Judge rules in favor of LGBT and against Parents

[Bob Blaylock]

That you obsess about what kind of sex other people are having is kind of your hangup, Bob.
First, gay people don't do anything that straight people don't.
37% of straight people have tried anal.
Most straight people have done fellatio or cunnilingus.

That first line is ironic, given that it is immediately followed by descriptions of certain sexual practices.

How often have I ever gone into such detail about specific sexual practices?

It appears that you are projecting your own deviant hangups on me.

And I have to call bullshit on any statistical claims you might make. I think it is safe to say that the vast majority of us don't speak of our sexual practices to anyone other than our spouses. How would anyone credibly know what percentage of people have engaged in what practices? If some “pollster” were to ask me, my response would be something along the lines of “It's none of your fucking business, and do not ever bother me again you sick, fucking pervert!” I feel safe in saying that there are more who would respond similarly than there Are that would give honest answers about our intimate lives to any such pervert.

 

[JoeB131]

Yeah and there were people just like you who thought it was a great idea. They were wrong. So are you.

Nope. Nobody is going to go out and be gay because they saw a story about a gay kid once.
Frankly, if anything, that story would probably scare kids away from gay sex if that's not what they are into.

No I'm really not. It being offered is different that it being required especially against the parents' wishes.

If we catered education to the least common denominator, we won't teach these kids anything.
Evolution? Offends my religious beliefs!
Sex education. Offends my religious beliefs!
Teaching history? Offends my whiteness.

 

[JoeB131]

That first line is ironic, given that it is immediately followed by descriptions of certain sexual practices.

How often have I ever gone into such detail about specific sexual practices?

Oh, just because you don't describe Red Hot Mormon Love (God, there's a good name for a parody film!) doesn't mean you don't obsess. Seriously, half your posts are screaming about gay people.

Tell you true, Bob, I don't spend time thinking about gay people other than I think they shouldn't be mistreated by religious assholes. What they do on their own time is their business.

And I have to call bullshit on any statistical claims you might make. I think it is safe to say that the vast majority of us don't speak of our sexual practices to anyone other than our spouses. How would anyone credibly know what percentage of people have engaged in what practices? If some “pollster” were to ask me, my response would be something along the lines of “It's none of your fucking business, and do not ever bother me again you sick, fucking pervert!” I feel safe in saying that there are more who would respond similarly than there Are that would give honest answers about our intimate lives to any such pervert.

That would indicate that the numbers are probably HIGHER than we think they are, and they are pretty high.

Remember, these polls are how many people ADMIT to anal or oral sex.

 

[Couchpotato]

Nope. Nobody is going to go out and be gay because they saw a story about a gay kid once.
Frankly, if anything, that story would probably scare kids away from gay sex if that's not what they are into.

A, how the fuck do you know?

B, not the point.

C, Still not the Governments job. Not sure why that’s so hard for you to grasp.

D. The parents get to decide what their children learn. Not sure why that’s so hard for you to understand either.

If we catered education to the least common denominator, we won't teach these kids anything.
Evolution? Offends my religious beliefs!
Sex education. Offends my religious beliefs!
Teaching history? Offends my whiteness.

who said anything about any of those subjects other than sex ed?

 

[JoeB131]

A, how the fuck do you know?

B, not the point.

C, Still not the Governments job. Not sure why that’s so hard for you to grasp.

D. The parents get to decide what their children learn. Not sure why that’s so hard for you to understand either.

Um, no, the community decides what is appropriate and hires professionals who know what they are doing.

Which is beside the point because the icky gay book that has your knickers in a twist isn't assigned reading.

For every mouth-breathing Christian who hates the gays, there's a tolerant parent who is just fine with this material.

who said anything about any of those subjects other than sex ed?

Actually, they do now. For instance, biology textbooks across the country are deficient in teaching about evolution because they want those textbooks to be purchased in Texas.

Censorship of Evolution in Texas | National Center for Science Education

Recent textbook adoptions by the Texas State Textbook Committee continue the state's suppression of the topic of evolution in science textbooks.

ncse.ngo

 

[Seymour Flops]

Actually, they do now. For instance, biology textbooks across the country are deficient in teaching about evolution because they want those textbooks to be purchased in Texas.

Censorship of Evolution in Texas | National Center for Science Education

Recent textbook adoptions by the Texas State Textbook Committee continue the state's suppression of the topic of evolution in science textbooks.

ncse.ngo

I blame the Darwinist fanatics for that.

All they would have had to do is to respectfully acknowledge that natural selection is not "settled science" in any way. It's one interpretation of natural history and the variety of species on Earth. No scientific experiment has ever been done that provides evidence for it. It's a hypothesis that was glommed onto because it was the first reasonable idea for how life on Earth could exist without some guiding intelligence.

But no.

They fought in court against textbook stickers encouraging critical thinking in science. Critical thinking, a bad thing in science. Damned if they didn't find a judge who agreed with that.

Private: Court Says Evolution Stickers in Textbooks Are Unconstitutional | ACS

www.acslaw.org

Now, they will have to teach their kids about evolution at home. They should have time, now that the schools are giving up on teaching math and focusing on alternate sexuality for elementary kids.

 

[JoeB131]

I blame the Darwinist fanatics for that.

All they would have had to do is to respectfully acknowledge that natural selection is not "settled science" in any way. It's one interpretation of natural history and the variety of species on Earth. No scientific experiment has ever been done that provides evidence for it. It's a hypothesis that was glommed onto because it was the first reasonable idea for how life on Earth could exist without some guiding intelligence.

Evolution is a settled science. There is absolutely zero doubt that evolution happened. We have fossils, genetics, physiology, etc. that all prove evolution happened. You have an old book with a talking snake in it.

Now, I get WHY the Bible-thumping inbreds don't want evolution taught. If man EVOLVED into his current form through a process of natural selection, that would eliminate the need for a "God" in the model, and what would the religious hucksters have to scam money out of people with?

But no.

They fought in court against textbook stickers encouraging critical thinking in science. Critical thinking, a bad thing in science. Damned if they didn't find a judge who agreed with that.

There's a difference between "Critical thinking" and "Magical Thinking". Religion is magical thinking. You want there to be a God who hates Gays and Mexicans, just like you do. You want to believe that there's a life after death.

Now, they will have to teach their kids about evolution at home. They should have time, now that the schools are giving up on teaching math and focusing on alternate sexuality for elementary kids.

What will happen is kids will have an incomplete understanding of science which will hobble them in getting those STEM jobs.

Meanwhile, the Chinese don't bother with such nonsense, which is why they are running circles around us.

Maybe we need to teach these kids how to speak Mandarin...

 

[Couchpotato]

Um, no, the community decides what is appropriate and hires professionals who know what they are doing.

No it doesn't. It might decided what's offered at the school and what the graduation requirements are but they don't decide what individual children take as far as classes go. Nor should it, That's the job of the parents. If parents don't want their kid to take instruction on sex from the school that's their business. It's no different then them opting to not take Trig. There are tons of kids who "opt out" of Trigonometry (by not signing up) and oddly no one is up at arms about it. If the school wants to offer a sex class gay or otherwise, that's fine. It shouldn't be mandatory.

Which is beside the point because the icky gay book that has your knickers in a twist isn't assigned reading.

Please don't project your issues onto me. My entire problem with this is the State inserting itself into the role of the parents. I don't care about the subject of the class. Read whatever "icky gay book" you want. Have a class that shows nothing men fucking each other up the ass for all I care. But if parents decide their kids aren't taking that class you don't get to decide they are.

For every mouth-breathing Christian who hates the gays, there's a tolerant parent who is just fine with this material.

And they are free to have their kids in the class. So cool huh? These parents werent trying to get the class pulled, just their kid pulled from it.

Actually, they do now. For instance, biology textbooks across the country are deficient in teaching about evolution because they want those textbooks to be purchased in Texas.

Censorship of Evolution in Texas | National Center for Science Education

Recent textbook adoptions by the Texas State Textbook Committee continue the state's suppression of the topic of evolution in science textbooks.

ncse.ngo

Cool story. Not the issue.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Please don't project your issues onto me. My entire problem with this is the State inserting itself into the role of the parents. I don't care about the subject of the class. Read whatever "icky gay book" you want. Have a class that shows nothing men fucking each other up the ass for all I care. But if parents decide their kids aren't taking that class you don't get to decide they are.

It's not just about “icky” books depicting sex acts between consenting adults. That would be inappropriate for minors, anyway, but the shit that the subhuman perverted piece of shit JoeB131 defends explicitly depicts minors engaging in sex acts with each other, and with adults, in a manner that is clearly intended to depict this behavior as normal and proper.

You have to be seriously fucked in the had, and in the soul (assuming you still have one) to think that this is in any way acceptable content for minors. I'm not talking about normal levels of fucked up. I'm talking about extreme JoeB131-level fucked up.

 

[JoeB131]

It's not just about “icky” books depicting sex acts between consenting adults. That would be inappropriate for minors, anyway, but the shit that the subhuman perverted piece of shit @JoeB131 defends explicitly depicts minors engaging in sex acts with each other, and with adults, in a manner that is clearly intended to depict this behavior as normal and proper.

You have to be seriously fucked in the had, and in the soul (assuming you still have one) to think that this is in any way acceptable content for minors. I'm not talking about normal levels of fucked up. I'm talking about extreme @JoeB131-level fucked up.

Um, given what Joseph Smith and Brigham Young and other Mormon Elders did to their "Child Brides" for decades, you really don't have much room to talk.

No, an adult shouldn't have sex with a minor.

Reality- minors are going to have sex whether we like it or not. You can give them all the moral guidance in the world, but eventually, they are going to have to make the mistakes on their own.

 

[JoeB131]

No it doesn't. It might decided what's offered at the school and what the graduation requirements are but they don't decide what individual children take as far as classes go. Nor should it, That's the job of the parents. If parents don't want their kid to take instruction on sex from the school that's their business. It's no different then them opting to not take Trig. There are tons of kids who "opt out" of Trigonometry (by not signing up) and oddly no one is up at arms about it. If the school wants to offer a sex class gay or otherwise, that's fine. It shouldn't be mandatory.

Most kids will never use Trig.

Almost all of them will use their genitals.

Sex education DOES have a positive effect. For instance, the Teen Pregnancy rate has dropped by 80% since sex education was introduced. The problem with not offering it is that kids will just blunder into sex with trial and error.

Please don't project your issues onto me. My entire problem with this is the State inserting itself into the role of the parents. I don't care about the subject of the class. Read whatever "icky gay book" you want. Have a class that shows nothing men fucking each other up the ass for all I care. But if parents decide their kids aren't taking that class you don't get to decide they are.

Quite the contrary, I don't feel like paying for the welfare for all the teen moms who end up getting pregnant because they thought they couldn't get pregnant if they only had sex once.

And they are free to have their kids in the class. So cool huh? These parents werent trying to get the class pulled, just their kid pulled from it.

And the district decided this was necessary instruction.

Cool story. Not the issue.

Completely the issue. We can't let religious fanatics dictate policy.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Um, given what Joseph Smith and Brigham Young and other Mormon Elders did to their "Child Brides" for decades, you really don't have much room to talk.

Your hateful lies about my religion are not the least bit relevant to this discussion.

The only thing you accomplish with them is to show everyone what a hateful lying piece of shit you are; and how low you are willing and eager to go to support and defend the destructive sexual abuse of children.

Even if your lies were true, they still amount to nothing better than a very poor attempt at a tu quoque, arguing that it is OK to for you to support a blatant and very harmful evil, because someone else some generations ago allegedly engaged in a related evil. But you don't even have that.

You don't have anything that hides the fact that you are openly, unabashedly on the side of those who, in our time, in our culture, sexually abuse children, to the great harm of those children. You do not have anything that hides what an evil, malevolent, soulless, subhuman piece of shit you truly are.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Completely the issue. We can't let religious fanatics dictate policy.

Right. Better to let sexually-depraved, Godless, sociopathic pedophiles dictate those policies.

What could possibly go wrong?

 

[Couchpotato]

Most kids will never use Trig.

Most kids will never have gay sex.....

Most kids will never use evolution or algebra, or us history, or 95% of what they learn in HS or college.

Almost all of them will use their genitals.

Almost all of them will have a need to know how to swim, drive, balance a check book, negotiate a car loan, open a bank account, etc etc. Odd the schools dont teach any of that shit.

Sex education DOES have a positive effect. For instance, the Teen Pregnancy rate has dropped by 80% since sex education was introduced. The problem with not offering it is that kids will just blunder into sex with trial and error.

Irrelevant.

Quite the contrary, I don't feel like paying for the welfare for all the teen moms who end up getting pregnant because they thought they couldn't get pregnant if they only had sex once.



And the district decided this was necessary instruction.

Cool story. They shouldnt be allowed to mandate any instruction the parents feel is inappropriate. There's nothing you're going to say that's going to convince me that a parents right to raise their children should be superseded by the Government.

Completely the issue. We can't let religious fanatics dictate policy.

These parents aren't dictating policy for anyone but THEIR KID you moron. The lawsuit didn't ask for the course of instruction to be stopped. It didn't ask for anyone else's kid to be taken out of the class dd it?

Talk about facist.....

 

[BS Filter]

Oh, just because you don't describe Red Hot Mormon Love (God, there's a good name for a parody film!) doesn't mean you don't obsess. Seriously, half your posts are screaming about gay people.

Tell you true, Bob, I don't spend time thinking about gay people other than I think they shouldn't be mistreated by religious assholes. What they do on their own time is their business.



That would indicate that the numbers are probably HIGHER than we think they are, and they are pretty high.

Remember, these polls are how many people ADMIT to anal or oral sex.

Sex habits of children is no one's business but the parents. Your posts are pretty much about grooming, although I'm positive that you will deny it.

 

[BS Filter]

Most kids will never use Trig.

Almost all of them will use their genitals.

Sex education DOES have a positive effect. For instance, the Teen Pregnancy rate has dropped by 80% since sex education was introduced. The problem with not offering it is that kids will just blunder into sex with trial and error.



Quite the contrary, I don't feel like paying for the welfare for all the teen moms who end up getting pregnant because they thought they couldn't get pregnant if they only had sex once.


And the district decided this was necessary instruction.


Completely the issue. We can't let religious fanatics dictate policy.

99.9% of Christians aren't religious fanatics. You're Christophobic.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

99.9% of Christians aren't religious fanatics. You're Christophobic.

JoeB131 seems to consider anyone who holds to any basic standards of ethics, morality, or decency, to be a “religious fanatic”. He's sort of an extreme manifestation of a cliché to which many on the left wrong conform, in using “religion” as a vague bogyman on which to blame any opposition for whatever madness, evil, and degeneracy they want to promote.

 

[JoeB131]

99.9% of Christians aren't religious fanatics. You're Christophobic.

Witch burnings. Crusades, religious wars, inquisitions... One should be reasonably afraid of religious fanatics. Nothing is more dangerous than a crazy person who thinks "God" is on his side.

Speaking of which.

@JoeB131 seems to consider anyone who holds to any basic standards of ethics, morality, or decency, to be a “religious fanatic”. He's sort of an extreme manifestation of a cliché to which many on the left wrong conform, in using “religion” as a vague bogyman on which to blame any opposition for whatever madness, evil, and degeneracy they want to promote.

Okay, Bob... one more time. Tell me why Homosexuality is "evil" or "wrong" that doesn't involve some variation on "God Says It's Bad!" or "I think it's icky!"

I have a much simpler definition of Right and Wrong, which involves zero sky pixies.

Does an action harm another person? Murder on that standard is immoral. So is theft. So is rape.

So who is harmed by two adults having sex you don't like?

Oh, that's right. NO one.

 

[JoeB131]

Sex habits of children is no one's business but the parents. Your posts are pretty much about grooming, although I'm positive that you will deny it.

Naw, I'll just report you to the mods.

 

[BS Filter]

Witch burnings. Crusades, religious wars, inquisitions... One should be reasonably afraid of religious fanatics. Nothing is more dangerous than a crazy person who thinks "God" is on his side.

Speaking of which.



Okay, Bob... one more time. Tell me why Homosexuality is "evil" or "wrong" that doesn't involve some variation on "God Says It's Bad!" or "I think it's icky!"

I have a much simpler definition of Right and Wrong, which involves zero sky pixies.

Does an action harm another person? Murder on that standard is immoral. So is theft. So is rape.

So who is harmed by two adults having sex you don't like?

Oh, that's right. NO one.

So you're living in the 1600s? Cool.