All Things SCOTUS

[TorontoGold]

I don't think that's what the Q is. I'm happy to be corrected. In my mind, I associate Q with the alt straight women who wish they were lesbians. Probably goes to Renaissance Fairs and gets a little too into it. I'm sure I'm wrong too.

I think the naked twerking 200 partner/bondage gear crowd is generally the stereotypical gay guys?

Queer is usually just a high level term for any non-straight person, and then from there they are categorized further. Would be like someone referring to their "pet" but then further defining it as "their dog".

I think it's used in the LGBTQ title as a "catchall" for those that don't align themselves with the other ones.

 

[ColoradoIrish]

My post is not directed at all to the back and forth on this thread. My post is directed specifically at the merits of the case that was argued before the Supreme Court.

I know and I didn't mean for it to come across that way. My first post regarding this topic was around the premise of removing queer representation based upon religious beliefs, but there's never any outrage for any other issue that goes against religious beliefs, and the example I used was divorce. It comes across as hateful and homophobic, and then RDU went and proved my point for me.

 

[TorontoGold]

You are right, the Supreme Court case you are so worked up about has nothing to do with grooming kids. People refusing to engage in your fantasy world are just hate filled bigots. Believing perverts shaking their junk in front of kids belong in jail is just hate. Calling someone a weirdo or tranny is total hate. If my lingo doesn't jibe with your preferred whatever it's hate. Fuck off.

Stop telling on yourself dude lol. No mentally stable person gets this worked up of trans people, not even trans people care this much about random books and parades.

 

[ColoradoIrish]

Stop telling on yourself dude lol. No mentally stable person gets this worked up of trans people, not even trans people care this much about random books and parades.

Ive never been to a pride parade because of the gay guys he hates so much 😂

 

[TorontoGold]

Are your emotions are driving your comments? This has nothing to do with hate. The bottom line is this should not be taught in school. Let the parents teach about sex and the teachers teach reading, writing and arithmetic.

You've read the entire exchange, and you think Colorado is responding with emotion? Try again and revisit the actual content of the posts and not just the poster.

 

[ColoradoIrish]

You've read the entire exchange, and you think Colorado is responding with emotion? Try again and revisit the actual content of the posts and not just the poster.

Men only call women emotional so I guess I should be thanking him for affirming my gender 😂

 

[BuaConstrictor]

Ive never been to a pride parade because of the gay guys he hates so much 😂

Is this happening places? A lot? A little? At all?

re: people shaking their shit in front of 6 years old..

I'm asking this sincerely..where is this coming from?

 

[TorontoGold]

Ive never been to a pride parade because of the gay guys he hates so much 😂

It's wild these make believe issues that Irish#1 and RDU have created in their minds. The big bad scary pride festival that happens 100's of miles away from my house is evil! And all of a sudden they become experts on how pride organizers self police these events. I know I know, they once worked with a gay guy in 1987 so they understand the full scope of the matter.

 

[BuaConstrictor]

. The big bad scary pride festival that happens 100's of miles away from my house is evil!

RDU and Irish reading about the parade

 

[ab2cmiller]

I know and I didn't mean for it to come across that way. My first post regarding this topic was around the premise of removing queer representation based upon religious beliefs, but there's never any outrage for any other issue that goes against religious beliefs, and the example I used was divorce. It comes across as hateful and homophobic, and then RDU went and proved my point for me.

I won't derail the thread, but agree the church's "almost acceptance" of divorce over time is problematic. I'll share my thoughts some other time.

 

[ColoradoIrish]

I won't derail the thread, but agree the church's "almost acceptance" of divorce over time is problematic. I'll share my thoughts some other time.

I was simply calling the hypocrisy of those using religious beliefs to discriminate towards queer people.

 

[ab2cmiller]

I was simply calling the hypocrisy of those using religious beliefs to discriminate towards queer people.

I know and agree that there is some hypocrisy there.

 

[BuaConstrictor]

Maybe it means - keep everyone guessing so you can make everyone around you as uncomfortable as you are around them. Can easily be confused with "I'll fuck anything, including door knobs" or may encompass that too depending on which way the wind is blowing. But all of it is perfectly normal, healthy behavior to be celebrated and encouraged - especially amongst the young and impressionable. The most important thing is that you shove it in everyone's face because if they DGAF then they are a bigot not some normal person trying to live their normal life. Those people are the worst and exactly why drag queen story hour is important to see who is most upset when you shake your junk in a thong in the face of a 6 year old.

FFS if you have to nuance every letter of your alphabet soup maybe you are all just full of shit and making a bad name for people who want normal same sex relationships. Keep it in the bedroom and nobody GAF. Honestly - the gay majority needs to distance from the weirdos.

More people need to take their kids to church!

Wait.

 

[ulukinatme]

The Catholic church is still pretty tough on divorce, I wouldn't say they're accepting of it in any way. Technically you can't even be traditionally divorced, your only option is annulment and you have to jump through so many hoops to do it you might as well stay married.

 

[BuaConstrictor]

your only option is annulment and you have to jump through so many hoops to do it you might as well stay married.

Annulments have been made a lot easier in recent years. Can vary by your diocese but overall easier than in the past.

 

[Irish#1]

Holy cow!

 

[ColoradoIrish]

Holy cow!

If you're religious beliefs are dictating what you believe should be taught in a public school, put them in a private religious school. That's not hard to understand. For someone that routinely says they don't want religion dictating public policy you should understand that better than anyone

 

[BuaConstrictor]

Holy cow!

1. This is an elementary school. How many three year olds do you know who attend elementary school?
2. Yes, what that person is describing is a "choice". He's just not happy with the choice. No different than if you choose to not vaccinate your child.
3. Maryland has a bill in the state senate right now for public school open enrollment. If it passes, they will have even more choices.
4. Divorce also violates a lot of religious doctrine, will those books be thrown out? None of the books are sexual in nature. How is telling the story of a same sex wedding more sexualized than if the story was about a straight wedding?

In either case: I'll reiterate what I said yesterday:
I think it's fucking ridiculous that you can opt out of sexual education in school (like you can at the school in question) because of "religious" reasons. That's basic science/biology shit.

In a vacuum.... from purely a curricula standpoint.... I'm more open to the idea of parents opting their kids out of books about LGBTQ topics for "religious" angles because those seem to be more optional curriculum choices. The books should be available in the library and not banned but I can see the "mandatory reading" aspect of it being untenable.

That being said, the parents opting their kids out aren't generally coming from a place of love or true religious objection. It's usually just bigotry so that "vacuum" kind of doesn't exist.

 

[Blazers46]

There was nothing sexual in those books, you just hate queer people

I’ve never agreed with this argument. That there is nothing sexual in an LGBTQ book.

The whole alphabet soup by definition is sexual. Lesbian, one woman sexually/romantically attracted to another woman. Gay, by definition is sexual… Bi, sexual…

The issue at hand is, The Supreme Court is currently considering a case regarding the ability of parents in Montgomery County, Maryland to opt their children out of lessons that include LGBTQ-themed books.

Any LBGTQ “themed” book is Inherently sexual.

If you don’t agree parents should have a right to opt out but also tell me you aren’t trying to indoctrinate or shove this on young children then put your actions behind those words and let them opt out.

 

[ColoradoIrish]

I’ve never agreed with this argument. That there is nothing sexual in an LGBTQ book.

The whole alphabet soup by definition is sexual. Lesbian, one woman sexually/romantically attracted to another woman. Gay, by definition is sexual… Bi, sexual…

The issue at hand is, The Supreme Court is currently considering a case regarding the ability of parents in Montgomery County, Maryland to opt their children out of lessons that include LGBTQ-themed books.

Any LBGTQ “themed” book is Inherently sexual.

If you don’t agree parents should have a right to opt out but also tell me you aren’t trying to indoctrinate or shove this on young children then put your actions behind those words and let them opt out.

Let's only have books of single people then. Holy hell dude you're a lost cause

 

[BuaConstrictor]

Any LBGTQ “themed” book is Inherently sexual.

So is any straight "themed" book.

We going to have kids opting out of "The Giver"?

 

[BuaConstrictor]

Hell, let's ground it in an example of one of the books.

If Uncle Bobby's Wedding was about Uncle Bobby marrying a woman, and his niece was worried about losing time with him as a result..the book would carry the same "sexualization". The book is still revolving around a relationship, we've just changed the gender of the spouse. Would you, or anyone, have issues with it being read to children?

How is the gay relationship more sexual than the straight one?

 

[ColoradoIrish]

Hell, let's ground it in an example of one of the books.

If Uncle Bobby's wedding was about Uncle Bobby marrying a woman, and his niece was worried about losing time with him as a result..the book would carry the same "sexualization". The book is still revolving around a relationship, we've just changed the gender of the spouse. Would you, or anyone, have issues with it being read to children?

How is the gay relationship more sexual than the straight one?

Because of butt stuff 😂

 

[drayer54]

Disregard the fact that these books were specifically selected by the school district because it wanted more LGBTQ characters represented.
Disregard the fact that these books were not selected for their educational value.
Disregard the fact that the petitioners of the legal case were NOT even demanding that the books be removed.

The petitioners asked that they be allowed to opt-out. Why is that simple fact so outrageous?

Because they lose the ability to influence children. It wasn’t about educating them necessary skills, it was about influencing them with prioritized objectives.

 

[BuaConstrictor]

Because of butt stuff 😂

OH SO HETEROSEXUAL BUTT STUFF IS OK?!

 

[ColoradoIrish]

OH SO HETEROSEXUAL BUTT STUFF IS OK?!

I mean have you tried it??? 😂😂😂

 

[ColoradoIrish]

@Irish#1 you want to call everyone out that's pushing their religious beliefs out over this issue? Seeing as that's where this all stems from. Plenty of examples throughout nature that support that gay people exist as well add examples of other animals and plants changing their gender

 

[Blazers46]

Let's only have books of single people then. Holy hell dude you're a lost cause

How do we coexist if you make me read things I dont want to? Or make my children read things I don’t want them to? I disagree with you and I’m a lost cause. There comes a point where your intentions are pretty clear and it’s not about coexisting or being civil.

 

[ColoradoIrish]

How do we coexist if you make me read things I dont want to? Or make my children read things I don’t want them to? I disagree with you and I’m a lost cause. There comes a point where your intentions are pretty clear and it’s not about coexisting or being civil.

I've said previously I'm ok with opt outs for things of sexual nature. This isn't it.

There comes a point where your intentions are pretty clear and it’s not about coexisting or being civil.

You can't be serious with this, after everything being pushed. The goal of the Republican party isn't to coexist or be civil. We saw Trump sign an EO yesterday eroding civil rights and making it legal to discriminate against people again

 

[BuaConstrictor]

This isn't it.

When can we ban Romeo and Juliet being read in schools?