Rainbows Are “Sexually Suggestive”

[Ravi]

So Gunny, you think rainbow shirts, etc., should be banned from schools?

 

[Gunny]

Gotta love that tyrrany of the majority. The minorities must be oppressed at all times.

The fallacy to your statement is that it has to be one or the other. Truly tolerant and respectful people can live in a happy medium without tramping all over someone else's dream to force their own on everyone else.

But if one HAS to choose, no society is going to stand long allowing the minority to dictate to the majority. Eventually, the majority is going to rise up and rebel.

The problem here is eveyone's lost their balls. They've forgotten what brought them to the dance. Much easier to lest some lameasses in DC think for them.

 

[Diuretic]

The fallacy to your statement is that it has to be one or the other. Truly tolerant and respectful people can live in a happy medium without tramping all over someone else's dream to force their own on everyone else.

But if one HAS to choose, no society is going to stand long allowing the minority to dictate to the majority. Eventually, the majority is going to rise up and rebel.

The problem here is eveyone's lost their balls. They've forgotten what brought them to the dance. Much easier to lest some lameasses in DC think for them.

Sorry Gunny, you just made my argument. Majority rules is your position.

Eventually, the majority is going to rise up and rebel.

Says it all.

 

[Gunny]

So Gunny, you think rainbow shirts, etc., should be banned from schools?

I do not consider public schools an appropriate forum for children to parrot their parents' political opinions.

I also have a problem with the double standard. If this child was wearing a swastika, klan emblem or Confederate Battle Flag, how many of you that are more than happy to stand up for the "rights" of some kid promoting homosexuality would be doing the same for the latter? Unless something's changed since last time this got tossed out here, NONE. You'd all be deflecting to and arguing against the intolerance of the message instead of the child's right to express his/her political beliefs.

 

[Gunny]

Sorry Gunny, you just made my argument. Majority rules is your position.

Eventually, the majority is going to rise up and rebel.

Says it all.

No, I haven't made your argument and you completely ignored half my post to cherrypick what you wanted to find. I thought I could expect better than that from you, at least. From some, I expect nothing more.

Bur DO tell ... if it comes down to one or the other and compromise is not an option, why SHOULD the majority be forced to suffer the tyranny of the minority? Why should noncomformists be allowed to dictate the rules?

And remember, I have not forgotten your socialist thinking; which, based on absolute conformity.

Please explain.

 

[mattskramer]

Actually I do. Why should I have to walk away when I am not the extremist nimrod doing the offending?

That's one of THE biggest problems here. Since when did average, normal-thinking people who are the vast majority subjugate themselves to the vocal extremist minorities?

Where exactly does the Constitution emasculate the majority and force it to suffer the tyranny of the minorities? It doesn't and it takes a backwards-assed viewpoint to believe that it does.

Flip it around. Why should I have to walk away when I think that you are the offending one? Is it your position that the majority may speak and the minority must keep silent?

 

[mattskramer]

People like me turning off the tv has resulted in a choice between absolute idiots like Obama, Clinton and McCain as the representatives of this Nation. It's just a matter of which of the 3 liberals I want dictating what we're supposed to think and fleecing my wallet.

Choose CBN or Fox.

 

[mattskramer]

No, I haven't made your argument and you completely ignored half my post to cherrypick what you wanted to find. I thought I could expect better than that from you, at least. From some, I expect nothing more.

Bur DO tell ... if it comes down to one or the other and compromise is not an option, why SHOULD the majority be forced to suffer the tyranny of the minority? Why should noncomformists be allowed to dictate the rules?

And remember, I have not forgotten your socialist thinking; which, based on absolute conformity.

Please explain.

It is called freedom of speech. Don't ya just love it.

 

[Ravi]

I do not consider public schools an appropriate forum for children to parrot their parents' political opinions.

I also have a problem with the double standard. If this child was wearing a swastika, klan emblem or Confederate Battle Flag, how many of you that are more than happy to stand up for the "rights" of some kid promoting homosexuality would be doing the same for the latter? Unless something's changed since last time this got tossed out here, NONE. You'd all be deflecting to and arguing against the intolerance of the message instead of the child's right to express his/her political beliefs.

Kids at our schools wear or display the con flag. It's called freedom of speech.

I don't see tolerance as a political belief. I also don't accept that they are simply reflecting their parent's opinion, not that has much to do with the argument.

 

[Larkinn]

Actually I do. Why should I have to walk away when I am not the extremist nimrod doing the offending?

Because there is an amendment in the Constitution that protects him,. and not you.

That's one of THE biggest problems here. Since when did average, normal-thinking people who are the vast majority subjugate themselves to the vocal extremist minorities?

Subjugate yourself? You mean why aren't you allowed to oppress a minority because you don't like their viewpoints?

Where exactly does the Constitution emasculate the majority and force it to suffer the tyranny of the minorities? It doesn't and it takes a backwards-assed viewpoint to believe that it does.

Tyranny? Not quite.

The fallacy to your statement is that it has to be one or the other. Truly tolerant and respectful people can live in a happy medium without tramping all over someone else's dream to force their own on everyone else.

Tolerant and respectful like letting other people speak without wanting the government to step in and stop them? Yeah that would be people other than you.

 

[Diuretic]

No, I haven't made your argument and you completely ignored half my post to cherrypick what you wanted to find. I thought I could expect better than that from you, at least. From some, I expect nothing more.

Bur DO tell ... if it comes down to one or the other and compromise is not an option, why SHOULD the majority be forced to suffer the tyranny of the minority? Why should noncomformists be allowed to dictate the rules?

And remember, I have not forgotten your socialist thinking; which, based on absolute conformity.

Please explain.

I don't often cherrypick because I hate it being done to me but when I see what is possibly an inconsistency I will point it out.

Anyway, the point is that your thinking is that the majority rules. Fine if you're a member of the majority but tough cheese if you're in a minority.

You have a problem with nonconformists and you accuse me of holding a view of society which is based on absolute conformity.

What's it going to be? Is there room for nonconformity in a society or is there not? Is it majority rules and that's that or are minorities considered as deserving of rights and equality?

 

[Gunny]

I don't often cherrypick because I hate it being done to me but when I see what is possibly an inconsistency I will point it out.

Anyway, the point is that your thinking is that the majority rules. Fine if you're a member of the majority but tough cheese if you're in a minority.

You have a problem with nonconformists and you accuse me of holding a view of society which is based on absolute conformity.

What's it going to be? Is there room for nonconformity in a society or is there not? Is it majority rules and that's that or are minorities considered as deserving of rights and equality?

And? If I disagree with the majority, and the law the majority makes, I may disagree but I accept the law as the law.

I don't have any problem at all with nonconformists. If you look up "nonconformist" in the dictionary, it probably uses my teenage years as an example.

However, noncomformists need to accept the responsibility for their decisions. I was a long-haired, dope-smoking, bell-bottoms and sandals-wearing "freak" during my day but I accepted the consequences of my actions. I didn't need to ask why Sears didn't want me working for them. When I walked in for the interview the first thing the guy looked at was my hair. End of story.

I didn't get it cut. I didn't bitch. I found a different job.

Homosexuals currently have equality under the law. I accept THAT.

None of which ahs ANYTHING to do with the fact I firmly believe a public school is a place for kids to learn a basic education, not to parrot their parents' political views. That has nothing tio do with conformity and everything to do with the purpose of the institution. Politics and religion are a needless distraction beyond being covered as a topic in classrooms.

 

[Larkinn]

However, noncomformists need to accept the responsibility for their decisions. I was a long-haired, dope-smoking, bell-bottoms and sandals-wearing "freak" during my day but I accepted the consequences of my actions. I didn't need to ask why Sears didn't want me working for them. When I walked in for the interview the first thing the guy looked at was my hair. End of story.

I didn't get it cut. I didn't bitch. I found a different job.

Sears isn't the government.

Homosexuals currently have equality under the law. I accept THAT.

Gays can marry in all 50 states? Since when?

When you can say that one demographic of people can do something and another demographic can't under the law, merely because they are gay, thats called discrimination.

None of which ahs ANYTHING to do with the fact I firmly believe a public school is a place for kids to learn a basic education, not to parrot their parents' political views. That has nothing tio do with conformity and everything to do with the purpose of the institution. Politics and religion are a needless distraction beyond being covered as a topic in classrooms.

The thing about freedom of speech is that you don't restrict unless there is a compellling reason to. The standard is unrestricted and then you restrict it if you have a damn good reason. That its "needless" doesn't matter. If we start restricting speech based on that, thats a slope thats going to go downhill and fast.

 

[Diuretic]

I am now going to spend hours trying to get my head around Gunny being "a self-confessed long-haired, dope-smoking, bell-bottoms and sandals-wearing "freak".

Man this is going to take some work