The Gay Debate

[Damocles]

Should the state just raise all children then? Let's just make them all wards of the state, execute the parents, and rename the country to KINGDOM OF GAY.

This is laughable! Seriously.

The only two choices in the "World Accroding to Asshat" is:

Don't cover the dangers of anal sex in a science class.

Or

The State must Raise your kids now and they will teach them all to be Gay!

This is the stupidest argument you have presented to date. It is the most imbecilic thing I have read from you. Yes, even compared to the inane "Freemasons Control the Universe" crap this is dumb.

You have the ability to disallow that education for your children if you wish, do so.

 

[Litmus]

This is laughable! Seriously.

The only two choices is:

Don't cover the dangers of anal sex in a science class.

Or

The State must Raise your kids now and they will teach them all to be Gay!

This is the stupidest argument you have presented to date. It is the most imbecilic thing I have read from you. Yes, even compared to the inane "Freemasons Control the Universe" crap this is dumb.

You have the ability to disallow that education for your children if you wish, do so.

It's hyperbole, an extension of your thought pattern.

And again, I've heard of them doing it without a chance to opt out. Sorry.

Respect The Family.

 

[Damocles]

It's hyperbole, an extension of your thought pattern.

And again, I've heard of them doing it without a chance to opt out. Sorry.

Respect The Family.

No, it is only an extension of your thought pattern. My thought is to give information so that people can avoid danger, yours is to keep it from them because it "might give them ideas". That is preposterous and ignores the fact that by the 8th grade they definitely already have knowledge from the most questionable source, that of their peers, on this subject, and giving them reasons to avoid it isn't "giving them ideas".

Your argument is the most ridiculous idiocy I have heard to date. You have the ability in many different ways to avoid your own children being taught this, up to and including teaching them at home, sending them to parochial school, writing to the school and refusing to give permission for the class, and mostly, I'll say this one twice because it should be stressed, you can teach them at home exactly as you think they should be taught.

If you fear the education system so much, home school your children, don't presume your emotive fear of teaching "anal sex" is so prevalent that all of society must follow your emotive moral stance and that you must use the power of government to ensure everybody else follows your moral code.

 

[Litmus]

No, it is only an extension of your thought pattern. My thought is to give information so that people can avoid danger, yours is to keep it from them because it "might give them ideas". That is preposterous and ignores the fact that by the 8th grade they definitely already have knowledge from the most questionable source of their peers on this subject, and giving them reasons to avoid it isn't "giving them ideas".

Your argument is the most ridiculous idiocy I have heard to date. You have the ability in many different ways to avoid your own children being taught this, up to and including teaching them at home, sending them to parochial school, writing to the school and refusing to give permission for the class, and mostly, I'll say this one twice because it should be, you can teach them at home exactly as you think they should be taught.

If you fear the education system so much, home school your children.

You believe in substituting the schools judgement for parents. That makes you a sex nazi.

 

[Damocles]

You believe in substituting the schools judgement for parents. That makes you a sex nazi.

No, you believe in substituting your morals code for arming them with information on why to avoid something, this makes you an idiot who cannot define the line between religion and government.

It also makes you too stupid to realize you can refuse permission through your own positive action. Nobody can force your children to learn anything against your will.

Seriously, to borrow your phrase once again...

Asshat - Check...

 

[doniston]

You believe in substituting the schools judgement for parents. That makes you a sex nazi.

That is another stupod remark. he may be anti-parential, but the term Nazi doesn't corelate.

 

[Litmus]

No, you believe in substituting your morals code for arming them with information on why to avoid something, this makes you an idiot who cannot define the line between religion and government.

It also makes you too stupid to realize you can refuse permission through your own positive action. Nobody can force your children to learn anything against your will.

Seriously, to borrow your phrase once again...

Asshat - Check...

Not so fast, "Ass Sex Daddy". I believe in parents deciding the issue of how to sexually educate their children. I don't trust them to give notice and the opportunity to opt out. the coercive one here is YOU, Adolph.

 

[Damocles]

Not so fast, "Ass Sex Daddy". I believe in parents deciding the issue of how to sexually educate their children. I don't trust them to give notice and the opportunity to opt out. the coercive one here is YOU, Adolph.

It is not coercive to allow you to educate your children yourself, the coercive one is the one who demands that "offensive" material be removed so that it is standardized to fit their own "morality" code.

Your position is weak, you have failed to promote an ideation where your morality dictates to others what shouldn't be taught based on an obligation that others follow your morality code, or to even justify a reason other than you "don't agree" that it must follow your specific code.

You have even knowingly understood that you can opt out of the education for your children if you wanted, suggesting that on very few occasions people don't follow that doesn't make it a truism.

Your weak position from the start was apparent and you have exposed yourself as one who would dictate to others how their children must be educated according to your own moral standard.

 

[uscitizen]

Should the state just raise all children then? Let's just make them all wards of the state, execute the parents, and rename the country to KINGDOM OF GAY.

Gays, Dark skinned People, joos....
What does not frighten you ?

 

[Litmus]

It is not coercive to allow you to educate your children yourself, the coercive one is the one who demands that "offensive" material be removed so that it is standardized to fit their own "morality" code.

But that's not your position. You want the school to decide and parents who don't agree be considered criminal. Let's not revise history.

 

[Cancel7]

Gays, Dark skinned People, joos....
What does not frighten you ?

He seems obsessed with anal sex regardless of its homosexual or heterosexual. He's got a real problem this guy. Must be one of those, if you do it in anything other than the missionary positon with the lights out, you're "ill".

 

[Cancel7]

But that's not your position. You want the school to decide and parents who don't agree be considered criminal. Let's not revise history.

Damo never said anything like that, knock your shit off.

 

[Damocles]

But that's not your position. You want the school to decide and parents who don't agree be considered criminal. Let's not revise history.

I have specifically stated that you would get to decide to opt out of the education if you wished, your attempt to exaggerate my position is embarrasing to watch.

I said "criminally stupid" it is a facetious way to say that it is extremely stupid to pretend that their peers haven't already suggested this to them as an idea, not an assertion that it should be legislated so. Your argument has been undermined from the beginning because of exaggeration of what they would teach, when they would teach it, that it would be "forced" on you, and that it couldn't be taught other than a promotion of a gay lifestyle all of which have been proven untrue.

They are not teaching pre-K kids about this, they don't promote a lifestyle other than not mentioning the "morality" issue and leaving it to you to teach your own kids about the morality, there is a way to opt-out, if they go against your wishes you have the ability to sue, by the time we are done it is just fear that your kids might suddenly, in 8th grade, think, "Wow, what a great idea it is to be gay!" and you know that is total garbage.

 

[Litmus]

Damo never said anything like that, knock your shit off.

this is something like it.

Reading is fundamental, darla.

Not teaching dangers and consequences and pretending they have pristine minds is foolish and almost criminally detrimental to their emotional and physical development.

 

[Litmus]

I have specifically stated that you would get to decide to opt out of the education if you wished, your attempt to exaggerate my position is embarrasing to watch.

I said "criminally stupid" it is a facetious way to say that it is extremely stupid to pretend that their peers haven't already suggested this to them as an idea, not an assertion that it should be legislated so. Your argument has been undermined from the beginning because of exaggeration of what they would teach, when they would teach it, that it would be "forced" on you, and that it couldn't be taught other than a promotion of a gay lifestyle all of which have been proven untrue.

They are not teaching pre-K kids about this, they don't promote a lifestyle other than not mentioning the "morality" issue and leaving it to you to teach your own kids about the morality, there is a way to opt-out, if they go against your wishes you have the ability to sue, by the time we are done it is just fear that your kids might suddenly, in 8th grade, think, "Wow, what a great idea it is to be gay!" and you know that is total garbage.

And I have specifically stated that I don't believe they will give ample notification or a chance to opt out.

 

[Damocles]

this is something like it.

Reading is fundamental, darla.

Yeah, "almost" doesn't exist in that quote, does it.

Somebody's argument is so weak that exaggeration and emotive rubbish is all that they have.

You are getting the site all sticky, there, AssHat.

 

[Damocles]

And I have specifically stated that I don't believe they will give ample notification or a chance to opt out.

And I have specifically stated that if you don't already know that schools have sex ed programs and opt-out, then you are stupid.

 

[Litmus]

Yeah, "almost" doesn't exist in that, does it.

Somebody's argument is so weak that exaggeration and emotive rubbish is all that they have.

You are getting the site all sticky, there, AssHat.

Whatever, sexnazi, in the final analysis, you're the one wanting to use government power to override parents wishes, the opt out lie aside.

 

[Damocles]

Whatever, sexnazi, in the final analysis, you're the one wanting to use government power to override parents wishes, the opt out lie aside.

Rubbish, you are the one wanting to use the government's power to limit education.

 

[Socrtease]

Umm anal sex is illegal in many places.
So how could a school teach something illegal or how why should an illegal act be done at home?

Anal sex is NOT illegal anywhere anymore. I don't know if you all recall but the Supreme Court overturned sodomy laws in Gardner v. Texas ruling that states cannot prohibit private sexual conduct of consenting adults. Soooooo, Sodomy is NOT illegal.