Gay to Straight Program in Arizona Public Schools

[Mighty AC]

Like I tried to illustrate with my outdated action movie actor analogy, I tend not to comment on items I agree with unless there is a glass house issue going on. I think most of us would agree that Islam has been watered down less than Christianity and is thus a bigger problem. This forum has very few, if any, Muslims but several Christian pots calling the kettle black. Also, I live in North America so the Christian problem currently effects me more than the Muslim one.

So you posted a video of an Imam saying hateful, radical things. He's a wingnut and I wish he didn't exist. However, I've posted radical hateful comments by top US politicians, some who we're vying to be the most powerful leader in the world. In my opinion, that is a much bigger problem.

[sharkman]

Look, you demonstrated your bigotry by starting a thread on a topic that a reasonable person would fact check since the topic would be completely illegal. You simply assumed that it was true and started the thread. Then when I posted the link, I made no statement for you to agree or disagree with, so to claim you agreed with me so didn't respond is nonsense. Your multiple threads slagging christianity plus your posting bias show you for what you are and this window dressing explanation can't hide it. You claimed in this thread that only Republicans are courting the christian vote, it couldn't be more obvious.

[Guest American Woman]

Your definition is incomplete. Directed tax concessions are certainly a subsidy. They didn't give some x dollars, but x dollars have dissapeared from the budget just the same because they don't have to pay their taxes. It's a nice attempt to hide a subsidy with semantics.

No, a tax benefit is not a "subsidy;" it's not government money earmarked for the park. You won't find it anywhere in the budget.

Edited August 29, 2013 by American Woman

[guyser]

Look, you demonstrated your bigotry by starting a thread on a topic that a reasonable person would fact check since the topic would be completely illegal. You simply assumed that it was true and started the thread.

At first blush i too thought it true.

Originally I skipped over it and when I came back it had been pointed out that it was a hoax.

But the facts are, these things do exist , many many of them (I doubt any are public schools) exist so it really isnt hard to get fooled.

By the end of the first page he had apologized so not sure where all the outrage on some is coming from.

You have Joe Arpaio in Arizona, enough said.

[Guest American Woman]

You have Joe Arpaio in Arizona, enough said.

So in other words, everyone should just unquestioningly believe everything they read about every state/province/territory/country.

[guyser]

everyone should just unquestioningly believe everything they read

I am surprised you wrote the above. Oh my.

( see I can selective edit too ...weeeeee! )

[Guest American Woman]

I am surprised you wrote the above. Oh my.

( see I can selective edit too ...weeeeee! )

FYI, "trimming posts" to include just what one is replying to is required by the rules. "Selectively editing" posts to purposely change the meaning is against the rules. You might want to keep that in mind.

[kimmy]

As for this claim: "Arizona sheriff requires deputies to carry AR-15s at all times, even while off duty," it's not true. Took me two seconds to find that out.

The sheriff's press release said he has ordered his deputies to carry their weapons 24/7, and the same press release said that he has spent $500,000 buying 400 AR15s for his department, but I concede that the press release does not specifically state that the weapons the deputies will carry 24/7 must be AR15s.

He's not just "some crazy sheriff", he's the sheriff of one of the largest counties in America, with more citizens than many states. Over a million people voted in the sheriffs elections in Maricopa County, and he has won a solid majority in 4 straight elections, even after they've had a chance to find out that he's a kook.

-k

Edited August 30, 2013 by kimmy

[BC_chick]

I can't believe AW would even comment on this thread after her thread about Quebec having bilingual dog bylaws.

[Guest American Woman]

I can't believe AW would even comment on this thread after her thread about Quebec having bilingual dog bylaws.

I was wondering if someone would bring that up. The difference is that the article I cited was from Yahoo, and I did verify it before posting by checking other MSM sites. The story was picked up by the MSM, unlike this hoax, which was only on the one satirical site. WHY it was picked up by the mainstream media was also a news item. So I thought perhaps it wasn't being mentioned because posters were insightful enough to pick up on the difference. But here's the thing - at least one of the posters here said I was a "moron" and criticized me for believing a news item on Yahoo news, along with criticism from others.

If AC had checked this story out, and it was being reported in the MSM, I would have had no criticism. Capice? But this is nothing more than a satirical piece posted on a satirical site. You do see the difference now that it's been so clearly pointed out, right?

Edited August 30, 2013 by American Woman

[Mighty AC]

Your multiple threads slagging christianity plus your posting bias show you for what you are and this window dressing explanation can't hide it. You claimed in this thread that only Republicans are courting the christian vote, it couldn't be more obvious.

There are posters who have started several threads slagging the Liberals, CPC, Republicans or Democrats. I'm not trying to hide my distaste for religion so in similar fashion all of my posts on the subject are going to be scornful. Ideas are ideas and those of the religious variety do not deserve special protection. If you don't see a problem with Christian and Republican homophobic hate speech then by all means try to defend it.

Nowhere in this thread have I claimed that only the Repubs court the Christian vote. It is a very public and deliberate strategy though. I have pointed out that Republican politicians, even the top dogs, make frequent public, hateful, discriminatory, christian based comments. Republican hate comments greatly out number those by the Democrats and so I am pointing it out. If you feel this point is incorrect, then prove it.

[guyser]

. "Selectively editing" posts to purposely change the meaning is against the rules. You might want to keep that in mind.

Yes you might since you did exactly that. That you cannot see it isnt my problem.

[guyser]

The difference is that the article I cited was from Yahoo, and I did verify it before posting by checking other MSM sites. The story was picked up by the MSM, unlike this hoax, which was only on the one satirical site.

It was reported on MSN News , Yahoo .

Lets not forget that the official education policy in Arizona is that homosexuality is not acceptable.

If AC had checked this story out, and it was being reported in the MSM, I would have had no criticism. Capice? But this is nothing more than a satirical piece posted on a satirical site. You do see the difference now that it's been so clearly pointed out, right?

Considering the original posting had no disclaimer (since rectified)and fooled many , add in the official policy for educators in Arizona,the Governer has attempted to strip away same sex benefits, and what you have is this. Edited August 30, 2013 by Guyser2

[The_Squid]

No, a tax benefit is not a "subsidy;" it's not government money earmarked for the park. You won't find it anywhere in the budget.

Because you say so?

Read the link. It is certainly a subsidy.

[cybercoma]

Because you say so?

Read the link. It is certainly a subsidy.

It's all good. That was just her opinion, stated as fact.

[bleeding heart]

That's a funny response. In my opinion.

[Guest American Woman]

Because you say so?

Read the link. It is certainly a subsidy.

No, not because I say so; that wasn't my definition that I posted.

The federal government gives tax breaks to Americans for charitable donations, but the government doesn't "subsidize" said charities - and the dollar amount of the break that the tax payers get sure isn't included in the figure that the government gives to aid/foreign aid. I doubt if anyone even has a clue what that figure would be.

[Guest American Woman]

It was reported on MSN News , Yahoo .

http://urbanlegends.about.com/b/2013/08/22/hoax-gay-to-straight-program-in-all-arizona-public-schools.htm Emphasis mine:

"Gay-To-Straight Program To Be Used In All Arizona Public School Curriculums Beginning November 1st - NationalReport.net"

Folks are getting all upset over the above story as if it came from a legitimate source, when in fact the only place it has appeared (aside from the usual copy-and-paste blogs) is the National Report, a satirical website not unlike The Onion.

Edited August 30, 2013 by American Woman

[guyser]

Ok, that makes you and him wrong .

So yeah, you have company, wonderful.

Still wrong.

[Guest American Woman]

Ok, that makes you and him wrong .

So yeah, you have company, wonderful.

Still wrong.

So how about some proof/links?

[Guest American Woman]

The sheriff's press release said he has ordered his deputies to carry their weapons 24/7, and the same press release said that he has spent $500,000 buying 400 AR15s for his department, but I concede that the press release does not specifically state that the weapons the deputies will carry 24/7 must be AR15s.

News articles specifically state that it does not have to be an AR15, which makes the claim incorrect. "Local affiliate ABC15 reports that the deputies will be required to carry only a handgun at all times, meaning they will have to employ the AR-15 style rifles only while on duty." http://news.yahoo.com/-arizona-sheriff-joe-arpaio-orders-deputies-to-carry-ar-15-style-rifles-and-remain-armed-even-when-off-duty--200405230.html

He's not just "some crazy sheriff", he's the sheriff of one of the largest counties in America, with more citizens than many states. Over a million people voted in the sheriffs elections in Maricopa County, and he has won a solid majority in 4 straight elections, even after they've had a chance to find out that he's a kook.

It's still just one county out of 3,144 counties and county-equivalents in the United States. - and "over a million" is just a drop in the bucket of the overall population.

There are so many, many more perfectly reasonable and sane examples, yet it seems as if the few are trotted out in reference to the whole.

Edited August 30, 2013 by American Woman

[The_Squid]

No, not because I say so; that wasn't my definition that I posted.

The federal government gives tax breaks to Americans for charitable donations, but the government doesn't "subsidize" said charities - and the dollar amount of the break that the tax payers get sure isn't included in the figure that the government gives to aid/foreign aid. I doubt if anyone even has a clue what that figure would be.

Read the link. It explains what tax breaks are subsidies (like the one in Kentucky) and why some are not (like your example). Read the link.

[cybercoma]

Let's all go have a drink before Charles Anthony locks this thread.

[GostHacked]

Let's all go have a drink before Charles Anthony locks this thread.

Alcohol makes me angry sometimes. Hit from the bong perhaps?

[kimmy]

News articles specifically state that it does not have to be an AR15, which makes the claim incorrect. "Local affiliate ABC15 reports that the deputies will be required to carry only a handgun at all times, meaning they will have to employ the AR-15 style rifles only while on duty." http://news.yahoo.com/-arizona-sheriff-joe-arpaio-orders-deputies-to-carry-ar-15-style-rifles-and-remain-armed-even-when-off-duty--200405230.html

As with your story about bilingual dogs, or whatever it was, this is how it was reported by a number of major news sites:

Sheriff Joe requires all deputies to carry AR-15s 24/7

-United Press International

Joe Arpaio Requiring His Deputies To Carry AR-15s At All Times, Fight Crime Even When They're Off Duty

-Huffington Post

Arpaio requiring deputies to carry assault rifles 24 hours per day

-even a Phoenix TV station, who you'd think would know their own sheriff well enough.

I mean, the Phoenix news people that cover the guy regularly figured he was ordering his people to carry AR15s 24-7.

It's still just one county out of 3,144 counties and county-equivalents in the United States. - and "over a million" is just a drop in the bucket of the overall population.

There are so many, many more perfectly reasonable and sane examples, yet it seems as if the few are trotted out in reference to the whole.

You keep missing the point. A nutbag like Arpaio wouldn't get elected by the whole country. He wouldn't get elected in Washington or Oregon or Massachusetts or Michigan. The people that keep re-electing Joe Arpaio aren't representative of the US as a whole, but they constitute a solid majority in their own part of the country.

-k