Leave it to Texas republicans to ban books. Free speech is circumstantial, apparently.

[scruffy]

I have a bachelor’s in it so I doubt it. If he had that degree or higher, he wouldn’t be voting Republican lol

You sure are awful stupid for someone with a degree in psychology.

I guess they didn't teach you elementary logic in college, hm?

First you said if it isn't is the DSM it can't be abnormal. That's a pretty stupid thing to say.

Then you accused me of being a Republican, which is even dumber.

And thirdly you're not even a very good psychologist. This is politics, learn how to influence people. Slinging mud is so 90's.

 

[Billy000]

You sure are awful stupid for someone with a degree in psychology.

I guess they didn't teach you elementary logic in college, hm?

First you said if it isn't is the DSM it can't be abnormal. That's a pretty stupid thing to say.

Then you accused me of being a Republican, which is even dumber.

And thirdly you're not even a very good psychologist. This is politics, learn how to influence people. Slinging mud is so 90's.

Lol yeah dude. If it isn’t in the DSM then, no, it isn’t considered abnormal. YOU may think it is abnormal, but it doesn’t fit as being clinical or abnormal within that context. Also, I’m definitely not a psychologist lol

 

[Papageorgio]

Your perception of it being abnormal does not mean the field thinks it is abnormal. In order for something to be considered a disorder, it must either cause harm to the person with it or anyone else around that person. Simply being gay does not cause harm to those around them. Simply being gay does not cause harm to the individual since many gays are content with their sexual preference. There would also need to be a perpetual pattern of harm as well.

And no, you being too childish to tolerate any gay people does not count.

I tolerate homosexuals, Don't care what they like sexually, not my business. That doesn't mean we can have explicit books in the school library, gay, straight, they just don't belong. Catcher in the Rye, Grapes of Wrath has been removed as Huck Finn has for racial overtures.

 

[Billy000]

I tolerate homosexuals, Don't care what they like sexually, not my business. That doesn't mean we can have explicit books in the school library, gay, straight, they just don't belong. Catcher in the Rye, Grapes of Wrath has been removed as Huck Finn has for racial overtures.

Take the explicit books out. I don’t care. What’s dumb is the outrage over there simply being a gay character in the book.

 

[Papageorgio]

Take the explicit books out. I don’t care. What’s dumb is the outrage over there simply being a gay character in the book.

I'm not outraged over any of it. Why does a character need to be gay or straight? Most stories, male and female matter however being gay or straight would seem irrelevant but I really am not that close to the subject.

Why is the left against the N word in books and ban them for a word? I don't get that either. The left gets outraged over that and statues. Just bizarre on both sides of the fence.

 

[MarathonMike]

Is that what the OP proposed?

Presenting Gay characters in books is IMO sexually ORIENTED material. It is neither good nor bad to be Gay IMO. It is not pornographic, but it is still inappropriate material for underage children.

 

[Dragonlady]

Our children need to be shielded from the perversions of humanity you evil fags promote.

Your children are the most perverted offspring America has every raised because you've made normal sex completely off limits to them. Young girls in Christian schools are giving blow jobs and engaging in anal sex because they pledge to remain "virgins" until marriage. Normal sex is forbidden, but anal and oral doesn't county.

This is the law of unintended consequences. If any boy in high school had suggested either oral or anal sex to any girl of my generation, she would have slapped his face and walked home. Your young Christian girls are doing it to remain "virgins" until marriage.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

This is what happens when you put the shiny side inward.

Or perhaps she's just assuming that because she was a sleazy whore with no morals in her youth, that that's what all young women are like.

​

Your children are the most perverted offspring America has every raised because you've made normal sex completely off limits to them. Young girls in Christian schools are giving blow jobs and engaging in anal sex because they pledge to remain "virgins" until marriage. Normal sex is forbidden, but anal and oral doesn't county.

​

This is the law of unintended consequences. If any boy in high school had suggested either oral or anal sex to any girl of my generation, she would have slapped his face and walked home. Your young Christian girls are doing it to remain "virgins" until marriage.​

 

[scruffy]

Your children are the most perverted offspring America has every raised because you've made normal sex completely off limits to them. Young girls in Christian schools are giving blow jobs and engaging in anal sex because they pledge to remain "virgins" until marriage. Normal sex is forbidden, but anal and oral doesn't county.

This is the law of unintended consequences. If any boy in high school had suggested either oral or anal sex to any girl of my generation, she would have slapped his face and walked home. Your young Christian girls are doing it to remain "virgins" until marriage.

This ^^^ is right up there with Pizza Gate.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Is there a list of books easily accessible of the books they want banned, along with the statutes that they are making to ban the books?

I'm curious if they are actually banning the books because they are about homosexuality, or if in fact they are explicit material. I'd also be interested in finding out if there are other books dealing with homosexuality that are still allowed in the schools.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

This ^^^ is right up there with Pizza Gate.

Rather dull, actually, compared with LIE-Sistrata who has not been here for a while. It's schtick consisted of claiming that most Christian churches were engaged in grooming young girls to be sold as sex slaves to older men. Dragonlady seems to be a less extreme version of LIE-Sistrata; well on the path away from sanity, but not quite so far, yet.

 

[dudmuck]

Take the explicit books out. I don’t care. What’s dumb is the outrage over there simply being a gay character in the book.

 

[Seymour Flops]

How is a book featuring a mom and a dad highlighting a sexual preference any less than a book featuring same sex parents?

It's not, and I don't think that is what parents would object to. The Romona Quimby series had a male dad and a female mom and they talked about hard time when dad was unemployed. No mention of their sexual activity at all. If a modern book happened to have same sex married people, but did not go on and on about how "brave" they are, or be as explicit as the book I talked about upthread, I doubt they would object.

But the left has to be much more heavy handed than that.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I am straight. Nobody interfered with my development as a young child. I don’t dislike gay people but their lifestyle holds no appeal for me.

I really liked my first grade teacher and had she taught all about LGBTQIA and how boys can be girls and girls can be boys I might be a member of that community today.

Fortunately that didn’t happen. I was never groomed.

So you’re saying that as a straight person, sucking a dick was never appealing to you?
Interesting.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

LMAO! WTF do you think gay means or is? It’s purely sexual you moron. Just the word gay means man who sucks dick. If you didn’t want your reader to know this male character sucks dicks you wouldn’t have mentioned he was gay.

You fucking people are retarded.

Interesting. I don’t think sexual acts have anything to do with it any more than it does when talking about straight people. Do you imagine the sex lives of everyone you meet?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The natural order is that homosexuals are ostracized from society. It's been that way for thousands of years.

Simply not true.

 

[scruffy]

Simply not true.

Bullshit

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It's not, and I don't think that is what parents would object to. The Romona Quimby series had a male dad and a female mom and they talked about hard time when dad was unemployed. No mention of their sexual activity at all. If a modern book happened to have same sex married people, but did not go on and on about how "brave" they are, or be as explicit as the book I talked about upthread, I doubt they would object.

But the left has to be much more heavy handed than that.

It is the right that is being exceptionally heavy handed. Certainly the left is not passing “ must say gay” laws.

 

[scruffy]

It is the right that is being exceptionally heavy handed. Certainly the left is not passing “ must say gay” laws.

Oh yeah? They're suing for improper use of pronouns, though.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

So republicans are concerned books are “pornographic” if they have gay characters in it. There doesn’t have to be sex or nudity in these books of course. They are simply pornographic for having gay characters lol. Republicans have the emotional maturity of 8th graders. This is ironic, of course, because they are pretending to they want to protect kids of such an age.

Think about this critically, republicans. Let’s say a kid’s book has a gay character in it who is fully clothed through out and a child read it. Do you really think with any rationality that this would turn the kid gay?

Your right of course but you just have such a knack for seeming to be so wrong when expressing yourself [which I suppose is why freedom of speech is probably so important to you ]
Heck I remember when the argument was over the pledge of allegiance being banned cuz some commie said that the words "under God" made it a prayer...but righteous indignation like yours saved the day billy...keep up the good work on book banning and our right to say "One Nation Under God" in school...