- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:02 am to burger bearcat
quote:
These 2 are not mutually exclusive. You may know this on some level, but don't want to admit it.
the more gay people I know, the more I think its about hypersexuality.
We all go through that phase, most remain true to self.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:02 am to stout
quote:
I see your point but we aren't putting that genie back in the bottle so it's a losing proposition.
Then don't even bother with it. You aren't going to win this unless you are willing to go after it at the source, and call out the entire premise of all these lifestyles as immoral and culturally destructive. It's a losing proposition otherwise.
The whole gay marriage thing, now means we need to accept things like Gay couples adopting and raising children, or even worse using surrogates to produce children artificially so they can "feel normal" about their abnormal lifestyle.
Either the entire thing is wrong, or all of it is right. I don't see the "middle grey area", everyone thinks is out there.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:09 am to burger bearcat
quote:
You aren't going to win this unless you are willing to go after it at the source
I honestly don't care what hypersexual people do as long as they leave kids alone.
But they don't, hence the issue.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:09 am to stout
The act needs to be spelled out. If it can be done in public it should be postable online anywhere. Was it:
1) BJ
2) handjob
3) buttfrick
4) salad tossing
or something else
I think "pride" out to spell out what they are proud about.
1) BJ
2) handjob
3) buttfrick
4) salad tossing
or something else
I think "pride" out to spell out what they are proud about.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:11 am to burger bearcat
quote:
Then don't even bother with it.
quote:
I don't see the "middle grey area", everyone thinks is out there.
The least we can do is to protect kids at this point. Just because you are willing to give up on that doesn't mean we all are.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:12 am to burger bearcat
quote:
Then don't even bother with it. You aren't going to win this unless you are willing to go after it at the source, and call out the entire premise of all these lifestyles as immoral and culturally destructive. It's a losing proposition otherwise.
I don't care what two adults do.
I do care when they involve children, or when they require validation.
frick their validation.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:18 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:so you'd be okay with limiting the interaction of such persons with preschoolers? or boy scouts?
The freaks who get off on this stuff just have that troll-like personality, just hyper-focused on this specific area. You can tell with many of them it's consumed their total personality and there isn't much person yet. It's all a projection for reactions.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:22 am to FearlessFreep
quote:
so you'd be okay with limiting the interaction of such persons with preschoolers? or boy scouts?
Define limiting.
You trying to make it a crime for parents to make decisions regarding what content the kids consume or who provides the content, on behalf of their kids?
THAT is a slippery slope.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:23 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You trying to make it a crime for parents to make decisions regarding what content the kids consume or who provides the content, on behalf of their kids?
We already do.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:24 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:“if it saves just one kid…“
You trying to make it a crime for parents to make decisions regarding what content the kids consume or who provides the content, on behalf of their kids? THAT is a slippery slope.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:24 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You trying to make it a crime for parents to make decisions regarding what content the kids consume or who provides the content, on behalf of their kids?
I am pretty sure it is already considered child abuse in many states to expose kids to some of the perversions seen at gay pride events.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:24 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You trying to make it a crime for parents to make decisions regarding what content the kids consume or who provides the content, on behalf of their kids?
Next thing you know, it will be a crime to provide a kid with porn or alcohol.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:26 am to AggieHank86
quote:
“if it saves just one kid…“
Then drop all age of consent laws if thats your opinion.
Drinking, driving, etc.
You are a hypocrite, of course.
This post was edited on 6/5/23 at 10:29 am
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:26 am to the808bass
quote:
Next thing you know, it will be a crime to provide a kid with porn or alcohol.
I imagine the outrage would be different to him if it whether it were straight or gay porn.
This post was edited on 6/5/23 at 10:28 am
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:27 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You trying to make it a crime for parents to make decisions regarding what content the kids consume or who provides the content, on behalf of their kids? THAT is a slippery slope.
OCS says hello.
Children can be removed for a myriad of reasons (many totally legitimate). The slope already exists, it just depends on who is given the power to implement their will.
I would argue that allowing children to view sex acts is grossly outside of the norm for parenting. Just my .02.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:29 am to jimmy the leg
You don’t need to add that it’s just your personal judgment.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:30 am to stout
quote:
I am pretty sure it is already considered child abuse in many states to expose kids to some of the perversions seen at gay pride events.
Sure. Again, I'm not defending those acts.
We already have laws for that. We don't need more.
I feel his comment was a bit more expansive than that pole, which would require those new laws.
And I imagine once he defines how those laws would have to be written, it would be impossible for Leftists to use the very laws against conservative parents
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:31 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
We don't need more
Maybe you'll understand why conservatives consider it wrong.
We have laws, they break laws, conservatives notice and it bothers you.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 10:34 am to the808bass
quote:I do not know where you personally live, but in Texas a parent is allowed to do exactly that.
You trying to make it a crime for parents to make decisions regarding what content the kids consume or who provides the content, on behalf of their kids?quote:
Next thing you know, it will be a crime to provide a kid with … alcohol.
SFP is basically arguing that a parent should be the one making these decisions, rather than some bureaucrat or legislator.
You prefer to involve the state.
It is a legitimate debate.
Page 7 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News