Give an inch.....
Do you think its a compliment to call somepne homophobic? All that takes is a yes or no answer...no left wing spin........yes or no?
For one it has been the basis for the family unit since this country and dozens of other countries have used for thousands of years.
It is genetic. I can prove quite easily that heterosexual sex is the foundation for procreation.
Homosexuality has never been proven to be genetic and therefore can never be elevated to the heterosexual level.
There are many alternative lifestyles out there and not one has been proven to be genetic ergo the label "alternative" lifestyles.
Why do you feel (and it is feel since you have no factual basis) that this one alternative lifestyle should be equal to heterosexuality?
Or refuse to give an inch, and end up losing your job as a high school administrator and attempt to support your family on what you can make as a Walmart greeter.
A prudent decision, I must say. :roll:
I hope this soon-to-be-former principal's children enjoy the taste of self-righteous bigotry, because that's what they're going to be eating for dinner from now on.
Better to stand by your beliefs rather than do something you know to be morally wrong....
Meanwhile, the two lesbians will soon be off to college (where the former principal won't be able to afford to send his own children now), where they will no doubt be lauded as heroes by professors and fellow students alike.
Of couse, this fits in nicely with the social engineering that is part of the Liberal agenda......
Yeah, this principal really did something awesome, alright.
Progress maybe, but not in a positive direction.......He's really taking a stand for fundamentalist conservatism. He's really single-handedly holding back the tide of social progress.What a guy
The only explanation for his behavior, as far as I'm concerned, is that he somehow thought he'd get away with it, and that there would be no repercussions.
Why should there be repercussions?....
He has a responsibility to protect the students from exposure to deviant behavior.....
Which is ludicrous, and all the more reason he shouldn't be involved in education anymore. He's stupid, and he's out of touch with reality.
I wonder how the majority of the parents at that school feel about his decision?...
I would imagine that they are angered that it had to be done this way...
I wonder how the majority of the parents at that school feel about his decision?...
I would imagine that they are angered that it had to be done this way...
Some of us don't like being called names when we have a different opinion:doh....that is not tolerance..:doh.
It proved that heterosexual sex, which people of either orientation can and do engage in, is required for procreation. That is all it proves.
Yes, a misunderstanding, which you continue. Evolution depends on mutations, which are random.
Those that enhance survival tend to get passed onto later generations, which have the increased chance of survival again, passing the mutation onto the next generation and so on. There is no design, only random chance. You could argue some creator who designed things, but that is beyond the topic of evolution and unprovable.
You can, as is obviously provable, use the "technology" for things other than procreation. Examples include heterosexual sex while using birth control, masturbation, anal and oral intercourse, and many more.
Heterosexual sex is not heterosexuality. You know this. It has been explained to you repeatedly, with sources and examples.
Heterosexuality is an orientation, which you have not proven is genetic in any way, shape or form. Homosexuality is an orientation, and you have not proven it is not genetic. In point of fact, no one knows for sure, though genetics is quite likely a part of it.
And homosexuality threatens this how?
This has been addressed numerous times. See earlier in the thread.
Neither has heterosexuality.
Sexual Orientation =/= Goth
We hold these truths to be sef-evident that all men are created equal
The very ACT of continuing the genetic line isn't genetic according to you. Unbelievable.
So now procreation is random. Do you ever quit with the dishonest conclusions?
So you have zero evidence of any mutation to which you speak of and expect everyone to buy this nonscense because you say so.
None of which are natural which you know was and is my point. You are simply not honest enough to admit it.
No it hasn't. Another dishonest statement with no fcatual evidence to support it whatsoever.
Heterosexual sex is the ONLY means of procreation naturally. You have zero evidence of any natural purpose of homosexual sex.
It this really that important?
Do people have nothing else to worry about than some gay girl going to a prom?
These 'issues' are such distractions to much more important things.
It this really that important?
Do people have nothing else to worry about than some gay girl going to a prom?
These 'issues' are such distractions to much more important things.
Actually, yes, I think it is that important. Treating people as they should be treated is something I think is important.
It's a civil rights issue.
In retrospect, was allowing some black girl to sit at a white lunch counter "that important"?
I'm sure we all had much more important things to worry about. :roll:
LOL Really. Then what does it prove?
A misunderstanding of evolution? Can you think of any other way other than using technology to procreate? I'd love to hear this one.
Of course it is. Heterosexual sex is the only means of procreation yet you want to claim the very act of procreation being heterosexual intercourse is not genetic when it is the only way to pass genetics from one generation to another.
How does that not compute in your mind?
Yes it has as the only natural way to pass genetic material to the next generation through procreation. Amazing how basic sex ed is lost on you.
I never said it did. Please stick to the subject.
I have addressed it yes. No one can disprove it because it is fact.
Yes it has as the only natural way to pass genetic material to the next generation through procreation. Amazing how basic sex ed is lost on you.
And that means what?
And where does it say sexual orientation is part of that? Oh thats right, it doesn't.
But it is amusing watching you try in vain to find acceptance for something that is 0-31 with the public
You are being willfully ignorant. Everyone here knows how babies are made. Being disadvantageous toward passing on one's genes =/= something not being genetic.
You know I have to ask this, why is the argument always made that since the anti-gay crowd thinks that homosexuality is a choice, and not something they are born as, then it is automatically not protected as a civil right? I constantly hear this argument, "it's a choice so it shouldn't be considered the same argument as race".
I can name something else that is a choice. Religion. That tells me that it doesn't matter if they were born that way or if they are choosing to be that way. Its in the same protections as race and is a choice.
So how's this argument for you? Should it be okay for a public school to ban couples of different religious beliefs from going to prom together? It's not like their religious beliefs would be really violated, especially considering there are several religions that consider it wrong to date someone not of your faith.
You know I have to ask this, why is the argument always made that since the anti-gay crowd thinks that homosexuality is a choice, and not something they are born as, then it is automatically not protected as a civil right? I constantly hear this argument, "it's a choice so it shouldn't be considered the same argument as race".
I can name something else that is a choice. Religion. That tells me that it doesn't matter if they were born that way or if they are choosing to be that way. Its in the same protections as race and is a choice.
So how's this argument for you? Should it be okay for a public school to ban couples of different religious beliefs from going to prom together? It's not like their religious beliefs would be really violated, especially considering there are several religions that consider it wrong to date someone not of your faith.
I don't know where Jerry lives, but I don't think Jerry realizes that society's idea of "suitable attire" for females has changed significantly since, oh... the 1950s and 60s.
I, for instance, wear a teeshirt or wifebeater every day of my life. With jeans, cut-offs, or boxers (depending upon the weather, and whether I'm going out in public or just hanging around my own apartment complex).
On cold days, I also wear a flannel or hoodie. The only shoes I own are converse all-stars.
That is my entire wardrobe.
It's more or less identical to my husband's wardrobe, except that he owns some expensive running shoes and some additional lycra sport clothes for working out.
You know I have to ask this, why is the argument always made that since the anti-gay crowd thinks that homosexuality is a choice, and not something they are born as, then it is automatically not protected as a civil right? I constantly hear this argument, "it's a choice so it shouldn't be considered the same argument as race".
I can name something else that is a choice. Religion. That tells me that it doesn't matter if they were born that way or if they are choosing to be that way. Its in the same protections as race and is a choice.
So how's this argument for you? Should it be okay for a public school to ban couples of different religious beliefs from going to prom together? It's not like their religious beliefs would be really violated, especially considering there are several religions that consider it wrong to date someone not of your faith.
I wear men's pants all the time. Because they're ****ing comfortable. I buy men's swim trunks, boxer, and men's lounge pants. For MYSELF.
And I LOVE flannel. Flannel sheets, flannels shirts, flannel pants.
Oh, and my ballcap
We should not limit someone's freedom to express love towards another (so long as it is decent, I am not advocating public sex) and cancel the whole prom because of a lesbian couple. I don't support gay marriage or the homosexual agenda, but it's going to far to close a prom because of a lesbian couple and ruin it for everyone. Even though I think homosexuality is wrong I think people's rights should be protected. If someone chooses to be gay they shouldn't have people forcing them against that. Now I'm not for extending marriage benefits to homosexual couples, but I also don't believe in oppressing them or telling others who they can and can't have a relationship with. It's not my place and what this school did was wrong. Not only on the part of discrimination, but also publicly humiliating a lesbian couple and placing the blame on them for a canceled prom when really it's the high school that has the problem. You can be against the homosexual agenda without being against homosexual people.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?