cinepro wrote:I'm still not clear on the connection between Prop 8 and the "Gay Education" law.
Can you explain to me how things with the "Gay Education" law would be different if Prop 8 had never existed, or if it had not been passed?
The biggest factor in all this is the fact that we now have a Democrat governor. If Meg Whitman had won, I doubt she would have signed it, and we wouldn't be having this discussion. And it would still have nothing to do with Prop 8.
Sorry, I missed your post through all the childish dribble from the cesspool.
It has to do with Prop 8 because the Pro-Prop 8 community warned that educational indoctrination was next, and the anti-Prop 8, pro-homosexual groups said it was a lie. Yet, here we are, after they defeated the proposition (through legal action of course), they went straight for gay propaganda education, just as we all said would happen.
That's the connection.
JMS
Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition from Mediocre Minds - Albert Einstein
Buffalo wrote:Yes, it's too bad he included a few jabs. It gave you a way to weasel out of actually responding to his argument.
His argument is false. I do not need to know a man or woman's sexual preferences to know their contributions. Do you need to know who butt-screwed who or who liked oral or who liked to fondle goats or who liked to dress in candy underwear to know a person. It's the liberal community that is so hardcore about exposing the bedroom affairs of others. Conservatives generally think those are private matters not for public consumption.
JMS
Do you actually think this bill requires teachers to discuss the private sex lives of individuals? You can't be serious.
And you do need to understand a person's preferences to know (some of) their contributions. How can students appreciate the significance of the gay liberation movement if they don't understand that the campaigners were fighting for their own rights? It would be like trying to teach the civil rights movement without referencing race, or the history of the Latter-day Saint movement, because "you don't need to know someone's race or religion to know their contributions."
Last edited by Guest on Mon Jul 18, 2011 7:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
JohnStuartMill wrote:Do you actually think this bill requires teachers to discuss the private sex lives of individuals? You can't be serious.
And you do need to understand a person's preferences to know (some of) their contributions. Students wouldn't appreciate the significance of the gay liberation movement if they don't understand that the campaigners were fighting for their own rights? It would be like trying to teach the civil rights movement without referencing race, because "you don't need to know someone's race to know their contributions."
Sexual activity is not the same as race. Comparing the "gay movement" to things like the black civil rights movement is sad and emotional rhetoric.
JMS
Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition from Mediocre Minds - Albert Einstein
jskains wrote:Bet I got a bigger deck than you....
JMS
(Waiting for your painfully obvious homosexual comeback)
Nah, I actually assumed you were talking about your mid-section...you just seem really insecure and afraid...The gays are going to get you and "indoctrinate" your children, Liberals are out to get you with their "agenda", you can't stand being called out for you small-minded bigotry (you still haven't explained who had their 1st amendment rights violated), you feel the need to internet-brag about how "smart" you are (a sure sign that you are a bit of dim bulb)...I just feel sorry for you...
"your reasoning that children should be experimented upon to justify a political agenda..is tantamount to the Nazi justification for experimenting on human beings."-SUBgenius on gay parents "I've stated over and over again on this forum and fully accept that I'm a bigot..." - ldsfaqs
Buffalo wrote:Oh, so I was right. That makes you the liar. Thanks!
Manipulation of facts to enforce your case is also a lie. You made a statement as if gay marriage had long been legal in California and some group decided to stop it. And I pointed out that you are lying. It was only briefly "legal".
JMS
I stated the facts, plainly and simply. Any inference is strictly your own.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Buffalo wrote:Unlike homosexuality, Mormonism is a choice. You're the one making the choice every day to live the abhorrent, unnatural Mormon lifestyle.
According to some, we do not have free will. We are a series of chemical reactions and some have even said we have a "God" gene that drives one to believe.
I can't help it. I was born that way.
JMS
There is no biological basis for Mormanity. Sorry.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
jskains wrote: His argument is false. I do not need to know a man or woman's sexual preferences to know their contributions. (Cesspool content deleted)
JMS
So is the sexual orientation of a judge relevant?
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
Buffalo wrote:It could be argued successfully that there are a far greater number of "butt screwers" among straight people than among gays.
Extra stupidity points for thinking that gay women are by and large "butt screwers."
You have the intellect of a dazed badger.
LOL, I bet my IQ walks over yours, buddy. Especially since I can actually read and comprehend what I've read, where as you seem to be challenged in this department.
JMS
Go ahead, make another rant about butt screwing. Show us how intelligent you are. :)
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
jskains wrote: Sorry, I missed your post through all the childish dribble from the cesspool.
It has to do with Prop 8 because the Pro-Prop 8 community warned that educational indoctrination was next, and the anti-Prop 8, pro-homosexual groups said it was a lie. Yet, here we are, after they defeated the proposition (through legal action of course), they went straight for gay propaganda education, just as we all said would happen.
That's the connection.
JMS
It says something about your world view when you view a more complete history as "propaganda." :)
If there is a cesspool here, it's only because you've been standing in one place for too long.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
JohnStuartMill wrote:Do you actually think this bill requires teachers to discuss the private sex lives of individuals? You can't be serious.
And you do need to understand a person's preferences to know (some of) their contributions. Students wouldn't appreciate the significance of the gay liberation movement if they don't understand that the campaigners were fighting for their own rights? It would be like trying to teach the civil rights movement without referencing race, because "you don't need to know someone's race to know their contributions."
Sexual activity is not the same as race. Comparing the "gay movement" to things like the black civil rights movement is sad and emotional rhetoric.
JMS
Either sexuality is a choice, or it is not. If it's the latter, it's like race. If it's the former, it's like religion. See my edit.