the Bible ANYWHERE that abortion is specifically prohibited.
You won't find it.

In fact, opposition to abortion is a relatively recent development in Christiandom.

Now, you could argue that Pelosi and Biden aren't good Catholics, because they disagree with their church's teachings about abortion. But....

Like Americans overall, Catholics vary in their abortion views, with regular Mass attenders most opposed

About three-quarters of U.S. Catholics (76%) say abortion should be illegal in some cases but legal in others.

www.pewresearch.org

Overall, about three-quarters of U.S. Catholics (76%) say abortion should be illegal in some cases but legal in others. Just one-in-ten say abortion should be illegal in all cases, with no exceptions, while a similar share (13%) take the position that abortion should be legal in all cases, without exceptions.

About seven-in-ten Catholics say abortion should be legal if the pregnant woman’s life or health is threatened (69%), and two-thirds say it should be legal if the pregnancy is the result of rape (66%). At the same time, roughly two-thirds of Catholics say how long a woman has been pregnant should be a factor in determining abortion’s legality (63%), with larger shares opposing abortions in the late stages of a pregnancy than in the early stages.

 

[BS Filter]

Actually, about 20% of them will have gay sex and 10% of them will be gay.
What they will have to learn is how to deal with gay people as members of this society. This is why you want to teach them that gay people are a thing and there's nothing wrong with that, as Seinfield used to say.


They taught driver's ed and swimming at my school.
I agree, we do need more practical life skills courses.

One of those practical life skills is "how not to be a bigot even if your parents are."




Not at all. The same kinds of arguments were made when sex ed was introduced in the 1950's. Oh, it would lead to immorality. In fact,

Here's the thing. Most parents really don't know how to talk to their kids about sex. Which means they are getting the wrong ideas from other kids who are just as clueless.



I guess not... thank goodness people like you don't get a say in the matter.



No, but that still doesn't make it okay.

But it's okay for queers to be Christophobic bigots, huh. Some people get a pass.

 

[BS Filter]

Not at all.

Point out to me in the Bible ANYWHERE that abortion is specifically prohibited.
You won't find it.

In fact, opposition to abortion is a relatively recent development in Christiandom.

Now, you could argue that Pelosi and Biden aren't good Catholics, because they disagree with their church's teachings about abortion. But....

Like Americans overall, Catholics vary in their abortion views, with regular Mass attenders most opposed

About three-quarters of U.S. Catholics (76%) say abortion should be illegal in some cases but legal in others.

www.pewresearch.org

Overall, about three-quarters of U.S. Catholics (76%) say abortion should be illegal in some cases but legal in others. Just one-in-ten say abortion should be illegal in all cases, with no exceptions, while a similar share (13%) take the position that abortion should be legal in all cases, without exceptions.

About seven-in-ten Catholics say abortion should be legal if the pregnant woman’s life or health is threatened (69%), and two-thirds say it should be legal if the pregnancy is the result of rape (66%). At the same time, roughly two-thirds of Catholics say how long a woman has been pregnant should be a factor in determining abortion’s legality (63%), with larger shares opposing abortions in the late stages of a pregnancy than in the early stages.

View attachment 835032

Deliberately killing an innocent human is murder. It's a commandments. You shall not murder. The rest of your post about Christians previously tolerated abortion is bullshit.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Point out to me in the Bible ANYWHERE that abortion is specifically prohibited.
You won't find it.

It's one of the Ten Commandments, one of the most fundamental of all the rules that God gave the Hebrews.

Exodus 20:13: Thou shalt not kill.

 

[JoeB131]

But it's okay for queers to be Christophobic bigots, huh. Some people get a pass.

I'm sorry, what "Christophobic bigots" are you talking about? It seems to me, given the history of Christians of murdering people for doing things their Imaginary Sky Friend doesn't like, that's a pretty reasonable fear.

Deliberately killing an innocent human is murder. It's a commandments. You shall not murder. The rest of your post about Christians previously tolerated abortion is bullshit.

Where does it specifically say that about abortion?

Exodus 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

It's one of the Ten Commandments, one of the most fundamental of all the rules that God gave the Hebrews.

Exodus 20:13: Thou shalt not kill.

It says "Thous shall not murder".. nothing in there about abortion.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It says "Thous [sic] shall not murder".. nothing in there about abortion.

Abortion is murder. It is the killing of a human being, in the absence of any circumstances that would justify such a killing.

 

[BS Filter]

I'm sorry, what "Christophobic bigots" are you talking about? It seems to me, given the history of Christians of murdering people for doing things their Imaginary Sky Friend doesn't like, that's a pretty reasonable fear.



Where does it specifically say that about abortion?

Exodus 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.


It says "Thous shall not murder".. nothing in there about abortion.

You're still confused. People's sins isn't Christianity. You want to demonize Christianity because of People's sins. That's ridiculous.

Abortion is murder. Period.

 

[JoeB131]

Abortion is murder. It is the killing of a human being, in the absence of any circumstances that would justify such a killing.

Except, abortion was never treated like murder, even when it was illegal.

Even the bible didn't consider causing a fetus to die to be the same as murder. the Mosaic law, you could be stoned for picking up sticks on the Sabbath, but punching a woman and causing a miscarriage was only a fine.

Heck, the Bible didn't even count newborns as people. Babies weren't counted in the Census until they were a year old. (Because the infant mortality rate back in the Bible Days was 50%, so people didn't get attached to them.)

You're still confused. People's sins isn't Christianity. You want to demonize Christianity because of People's sins. That's ridiculous.

Except these people weren't "sinning", they were doing what their Religious Leaders told them to do because "God Wills It". (The actual rallying cry of the crusades, which were 200 years of warfare against other people with different beliefs.)

 

[HeyNorm]

Nope. Nobody is going to go out and be gay because they saw a story about a gay kid once.
Frankly, if anything, that story would probably scare kids away from gay sex if that's not what they are into.



If we catered education to the least common denominator, we won't teach these kids anything.
Evolution? Offends my religious beliefs!
Sex education. Offends my religious beliefs!
Teaching history? Offends my whiteness.

Evolution? Joe, evolution only occurs because of sexual activity between Men and Women. Indeed, that should be taught in schools. That heterosexuality is indeed necessary. All other sexual encounters are not.

 

[JoeB131]

Evolution? Joe, evolution only occurs because of sexual activity between Men and Women. Indeed, that should be taught in schools. That heterosexuality is indeed necessary. All other sexual encounters are not.

Perhaps homosexuality is necessary as a stop against overpopulation. There is science to support this in that when they gave mice unlimited food but limited space, some of them turned gay and stopped reproducing.

 

[HeyNorm]

Perhaps homosexuality is necessary as a stop against overpopulation. There is science to support this in that when they gave mice unlimited food but limited space, some of them turned gay and stopped reproducing.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. How friggen gay are you. Constant deflection and conflation is all you got?

 

[HeyNorm]

Perhaps homosexuality is necessary as a stop against overpopulation. There is science to support this in that when they gave mice unlimited food but limited space, some of them turned gay and stopped reproducing.

Joe, one of your biggest arguments on the subject of banning sexually explicit gay books in schools has been, and you’ve repeated it over and over and over again, is that you can’t condition someone to become gay, but then you produce evidence that you absolutely can, when you said:

“

There is science to support this in that when they gave mice unlimited food but limited space, some of them turned gay and stopped reproducing.”

Case closed.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe, one of your biggest arguments on the subject of banning sexually explicit gay books in schools has been, and you’ve repeated it over and over and over again, is that you can’t condition someone to become gay, but then you produce evidence that you absolutely can, when you said:

Except the two things are in no way related.
Perhaps there is a latent aspect of the human brain that reacts to overcrowding, but the point is, it's latent. It triggers from environment, not exposure to books.

 

[HeyNorm]

Except the two things are in no way related.
Perhaps there is a latent aspect of the human brain that reacts to overcrowding, but the point is, it's latent. It triggers from environment, not exposure to books.

You crack me up Joe.

Books are not part of the human environment now?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

How friggen gay are you.

See all the posts where he obsesses over my “magic underwear”.

Yes, he's pretty damn “gay”, his efforts to hide it, his efforts to project it on others, notwithstanding.

 

[JoeB131]

You crack me up Joe.

Books are not part of the human environment now?

You really live in some fantasy world where a kid went gay because he read it in a book once. Or maybe the mere presence of the book influenced him without reading it.

See all the posts where he obsesses over my “magic underwear”.

Yes, he's pretty damn “gay”, his efforts to hide it, his efforts to project it on others, notwithstanding.

My wife would disagree, but man, I'm sorry you can't see how weird Magic Underwear sounds to normal people.