[LA Reader]

I think we did the right thing killing him.

If have captured him alive, it would have turned into a circus. No trial, no jail, no argument over where to keep him, no 20 year trials, no argument over death penalty, just shot dead. Beautifully done.

Only bummer is that they dumped his body in the ocean. They should’ve mummified him and put it in the Smithsonian.

Because now the conspiracy nuts going to keep insisting he is really alive and Obama faked it for election. You all know this BS is coming….

[LA Reader]

I think we did the right thing killing him.

If have captured him alive, it would have turned into a circus. No trial, no jail, no argument over where to keep him, no 20 year trials, no argument over death penalty, just shot dead. Beautifully done.

Only bummer is that they dumped his body in the ocean. They should’ve mummified him and put it in the Smithsonian.

Because now the conspiracy nuts going to keep insisting he is really alive and Obama faked it for election. You all know this BS is coming….

[LA Reader]

I think we did the right thing killing him.

If have captured him alive, it would have turned into a circus. No trial, no jail, no argument over where to keep him, no 20 year trials, no argument over death penalty, just shot dead. Beautifully done.

Only bummer is that they dumped his body in the ocean. They should’ve mummified him and put it in the Smithsonian.

Because now the conspiracy nuts going to keep insisting he is really alive and Obama faked it for election. You all know this BS is coming….

[LA Reader]

I think we did the right thing killing him.

If have captured him alive, it would have turned into a circus. No trial, no jail, no argument over where to keep him, no 20 year trials, no argument over death penalty, just shot dead. Beautifully done.

Only bummer is that they dumped his body in the ocean. They should’ve mummified him and put it in the Smithsonian.

Because now the conspiracy nuts going to keep insisting he is really alive and Obama faked it for election. You all know this BS is coming….

[LA Reader]

I think we did the right thing killing him.

If have captured him alive, it would have turned into a circus. No trial, no jail, no argument over where to keep him, no 20 year trials, no argument over death penalty, just shot dead. Beautifully done.

Only bummer is that they dumped his body in the ocean. They should’ve mummified him and put it in the Smithsonian.

Because now the conspiracy nuts going to keep insisting he is really alive and Obama faked it for election. You all know this BS is coming….

[LA Reader]

[quote=Rustico]
Kids come into life vunerable as to identity formation and social function in many factors. Kind of like when a soldier goes to war. Homosexuality is a type of PTSD reaction that children acquire to unusual circumstances, subtle and extreme. I don’t want to codify reinforcement of that with Homoagenda and resulting politics based social engineering.

Homosexuals should have the same protections as anyone, else but promotion via a special class because of an acquired “identity” is wrong, even if most of them can’t change, or are thrilled to be gay.[/quote]

What you are saying makes no sense what so ever. With your logic we mind as well abolish Americans with Disabilities Acts all together. Or how about treatments of injured Vets? They all get promotion via special class via acquired “identity”. Right? Kids who lose an eye sight due to illness? How about people with PTSD? They shouldn’t be treated with some special consideration? Should we yank any articles published by government who’s aim is to expand the understanding of PTSD in the communities?

You aim to cast gays into shadows and make them live as 2nd class citizens. No matter how you dress it or try to add logic to it to make it sound nice, it is what it is. Your aim is very clear.

[quote=paramount]Being gay should not define a special class of citizens or special status; and gays should not be recognized in a public school curriculum in the way that is being proposed.

Being gay is a behavior, not a social class.[/quote]

It is a social class as long as people like you and rustico discriminate against them. If discrimination didn’t exist then there will be no need to define them as social class but since people like you exist, there’s the need and kids should be taught the history of this violent oppression.

[LA Reader]

[quote=Rustico]
Kids come into life vunerable as to identity formation and social function in many factors. Kind of like when a soldier goes to war. Homosexuality is a type of PTSD reaction that children acquire to unusual circumstances, subtle and extreme. I don’t want to codify reinforcement of that with Homoagenda and resulting politics based social engineering.

Homosexuals should have the same protections as anyone, else but promotion via a special class because of an acquired “identity” is wrong, even if most of them can’t change, or are thrilled to be gay.[/quote]

What you are saying makes no sense what so ever. With your logic we mind as well abolish Americans with Disabilities Acts all together. Or how about treatments of injured Vets? They all get promotion via special class via acquired “identity”. Right? Kids who lose an eye sight due to illness? How about people with PTSD? They shouldn’t be treated with some special consideration? Should we yank any articles published by government who’s aim is to expand the understanding of PTSD in the communities?

You aim to cast gays into shadows and make them live as 2nd class citizens. No matter how you dress it or try to add logic to it to make it sound nice, it is what it is. Your aim is very clear.

[quote=paramount]Being gay should not define a special class of citizens or special status; and gays should not be recognized in a public school curriculum in the way that is being proposed.

Being gay is a behavior, not a social class.[/quote]

It is a social class as long as people like you and rustico discriminate against them. If discrimination didn’t exist then there will be no need to define them as social class but since people like you exist, there’s the need and kids should be taught the history of this violent oppression.

[LA Reader]

[quote=Rustico]
Kids come into life vunerable as to identity formation and social function in many factors. Kind of like when a soldier goes to war. Homosexuality is a type of PTSD reaction that children acquire to unusual circumstances, subtle and extreme. I don’t want to codify reinforcement of that with Homoagenda and resulting politics based social engineering.

Homosexuals should have the same protections as anyone, else but promotion via a special class because of an acquired “identity” is wrong, even if most of them can’t change, or are thrilled to be gay.[/quote]

What you are saying makes no sense what so ever. With your logic we mind as well abolish Americans with Disabilities Acts all together. Or how about treatments of injured Vets? They all get promotion via special class via acquired “identity”. Right? Kids who lose an eye sight due to illness? How about people with PTSD? They shouldn’t be treated with some special consideration? Should we yank any articles published by government who’s aim is to expand the understanding of PTSD in the communities?

You aim to cast gays into shadows and make them live as 2nd class citizens. No matter how you dress it or try to add logic to it to make it sound nice, it is what it is. Your aim is very clear.

[quote=paramount]Being gay should not define a special class of citizens or special status; and gays should not be recognized in a public school curriculum in the way that is being proposed.

Being gay is a behavior, not a social class.[/quote]

It is a social class as long as people like you and rustico discriminate against them. If discrimination didn’t exist then there will be no need to define them as social class but since people like you exist, there’s the need and kids should be taught the history of this violent oppression.

[LA Reader]

[quote=Rustico]
Kids come into life vunerable as to identity formation and social function in many factors. Kind of like when a soldier goes to war. Homosexuality is a type of PTSD reaction that children acquire to unusual circumstances, subtle and extreme. I don’t want to codify reinforcement of that with Homoagenda and resulting politics based social engineering.

Homosexuals should have the same protections as anyone, else but promotion via a special class because of an acquired “identity” is wrong, even if most of them can’t change, or are thrilled to be gay.[/quote]

What you are saying makes no sense what so ever. With your logic we mind as well abolish Americans with Disabilities Acts all together. Or how about treatments of injured Vets? They all get promotion via special class via acquired “identity”. Right? Kids who lose an eye sight due to illness? How about people with PTSD? They shouldn’t be treated with some special consideration? Should we yank any articles published by government who’s aim is to expand the understanding of PTSD in the communities?

You aim to cast gays into shadows and make them live as 2nd class citizens. No matter how you dress it or try to add logic to it to make it sound nice, it is what it is. Your aim is very clear.

[quote=paramount]Being gay should not define a special class of citizens or special status; and gays should not be recognized in a public school curriculum in the way that is being proposed.

Being gay is a behavior, not a social class.[/quote]

It is a social class as long as people like you and rustico discriminate against them. If discrimination didn’t exist then there will be no need to define them as social class but since people like you exist, there’s the need and kids should be taught the history of this violent oppression.

[LA Reader]

[quote=Rustico]
Kids come into life vunerable as to identity formation and social function in many factors. Kind of like when a soldier goes to war. Homosexuality is a type of PTSD reaction that children acquire to unusual circumstances, subtle and extreme. I don’t want to codify reinforcement of that with Homoagenda and resulting politics based social engineering.

Homosexuals should have the same protections as anyone, else but promotion via a special class because of an acquired “identity” is wrong, even if most of them can’t change, or are thrilled to be gay.[/quote]

What you are saying makes no sense what so ever. With your logic we mind as well abolish Americans with Disabilities Acts all together. Or how about treatments of injured Vets? They all get promotion via special class via acquired “identity”. Right? Kids who lose an eye sight due to illness? How about people with PTSD? They shouldn’t be treated with some special consideration? Should we yank any articles published by government who’s aim is to expand the understanding of PTSD in the communities?

You aim to cast gays into shadows and make them live as 2nd class citizens. No matter how you dress it or try to add logic to it to make it sound nice, it is what it is. Your aim is very clear.

[quote=paramount]Being gay should not define a special class of citizens or special status; and gays should not be recognized in a public school curriculum in the way that is being proposed.

Being gay is a behavior, not a social class.[/quote]

It is a social class as long as people like you and rustico discriminate against them. If discrimination didn’t exist then there will be no need to define them as social class but since people like you exist, there’s the need and kids should be taught the history of this violent oppression.

[LA Reader]

[quote=Rustico]
I am perplexed that you would want to say what LA Reader said. He was pretty clearly not following what I was saying and he was aggressive and haughty with his first post in rebuttal. My question about his family was a much more mild turnabout on that.[/quote]

I still don’t understand what you are saying. So you are saying that exposure to normal environmental “gay acceptance” (such as interacting with gay family friend, seeing gays on TV in none-negative way, seeing a friend with 2 dads or moms) can turn a straight child into a gay child?

And this somehow happens in spite of genetic instinct to be straight, being around straight couples for most of their lives, seeing straight couples on TV for 99% of the time, etc?

I don’t buy it at all. That’s a whole lot of “Straight” conditioning you have to over come with just a passive environmental “gay indoctrination”.

And no I actually don’t have a brother and my sister is not gay. And I don’t understand how my family make up has any relevance. In fact, if I had gay siblings, it would be counter to your argument. Wouldn’t it? If I had a gay brother, why am I not gay? OR vice versa?

[LA Reader]

[quote=Rustico]
I am perplexed that you would want to say what LA Reader said. He was pretty clearly not following what I was saying and he was aggressive and haughty with his first post in rebuttal. My question about his family was a much more mild turnabout on that.[/quote]

I still don’t understand what you are saying. So you are saying that exposure to normal environmental “gay acceptance” (such as interacting with gay family friend, seeing gays on TV in none-negative way, seeing a friend with 2 dads or moms) can turn a straight child into a gay child?

And this somehow happens in spite of genetic instinct to be straight, being around straight couples for most of their lives, seeing straight couples on TV for 99% of the time, etc?

I don’t buy it at all. That’s a whole lot of “Straight” conditioning you have to over come with just a passive environmental “gay indoctrination”.

And no I actually don’t have a brother and my sister is not gay. And I don’t understand how my family make up has any relevance. In fact, if I had gay siblings, it would be counter to your argument. Wouldn’t it? If I had a gay brother, why am I not gay? OR vice versa?

[LA Reader]

[quote=Rustico]
I am perplexed that you would want to say what LA Reader said. He was pretty clearly not following what I was saying and he was aggressive and haughty with his first post in rebuttal. My question about his family was a much more mild turnabout on that.[/quote]

I still don’t understand what you are saying. So you are saying that exposure to normal environmental “gay acceptance” (such as interacting with gay family friend, seeing gays on TV in none-negative way, seeing a friend with 2 dads or moms) can turn a straight child into a gay child?

And this somehow happens in spite of genetic instinct to be straight, being around straight couples for most of their lives, seeing straight couples on TV for 99% of the time, etc?

I don’t buy it at all. That’s a whole lot of “Straight” conditioning you have to over come with just a passive environmental “gay indoctrination”.

And no I actually don’t have a brother and my sister is not gay. And I don’t understand how my family make up has any relevance. In fact, if I had gay siblings, it would be counter to your argument. Wouldn’t it? If I had a gay brother, why am I not gay? OR vice versa?

[LA Reader]

[quote=Rustico]
I am perplexed that you would want to say what LA Reader said. He was pretty clearly not following what I was saying and he was aggressive and haughty with his first post in rebuttal. My question about his family was a much more mild turnabout on that.[/quote]

I still don’t understand what you are saying. So you are saying that exposure to normal environmental “gay acceptance” (such as interacting with gay family friend, seeing gays on TV in none-negative way, seeing a friend with 2 dads or moms) can turn a straight child into a gay child?

And this somehow happens in spite of genetic instinct to be straight, being around straight couples for most of their lives, seeing straight couples on TV for 99% of the time, etc?

I don’t buy it at all. That’s a whole lot of “Straight” conditioning you have to over come with just a passive environmental “gay indoctrination”.

And no I actually don’t have a brother and my sister is not gay. And I don’t understand how my family make up has any relevance. In fact, if I had gay siblings, it would be counter to your argument. Wouldn’t it? If I had a gay brother, why am I not gay? OR vice versa?

[LA Reader]

[quote=Rustico]
I am perplexed that you would want to say what LA Reader said. He was pretty clearly not following what I was saying and he was aggressive and haughty with his first post in rebuttal. My question about his family was a much more mild turnabout on that.[/quote]

I still don’t understand what you are saying. So you are saying that exposure to normal environmental “gay acceptance” (such as interacting with gay family friend, seeing gays on TV in none-negative way, seeing a friend with 2 dads or moms) can turn a straight child into a gay child?

And this somehow happens in spite of genetic instinct to be straight, being around straight couples for most of their lives, seeing straight couples on TV for 99% of the time, etc?

I don’t buy it at all. That’s a whole lot of “Straight” conditioning you have to over come with just a passive environmental “gay indoctrination”.

And no I actually don’t have a brother and my sister is not gay. And I don’t understand how my family make up has any relevance. In fact, if I had gay siblings, it would be counter to your argument. Wouldn’t it? If I had a gay brother, why am I not gay? OR vice versa?

[Author]

Posts