The Sodomite Party strikes again: Parents rip school

[Recidivist 1]

I think this is why a parent got upset:

 

Coronation scene from "King & King"

[supermike80 1,928]

So you and the mikes before you got together and somehow saw each other's peemuses?

 

I'm think that's not so super.

 

 

[brinett9 0]

So you and the mikes before you got together and somehow saw each other's peemuses?

Yes, and of course they had to be measured in the erect state.

 

Fortunately, once they were all nude in a room together that wasn't a problem.

[Toro 1]

often

 

[Dr. Octopus 0]

If ya follow Torrid's line of reason to it's conclusion, you get homo-indoctrination starting in pre-school and re-enforced thru elemetary school, with advanced brain washing in jr. high school. By the time the kids hit high school, seeing boys and girls dating each other will be an object of curiosity for the multitude of new recruits the Gay Agenda graduated from their very well planned assult on the institution of marriage.

 

 

Teaching a subject is equivalent to recruitment tactic?

 

So when a school teaches about slavery, they are endorsing the institution of slavery?

 

When it teaches about the Revolutionary War it is saying "hey kids start a militia and overthrow the government"?

 

A lesson about the holocaust is actually trying to plant a seed in the mind of one of the kids to eliminate the Jewish race?

 

I'm in the camp that second grade is too young to broach the subject, but you are the one with the agenda here.

[Toro 1]

How come creationists are kookoo and believers in intelligent design aren't?

 

Creationists believe that the ID happened a couple of thousand years ago. Which has been scientifically blown out of the water.

[Uh-huh 0]

Teaching a subject is equivalent to recruitment tactic?

 

So when a school teaches about slavery, they are endorsing the institution of slavery?

 

When it teaches about the Revolutionary War it is saying "hey kids start a militia and overthrow the government"?

 

A lesson about the holocaust is actually trying to plant a seed in the mind of one of the kids to eliminate the Jewish race?

 

I'm in the camp that second grade is too young to broach the subject, but you are the one with the agenda here.

 

You're making way too much sense.

 

You need to dumb it down for fastfish and company.

 

IT IS A TIP!!!

[Toro 1]

So when a school teaches about slavery, they are endorsing the institution of slavery?

 

They aren't teaching that slavery is acceptable. They are teaching it is bad.

 

When it teaches about the Revolutionary War it is saying "hey kids start a militia and overthrow the government"?

 

 

A lesson about the holocaust is actually trying to plant a seed in the mind of one of the kids to eliminate the Jewish race?

 

Once again, they aren't saying that the Germans were just like that because they were born that way and it's not their fault.

[Uh-huh 0]

Creationists believe that the ID happened a couple of thousand years ago. Which has been scientifically blown out of the water.

But Intelligent Design advocates believe in the existence of an intelligent designer; this belief does not have any basis in reality, nor can be proven. So ID is a matter of faith, just like creationism. As long as we can agree on that, it's all good.

 

I'll concede ID is an attractive idea, which dates clear back to Aristotle. I have no problem with someone believing in a master designer, or teaching their kids to believe in ID. Just don't teach it in our tax-payer funded schools as an "alternative scientific theory to evolution", because it isn't a scientific theory.

[Toro 1]

But Intelligent Design advocates believe in the existence of an intelligent designer; this belief does not have any basis in reality, nor can be proven. So ID is a matter of faith, just like creationism. As long as we can agree on that, it's all good.

 

Oh, we can agree on that. I am just saying that ID can still be plausible even with evolution.

 

I'll concede ID is an attractive idea, which dates clear back to Aristotle. I have no problem with someone believing in a master designer, or teaching their kids to believe in ID. Just don't teach it in our tax-payer funded schools as an "alternative scientific theory to evolution", because it isn't a scientific theory.

 

I will even concede that. The one problem I have is the fact that it still doesn't explain origin of life and origin of the universe. And I am sorry, but which sounds more feasible: a bolt of lighting hitting a big bowl of primordial soup and creating life, then evolution takes us from those single cell organisms to the complex structures we are today or that someone somewhere has a neat little "antfarm" that he plays with.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

They aren't teaching that slavery is acceptable. They are teaching it is bad.

Once again, they aren't saying that the Germans were just like that because they were born that way and it's not their fault.

 

 

So homosexuality isn't acceptable? Why does two men living together bother you? Does the sound of butt slapping make it hard for you to concentrate?

 

Like I said I think second grade is to young to teach the subject as well? But do you beleive as fastfish does that teaching the subject is going to make kids gay or that the school is actually hoping it will?

If some one read you that story, are you going to want to run out and suck ######?

 

Kids are smarter than people give them credit for and I don't think a kid not predesposed to be gay is going to be gay just because two Kings are getting together.

[Toro 1]

So homosexuality isn't acceptable? Why does two men living together bother you? Does the sound of butt slapping make it hard for you to concentrate?

 

Like I said I think second grade is to young to teach the subject as well? But do you beleive as fastfish does that teaching the subject is going to make kids gay or that the school is actually hoping it will?

If some one read you that story, are you going to want to run out and suck ######?

 

Kids are smarter than people give them credit for and I don't think a kid not predesposed to be gay is going to be gay just because two Kings are getting together.

 

In my eyes, no it is not. It's a personal belief. I am not saying it is right or PC, but it's just the way I feel. Do I care if you are gay? No. Do what you want. I don't care. It's called tolerance. Just as I don't approve of the KKK, the Black Panthers, Al Sharpton, or any other people or things that I do not like, it's doesn't mean that I won't tolerate them. I will. As long as those values and issues do not begin to restrict my freedoms.

 

Now, that being said. If I choose to teach my children that homosexuality is wrong, then that's my business. Just as it's your business to teach your kids that religion is bad and sucking another guy's ass is ok. It's all about freedom and personal choice.

 

And your statement that 2nd graders are savvy enough to read a story and understand that their true feelings is what they should follow, not the Prince, you are an idiot. Kids are very open to suggestion.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

In my eyes, no it is not. It's a personal belief. I am not saying it is right or PC, but it's just the way I feel. Do I care if you are gay? No. Do what you want. I don't care. It's called tolerance. Just as I don't approve of the KKK, the Black Panthers, Al Sharpton, or any other people or things that I do not like, it's doesn't mean that I won't tolerate them. I will. As long as those values and issues do not begin to restrict my freedoms.

 

Now, that being said. If I choose to teach my children that homosexuality is wrong, then that's my business. Just as it's your business to teach your kids that religion is bad and sucking another guy's ass is ok. It's all about freedom and personal choice.

 

And your statement that 2nd graders are savvy enough to read a story and understand that their true feelings is what they should follow, not the Prince, you are an idiot. Kids are very open to suggestion.

 

 

Maybe you just know stupid kids. The one I live with (gf's kid, 6) and the ones in my family have very strong wills and opinions.

[Toro 1]

Maybe you just know stupid kids. The one I live with (gf's kid, 6) and the ones in my family have very strong wills and opinions.

 

Actually, my wife teaches 2nd grade and we have discussed this subject a lot. Thanks for playing.

[Jeff Garcia 8]

If it goes against your wishes, put them in private school.

 

Same-sex marriage is something they HAVE to deal with. It's legal, remember?

You don't see the purpose of teaching children the concept of marriage?

Legal until the people get to vote on it. Oh, and it isn't legal in my state, and I hope it never is. Marriage is for a male and female, "civil unions" are for other things like man on man, girl on girl, man on dog.

[hoytdwow 202]

Legal until the people get to vote on it. Oh, and it isn't legal in my state, and I hope it never is. Marriage is for a male and female, "civil unions" are for other things like man on man, girl on girl, man on dog.

But, Jeff, aren't you gay?

[Uh-huh 0]

Oh, we can agree on that. I am just saying that ID can still be plausible even with evolution.

I will even concede that. The one problem I have is the fact that it still doesn't explain origin of life and origin of the universe. And I am sorry, but which sounds more feasible: a bolt of lighting hitting a big bowl of primordial soup and creating life, then evolution takes us from those single cell organisms to the complex structures we are today or that someone somewhere has a neat little "antfarm" that he plays with.

 

Well, we probably will never know the answer, will we?

 

I will concede the idea of God as the master designer who whipped up the universe much as a chef would whip up a stew is as plausible as life arising from, as you eloquently put it, "a bolt of lightning hitting a big bowl of primordial soup".

 

As far as I know, there is nothing in evolutionary theory that dismisses the possibility of an intelligent designer.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

In my eyes, no it is not. It's a personal belief. I am not saying it is right or PC, but it's just the way I feel. Do I care if you are gay? No. Do what you want. I don't care. It's called tolerance. Just as I don't approve of the KKK, the Black Panthers, Al Sharpton, or any other people or things that I do not like, it's doesn't mean that I won't tolerate them. I will. As long as those values and issues do not begin to restrict my freedoms.

 

Now, that being said. If I choose to teach my children that homosexuality is wrong, then that's my business. Just as it's your business to teach your kids that religion is bad and sucking another guy's ass is ok. It's all about freedom and personal choice.

 

And your statement that 2nd graders are savvy enough to read a story and understand that their true feelings is what they should follow, not the Prince, you are an idiot. Kids are very open to suggestion.

 

 

You totally contradict your self throughout this post. You talk of tolernace, doesn't tolerance come with knowledge and undertsanding?

 

How does a homo restrict your freedoms?

 

So you'll tolerate tesrrorist racist organizations like the KKK and Black Panthers, but not tolerate gays.

[Toro 1]

Well, we probably will never know the answer, will we?

 

I will concede the idea of God as the master designer who whipped up the universe much as a chef would whip up a stew is as plausible as life arising from, as you eloquently put it, "a bolt of lightning hitting a big bowl of primordial soup".

 

As far as I know, there is nothing in evolutionary theory that dismisses the possibility of an intelligent designer.

 

OK. Uh, I think we agree on just about everything.

 

BTW, go fock yourself.

[Jeff Garcia 8]

But, Jeff, aren't you gay?

shhhhhhhh.

[Uh-huh 0]

OK. Uh, I think we agree on just about everything.

 

BTW, go fock yourself.

 

My cack isn't long enough

[Ravens 03 0]

Actually, my wife teaches 2nd grade and we have discussed this subject a lot. Thanks for playing.

 

OWNED!!!!!

[Toro 1]

You totally contradict your self throughout this post. You talk of tolernace, doesn't tolerance come with knowledge and undertsanding?

 

How does a homo restrict your freedoms?

 

So you'll tolerate tesrrorist racist organizations like the KKK and Black Panthers, but not tolerate gays.

 

How am I not tolerating them? By not having a suggestive book read to my son when he is 8? I don't want them to be read Mein Kampf either. My choice to educate my son in certain things does not take away from the right of your son to suck someone's ass.

 

Come on, are you focking serious? You wanna teach them that gay is OK, do it at your house.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

OWNED!!!!!

 

Well they are in Texas.

[fastfish 0]

Torrid rest his case on the fact that in MA, gay marriage is legal. Thus, kids in 2nd grade need to know that legal=ok.

 

This leap of illogic can be best understood by having the two homo-Princes in the story doing shots of peppermint liqueur, getting very gay on the alcohol, and then after their kiss at the end, they retire for a smoke and sex.

 

Now explain to the children that men can marry men because in the great state of MA, this is legal. And they can drink alcohol because that is legal and they can smoke because that is also legal. And sex between grownups is legal too. All legal and ALL wrong for children to try to decipher.

 

These news reports of the indoctrination of children by the Gay Agenda at such an early age need to be given the widest possible broadcast. The apologists here for these so called lessons in tolerance and diversity are exactly what the voters need to hear. If they were heard, then the Party of sodomy, surrender, abortion and atheism could be placed in permanent minority status on the national level.

[torridjoe 48]

Legal until the people get to vote on it. Oh, and it isn't legal in my state, and I hope it never is. Marriage is for a male and female, "civil unions" are for other things like man on man, girl on girl, man on dog.

 

What will happen between now and then to change things?

 

58% in Mass back same-sex marriage

 

How am I not tolerating them? By not having a suggestive book read to my son when he is 8? I don't want them to be read Mein Kampf either. My choice to educate my son in certain things does not take away from the right of your son to suck someone's ass.

 

Come on, are you focking serious? You wanna teach them that gay is OK, do it at your house.

 

I think you're doing the suggesting, rather than the book. You're imputing your own views of marriage and sex onto 7 year olds, which doesn't make much sense. Believe it or not, a 7 year old doesn't look at two males raising a child and get an image of anal sex in their minds.

[donhaas 18]

What will happen between now and then to change things?

 

58% in Mass back same-sex marriage

I think you're doing the suggesting, rather than the book. You're imputing your own views of marriage and sex onto 7 year olds, which doesn't make much sense. Believe it or not, a 7 year old doesn't look at two males raising a child and get an image of anal sex in their minds.

 

I think most 7-year-olds probably think of Cincinatti Bowties before they think of anal sex.

[supermike80 1,928]

What will happen between now and then to change things?

 

58% in Mass back same-sex marriage

I think you're doing the suggesting, rather than the book. You're imputing your own views of marriage and sex onto 7 year olds, which doesn't make much sense. Believe it or not, a 7 year old doesn't look at two males raising a child and get an image of anal sex in their minds.

 

 

Dood..you are completely wasting your time. Most who disagree with this are those that cannot separate same sex marriage from sex...they just cant.

 

There is no way you can win this argument. Small minds....

[Rusty Syringes 478]

What will happen between now and then to change things?

 

58% in Mass back same-sex marriage

I think you're doing the suggesting, rather than the book. You're imputing your own views of marriage and sex onto 7 year olds, which doesn't make much sense. Believe it or not, a 7 year old doesn't look at two males raising a child and get an image of anal sex in their minds.

 

Mass. is anything but a litmus test for how the majority of this country feels.

 

And a vast majority of 7-year-olds in this country are going to think dad is creepy if he's trying to be even-Steven about Steven and Steven.

[torridjoe 48]

Mass. is anything but a litmus test for how the majority of this country feels.

 

And a vast majority of 7-year-olds in this country are going to think dad is creepy if he's trying to be even-Steven about Steven and Steven.

 

what does the majority of the country have to do with whether Mass voters will overturn gay marriage?

 

In any case, opposition to gay marriage nationwide has declined significantly since 2003.

[Rusty Syringes 478]

what does the majority of the country have to do with whether Mass voters will overturn gay marriage?

 

In any case, opposition to gay marriage nationwide has declined significantly since 2003.

 

Link to "significantly."

[torridjoe 48]

Link to "significantly."

 

"Half of Americans (51%) continue to oppose legalizing gay marriage, but this number has declined significantly from 63% in February 2004"

[Rusty Syringes 478]

"Half of Americans (51%) continue to oppose legalizing gay marriage, but this number has declined significantly from 63% in February 2004"

 

You said 2003, and now you're switching to 2004, when there was a spike to 63 percent.

 

Hmmm, comparing it to mid-2003, it appears that "significant" drop would be only 2 percentage points.

 

I guess a report on bug chasers or some other sick gay practice came out just before that spike.

 

 

Wow, it only took three posts this time to castrate his argument.

 

Me ===>

[torridjoe 48]

You said 2003, and now you're switching to 2004, when there was a spike to 63 percent.

 

Hmmm, comparing it to mid-2003, it appears that "significant" drop would be only 2 percentage points.

 

I guess a report on bug chasers or some other sick gay practice came out just before that spike.

 

 

Check again, Charlie. The last survey of 2003 was November. Opposition was 62%.

[Rusty Syringes 478]

Check again, Charlie. The last survey of 2003 was November. Opposition was 62%.

 

 

BIG OBVIOUS GRAPHIC ON RIGHT SIDE SAYS: YOU'RE WRONG!!!!

 

JULY 2003 - 53 PERCENT

FEBRUARY 2004 - 63 PERCENT

[torridjoe 48]

BIG OBVIOUS GRAPHIC ON RIGHT SIDE SAYS: YOU'RE WRONG!!!!

 

JULY 2003 - 53 PERCENT

FEBRUARY 2004 - 63 PERCENT

 

How does the fact that the July 2003 number was 53%, invalidate the OTHER fact that November 2003's figure was 62%?

[Strike 5,570]

How does the fact that the July 2003 number was 53%, invalidate the OTHER fact that November 2003's figure was 62%?

 

I think it has to do with the fact that the statement Rusty originally challenged was

 

"In any case, opposition to gay marriage nationwide has declined significantly since 2003."

 

HTH

[torridjoe 48]

I think it has to do with the fact that the statement Rusty originally challenged was

 

"In any case, opposition to gay marriage nationwide has declined significantly since 2003."

 

HTH

 

And it has--from 62% to 51%.

[Rusty Syringes 478]

How does the fact that the July 2003 number was 53%, invalidate the OTHER fact that November 2003's figure was 62%?

 

Because you picked the big-ass spike on the roller coaster of opinion and trumpeted it as some huge decline in America's feelings about gay marriage.

 

Sure, it's a big drop since then, but it's not much of a drop since a few months earlier than that, and it's clear that that this opinion has had many ups and downs, with summer being the most gay-favorable time for some reason.

 

I'm simply pointing out your shortcomings in balanced statistical analysis.

 

 

And it has--from 62% to 51%.

 

Well it has AND it hasn't, depending on which month you pick.

 

You just decided to take the "has" and run hairy-ass nekkid down the field with it.

[torridjoe 48]

Because you picked the big-ass spike on the roller coaster of opinion and trumpeted it as some huge decline in America's feelings about gay marriage.

 

Sure, it's a big drop since then, but it's not much of a drop since a few months earlier than that, and it's clear that that this opinion has had many ups and downs, with summer being the most gay-favorable time for some reason.

 

I'm simply pointing out your shortcomings in balanced statistical analysis.

 

Well it has AND it hasn't, depending on which month you pick.

 

You just decided to take the "has" and run hairy-ass nekkid down the field with it.

 

But July 2003 was prior to the Supreme Court decision (as was Nov 2003, but not Feb 2004).

 

It hasn't had many ups and downs. As Pew notes, it peaked with the SC decision, stayed there during the election season, and has been dropping ever since.

 

There is no logic in saying it's not much of a drop from July 2003, when you know that it wasn't dropping from July; it was dropping from November/February. If your stock is at $5 in May, $10 in July, and $3 in September, you don't say, "hey, my stock has only dropped 2 bucks!" because it hasn't; it's dropped 7 bucks. You're pretending no spike in opposition ever occurred.

 

Spin all you want; I'm correct: opposition has declined significantly since 2003. That's a fact.