link
I always forget which group it is that is intolerant?
I am always told it is conservatives.
But everytime I look, it is liberals restricting speech, it is liberals telling people what they can and can not say...
Once again, a small group of people, about 10%, get exactly what they want, while offending the other 90%.
I am positive that not talking about mom and dad is not good for the social and family structure in this country.
I'll take the conservative message over the "two mommies and two daddies" message any day.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
'Mom' and 'Dad' banished by California
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
27 comments:
Your headline is false.
It was the headline of the link...and my comments are dead on...again.
"Once again, a small group of people, about 10%, get exactly what they want, while offending the other 90%."
Yup...and, for a host of bad reasons, we let you 10% continue to degrade the nation with your filth and stupidity anyway.
Not all that many years ago, I worked a second job (and game, what that means is, you actually go to your first job, work all day, and then go to ANOTHER job, and work all evening, preferably without whining about it) as a bouncer at a downtown club with a predominantly queer clientele.
What you may not realize, and what I came to understand, is that these young people were easily ten times more well-behaved, and far less likely to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs, equally less likely to be involved with crime elements on the street, orderly, able to take direction (largely) without backtalk, resilient, intelligent, self-sufficient, etc., then their lily-white, suburban, bourgeous frat-party counterparts.
Trust me, I had expected one sort of learning experience about a group of people and had to admit even I had carried a bunch of false preconceived notions beforehand.
I experienced the same phenomenon as a mid-level corporate manager in a major New York financial firm, stunned when my young entry-level account reps and execs, weary of false sexual-harrassment suits and excessive demands for paid time off, balked at hiring straight female administrative assistants and secretaries, and discovered a ready and willing labor pool of men and women, who just happened to be gay, and were a hell of a lot less "in your face" about it than the women ever were, assume these everyday positions with a maturity, dignity, proficiency, and work ethic I hadn't seen in years, and more or less help bring the unit back up to the exacting standards I demanded.
And, do you know, not one of them was an illegal alien? They all knew how to speak English! No two-hour phone convos with spoiled children, no surreptitious Internet shopping, no two-hour discussions on company time about Korean nail salons, Nancy Grace, no endless complaints about bathrooms they'd fouled themselves, no HVAC-temperature issues, no microwave popcorn, no PMSing.
The phones were answered, without attitude! Necessary correspondence was answered on a timely basis! Projects were completed, finalized, and submitted prior to target date, without careless errors or need for revisions (gasp)!
Broken things got fixed. Without talk.
And, on a far smaller scale, I rediscovered this as an entrepreneur in my own start-up in a completely unrelated field.
So, whose presence REALLY benefits American business?
Now, I can show you any number of urban (in the original sense of the word) communities that I have seen completely revitalized by queers and the upscale businesses they attract...Hell's Kitchen, Center City Philly, Halsted, Adams Morgan, etc. Most of the fashions and foodstuffs in these businesses are perhaps a bit fancy for my down-to-earth tastes, but they undeniably attract a far better and civilized class of clientele then the empty storefronts and the long-forgotten establishments that the rioters and savages had chased out three decades earlier (and that is from a law-enforcement point of view)...
Tell me again how the NASCAR garbage have revitalized America's social fabric, and the faggots have destroyed it.
It is said that, in America, there is no such thing as a white neighborhood gone black, that has in any way improved, and I largely concur with that.
Show me one formerly black, Hispanic, or white-trash neighborhood in an American city, that has had a sizable influx of the gays and is NOT noticeably better, cleaner, more self-sufficient from city and state funding, with better housing, shopping, and dining options, and markedly less crime.
They UNDID what three decades of social decay (presided over by neocon policies of "planned shrinkage" in the cities, NOT any "Great Society" scapegoats) and restored our cities and our tax base, and they did it singlehandedly.
Fair is fair. You can bash someone for what they do in their personal lives and how they make you FEEL inside, but that's not their damage.
Give credit where credit is due for once.
Oh yeah, Hash. The homosexuals are the saviors of all that's wrong with society. Could you dress up your lie just a little bit more you fraud? It's not quite perfect enough.
As for the point of the post, Arnie has made the biggest mistake of his political career, or at least as bad as using citizens' money for embryonic stem cell nonsense, in the biggest affront to parenthood and family that's ever come down the pike. How dare he, and his liberal, moral-free education destroying allies force their "morality" down the throats of so many on behalf of so few, who have no leg upon which to stand to demand the concessions they do. This is an absolute outrage and I suspect the SCOTUS will be checking this out soon.
Now. Psuedo-Christian Hashboy will now wrongly accuse me of hate, and do so in a very hateful way. Go ahead, Hash.
"This is an absolute outrage and I suspect the SCOTUS will be checking this out soon."
If he can disentangle himself from Jeff Gannon's muscular, military man-thighs long enough to get a shot of Jim Beam and a flight out, maybe...
"Now. Psuedo-Christian Hashboy will now wrongly accuse me of hate, and do so in a very hateful way. Go ahead, Hash."
Dude? You're the one who hides in an ultra-liberal, uber-permissive denomination, so you can appear stern and authoritative by comparison, and worships the likes of D. James Kennedy because the theology fits a POLITICAL agenda, while all you're doing is running away from the truth in your own life and upbringing, and you can't accept the fact that it's called the "Good News" for a reason?
You were grounded in the truth at some point. It was you who chose to step off, and mix with the unclean thing.
Might I suggest chabad.org?
Just become a Noahide, and live your OWN life to some sort of discernable code of morals, instead of this counterfeit and very transparent charade you're trying to pull off.
Or, of course, more beer will fend it all off until tomorrow!
Here is the text of SB777; would you mind identifying within it which parts will outlaw schools' use of "mom and dad" or "husband and wife" for me? Thanks.
Once again, Trashboy, I'll be sober soon, and you'll still be stupid. But in truth, something with which you are quite unfamiliar, it's fascinating that you'll take a one-night-out-per-week routine (that only lasts 33 weeks, btw) and turn it into alcholism. Whatever moves along your point of view, I guess. And I could easily find a more Bible believing denomination, but then I'd be preaching to the choir, wouldn't I? I can do far more good where I am, and the people of my church are good ones.
Might I suggest you pound sand?
"If he can disentangle himself from Jeff Gannon's muscular, military man-thighs long enough to get a shot of Jim Beam and a flight out, maybe..."
Who's Jeff Gannon and why are you so enamored with his thighs? I don't drink Beam, thank you very much.
Hash, you were making an okay argument, then you write this:
They UNDID what three decades of social decay (presided over by neocon policies of "planned shrinkage" in the cities, NOT any "Great Society" scapegoats)
The cities were destroyed by a larger and larger group of people not wanting to work or take ownership in their neighborhoods...since they were given everything they had, they didn't care about it.
Add into that white flight caused by busing black kids to white schools, and you have the destruction of the cities.
You're right Game! If only we still had segregated schools!
World Nut Daily?
umm... a Republican signed that bill into law. Are you really willing to blast Arnold on social issues? Being a social liberal is the only thing keeping him in office.
And really:
would you mind identifying within it which parts will outlaw schools' use of "mom and dad" or "husband and wife" for me? Thanks.
"I'll be sober soon"
Wow.. nothing like backing up your arguments with another shot of tequila. Nice to see your bf, Game, is there to hold your hair back from the toilet.
Parklife,
You would think that identifying the key text of the law would be easy for Game. After all, his arguments are based on fact rather than emotion....
"The cities were destroyed by a larger and larger group of people not wanting to work or take ownership in their neighborhoods..."
And who exactly was behind all that, game?
Here is what is coming our way. The left says they want to model us on Europe.
I believe them.
"Wow.. nothing like backing up your arguments with another shot of tequila."
I guess you've got nothing if you're ripping a flip comment like that. I don't drink tequila. But thanks for the offer. What do you mean by "bf"? Is that an abbreviation of your favorite hobby?
"Are you really willing to blast Arnold on social issues?"
Totally. He's far less than advertised. Socially, he's a total loss.
"And who exactly was behind all that, game?"
C'mon Hashley. It'll be a lot more entertaining if YOU answer the question.
Hash would have something to say about some neocon stealing something and needing to pay back what they stole...
maybe a sentence about cooperations acting all coorperationy...
When the real answer is welfare, the projects and leaders telling them that they need to blame white people for their problems.
"The left says they want to model us on Europe."
Linky no worky, jason.
"When the real answer is welfare..."
Partially correct, possibly one of the top five leading reasons.
", the projects"
Well, no, not at all. This may surprise you, but the projects were actually a good thing initially. They were originally constructed to replace decrepit, unreparable slums
and were largely populated by intact, white, working- and middle- class families headed by returning World War Two veterans at a time where affordable, decent housing was scarce, and there was little incentive for private industry to build any.
The projects were, up until other variables were introduced into the equation, clean, safe, pleasant places to live, that stabilized many a transitional neighborhood at the time.
I don't know the Milwaukee public housing situation, and how it contributed to the collapse of the system. I can tell you New York's projects are (presently) well-run, actually somewhat safer than most of the blocks surrounding most of them, since the institution of vertical patrolling and published lists of banned undesirables.
Newark, Paterson, Atlantic City, Philadelphia, and Chicago are a different kettle of fish altogether, and in these places, many have been demolished.
They were unworkable because order was not enforced, because forced integration policies, the acceptance of homeless, mentally ill, criminal elements, and untreated Vietnam vets chased the core families out, and state and local governments refused to enforce the elements of order in the projects because they were not seen as cash cows.
"and leaders telling them that they need to blame white people for their problems."
True, but to a much lesser extent than you perceive it. Remember, actual ghettoes were fewer, smaller, and far less influential in those days.
What about the policies of urban planning that caused these concentrations to begin with?
What about "planned shrinkage", which, after all, predated the initial riots themselves?
And what about arson? Who torched the buildings?
Oh, I forgot.
Busing.
Busing destroyed the inner-city.
I was there, I lived it, and I saw it for myself.
It destroyed the neighborhoods and the school systems and, IMHO, accomplished absolutely nothing worthwhile.
I really don't believe in integration in general. I don't believe you can legislate it, I don't honestly believe most people think it is desirable, and I think it is a waste of time and money to try and enforce it.
I believe in neighborhood schools (preferably smaller ones).
Hi, yeah, I'm still waiting for someone to point out where in the bill the words "mom and dad" and "husband and wife" would be banned.
Thanks much for this.
Give it up Jay. World Net Daily has no bias and is always right.
Jay,
I haven't seen the bill, but based on how these things have progressed thus far, it isn't a far fetched fear whatsoever. There is a push to legitimize, so anything that harkens to the traditional is seen as a threat. How could you reasonably expect the terms to remain in use if same sex marriage is allowed? You'd either have to constantly qualify your remarks or redefine the terms or simply use "spouse" or "life-partner" or "parent" instead of "husband and wife", "mom and dad" and other such real terms in deference to the artificial versions. Look at the level of vitriol now towards anyone preaching or discussing the Biblical view of homosexuality. So to extrapolate based on past history, it's, as I said, no stretch to see it coming.
But even worse, in my view, is the notion that there should be ANY such discussions in elementary schools. To subject children to such topics during what should be a time of innocence is unconscienable. It demonstrates that what is of foremost importance is their own selfish desires. Reason enough to thwart their efforts to redefine our culture in their own sick image.
Thanks Marshall. You haven't read the bill and have nothing but your opinion to offer.
A few facts wouldn't hurt.
"Look at the level of vitriol now towards anyone preaching or discussing the Biblical view of homosexuality."
It is not the preaching or discussing of it that is oppressive, it is the forced imposition of THAT version of it on all citizens that is oppressive.
Isn't it a bit interesting that this law has not been mentioned on any news programs to date? You would think it would be all over the news...and yet, by the Liberal news media even reporting on it, it would seem as though they would be "intolerant." This is a very scary law that has been passed and it has made me decide I will never put my innocent children into a public school. School is where you learn how to read and write, not where you learn sexuality...and those poor children who now have to share bathrooms w/ people of the opposite sex, who by saying anything about it in a way that shows they are uncomfortable w/ the situation will be punished for being intolerant...what is this world coming to. This tiny group of people who complain of intolerance always....where is their tolerance for the majority of the population???
Marshall, I helpfully linked the text of the bill above. Read it and try again.
"Totally. He's far less than advertised. Socially, he's a total loss."
Helllloooo.. Earth to Marshall.. The only reason he has not been tossed into the political scrap heap is his compliance on social issues in this state. Arnold was on his back with the Unions beating him to a bloody pulp before he found a liberal social side. Wake up.. Jeesshh..
Andy,
Your welcome. And now that I've read the link Jay helpfully offered, my comments were more on point than I imagined, particularly with the phrase "that adversely affects..." Who decides what that means? Where is it defined? To mention traditional terms in relation to traditional marriage, as well as other topics, gender specific terms, that is, may be considered having an adverse affect on the sensibilities of the deviant teacher, student or staff member, and at this point, just for merely mentioning it. Some militant transexual might decide that the mere mention of such proper terms hurts his/her feelings. Considering how some feel the need to bend over backwards for such a tiny percentage of the population in order to appear "tolerant", it isn't a stretch at all to expect these proper gender specific terms to be put to the side in favor of some more sensitive to the sensibilities of the sexually confused.
Hashboy,
"It is not the preaching or discussing of it that is oppressive, it is the forced imposition of THAT version of it on all citizens that is oppressive."
Yet it is the preaching of it that is being framed as oppression by the homosexual community. And it is THEIR version of all things sexual that is being imposed on all of society. The Christian right has merely been attempting to block that imposition.
Parklife,
Who cares? The point is he billed himself as a conservative and he's more liberal than conservative, aside from his fiscal positions. And with the spending of billions on embryonic stem cell research, I'm wondering about that as well. Once again, a total loss.
Post a Comment