[TheBadgerHunter]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
What exactly are you arguing in this thread, then?

Maybe you should try replying to comments directed at you? All your posts are taking mine out of context.

[Xeo]

Originally posted by TheBadgerHunter:
I don't see anyone supporting it here.

What exactly are you arguing in this thread, then?

[TheBadgerHunter]

Originally posted by Xeo:
What exactly are you arguing in this thread, then?

Do I hear an echo in here?

[PacHead]

Originally posted by TheBadgerHunter:
Do I hear an echo in here?

here
......here
.............here
......................here
..............................here
......................................here
..............................................here
.................................................. ....here
.................................................. ............here

[Xeo]

Originally posted by TheBadgerHunter:
Do I hear an echo in here?

Well, you seemed to have a problem with who was asking, regardless of whether it is a valid question or not. Considering you quoted me when you said that no one was supporting it, then I have more of a "right" I guess, to then ask a follow up question. And again, you sidestepped it completely.

Also, I didn't mention before, but you said his was out of context. Considering he quoted your entire post, I don't see how it was out of context.

[TheBadgerHunter]

Originally posted by Xeo:
Well, you seemed to have a problem with who was asking, regardless of whether it is a valid question or not. Considering you quoted me when you said that no one was supporting it, then I have more of a "right" I guess, to then ask a follow up question. And again, you sidestepped it completely.

Also, I didn't mention before, but you said his was out of context. Considering he quoted your entire post, I don't see how it was out of context.

I said all of his posts were out of context, not that particular one.


Just for the record I was referring to the article: "If the bill became law, public school textbooks could not present homosexuality as a genetic trait.."

So I was saying that while I disagree with the bill completely I don't believe it should be in school textbooks. No one here supports it with the exception of PacHead.

[kmkkid]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Why stop with just explaining to kids what gays are ?

Why not have a whole lesson plan, and explain the whole deal ? This way no kids will be confused about anything.

Lesson plan # 1

(1) MONDAY> Explain to the kiddies what gays and lesbians are

(2) TUESDAY> Explain about Sex change operations, transvestites etc. Kids might be confused when they see some man with facial hair dressed up in womens clothes

(3) WEDNESDAY > Bestiality day, where the kids dress up as various animals and hold a contest where the best costume is awarded.

(4) THURSDAY > Fetish day, and if time permits the topic of orgies will be covered in depth

(5) FRIDAY > Child molestation day

Are you trying to imply that gays preform both acts of bestiality and child molestation? If so, you're a retard and I hope someone kicks the living **** out of you someday.



Chris

[kmkkid]

Originally posted by PacHead:
So visit someplace else. Like we give a crap. We don't need your Aussie dollars.

Go visit canada. I hear they have these two NAMBLA groups which are thriving in Quebec, plus the legal age in Canada is 14. Hmmmm, small tasty, legal boys. I bet you're booking your ticket right now at this very moment.

I hope he reports you for this.

quoted for evidence.



Chris

[Xeo]

Originally posted by kmkkid:
Are you trying to imply that gays preform both acts of bestiality and child molestation? If so, you're a retard and I hope someone kicks the living **** out of you someday.



Chris

Not that I think his example was too great, myself, but I think he was just saying if we're going to teach about one part of sexuality, we have to touch on them all. He just used crude examples that people won't even admit to in efforts to make homosexuality seem worse than it is. However, homosexuality is a lot closer to heterosexuality than it is to bestiality or child molestation.

And also, for the record, child molestation is taught in schools. I remember being told by adults in school that we should always tell someone if we were "touched" or however they worded it.

[dcmacdaddy]

WTF?!?

Some guy is advocating the removal of books from school libraries and burying them and you guys--well most of you guys--can't get past the whole homosexuality issue?

What is going on here? An elected member of a state legislator is advocating forced removal of books dealing with a specific subject matter from bookshelves in public schools and public libraries?

Does anyone else find that terrifying? I do. We are at the top of a slippery slope that could, and I emphasize could could could, go in a very ugly direction. Right now it is just the issue of homosexuality but who knows what could come next. There will always be someone else out there who finds something abhorrent to them and wants to ban everyone from having acces to it for their own good.

But just as a reminder, and also to indirectly invoke Godwin's Law, here is a little something for you to think about.

• First they came for the Jews
  and I did not speak out
  because I was not a Jew.
  Then they came for the Communists
  and I did not speak out
  because I was not a Communist.
  Then they came for the trade unionists
  and I did not speak out
  because I was not a trade unionist.
  Then they came for me
  and there was no one left
  to speak out for me.
  
  Pastor Martin Niem�ller

[qnxde]

Originally posted by PacHead:
So visit someplace else. Like we give a crap. We don't need your Aussie dollars.

Go visit canada. I hear they have these two NAMBLA groups which are thriving in Quebec, plus the legal age in Canada is 14. Hmmmm, small tasty, legal boys. I bet you're booking your ticket right now at this very moment.

Why are you still here? You disgust me. Reported.

[PacHead]

Originally posted by kmkkid:
Are you trying to imply that gays preform both acts of bestiality and child molestation? If so, you're a retard and I hope someone kicks the living **** out of you someday.

Chris

Are you implying that you're just a kneejerking drama queen who is projecting ?

You should do something about your violent nature and thoughts. Perhaps there's a gay hate group accepting applications in your area.

[PacHead]

Originally posted by Xeo:
Not that I think his example was too great, myself, but I think he was just saying if we're going to teach about one part of sexuality, we have to touch on them all. He just used crude examples that people won't even admit to in efforts to make homosexuality seem worse than it is. However, homosexuality is a lot closer to heterosexuality than it is to bestiality or child molestation.

And also, for the record, child molestation is taught in schools. I remember being told by adults in school that we should always tell someone if we were "touched" or however they worded it.

Yes, you apparently read it correct, unlike some other kneejerks around here.

I'm not for banning any books or anything. My comments had to do with what one should teach or not.

[Krusty]

On a side note:
If you read the article, this guy is the same one who introduced the gay marriage ban into the Alabama legislature. That bill FAILED to pass in Alabama. It passed in 11 other states on Nov 2 ... including a couple of "blue" states. Alabama seems like the least worry right now ... do we expect a state that blocked the gay marriage ban to somehow leapfrog right over to book banning (even in Universities)? This guy's a kook. PnacHead sounds insane.

[PacHead]

Originally posted by qnxde:
Why are you still here? You disgust me. Reported.

OMG - Pachead gave his opinion on a forum, and I don't like what he wrote, so I'm gonna report him, and try to censor him like a nazi would do.

[kmkkid]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Are you implying that you're just a kneejerking drama queen who is projecting ?

You should do something about your violent nature and thoughts. Perhaps there's a gay hate group accepting applications in your area.

No I'm implying that you are an idiot both for the comment I quoted you on and for basically calling qnxde a pedophile.


sick.



Chris

[kmkkid]

Originally posted by PacHead:
OMG - Pachead gave his opinion on a forum, and I don't like what he wrote, so I'm gonna report him, and try to censor him like a nazi would do.

You slandered him, what do you expect?




Chris

[PacHead]

Originally posted by kmkkid:
No I'm implying that you are an idiot both for the comment I quoted you on and for basically calling qnxde a pedophile.
sick.
Chris

Hey, it's your fantastic country that has the legal age set at 14. Call it for what you want. I don't give a crap what you think.

[kmkkid]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Hey, it's your fantastic country that has the legal age set at 14. Call it for what you want. I don't give a crap what you think.

Maybe you should read up on our laws before shoving your foot in your mouth. 14 is not the age of consent for an adult only a minor.

http://www.ageofconsent.com/canada.htm read it.



Chris

[PacHead]

Originally posted by kmkkid:
Maybe you should read up on our laws before shoving your foot in your mouth. 14 is not the age of consent for an adult only a minor.

http://www.ageofconsent.com/canada.htm read it.

Chris

Take your foot out of your own mouth, because this contradicts your link:

in 1987, the Conservative government reduced the age of consent for sexual activity from 18 to 14._ The reason for the change seemed to be that the Government did not want to criminalize teens who were sexually active with other teens, not that such charges had ever happened._ But since no restriction on the second person�s age was mentioned, the law gave legal permission for adults to engage in sexual activities with 14, 15, 16 and 17 year olds._

http://www.c-a-s-e.net/Age%20of%20Consent.htm

Anyhow, I don't give a crap if the age of consent were 6 years old in Canada. So continue your quarreling with somebody else if you so desire.

I'm now bored by this topic, and I will reply no more to this thread.

[TheBadgerHunter]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Hey, it's your fantastic country that has the legal age set at 14. Call it for what you want. I don't give a crap what you think.

You know, at least we recognize that they're going to make their own sexual decisions. Yours just pretends the problem doesn't exist.

You really expect anyone to consider you rational when you give your opinion then act like an ass?

[koogz]

Originally posted by TheBadgerHunter:
You know, at least we recognize that they're going to make their own sexual decisions. Yours just pretends the problem doesn't exist.

You really expect anyone to consider you rational when you give your opinion then act like an ass?

I think his comment was not appropriate.

But, let me get this straight.

A person of age 14 is supposed to understand and make their own sexual decisions?
Are you people a little too much into that ICE WINE up there?

The problem that exists is in someone that believes a 14 year-old can make any sort of sexual decisions. Parents are still making most of their decisions for them, as it should be. Age of consent should be 18, and sometimes I think that age is questionable, based on some of the morons that our PUBLIC schools produce in the USA.

[Xeo]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Yes, you apparently read it correct, unlike some other kneejerks around here.

Don't get me wrong. I still think it was a completely idiotic thing to say and the intent was clearly to make homosexuality sound bad by putting it in the same boat as bestiality. I just realize you weren't making the claims that homosexuals are into bestiality. There's a clear difference.

[TheBadgerHunter]

Originally posted by koogz:
I think his comment was not appropriate.

But, let me get this straight.

A person of age 14 is supposed to understand and make their own sexual decisions?
Are you people a little too much into that ICE WINE up there?

The problem that exists is in someone that believes a 14 year-old can make any sort of sexual decisions. Parents are still making most of their decisions for them, as it should be. Age of consent should be 18, and sometimes I think that age is questionable, based on some of the morons that our PUBLIC schools produce in the USA.

Age of consent is almost useless, much evidenced by the percentage of under-age people who have had sex. At least our system allows for prosecution where needed.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by koogz:
I think his comment was not appropriate.

But, let me get this straight.

A person of age 14 is supposed to understand and make their own sexual decisions?
Are you people a little too much into that ICE WINE up there?

The problem that exists is in someone that believes a 14 year-old can make any sort of sexual decisions. Parents are still making most of their decisions for them, as it should be. Age of consent should be 18, and sometimes I think that age is questionable, based on some of the morons that our PUBLIC schools produce in the USA.

No. The problem is that some people believe that kids younger than 18 just won't have sex WITH EACH OTHER ("the Government did not want to criminalize teens who were sexually active with other teens" - note the exception clause for cases where the partner is less than two years older. Designed to protect from pedophiles, while allowing sexual activity with peers, same as in most other countries. That choking noise you hear is PacHead with his foot in his mouth).

They may not "understand their own sexual decisions", but they certainly MAKE them.

And frankly, if I look at some of the people here that are quite a bit older than 14, it's clear that they've certainly made some "sexual decisions", but it's equally clear from their panicking defensiveness that they have no idea why.

And I'm not talking about the gays.

[Athens]

ok thats just pathetic, trying to ban books from a library. Thats just wrong!

[Athens]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
It legitimatizes it.

Some parents don't want their kids being taught such things.

That is their right.

Hence Private School, Hence parents being parents and checking what there kids are reading and doing.

[Sherwin]

Originally posted by Athens:
Hence Private School, Hence parents being parents and checking what there kids are reading and doing.

Private school costs. Why should a parent be forced to pay extra for their kid not to hear the latest leftie indoctrination?

It's happening here too. Kids learn about sexuality, about how SUVs are destroying the rainforest, about how Bush was a nasty bloke for getting rid of that nice Saddam, etc., etc.. Meanwhile, a third of 11-year-olds can't actually read. This is because most teachers are stupid lefties who don't understand that books promoting their own political agenda are only useful for promoting their own agenda and not real useful in helping a child to learn.

Really. If you want to tell your kids about the different varieties of shagging, do it at home (don't give me the argument that some kids might not have talkative parents - nobody explained the birds and bees to me yet I still know where to stick it). Let's leave schools for proper education instead of sexual propaganda.

[wdlove]

Parents should teach moral values to their children.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Athens:
Hence Private School, Hence parents being parents and checking what there kids are reading and doing.

Public schools shouldn't be teaching that either.

Originally posted by Sherwin:
Private school costs. Why should a parent be forced to pay extra for their kid not to hear the latest leftie indoctrination?

Exactly

Originally posted by wdlove:
Parents should teach moral values to their children.

Indeed.

[jlemons]

I for one am glad that I live in the south where we elect leaders that watch out for our moral interests. We the vast majority that do not condone such behavior should not have to tollerate or be subjected to such. If that is what you like, that is your business and I will continue to pray for you. But, please don't write books that try to legitimize it. I don't know, maybe Canada would be a great place for those that believe in that lifestyle.

[ironknee]

(sub title) christians in the south "legitimizes" burning books

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by ironknee:
(sub title) christians in the south "legitimizes" burning books

While you drama queen.

[ironknee]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
While you drama queen.

? come again?

[TheBadgerHunter]

Originally posted by jlemons:
I for one am glad that I live in the south where we elect leaders that watch out for our moral interests. We the vast majority that do not condone such behavior should not have to tollerate or be subjected to such. If that is what you like, that is your business and I will continue to pray for you. But, please don't write books that try to legitimize it. I don't know, maybe Canada would be a great place for those that believe in that lifestyle.

No, you elect leaders that try to control your morals. Morals are your problem and they have no business trying to make everyone else fit into them. You live in a very big world and you have no right to tell people that they can't express themselves in any way they choose. Would like it if they told you that you could be religious but not read the bible (or whatever)? How about if they told you that they wouldn't allow books with hetero situations? Suddenly the only "right" side is the bigger side.

Here in Canada we have always tried to accept other cultures, beliefs and life styles. I don't think there is a better example of all those things blending but staying unique than our west coast.

[ambush]

Birmingham...

why does it sound strangely familiar.

Ahem. Worst history of segregation in America. Ahem.