- 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
re: LGBTQ teacher scolds muslim children for skipping school pride event
Posted on 6/8/23 at 4:50 pm to Flats
Posted on 6/8/23 at 4:50 pm to Flats
quote:Places Banning Huck Finn
I'll just file this with all those Huck Finn books you claim were banned, another bullshite claim in this thread that you can't back up
Hell, it was CONSERVATIVES who threw a (warranted) fit when LEFTISTS tried to ban this classic work of literature. You would think you would remember it.
This post was edited on 6/8/23 at 4:56 pm
1
Posted on 6/8/23 at 4:59 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Hell, it was CONSERVATIVES who threw a (warranted) fit
That wasn’t your claim. You claimed books like Huck Finn were being banned when conservative were getting rid of “How to suck dick as a kindergartener”. Where has that happened?
Posted on 6/8/23 at 5:05 pm to Flats
You continue to struggle with reading comprehension. I said that MOST of the "LGBT-friendly" materials that the Church Ladies want to ban is the innocuous equivalent of the Left trying to ban Huck Finn due to Jim's nickname. Nothing remotely offensive to a reasonable person.
quote:
(only) about 5% of the books that these (Chuch Ladies) put on their (ban) lists are actually problematic for people outside the extreme Religious Right. Most are the equivalent of the Left trying to ban Huck Finn because the the nickname of the Jim character.
quote:You are welcome.
The problem is not (sexually explicit materials are) removed. The problem is the OTHER 95% of innocuous materials that knot-up the panties of the Church Ladies.
Again, MOST of the stuff that finds its way onto their ban lists is the sexual orientation version of Huck's friend Jim.
This post was edited on 6/8/23 at 5:07 pm
Posted on 6/8/23 at 5:18 pm to Jack Carter
parents need to sue
funny, trans shite going on every where in this country, in your back yards, and you have zero back bones, but the armenians and muslims in canada and michigan are out there fighting back, and pushing back.
hold them guns tight
funny, trans shite going on every where in this country, in your back yards, and you have zero back bones, but the armenians and muslims in canada and michigan are out there fighting back, and pushing back.
hold them guns tight
Posted on 6/8/23 at 5:19 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Most are the equivalent of the Left trying to ban Huck Finn because the the nickname of the Jim character.
And you were asked to provide examples. You ignored that response and you tried to weasel out when I asked the same question by deflecting to the woke crowd being upset about n****r. I guess this is one more thing just too stupid for your massive intellect to address.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 5:22 pm to Jack Carter
quote:
“You don’t belong here”
This teacher absolutely voted for them to be there.
This post was edited on 6/8/23 at 5:28 pm
Posted on 6/8/23 at 5:23 pm to Jack Carter
Lol - an intolerant liberal?
Posted on 6/8/23 at 5:24 pm to Nosevens
quote:
Now how will the democrats spin this narrative
Edmonton is in Canada.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 5:46 pm to Flats
Your story changes with absolutely EVERY subsequent post.
You should make a chart, so you can keep up with your stories.
You should make a chart, so you can keep up with your stories.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 6:03 pm to Jack Carter
Jihad
Posted on 6/8/23 at 6:09 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Kinda shoots a hole in the oft-repeated insistence that the Left will never "cross" the Muslims.
You think some lunatic teacher berating kids shoots a hole in this theory? Let’s put that to the test, have the teacher run her groomer mouth to the children’s parents.
Posted on 6/9/23 at 8:39 am to CAPEX
Does that somehow mean democrats here cannot spin ?
Posted on 6/9/23 at 11:22 am to AggieHank86
quote:
The data just do not seem to support that notion.
Then I think the data is inaccurate, which wouldn't be surprising on this topic. The mental health community is probably second only to the climate community in terms of prioritizing politics over "science."
Posted on 6/9/23 at 11:25 am to AggieHank86
quote:
I said that MOST of the "LGBT-friendly" materials that the Church Ladies want to ban is the innocuous
In addition to being an expert at everything else, you're a wiz at LBGTQ literature and have read it all to make sure it is innocuous.
Amazing. But you're simply guessing, and passing it off as knowledge.
This post was edited on 6/9/23 at 11:39 am
Posted on 6/9/23 at 11:29 am to AggieHank86
quote:
The most-convincing material I have seen is found in the studies examining some of the genetic markers found in both homosexual men AND their sisters. Where the boys tend to be gay, the sisters tend to have far greater levels of fertility than women lacking their markers.
In other words, the homosexual trait does not "die out" (for lack of a better term) because the same genetic markers which contribute to that behavior ALSO produce more babies in the females that share the same markers.
There are other studies as well, but this is the one that I find most interesting.
I'm not sure that is evidence of normalcy. Obviously not all traits that do not conform to survival value die out, for one thing.
Secondly, the trait obviously does NOT contribute to survival when it occurs in men, only women.
So when you look at the net result it's a wash, yes?
Third, how settled is this marker? We have a reliable gay gene now (or at least a marker?)
This post was edited on 6/9/23 at 11:31 am
Page 9 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News