Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows. - Page 2 - Politics and War Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009 9:14 PM on j-body.org
I guess in a sense but its not the point I was making. If youre talking about the feudal comment?............




Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009 9:50 PM on j-body.org
Sooo, the law of the land is crap? Whole new can of worms there farmboy.

.


“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 5:33 AM on j-body.org
I thought I heard somewhere God hates fags? Is this true?


I couldn't find anything about it on google.






Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 7:09 AM on j-body.org
Oh for Gawd sakes... Some of gotta stop paying attention to what people do with their private parts 5% of the time and pay attention to what they're doing the other 95% The Greek Spartans were pretty much all gay, I'd hardly call them unmanly. Gays are useful! If it wasn't for gay guys I wouldn't know how to dress myself in any kind of stylish way. I think gays are fine people. I like gay celebrities too. Know why? Cuz if I really really like them I could theoretically give them a blowjob in order to show my appreciation.

Look, some gays choose to be gay, most don't. That's life. Homosexually is sometimes genetic, sometimes not. Just like everything else in life.

Oh, and why is it that the people who say homosexuality is a choice are always the first ones to talk about people being born bad or born criminals? Color me confused.

Y'all stop being such sissies and stop being so hung up on the homos. They're good people! Lesbians are always good to ask "Why are women so damn crazy???" and gay guys are a great chick magnet. It's win-win.

STOP BEING SISSIES.
Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 7:58 AM on j-body.org
"Oh, and why is it that the people who say homosexuality is a choice are always the first ones to talk about people being born bad or born criminals? Color me confused."

I feel it is a choice, the same as being a bad person.

My cousin is not a bad person, I never said he was.



Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 8:31 AM on j-body.org
Newsflash yall.... If some "scientist" HAD discovered a gene, or some kind of solid medical evidence that homosexuality in written in one's dna, don't you think it would have been on the cover of ever major news mag and paper? Wouldn't there have been sweeping civil rights legislation already? If you tell the lie long enough to enough people, they'll begin to believe its true....they may even remember having "read it somewhere or heard it from a friend of a friend who is a doctor".

Hey if it ever comes out...that it is written in the dna, non-disputable evidence, then'll I'll believe you. Until then, its merely a hypothesis, and as such is subject to scrutiny, speculation, and downright scorn.


But enough of the gay issue, we all seem to have formed our own opinions or have let someone form them for us. Piss off and move on to the liberal edjumacashun of public school children.

Should state funds be witheld from a school that refuses to teach the environmentalist greeny-rainbow curriculum?

.


“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 8:54 AM on j-body.org
I can see teaching about be environmentally conscious but to be shoving the "green theory" down the throats, as they tried when I was in school, is BS. Dumping oil in the storm drain is wrong, but to tell kids that burning fossil fuel is a bad thing is just as wrong. When it came to electricity production, you know the stuff needed to recharge the beloved electric vehicles, some environmental group has a problem with every power production method.



Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 12:56 PM on j-body.org
ok Ill let the gay thing go.

But in all honesty there isnt anything wrong with teaching children that killing endangered species and dumping oil into drinkig water is bad. Is there? But I guess the issue starts when a teacher oversteps their boundry and tries to indoctrinate children into something that isnt proven. Legally teachers arent allowed to express any kind of political bias in school. Most of my teachers wont even answer what political party they support if i were to ask. Most wont touch the gay issue either for fear of offending someones mommy and daddy and creating a lawsuit against the school system. I had a teacher last year in sophomore Biology who challenged global warming and evolution in class. He still taught what he was required though. The political slant on whats taught probably more depends on the area of the country than the entirre US school cirriculum. Two teachers can teach the same subject very differently just based on their biew of it. If Republicans want more control of what is taught they need to get involved more in the teaching field. Because as was touched on earlier, right wing teachers are a minority. Therefore most things are taught with a Liberal slant.



Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 3:35 PM on j-body.org
The only thing endangered about some animals, is where they are around me....

Like one K9 around Me and my K9.

Chris




"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."

Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry


Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 3:49 PM on j-body.org
ScottaWhite wrote:

Newsflash yall.... If some "scientist" HAD discovered a gene, or some kind of solid medical evidence that homosexuality in written in one's dna, don't you think it would have been on the cover of ever major news mag and paper? Wouldn't there have been sweeping civil rights legislation already?

An interesting thought on this concept:

If they were to prove that there is a "gay" gene, do you think all the liberals who support selective abortions based on tests for birth defects, handicapping conditions, etc., would flip on this, because someone could theoreticly abort due to finding out that their child had the gay gene? So many of them emphaticly support both gay rights and selective abortion, wouldn't this be a massive inner conflict for them?







Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 7:48 PM on j-body.org
Actually due to the pro-choice view that a fetus is not a human with rights until its born they could logically justify aborting a "gay" fetus because it is applied to by the gay rights legislation because its not human. But thats just legally. It would be quite a conundrum morally.




Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 8:19 PM on j-body.org
Fags are not human, they don't make off spring by sex, now do they?

Chris




"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."

Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry


Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 8:22 PM on j-body.org
They will "breed" themselves out of the population eventualy.



Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 8:33 PM on j-body.org
Taetsch Z-24 wrote:

Fags are not human, they don't make off spring by sex, now do they?

Chris


Two heteroseuxal people made a gay person. Therefore it its doesnt take two fags to make a fag. If thats the logic youre using....

If there were to be a gay gene, it would probably be a recessive gene like the "ginger" gene. Both parents would need to be carriers. So if two parents that were carriers Gg and Gg (G being a dominant heterosexual gene and g being the recessive gay gene) there possible offspring could be GG, which is a pure heteroseuxal with no gay gene, 2 Gg which are carriers and gg which would be the gay child. Assuming the gg child doesnt breed, the g gene could not become dominant therefore gays will not inherit the Earth but the gene will still be in the gene pool because of carriers. In theory.



Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 8:40 PM on j-body.org
Quikilkav, that is the greatest "what if" argument I've heard in a long while. Greenierainbow lovin' liberals would go crazy on that one. They believe in abortion if it so much as slightly inconveniences the baby's mother. What would they do, if parents started screening their baby's genes for the "gay" gene. And when finding it, aborted the child. Can you imagine the outrage from the left!!!!!!

.


“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 9:03 PM on j-body.org
What would the right do when they want the gay babies aborted so the gay baby doesnt spread its faggery all over when its born?



Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 10:05 PM on j-body.org
ScottaWhite wrote:

So lets say one day "science" (Scientist = "they") discoveres a gene that makes someone sexually attracted to children.....hardwired.....just the way they are. Is it ok then?

What if there is a jerk-gene (I may be living proof here) Would this make for legal precedent that people with the JerkGene can't be fired for failing to be a team player?

.Oh, and don't bring up pedophilia being against the law. It wasn't too long ago that it was illegal for blacks to vote, or to drink out of certain drinking fountains. It was the law of the land, and most people saw it and said that it was good.
I never said they have found a gene that makes someone gay, but rather that certain conditions in the womb can cause things to develop differently - granted I could see DNA possibly having a major role in those conditions. Still, I have seen nothing yet that suggests DNA itself is directly responsible. Of course the possibility exists, and maybe it just hasn't been found yet.

Regarding pedophilia, I know many on the right lump that with homosexuality as "deviant behavior" and somehow think they are linked, but pedophilia is different than homosexuality in basically every way. Most importantly, homosexual sex is every bit as harmless as heterosexual sex. Where as @!#$ a child is probably gonna @!#$ up their head for life. That's a pretty big @!#$ difference there. Homosexuals are not pedophiles and pedophiles are not homosexuals - although some people are both. Raping a child often results in the victim having similar tendencies later in life(spreading the illness), where as if a guy raped you, your butthole might be sore for a while but it isn't gonna turn you gay. I think pedophilia is a mental illness. I don't see how the hell a sane adult could possibly be attracted to a child. Homosexuality is something else entirely, and its fairly annoying to see people try to compare the two.

Although I highly doubt it exists, if they actually DID find some kinda pedophile gene though, that would be a GOOD thing - since you could potentially cure that disease through genetic manipulation in the future as medical science advances. You could literally cure this world of pedophiles. Plus imagine being able to screen out pedophiles from jobs pertaining to children simply by taking a blood sample... not much different than drug screens you often have to take now. Still, I highly doubt that such a gene would exist.

Quiklilcav wrote:

ScottaWhite wrote:

Newsflash yall.... If some "scientist" HAD discovered a gene, or some kind of solid medical evidence that homosexuality in written in one's dna, don't you think it would have been on the cover of ever major news mag and paper? Wouldn't there have been sweeping civil rights legislation already?

An interesting thought on this concept:

If they were to prove that there is a "gay" gene, do you think all the liberals who support selective abortions based on tests for birth defects, handicapping conditions, etc., would flip on this, because someone could theoreticly abort due to finding out that their child had the gay gene? So many of them emphaticly support both gay rights and selective abortion, wouldn't this be a massive inner conflict for them?
Honestly, I would LOL if that scenario became reality. You'd probably have some leftist politician pass a law against telling parents if it would be gay or not just to prevent this - which to me a law like that should/probably would be struck down based on violating patients rights to know.

Plus you could then tell the butt-hurt gay rights groups that you aren't killing gay people, you are just terminating a fetus that could become a gay person. I'm always a fan of using someone's own argument against them. I think many heads on the left would explode instantly - to my great amusement.

TheSundownFire wrote:

What would the right do when they want the gay babies aborted so the gay baby doesnt spread its faggery all over when its born?
Excellent counter, good sir.




Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Thursday, March 19, 2009 3:19 AM on j-body.org
TheSundownFire wrote:

What would the right do when they want the gay babies aborted so the gay baby doesnt spread its faggery all over when its born?

The same thing they do now: stand against abortion.

The one thing that a lot of people seem to miss is that conservatives, for the most part, aren't anti-gay. They just don't believe that marriage should be changed to allow for same-sex couples. Civil unions serve the same purpose, which is fine. Conservatives believe in true tollerance, a word the left only uses as a euphemism, when they mean that traditional Christian beliefs need to be oppressed. I always find it amusing when I hear groups talking about tollerance while complaining about something like BC College putting crucifixes in their school. Tollerance is not getting pissed off when you see something you don't agree with, it is not trying to force someone to not be able to express their beliefs or opinions, or live their life the way they want.







Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Thursday, March 19, 2009 4:45 AM on j-body.org
TheSundownFire wrote:

Taetsch Z-24 wrote:

Fags are not human, they don't make off spring by sex, now do they?

Chris


Two heteroseuxal people made a gay person. Therefore it its doesnt take two fags to make a fag. If thats the logic youre using....

If there were to be a gay gene, it would probably be a recessive gene like the "ginger" gene. Both parents would need to be carriers. So if two parents that were carriers Gg and Gg (G being a dominant heterosexual gene and g being the recessive gay gene) there possible offspring could be GG, which is a pure heteroseuxal with no gay gene, 2 Gg which are carriers and gg which would be the gay child. Assuming the gg child doesnt breed, the g gene could not become dominant therefore gays will not inherit the Earth but the gene will still be in the gene pool because of carriers. In theory.


Maybe this is why others kill them when there in high school then.

Chris




"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."

Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry


Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Thursday, March 19, 2009 7:37 AM on j-body.org
I am gonna throw my opinion out there and i did not read what everyone else said so just bear with me
Does the Earth go through heating and cooling cycles over a long period of time? yes
Are we creating a blanket of gasses in the atmosphere that may lead to warmer temperatures? yes
What is happening this day in age, i believe, is a combination of the two. The Earth is going through its cycle, and we are perhaps accelerating it a little or making it a little worse. Is one to blame more than the other? I do not believe so, but I really do not think that we can just toss ourselves out the window when it comes to any sort of blame because we are, in fact, not helping things at all what-so-ever. And the steps we are taking because of all this global warming and climate change "propaganda" are in fact good for us and the environment so i will never denounce them. Some may call it scare tactics, but whatever. I am more concerned with results in creating better and more efficient forms of technology, whether it be for power generation, transportation, or whatever else you want to think of. If it pushes people to progress, then good. Is it as huge a problem as it is sometimes made out to be? maybe, maybe not, only time will tell us.



Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Thursday, March 19, 2009 8:11 AM on j-body.org
themarin8r wrote:

I am gonna throw my opinion out there and i did not read what everyone else said so just bear with me
Does the Earth go through heating and cooling cycles over a long period of time? yes
Are we creating a blanket of gasses in the atmosphere that may lead to warmer temperatures? yes
What is happening this day in age, i believe, is a combination of the two. The Earth is going through its cycle, and we are perhaps accelerating it a little or making it a little worse. Is one to blame more than the other? I do not believe so, but I really do not think that we can just toss ourselves out the window when it comes to any sort of blame because we are, in fact, not helping things at all what-so-ever. And the steps we are taking because of all this global warming and climate change "propaganda" are in fact good for us and the environment so i will never denounce them. Some may call it scare tactics, but whatever. I am more concerned with results in creating better and more efficient forms of technology, whether it be for power generation, transportation, or whatever else you want to think of. If it pushes people to progress, then good. Is it as huge a problem as it is sometimes made out to be? maybe, maybe not, only time will tell us.
Regarding the environment, we are likely just adding to what happens naturally. But that would still mean we make a difference. The question is... to what extent? But then again, just because cycles naturally occur doesn't necessarily mean that a natural cycle is under way right now - it could be completely artificial. More likely I think its a combination... probably.

But I think the idea that we should do nothing - just because some people insist that scientist haven't proven anything yet(if you buy that) - is still erroneous thinking. If we do something and it turns out to be unnecessary... oh well no big loss and a slightly cleaner planet for our wasted efforts. If we do nothing and it turns out that we really should have done something... well oh @!#$ its too late. In short, I'd rather do something and risk being wrong about it. But I think some people are more wrapped up in being "right or wrong" than in weighing the potential consequences of either choice.






Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Thursday, March 19, 2009 12:52 PM on j-body.org
Quiklilcav wrote:

TheSundownFire wrote:

What would the right do when they want the gay babies aborted so the gay baby doesnt spread its faggery all over when its born?

The same thing they do now: stand against abortion.

The one thing that a lot of people seem to miss is that conservatives, for the most part, aren't anti-gay. They just don't believe that marriage should be changed to allow for same-sex couples. Civil unions serve the same purpose, which is fine. Conservatives believe in true tollerance, a word the left only uses as a euphemism, when they mean that traditional Christian beliefs need to be oppressed. I always find it amusing when I hear groups talking about tollerance while complaining about something like BC College putting crucifixes in their school. Tollerance is not getting pissed off when you see something you don't agree with, it is not trying to force someone to not be able to express their beliefs or opinions, or live their life the way they want.


All of the people claiming to be conservatives that I know hate gay people. I guess they may not speak for the majority though.

I have no problem with Christian morals but the problems start when you get the kind of Christians who arent just putting up crucifixes theyre standing in front of a college telling everyone theyre going to hell for being gay or that everyone is a sinner. And that other people cant put up their own religious symbols. A conservative would probably have a fit if a Muslim or a Jew wanted one of their symbols next to the crucifix. Its all based off of one religions view of the "ultimate good." Historically Christians arent the most tolerant people. Every land they went to they established missionaries and killed off heretics. Anyone else remember how bloody the Reformation was?

The extremes are always the problem and why you cant just say inclusively that all Consevratives or all Liberals think one way. Its just a basic set of beliefs. I remember my friend telling me that Harvey Milk was a Republican before he was kicked out of the party for being openly gay. And Im willing to bet their are agnostic Conservatives as well as Christian liberals. Its just that the extremes of the parties always make the most conflict.

I just think its crap when a political party tries to justify limiting peoples rights based off of a religious view. Especially with seperation of church and state.



Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Thursday, March 19, 2009 5:09 PM on j-body.org
I don't hate homosexuals. Not one bit. I may hate the left-wing political agenda they espouse.

The Roman Catholic church "missionaries" i.e. Jesuits were the rocknrollas that were killing non-converts. True Christian missionaries like David Brainard (american indians) Jim Elliott, (amazon tribes), David Livingston (africa) died themselves in their field of service, trying to help those they met. Let's not confuse the "christian" Roman Catholic Church with evangelicals and baptists.

The Reformation was bloody, because by and large, Protestants, Baptists, Jews, and other religions were persecuted by the Roman Catholic Church. Torqmada from Spain was the mastermind behind that deal.

Oh, and the separation of church and state isn't in the constitution...anywhere. AND the purpose wasn't to keep religious people from expressing their beliefs through their vote either. It was to prevent a state-run church.

If a majority of people, within a set district, with the same religious belief vote a certain way ( "right wing" conservatives), then our vote will be expressed by that representative. To try to deny me that right is to impose the state's will on my way of thinking. If they majority happens to be greenierainbow lovers, then you'll see more liberal legislators in office.

.


“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Thursday, March 19, 2009 6:26 PM on j-body.org
TheSundownFire wrote:

All of the people claiming to be conservatives that I know hate gay people. I guess they may not speak for the majority though.

I have no problem with Christian morals but the problems start when you get the kind of Christians who arent just putting up crucifixes theyre standing in front of a college telling everyone theyre going to hell for being gay or that everyone is a sinner. And that other people cant put up their own religious symbols. A conservative would probably have a fit if a Muslim or a Jew wanted one of their symbols next to the crucifix. Its all based off of one religions view of the "ultimate good." Historically Christians arent the most tolerant people. Every land they went to they established missionaries and killed off heretics. Anyone else remember how bloody the Reformation was?

The extremes are always the problem and why you cant just say inclusively that all Consevratives or all Liberals think one way. Its just a basic set of beliefs. I remember my friend telling me that Harvey Milk was a Republican before he was kicked out of the party for being openly gay. And Im willing to bet their are agnostic Conservatives as well as Christian liberals. Its just that the extremes of the parties always make the most conflict.

I just think its crap when a political party tries to justify limiting peoples rights based off of a religious view. Especially with seperation of church and state.

Of course with every group, there are the extremes, but true conservatives are not anti-gay.

Also, to your point about there being different religeous beliefs among different political beliefs is absolutely true. However, there are obvious "average" groupings, where there are probably more (true) Christians that are conservative, and more non-Christians, or "casual" Christians on the left. I believe you will also run into people who are fake in either direction.

To respond to your last sentence, though, I will simply say that the difficulty in supporting that statement lies in the fact that the biggest issue comes to abortion, where many feel very very strongly that this is killing. This is also a moral issue, separate from religious beliefs, but they tend to follow the lines of religious beliefs (that is, most people who are against it are also Christian, and most people who are in support of it are not). And the main argument is that the unborn are, or are not, citizens deserving of their rights being protected.








Re: Elementary school...the training camps for greeny rainbows.
Thursday, March 19, 2009 7:37 PM on j-body.org
I will definitely agree that most of our morals are determined by religion and that isnt bad. I would rather be surrounded by good Christians than a bunch of despotic Satanists.

But you also have the fact that most of the argument over abortion comes from a religious basis. And from that point you cant impose a religious view on someone who doesnt believe in that particular religion. Im assuming most people would be pissed if we had a Muslim govt that made women cover their face and skin. Just because its not "our" believe and how dare they make us do anything.

Im currently writing up a debate for Sociology on abortion. I got the pro-choice side by luck of the draw. I really just dont want to take sides on the abortion case until it affects me. But just from the reading I've been doing the pro-choice argument makes more logical sense from a purely secular viewpoint. That may be why its a problem. Getting people to seperate the secular from the religious.

Abortion from a purely legal standpoint is NOT murder. Murder is the intentional killing of a human now even if the fetus is a functioning human, the mother and abortionist both believe it not to be, without a reasonable, therefore they are not intentionally killing a human because its not a human to them. Its like if two hunters went out and one hunter accidentally killed another because the first hunter thought the second was a deer or whatever. It wasnt intentional because the first hunter didnt see the second hunter as a human but as a deer. If anything abortion is accidental manslaughter.

Ya I probably majorly pissed someone off with those statements.



Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search