Gay Pride Season.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Black Dog said:

I don't fantasize 

[herbie]

5 hours ago, taxme said:

When we get a, probably a lesbian teacher, pushing the gay lifestyle on innocent children, then that is indoctrination. 

Let us know when you find one, other than in your vivid, paranoid imagination.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, herbie said:

Let us know when you find one

Plenty of teachers pushing this woke garbage onto kids.

[CdnFox]

21 minutes ago, herbie said:

Let us know when you find one, other than in your vivid, paranoid imagination.

A number of them have been posted here. And also schools, including ones that carried books in their Elementary School libraries here in bc that showed actual homosexual cartoons of oral sex between two boys exploring their homosexuality. Not to mention the Ontario teacher who was thrown out of a trustee meeting when she pointed out that she felt some of the extremely explicit trans and gay literature currently available to Elementary students was age inappropriate.

Plenty have been found.

[Moonlight Graham]

7 hours ago, herbie said:

By "pushing it" you mean even mentioning queer people or their concerns, right? Forcing you to walk on the same sidewalk without spitting, hitting or shouting insults. Such oppression.

No, I mean celebrating Pride.  Schools can teach about LGBT.  I'm not anti-LGBT, chill. 

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

No, I mean celebrating Pride.  Schools can teach about LGBT.  I'm not anti-LGBT, chill. 

That's kind of the game the last plays though isn't it. If you're not 100% all in, then you must be all out. If you are not willing to fully Embrace every single element of the celebration of gays then you must be homophobic. There's no in between.

It's one of the things that makes it hard to have a rational conversation. If there's no middle ground it makes it impossible to find common ground

[Moonlight Graham]

8 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Why or why not though ?

 

I can think of a lot of reasons on both sides

Well you have people of all religious backgrounds and views who send their children to public schools, and they have a right to not have schools push certain views like this on their children per Pride.  It's essentially state propaganda.

I think politicians and parties can back Pride, but the government themselves backing it presents similar problems.  Like Pride flags on city flagpolls.

Note that I don't personally have any issues with Pride or LGBT people/lifestyles in general.

Edited June 13, 2024 by Moonlight Graham

[Venandi]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

It's one of the things that makes it hard to have a rational conversation. If there's no middle ground it makes it impossible to find common ground

I think that's exactly what creates and nurtures the eventual backlash on this and a number of other  issues too. People in Europe aren't going hard right because they're anti immigration... they're anti crazy.

You would think that the people who clearly made great gains in a short period would be less inclined to alienate those who helped them achieve it... if for no other reason than to avoid a backlash of their own making.

There's this curious mixture of in your face disrespect, passive-aggressive ridicule, intolerance and outright aggressiveness in the air.  You can see that right here in the forum.

Whether true or not / fair or not, a pampered minority is being seen to deliberately cross the street in order to scream FU in the face of (what most would assert to be) the most tolerant majority in human history.

That FU invariably gets you the same thing in return, it makes people feel that they were duped by their own voluntary expression of tolerance and good will, it makes them regret having done it and they vote to rid themselves of craziness.

They aren't anti gay, they're anti f------ crazy.

Then comes the predictable pushback but this time, when you bring your petition to the people who would have previously supported it, you find that the goodwill and tolerance that buoyed your gains now fuels your losses.

All you had to do to keep that from happening was to extend the same tolerance you demanded for yourself to those who gave it to you in the first place... and not be crazy. After the point of total saturation, any increase in craziness is easily shed without reflection or regret. 

I would have thought that not being bat s&^% crazy was an easy ask, turns out I was wrong though... and for that reason, and that reason alone, I won't be signing your petition next time. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 13, 2024 by Venandi

[Guest]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

If you're not 100% all in, then you must be all out.

And they wonder why there is a surge of hate crimes when you use such divisive tactics to push your cause. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Venandi said:

They aren't anti gay, they're anti f------ crazy.

Exactly. 

Sorry, but if you tell me there are billions of genders but can't even name 10, and grow angry when pressed--sorry, but your stance is full of caca.

This is what they are teaching kids. Making many more question their gender.

This isn't a win, it's disturbing as it will have the unintended consequence of having perfectly normal kids mutilate their bodies, and then deeply regret it once at an age to understand such repercussions. 

[ExFlyer]

14 hours ago, Black Dog said:

Whats a mute point?

 

 

One not spoken?? LOL

But that is moot

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

1. Well you have people of all religious backgrounds and views who send their children to public schools, and they have a right to not have schools push certain views like this on their children per Pride.  It's essentially state propaganda.

2. I think politicians and parties can back Pride, but the government themselves backing it presents similar problems.  Like Pride flags on city flagpolls.

3. Note that I don't personally have any issues with Pride or LGBT people/lifestyles in general.

1. Well in a sense state propaganda is exactly what they do.  If the state is the embodiment of what the electorate wants for public policy, and the education establishment is the organization that executes education policy then ... yes ... state propaganda is what they're about.  

Of course there's a thorny bush to get through which is what happens when the rights of people to believe in their religious precepts conflicts with the state.  No disagreement there.  But to say we won't have any mention of homosexuality or pride because religious folks may be offended at the normalization of it all is too much.  After all, we have to live with others who don't believe as we do all the time and that's an asset of our national framework for rights.

Should they be saying that underage sex, that pre-marital sex, masturbation is the way someone should live ?  Absolutely not.  They should, and do, paint with a broad brush with the focus on health and the option to opt-out given to parents.

And that approach should be applied to many other things that we're not discussing here... things that people on the other side of the political spectrum get upset about such as Hallowe'en, Remembrance Day.  My two cents.

2. I don't see a problem with the government providing support for Pride as it's mostly supported as a secular celebration.  If you want to articulate a principle that doesn't single out Pride and thereby removes government support for certain things you will probably snag some other things in your net such as cultural events and so on.

3.  I know you don't but you need to also know that unless you can articulate a PRINCIPLE behind how government decides objectively what they will or will not fund then you are simultaneously saying you don't have issues with Pride while singling it out for removal from government funding so...

[blackbird]

17 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Well in a sense state propaganda is exactly what they do.  If the state is the embodiment of what the electorate wants for public policy, and the education establishment is the organization that executes education policy then ... yes ... state propaganda is what they're about.  

It was the state acting on the wishes of the general population that removed the Bible and reference to Christianity from public schools.  They did this to make way for the pagan ideologies of Socialism, progressivism, liberalism which includes sexual orientation and gender identity in the school system.  This proves the downward spiral and depravity of Canadians society in general.  This is probably the same in the rest of the world.  There needs to be a revival and return to the Bible and Jesus Christ in the land.  I don't see any sign of things improving.  Things are getting worse in the world in general.

[CdnFox]

7 hours ago, Venandi said:

I think that's exactly what creates and nurtures the eventual backlash on this and a number of other  issues too. People in Europe aren't going hard right because they're anti immigration... they're anti crazy.

You would think that the people who clearly made great gains in a short period would be less inclined to alienate those who helped them achieve it... if for no other reason than to avoid a backlash of their own making.

There's this curious mixture of in your face disrespect, passive-aggressive ridicule, intolerance and outright aggressiveness in the air.  You can see that right here in the forum.

Whether true or not / fair or not, a pampered minority is being seen to deliberately cross the street in order to scream FU in the face of (what most would assert to be) the most tolerant majority in human history.

That FU invariably gets you the same thing in return, it makes people feel that they were duped by their own voluntary expression of tolerance and good will, it makes them regret having done it and they vote to rid themselves of craziness.

They aren't anti gay, they're anti f------ crazy.

Then comes the predictable pushback but this time, when you bring your petition to the people who would have previously supported it, you find that the goodwill and tolerance that buoyed your gains now fuels your losses.

All you had to do to keep that from happening was to extend the same tolerance you demanded for yourself to those who gave it to you in the first place... and not be crazy. After the point of total saturation, any increase in craziness is easily shed without reflection or regret. 

I would have thought that not being bat s&^% crazy was an easy ask, turns out I was wrong though... and for that reason, and that reason alone, I won't be signing your petition next time. 

Yeah, to modify one of JFK's favorite sayings, if you make a moderate response impossible then you make a radical response inevitable.

There are a decent number of people who make money or gain some sort of power by being 'professionally angry/offended" and we see that in a number of 'causes'.  Often things like "occupy wallstreet" and even the trucker's convoy and such start off with genuinely honest grass roots movement and then get co-opted by a small handful of radic. 

I think the trans activist community and to a lesser degree the gay activist community have had that problem and the people pushing and demanding aren't necessarily the core grass roots of those communities.

But at the end of the day the result is the same, as you say a backlash.

To quote from Blackadder: " if you give them an inch they'll take a foot, much more than that and you haven't got a leg to stand on"

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

If the state is the embodiment of what the electorate wants for public policy,

If that's how we are governed, then the government is nothing more than a puppet of the masses.  I thought leaders were supposed to set an example and show moral leadership and courage in the face of a depraved society.  Are they leaders or followers? 

Edited June 13, 2024 by blackbird

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

1. It was the state acting on the wishes of the general population that removed the Bible and reference to Christianity from public schools.  They did this to make way for the pagan ideologies of Socialism, progressivism, liberalism which includes sexual orientation and gender identity in the school system.
2.  There needs to be a revival and return to the Bible and Jesus Christ in the land.  I don't see any sign of things improving.  Things are getting worse in the world in general.

1. I think it comes from this "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." in the modern context.

2. You can make the case for it but that ship sailed when the legal frameworks in the west were established.  Instead, focus on non-sectarian morality that applies to all.  

 

Quote

3. If that's how we are governed, then the government is nothing more than a puppet of the masses.  I thought leaders were supposed to set an example and show moral leadership and courage in the face of a depraved society.  Are they leaders or followers? 

3. They lead but the people choose to follow or not.

[impartialobserver]

At least in the US, a gay pride parade is a first amendment issue. If you bar it from existing.. that is a blatant first amendment violation. Some will say that it is pornography but that is not true in most cases. Unless they are nude and/or performing the sex act... there is no crime being committed as per the law. 

[Black Dog]

7 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

And they wonder why there is a surge of hate crimes when you use such divisive tactics to push your cause. 

"Divisive tactics" means violence is justified. OK psycho.

 

[Black Dog]

11 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Well you have people of all religious backgrounds and views who send their children to public schools, and they have a right to not have schools push certain views like this on their children per Pride.  It's essentially state propaganda.

They can send their kids to religious schools if they don't like the content of the public curriculum. Problem solved.

 

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Instead, focus on non-sectarian morality that applies to all.  

Non-sectarian morality is a myth.  There is no such thing.  You either accept God's word, the Bible and God's morality or you reject it in which case you are an enemy of God.  Humans don't get to decide what is right and wrong (apart from what God has said in his written revelation, the Bible).  

Edited June 13, 2024 by blackbird

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Non-sectarian morality is a myth.  There is no such thing.  You either accept God's word, the Bible and God's morality or you reject it in which case you are an enemy of God.  Humans don't get to decide what is right and wrong.  

All non believers are immoral. 🤔

That's a fringe belief, and I was taught the opposite in religion class 

[Black Dog]

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Non-sectarian morality is a myth.  There is no such thing.  You either accept God's word, the Bible and God's morality or you reject it in which case you are an enemy of God.  Humans don't get to decide what is right and wrong.  

I do. You're wrong.

8 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Exactly. 

Sorry, but if you tell me there are billions of genders but can't even name 10, and grow angry when pressed--sorry, but your stance is full of caca.

This is what they are teaching kids. Making many more question their gender.

This isn't a win, it's disturbing as it will have the unintended consequence of having perfectly normal kids mutilate their bodies, and then deeply regret it once at an age to understand such repercussions. 

I don't think a guy who identifies as "asexual" should be throwing around terms like "perfectly normal".

[blackbird]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

All non believers are immoral. 🤔

That's a fringe belief, and I was taught the opposite in religion class 

Doesn't sound like you were taught the Bible.  What religion or denomination was that?

How can anyone who doesn't believe the Bible and is an opponent of God and the Bible decide what is righteous or unrighteous? 

I have doubts about the use of the word moral.   When one talks about what is moral or immoral, whose morality are they referring to?  What is the basis of morality?

Edited June 13, 2024 by blackbird

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, blackbird said:

Doesn't sound like you were taught the Bible.  What religion or denomination was that?

How can anyone who doesn't believe the Bible and is an opponent of God and the Bible decide what is moral or immoral?

I'm Roman Catholic.

You are framing things in a way that I consider exclusionary and anti-Christian.  

You should go back and study the golden rule, then go outdoors and live it.

I'm not judging you, but everything you do seems to be about diminishing people who aren't the same as you..

Really nothing more to say here, we have vast differences of what it means to be moral and Christian 

 

[blackbird]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

I'm Roman Catholic.

You are framing things in a way that I consider exclusionary and anti-Christian.  

You should go back and study the golden rule, then go outdoors and live it.

I'm not judging you, but everything you do seems to be about diminishing people who aren't the same as you..

Really nothing more to say here, we have vast differences of what it means to be moral and Christian 

 

You just answered my question.  Thanks.  Yes, we have very different beliefs of what it means to be moral (which is really a secular word).  Your religion rejects the Bible and replaced it long ago with the opinions of men i.e.  popes, church councils, tradition, etc.  I will stick with the Bible thanks.  Sorry you find it offensive.  I don't diminish people.  That is your take because what I say disagrees with Romanism.   It appears you want to sound accepting of everyone and agreeable to anything.  It doesn't work that way.  If you stand for the truth, which most of the world rejects, you will be rejected.  If the world loves you , beware.  You may be on the wrong road.  It is not possible to straddle the fence and have it both ways.

I accept the Bible which was given to men by the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit.