N.C. Parents upset over Homosexual Children's book

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
The word unbelief is in The Bible which you would probably have known if you had read it. You ignorance about the word was just a symptom of your larger ignorance about God as a whole. The rest of your statements are also a result of that and there is no need to tackle them at all. You ignorance and your unbelief are going hand in hand. The real way to address it is for you to determine that you will try to learn about God yourself. That is what I am praying for my friend.

I'm in disbelief about your ignorance!

The word "unbelief" may be in your bible as an English translation of the Latin translation of the Greek text that was translated from the original Aramaic, but trying to use such a weak, watered down point to prove anything is like trying to pull a rabbit out of a hat, bugs, without the hat or hare.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Moonbeam,

Well I don't think I would agree. I been curious about sex since I slid down a flag pole in kindergarten. It was my first 21 gun salute and definitely got my attention.

Well, I guess kids do need understanding about all their biological functions. It is just the ' who the teachers are and what they teach' that I'm concerned about. I prefer teaching about those issues from my perspective and cultural background. Now, that may not be the most appropriate means if the parental teachers are way biased in some manner or another. I teach just the facts without the 'God said' or any of the 'you'll go blind' associations..
But, I do see your point. We need proper instruction from proper instructors at the proper time.

But I don't pretend to know the who what when where and why, LR, I guess in part because having been sexualized at such a tender age and all, well, I just don't trust my judgment in such matters.

I can hear Jimmy Hendrix asken, "Have you ever been sexualized at a yourn age?"

Kain, be careful you don't get sexualized in your dotage.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Moonbeam,

Well I don't think I would agree. I been curious about sex since I slid down a flag pole in kindergarten. It was my first 21 gun salute and definitely got my attention.

Well, I guess kids do need understanding about all their biological functions. It is just the ' who the teachers are and what they teach' that I'm concerned about. I prefer teaching about those issues from my perspective and cultural background. Now, that may not be the most appropriate means if the parental teachers are way biased in some manner or another. I teach just the facts without the 'God said' or any of the 'you'll go blind' associations..
But, I do see your point. We need proper instruction from proper instructors at the proper time.

But I don't pretend to know the who what when where and why, LR, I guess in part because having been sexualized at such a tender age and all, well, I just don't trust my judgment in such matters.

I can hear Jimmy Hendrix asken, "Have you ever been sexualized at a yourn age?"

Kain, be careful you don't get sexualized in your dotage.

Hehehehe, Jimi Hendrix is way before my time... You must have some of them LP hand me down music thingi. What do they play on BTW? One thing for sure, though, is the folks all along the watch tower know. They know and know they know cuz they said they know so they must know. I know only what my Gramma taught me.. that girls are evil and you go blind and don't eat apples so I conclude that God wants folks to only be with their own kind... don't be unequally yoked and all that must mean what Gramma said.. NO?

 

[DoubleL]

Boy this topic has been all over the place, You are a bigot if you don't want your kids reading this book, Would you kill in the name of God, The flag and I know I left a lot of things out, Someone gave up God cause of something that happen to him, Fact is there is right and there is wrong and all the talk in the world can't make wrong right and I would hate to be someone that thought this sick awful life was all there was

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: DoubleL
Boy this topic has been all over the place, You are a bigot if you don't want your kids reading this book, Would you kill in the name of God, The flag and I know I left a lot of things out, Someone gave up God cause of something that happen to him, Fact is there is right and there is wrong and all the talk in the world can't make wrong right and I would hate to be someone that thought this sick awful life was all there was

?

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
oppression of freedom of independent thought is definitely a left-wing objective;

otherwise the term 'bigot' wouldn't be thrown around so idiotically, as it's 'OK' to censor bigots, isn't it? and it's OK to censor those that want to 'oppress' you, isn't it? and it's wrong to allow people to 'force' their religion down your through, isn't it?

How is this oppression of freedom of independent thought?

I'll ask this again. ^

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: DoubleL
Boy this topic has been all over the place, You are a bigot if you don't want your kids reading this book, Would you kill in the name of God, The flag and I know I left a lot of things out, Someone gave up God cause of something that happen to him, Fact is there is right and there is wrong and all the talk in the world can't make wrong right and I would hate to be someone that thought this sick awful life was all there was

But, that is exactly the point. Sort of, anyhow. It is OK to disagree with the lifestyle of anyone or any group that you please. That is your right. But, you shouldn't be able to band together a flock of like minded dis-agreers and seek to deny some other group rights that you enjoy and that they should also be able to enjoy. The issue is: The Lifestyle of the homosexual is not illegal and, therefore, the participants have rights. Not more rights just equal rights. You may, I suppose, endeavor to deny access to homosexuals who seek entry into a private group like a church... while you pray for their souls but, not out of McDonald's while you feast on a Quarter Pounder. Equal access and equal rights.
The "I would hate to be someone that thought this sick awful life was all there was" from your above is exactly the point. The after death potential is for the individual and of no concern of the government. I doubt God will permit entry to the entire Catholic Church membership notwithstanding the condition of the individual souls nor can an act of Congress act in God's stead.

 

[AznMaverick]

i would be too

 

[przero]

"But, you shouldn't be able to band together a flock of like minded dis-agreers and seek to deny some other group rights that you enjoy and that they should also be able to enjoy."

Now who decides what group should have equal rights? Should polygamists? Necrophiliacs? Child molesters? NAMBLA? Who decides? Just tell me that?

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: przero
"But, you shouldn't be able to band together a flock of like minded dis-agreers and seek to deny some other group rights that you enjoy and that they should also be able to enjoy."

Now who decides what group should have equal rights? Should polygamists? Necrophiliacs? Child molesters? NAMBLA? Who decides? Just tell me that?

Two consenting adults of sound mind.

 

[RadBrad]

Originally posted by: tec699
Bugs..

I'm not gay and why would you get so worked up about this anyway. I don't care what anyone does on their spare time and I don't care.

As long as they don't post their views about homosexuallity here.


Give em hell bugs!!

 

[przero]

"Two consenting adults of sound mind. "

So, ANYTHING 2 adults agree on to do is fine? It's there right to publish books on it and have kids read it?

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: przero
"But, you shouldn't be able to band together a flock of like minded dis-agreers and seek to deny some other group rights that you enjoy and that they should also be able to enjoy." Now who decides what group should have equal rights? Should polygamists? Necrophiliacs? Child molesters? NAMBLA? Who decides? Just tell me that?

Thats the big question, that this debate across society is hopefully resolving. If we examine each topic individually and rationally, and ignore the 'slippery slope' fallacy then we should be able to find some coherent answers.

 

[przero]

The "we" being?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: przero
"But, you shouldn't be able to band together a flock of like minded dis-agreers and seek to deny some other group rights that you enjoy and that they should also be able to enjoy."

Now who decides what group should have equal rights? Should polygamists? Necrophiliacs? Child molesters? NAMBLA? Who decides? Just tell me that?

Those acts are illegal. Homosexuality is not.

 

[przero]

so suppose "we" decide to pass a law making homosexuality illegal?

 

[dpm]

well, that's one of the potential pitfalls of living in a democracy - the tyranny of the majority.

However, the world has moved on a long way since gays were put into concentration camps, so I don't think that we need worry about that. At least not in America.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: dpm
well, that's one of the potential pitfalls of living in a democracy - the tyranny of the majority.

However, the world has moved on a long way since gays were put into concentration camps, so I don't think that we need worry about that. At least not in America.

Who knows? Maybe przero secretly (or not so secretly) wishes for that to be so. After all, homosexuality is a sin, perhaps the worst of sins, and we must eradicate it from our Christian society.

 

[przero]

You guys miss my point. The polygamist is in a concentration camp as is the child molester. Who decides to put them there?

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: przero
"But, you shouldn't be able to band together a flock of like minded dis-agreers and seek to deny some other group rights that you enjoy and that they should also be able to enjoy."

Now who decides what group should have equal rights? Should polygamists? Necrophiliacs? Child molesters? NAMBLA? Who decides? Just tell me that?

Should polygamists?
----------------------
Yes as long as it's consentual.

Necrophiliacs?
------------------
One party can't agree is he/she is DEAD so theres not consent.

Child molesters?
--------------------
One party is under Undue influence being a child and is universally recognized as not bieng of sound judgement so theres not consent....however if a judge emacipates them then yes since by law they are now recognized as an adult. Everyone was a "child molester" during the victorian era by todays standards BTW.

NAMBLA?
------------
Ditto

Who decides?
------------------
Consenting adults decide the ralationship they wish to be in. Why do you care?

 

[przero]

So you are saying society can issue no rules regarding adult relationships or adult/child relaationship if a judge agrees?

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: przero
So you are saying society can issue no rules regarding adult relationships or adult/child relaationship if a judge agrees?

Your question is just so GAY! Not to mention confused and internally inconsistent. The very phrase "if a judge agrees" implies rules.

 

[przero]

agrees to emancipate.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: przero
So you are saying society can issue no rules regarding adult relationships or adult/child relaationship if a judge agrees?

If the Supreme court disagrees, any law that bigots pass is unconstitutional, yes. That's why polygamists can't marry and people of different races can and Homosexuals soon will be able to wed. The courts have to go by the Constitution. That's why the bigots want to amend it and put bigotry into law. Bad idea. It's not good for the soul.

 

[przero]

SWo if I don't agree with you I am a bigot? If I don't hire who you say I have to hire I am a bigot? What's up with that? Where's my rights?