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

Actually, in nature, animals with birth defects are usually left to die. We make all sorts of efforts to preserve and protect those born with birth defects.

So I'm not sure what your point is, here, exactly.
Faggots:
”I like c@ck in my ass and gargling man-gravy because I have a birth defect. Please coddle me and think what I do is cool.”
 
Actually, in nature, animals with birth defects are usually left to die. We make all sorts of efforts to preserve and protect those born with birth defects.

So I'm not sure what your point is, here, exactly.
You are a special kind of idiot. Something being natural doesn't make it desirable. I think even you can understand that. Smallpox is natural. Do you think that means we should infect everyone with it?
 
Faggots:
”I like c@ck in my ass and gargling man-gravy because I have a birth defect. Please coddle me and think what I do is cool.”

You do realize that more straight people are having anal and oral sex than gay people, right?

You are a special kind of idiot. Something being natural doesn't make it desirable. I think even you can understand that. Smallpox is natural. Do you think that means we should infect everyone with it?

Actually, we kind of do. What do you think vaccinations are?

The point is you guys are claiming that homosexuality is "unnatural" or "against God's plan". When in fact, it occurs quite a bit in the natural world.

What is unnatural is monogamy. In nature, the strongest are the ones who try to mate with as many partners as they can... that strengthens the species.
 
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?


Billy, who screamed to ban Mark Twain?

/ Thread
 
Maybe to make them fully fleshed out.

As someone who writes fiction and creates fictional characters, ideally, you want all aspects of that character fleshed out. What his backstory is, what motivates him, and so on.
Do you include all the female characters breast size? No you don’t because that would be stupid. Just like saying he’s a faggot is stupid.
 
Actually, we kind of do. What do you think vaccinations are?

Vaccinations do not give people small pox, dmbass.

The point is you guys are claiming that homosexuality is "unnatural" or "against God's plan". When in fact, it occurs quite a bit in the natural world.

I'm an atheist, so I don't claim that. Like I said, being natural doesn't make it good.

What is unnatural is monogamy. In nature, the strongest are the ones who try to mate with as many partners as they can... that strengthens the species.

Mass warfare because the majority of males are left without a mate doesn't not strengthen the species.
 
I'm an atheist, so I don't claim that. Like I said, being natural doesn't make it good.

Nor does it make it bad.

Okay, give you the conservative test. Homosexuality is bad because ______ (valid answers do not include variations on "I think it's Icky" and "God says it's bad".)


Mass warfare because the majority of males are left without a mate doesn't not strengthen the species.

Again, most animal species also don't engage in war... that's another "human" thing.

Makes you wonder if we are really the advanced species.

Vaccinations do not give people small pox, dmbass.
No, it just simulates smallpox to give your body an immunity, dummy.

Another one who thinks Jenny McCarthy is an expert.

1650225624223.png
 
Nor does it make it bad.

Okay, give you the conservative test. Homosexuality is bad because ______ (valid answers do not include variations on "I think it's Icky" and "God says it's bad".)

I didn't say that being natural made it bad. However, you tried to claim that being natural made it good.
Again, most animal species also don't engage in war... that's another "human" thing.

Makes you wonder if we are really the advanced species.
Of what relevance is that?

No, it just simulates smallpox to give your body an immunity, dummy.

Another one who thinks Jenny McCarthy is an expert.

View attachment 632052
Irrelevant, of course.
 
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?

1650243567267.png


The above is from one of the books you speak of. I found a version with blurring so it would not run afoul of USMB rules against pornographic posts. The "uncensored" version that you want school children to be encouraged to check out has no blurring and is very explicit.

I won't link to it, but if you google "Gender Queer" and select images, you can see the uncensored version. I hope there will not be school children in the room with you when you do.
 

Forum List

Back
Top