Progressive Va. School Refuses To Play Sports With Icky Christian Kids

[mdk]

I didnt dodge it - in FACT, I elaborated on why the two were made analogous.......they're both dispositions outside of your conscious control. Race and sexual attraction.

Unless you're going to tell me that your brain can tell your dick to get a boner for a tree if you really really wanted it to.

Sir, there are people who have sex with livestock. Are you telling me that they are born that way and there was no conscious effort on their part to get the required erection to have sex with a farm animal?

Yes, I'm telling you that there's likely a malfunction in their brain or hormones and that their "boner" for Cows is not voluntary -

Can you voluntarily get turned on by a cow?

THATS FUGGIN WEIRD!

That's pretty judgemental of you, and if we take that to its logical conclusion we must conclude that YOU believe that there is something wrong with the brain of a homosexual and that's why they feel the need to fuck a person of the same gender even though we a humans are naturally predisposed to procreation which requires sex with the opposite gender.

You are really really really bad at this.

Correct - I think something is biologically incorrect about a pro-creational being that is attracted to a sex it cannot procreate with. That's not a moral argument, it's a biological predisposition.

What does that mean, in practice? It means nothing, there are no Victims as long as we don't discriminate against their biological predisposition based on irrational fairy tales.

What does a person who fucks animals mean, in practice? It means the animals are Victims, as they are unable to rationally Consent to sex.

You see this mdk , this guy thinks you're mentally ill.

That’s not what he is saying at all. You know it as well as I that we are friends.

 

[G.T.]

I didnt dodge it - in FACT, I elaborated on why the two were made analogous.......they're both dispositions outside of your conscious control. Race and sexual attraction.

Unless you're going to tell me that your brain can tell your dick to get a boner for a tree if you really really wanted it to.

Sir, there are people who have sex with livestock. Are you telling me that they are born that way and there was no conscious effort on their part to get the required erection to have sex with a farm animal?

Yes, I'm telling you that there's likely a malfunction in their brain or hormones and that their "boner" for Cows is not voluntary -

Can you voluntarily get turned on by a cow?

THATS FUGGIN WEIRD!

That's pretty judgemental of you, and if we take that to its logical conclusion we must conclude that YOU believe that there is something wrong with the brain of a homosexual and that's why they feel the need to fuck a person of the same gender even though we a humans are naturally predisposed to procreation which requires sex with the opposite gender.

You are really really really bad at this.

Correct - I think something is biologically incorrect about a pro-creational being that is attracted to a sex it cannot procreate with. That's not a moral argument, it's a biological predisposition.

What does that mean, in practice? It means nothing, there are no Victims as long as we don't discriminate against their biological predisposition based on irrational fairy tales.

What does a person who fucks animals mean, in practice? It means the animals are Victims, as they are unable to rationally Consent to sex.

Do you enjoy oral sex or anal sex with a woman?? You must be mentally ill, neither of those leads to procreation.

Do you make any points that are not laughable?

I don't think you really have a clue what the fuck it means to be attracted to a certain sex, and I don't think you know what evolution and biology entails.

 

[jehanne1431]

So let me get this straight , YOUR moral code should come into play in a discussion but the moral code of anyone who disagrees with you should not?

Yep, that is EXACTLY what you are saying.

Not sure I would agree with that, but not sure it matters. I am saying the way heathens define Chrisianity is more straw than valid. And they all love those hypocrites in the Church and 'incongruous" teachings that one hangs on to as proof we have it all wrong. That hardly ranks as an argument.

 

[G.T.]

I didnt dodge it - in FACT, I elaborated on why the two were made analogous.......they're both dispositions outside of your conscious control. Race and sexual attraction.

Unless you're going to tell me that your brain can tell your dick to get a boner for a tree if you really really wanted it to.

Sir, there are people who have sex with livestock. Are you telling me that they are born that way and there was no conscious effort on their part to get the required erection to have sex with a farm animal?

Yes, I'm telling you that there's likely a malfunction in their brain or hormones and that their "boner" for Cows is not voluntary -

Can you voluntarily get turned on by a cow?

THATS FUGGIN WEIRD!

That's pretty judgemental of you, and if we take that to its logical conclusion we must conclude that YOU believe that there is something wrong with the brain of a homosexual and that's why they feel the need to fuck a person of the same gender even though we a humans are naturally predisposed to procreation which requires sex with the opposite gender.

You are really really really bad at this.

Correct - I think something is biologically incorrect about a pro-creational being that is attracted to a sex it cannot procreate with. That's not a moral argument, it's a biological predisposition.

What does that mean, in practice? It means nothing, there are no Victims as long as we don't discriminate against their biological predisposition based on irrational fairy tales.

What does a person who fucks animals mean, in practice? It means the animals are Victims, as they are unable to rationally Consent to sex.

You see this mdk , this guy thinks you're mentally ill.

Mental illness is a person who wants to fuck a being that cannot consent. That's got moral ramifications as being WRONG, and we can justify, logically, why that's WRONG.
Biologically being attracted to the opposite sex is incorrect for survival of the species - it is not the same as having the mental illness of fucking things without CONSENT....AND IS ALSO NOT morally WRONG AT ALL.

You're just a dummy, and you're trying too hard.

 

[DandyDonovan]

Sir, there are people who have sex with livestock. Are you telling me that they are born that way and there was no conscious effort on their part to get the required erection to have sex with a farm animal?

Yes, I'm telling you that there's likely a malfunction in their brain or hormones and that their "boner" for Cows is not voluntary -

Can you voluntarily get turned on by a cow?

THATS FUGGIN WEIRD!

That's pretty judgemental of you, and if we take that to its logical conclusion we must conclude that YOU believe that there is something wrong with the brain of a homosexual and that's why they feel the need to fuck a person of the same gender even though we a humans are naturally predisposed to procreation which requires sex with the opposite gender.

You are really really really bad at this.

Correct - I think something is biologically incorrect about a pro-creational being that is attracted to a sex it cannot procreate with. That's not a moral argument, it's a biological predisposition.

What does that mean, in practice? It means nothing, there are no Victims as long as we don't discriminate against their biological predisposition based on irrational fairy tales.

What does a person who fucks animals mean, in practice? It means the animals are Victims, as they are unable to rationally Consent to sex.

You see this mdk , this guy thinks you're mentally ill.

That’s not what he is saying at all. You know it as well as I that we are friends.

LOL Dude, he called you biologically incorrect. Myself I think you're just a pervert LOL

 

[G.T.]

I don't discriminate against folks who believe in fairy tales. They're even allowed into my home, I don't ban them from entry into my Organization like these Christian "snowflakes."

.
That is because you do not understand the reality of sin or the gravity of sin. A good parent instructs their children, and disciplines their children, for their own good. They may not understand it but sometime later they will be grateful.

Christian schools do not allow homosexual teachers because it gives off a very wrong message. I seriously doubt they would allow anyone to teach there bragged of their adultery or love of porn. You see, you and yours all too often have this feigned appearance of caring for others. Promoting premarital sex, gay sex, choose your gender talk, is all bad for the soul. And reading 1st and 2nd graders a book called “Johnny has two Dads” is an abomination. I guess, until you come to the realization God, heaven and hell are all very real you will rely on your ego and wits to form your conscience instead.

Ps --- your using discrimination against blacks analogy is totally lame.

Sin is not an empirically established concept - it has no gravity in a rational discussion with me. "Belief" and "empiricism" are two different playing fields.

God has revealed all that is necessary to know He is. We know your kind will never acknowledge our empirical evidence as proof or truth, but you can be sure your contentions are even further away from established truth.

When a claim is non-falsifiable, in Science it's not, then, a rational conclusion to hold.

Things are verified as facts through a process that is the best means we have for arriving at Truth. When ideas fall short of this process, they're merely faith beliefs and as a rational species I'm very thankful that agnosticism as a percentage of the population has been steadily growing as we advance technologically and, dare I say, rationally.

 

[G.T.]

Yes, I'm telling you that there's likely a malfunction in their brain or hormones and that their "boner" for Cows is not voluntary -

Can you voluntarily get turned on by a cow?

THATS FUGGIN WEIRD!

That's pretty judgemental of you, and if we take that to its logical conclusion we must conclude that YOU believe that there is something wrong with the brain of a homosexual and that's why they feel the need to fuck a person of the same gender even though we a humans are naturally predisposed to procreation which requires sex with the opposite gender.

You are really really really bad at this.

Correct - I think something is biologically incorrect about a pro-creational being that is attracted to a sex it cannot procreate with. That's not a moral argument, it's a biological predisposition.

What does that mean, in practice? It means nothing, there are no Victims as long as we don't discriminate against their biological predisposition based on irrational fairy tales.

What does a person who fucks animals mean, in practice? It means the animals are Victims, as they are unable to rationally Consent to sex.

You see this mdk , this guy thinks you're mentally ill.

That’s not what he is saying at all. You know it as well as I that we are friends.

LOL Dude, he called you biologically incorrect. Myself I think you're just a pervert LOL

STTAB, you've always been dogshit at debate dude. I'm not sure why you try so hard to step on your own dick.

 

[jehanne1431]

I don't discriminate against folks who believe in fairy tales. They're even allowed into my home, I don't ban them from entry into my Organization like these Christian "snowflakes."

.
That is because you do not understand the reality of sin or the gravity of sin. A good parent instructs their children, and disciplines their children, for their own good. They may not understand it but sometime later they will be grateful.

Christian schools do not allow homosexual teachers because it gives off a very wrong message. I seriously doubt they would allow anyone to teach there bragged of their adultery or love of porn. You see, you and yours all too often have this feigned appearance of caring for others. Promoting premarital sex, gay sex, choose your gender talk, is all bad for the soul. And reading 1st and 2nd graders a book called “Johnny has two Dads” is an abomination. I guess, until you come to the realization God, heaven and hell are all very real you will rely on your ego and wits to form your conscience instead.

Ps --- your using discrimination against blacks analogy is totally lame.

Sin is not an empirically established concept - it has no gravity in a rational discussion with me. "Belief" and "empiricism" are two different playing fields.

God has revealed all that is necessary to know He is. We know your kind will never acknowledge our empirical evidence as proof or truth, but you can be sure your contentions are even further away from established truth.

When a claim is non-falsifiable, in Science it's not, then, a rational conclusion to hold.

Things are verified as facts through a process that is the best means we have for arriving at Truth. When ideas fall short of this process, they're merely faith beliefs and as a rational species I'm very thankful that agnosticism as a percentage of the population has been steadily growing as we advance technologically and, dare I say, rationally.

And I call those who claim none of what we present to be verifiable, to be intellectually dishonest. Probably yours or their greatest sin next to pride and the lack of honest desire to know. I won't bore you at this time with my accounts of empirical evidence for God.

 

[G.T.]

I don't discriminate against folks who believe in fairy tales. They're even allowed into my home, I don't ban them from entry into my Organization like these Christian "snowflakes."

.
That is because you do not understand the reality of sin or the gravity of sin. A good parent instructs their children, and disciplines their children, for their own good. They may not understand it but sometime later they will be grateful.

Christian schools do not allow homosexual teachers because it gives off a very wrong message. I seriously doubt they would allow anyone to teach there bragged of their adultery or love of porn. You see, you and yours all too often have this feigned appearance of caring for others. Promoting premarital sex, gay sex, choose your gender talk, is all bad for the soul. And reading 1st and 2nd graders a book called “Johnny has two Dads” is an abomination. I guess, until you come to the realization God, heaven and hell are all very real you will rely on your ego and wits to form your conscience instead.

Ps --- your using discrimination against blacks analogy is totally lame.

Sin is not an empirically established concept - it has no gravity in a rational discussion with me. "Belief" and "empiricism" are two different playing fields.

God has revealed all that is necessary to know He is. We know your kind will never acknowledge our empirical evidence as proof or truth, but you can be sure your contentions are even further away from established truth.

When a claim is non-falsifiable, in Science it's not, then, a rational conclusion to hold.

Things are verified as facts through a process that is the best means we have for arriving at Truth. When ideas fall short of this process, they're merely faith beliefs and as a rational species I'm very thankful that agnosticism as a percentage of the population has been steadily growing as we advance technologically and, dare I say, rationally.

And I call those who claim none of what we present to be verifiable, to be intellectually dishonest. Probably yours or their greatest sin next to pride and the lack of honest desire to know. I won't bore you at this time with my accounts of empirical evidence for God.

I don't think you're about to be the first human to ever present an Empirical Justification for God.

That's no offense intended - I know that Dogma is really strong with Religious folks....hell, they'll believe anything!! (lol) - but seriously, seek the Nobel Prize, and forget all about US Messageboard if you've accomplished such a feat.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Yes, it is. it's being unable to stand anyone who thinks differently than you to be able to interact with you at something so simple as a High School basketball game.

Americans self segregate all the time. Why do you feel all the hand wringing on this particular issue is particularly notable?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

I won't bore you at this time with my accounts of empirical evidence for God.

Whew! Thank you.

 

[jehanne1431]

.
That is because you do not understand the reality of sin or the gravity of sin. A good parent instructs their children, and disciplines their children, for their own good. They may not understand it but sometime later they will be grateful.

Christian schools do not allow homosexual teachers because it gives off a very wrong message. I seriously doubt they would allow anyone to teach there bragged of their adultery or love of porn. You see, you and yours all too often have this feigned appearance of caring for others. Promoting premarital sex, gay sex, choose your gender talk, is all bad for the soul. And reading 1st and 2nd graders a book called “Johnny has two Dads” is an abomination. I guess, until you come to the realization God, heaven and hell are all very real you will rely on your ego and wits to form your conscience instead.

Ps --- your using discrimination against blacks analogy is totally lame.

Sin is not an empirically established concept - it has no gravity in a rational discussion with me. "Belief" and "empiricism" are two different playing fields.

God has revealed all that is necessary to know He is. We know your kind will never acknowledge our empirical evidence as proof or truth, but you can be sure your contentions are even further away from established truth.

When a claim is non-falsifiable, in Science it's not, then, a rational conclusion to hold.

Things are verified as facts through a process that is the best means we have for arriving at Truth. When ideas fall short of this process, they're merely faith beliefs and as a rational species I'm very thankful that agnosticism as a percentage of the population has been steadily growing as we advance technologically and, dare I say, rationally.

And I call those who claim none of what we present to be verifiable, to be intellectually dishonest. Probably yours or their greatest sin next to pride and the lack of honest desire to know. I won't bore you at this time with my accounts of empirical evidence for God.

I don't think you're about to be the first human to ever present an Empirical Justification for God.

That's no offense intended - I know that Dogma is really strong with Religious folks....hell, they'll believe anything!! (lol) - but seriously, seek the Nobel Prize, and forget all about US Messageboard if you've accomplished such a feat.

Then do not act so surprised that those who are certain of God cannot connect with secular humanist ideologies or perversions if we deem it morally wrong because of grave consequences. We are not asking for our religion be in public schools, just for your educators quit usurping parental rights on matters of sex and morals. That's your "religion" now brought in the schools.

 

[G.T.]

Sin is not an empirically established concept - it has no gravity in a rational discussion with me. "Belief" and "empiricism" are two different playing fields.

God has revealed all that is necessary to know He is. We know your kind will never acknowledge our empirical evidence as proof or truth, but you can be sure your contentions are even further away from established truth.

When a claim is non-falsifiable, in Science it's not, then, a rational conclusion to hold.

Things are verified as facts through a process that is the best means we have for arriving at Truth. When ideas fall short of this process, they're merely faith beliefs and as a rational species I'm very thankful that agnosticism as a percentage of the population has been steadily growing as we advance technologically and, dare I say, rationally.

And I call those who claim none of what we present to be verifiable, to be intellectually dishonest. Probably yours or their greatest sin next to pride and the lack of honest desire to know. I won't bore you at this time with my accounts of empirical evidence for God.

I don't think you're about to be the first human to ever present an Empirical Justification for God.

That's no offense intended - I know that Dogma is really strong with Religious folks....hell, they'll believe anything!! (lol) - but seriously, seek the Nobel Prize, and forget all about US Messageboard if you've accomplished such a feat.

Then do not act so surprised that those who are certain of God cannot connect with secular humanist ideologies or perversions and if we deem it morally wrong because of grave consequences. We are not asking for our religion be in public schools, just for your educators quit usurping parental rights on matters of sex and morals. That's your "religion" now brought in the schools.

Your certainty is not Justified, that's sort of the problem.

Justify it, and then it'll be lent all of the credence it deserves, and if you can't - you'll have to pardon when your views on homosexuality are scoffed at as irrational dogma.

 

[jehanne1431]

I won't bore you at this time with my accounts of empirical evidence for God.

Whew! Thank you.

.
That must mean you compel yourself to read it whenever one posts it --- even though it agonizes you. (?)

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

I won't bore you at this time with my accounts of empirical evidence for God.

Whew! Thank you.

.
That must mean you compel yourself to read it whenever one posts it --- even though it agonizes you. (?)

It simply means I tend to read opinions I don't necessarily agree with. Sometimes it is agonizing, yes.

 

[Lysistrata]

The school in question did not go out of their way to advertise their viewpoints, they were thrust into the limelight because Pence's wife had the audacity to work there, and the media decided to make them a "Christians bad" story.

and now that the world knows this "school" is preaching homophobia, we can act accordingly.

Not seeing a problem here.

It isn't preaching anything. the only reason the people outside of those going to the school know about it is because the media wanted to do a hit piece on Pence via his wife.

The only bigotry going on here is on the part of the Progressive school, for not being even able to associate with the Christian school via a fucking high school basketball game.

Maybe the Sheridan students just plain don't want to associate with these people know that they know what ICS is about.

 

[theHawk]

I wonder if the Christian school was all or predominately Black if this would have happened.

Or another religion.

So the school is proud to not only teach bigotry, but put it into action.

Ugly stuff.
.

What do you mean, Mac?

The school is teaching anti-bigotry if you researched the Story.

The school they declined to Visit bans Gay Parents, Students, and families that merely SUPPORT LGBT rights.

Do you want to teach kids that that form of Bigotry, as you just decried with this post, is OKAY?

Seems to me like you don't support a school that teaches bigotry.

There is nothing wrong with not wanting to promote queerdom. It’s an immoral act and should not be encouraged. Discriminating against people for their immoral actions is perfectly fine.

 

[TNHarley]

Tolerance. Learn it.
People are different. Accept it.

 

[RealDave]

I guess "can't we all just get along" isn't going to work anymore.


Progressive Va. School Refuses To Play Sports With Icky Christian Kids

News media recently attacked second lady Karen Pence for teaching art at a Christian school that requires fidelity to Christian sexual mores from students and staff. Now a progressive private school that used to play athletic games against Pence’s Immanuel Christian School is refusing to play against them at their facility, on grounds that playing basketball at a Christian school makes children “unsafe.” Yes, really.

The school in question did not go out of their way to advertise their viewpoints, they were thrust into the limelight because Pence's wife had the audacity to work there, and the media decided to make them a "Christians bad" story.

I particularly like these parts:

So we decided that we would invite ICS to play all of the games at Sheridan. Since ICS declined our offer to host, we will only play our home games and will not go to ICS to play.

When Immanuel kids come to play at Sheridan, Donovan said, her students plan to antagonize the Christian children by plastering LGBT images across their clothing and waving LGBT-celebratory signs during games.

So they asked to hold all the games on their home court, because, you know, uncomfortable, and then the person said they would go out of their way to make the other schools kids be uncomfortable as possible.

What a display of doublethink.

Why expose school children to a bunch of bigoted fucks.

 

[JoeB131]

The school promotes a certain morality, and asks for that from their staff. That is way different than not wanting to even be on the court of the school for a basketball game.

No it isn't.

They don't want their staff to be gay.

The parents don't want their kids playing with little homophobes...

Done deal. Kids learn an important life lesson, being a homophobe is going to be a stigma as years go on. Good to learn that now.