Gay Curriculum Proposal Riles Elementary School Parents

B5150

B5150

Legend
Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed

"Well son/daughter what do you want to be when you grow up?"

"I want to be gay!"

"You do?"

"Yes!"

"Then me and my same gender spouse are going to have a baby"

"You are?!"

"We're going to name him Tango!"

I have no issue with gay and lesbian lifestyles but by teaching our children that a gay and lesbian lifestyle is an option is unacceptable.

Schools need to discipline and or punish misconduct at school.

Parents need to discipline their children in their home regarding the way to treat other people with respect.

Stay the hell out of my school!
 
As a teacher I actually taught a unit that was based on homosexuality (it was a class on minorities). What was interesting, was that in a HS setting, the kids found it relatively dull and boring, and I approached it the same way I do other units. At the end of the day, if it is done appropriately in a HS setting I have no argument. However, anything below HS and the concern is about the maturity of ones audience.
 
AE14 said:
However, anything below HS and the concern is about the maturity of ones audience.
Click to expand...
That is my primary issue.

The gay and lesbia rights and even science has proposed that homosexuality is not a choice but rather a genetic predisposition. Note I use the term predisposition. I have no issue with their excuses.

When you teach a 5 to 8 year old about these things and animate it and make it an exciting adventure story where "we all live happiliy after" it imprints the idea that "I can do that to when I grow up" or worse yet "I want to be like that" now. Kids emulate the charcaters and heros in stories both fiction and non-fiction.

When I grwo up "I want to be like Mike" is now "I want to be like Adam" or "I want to be like Ellen".

I mean, look at all the kids here on the board who were too young to even see him in his bodybuilding career who think Arnold is some sort of hero or role model. ;)
 
B5150 said:
That is my primary issue.

The gay and lesbia rights and even science has proposed that homosexuality is not a choice but rather a genetic predisposition. Note I use the term predisposition. I have no issue with their excuses.

When you teach a 5 to 8 year old about these things and animate it and make it an exciting adventure story where "we all live happiliy after" it imprints the idea that "I can do that to when I grow up" or worse yet "I want to be like that" now. Kids emulate the charcaters and heros in stories both fiction and non-fiction.

When I grwo up "I want to be like Mike" is now "I want to be like Adam" or "I want to be like Ellen".

I mean, look at all the kids here on the board who were too young to even see him in his bodybuilding career who think Arnold is some sort of hero or role model. ;)
Click to expand...

I agree, there are certain concerns at the younger primary ages. However, children do see it all the time. I live relatively close to New Hope Pa, which has an enormous homosexual population. My daughter has seen couples and asked questions. Keep in mind she is 6.

I dont want to see it taught as an "adventure", but at some level it does need to be taught
 
I have no issue with gay and lesbian lifestyles but by teaching our children that a gay and lesbian lifestyle is an option is unacceptable.
Click to expand...

The problem is that it is a lifestyle choice that's been more and more recognized in this society. Since we're at that point then the next steps are going to be like the one's in this thread.

I'll keep my personal opinion out of this one though :p
 
Yes, but I can teach respect for and acceptance of (insert diversity or minority group) and those different from myself without teaching them how to be (insert diversity group).

Teaching someone respect and acceptance for a racial group does not empower them the idea of choice and the empowerment to chose to be that race.

Look at how African-American-ized our white youth has become in their choices of music and social behaviors. Soon little boys and girls will behave gay because it is either popular or rebelious and they choose to act that way becaue they are not only allowed to but are encouraged to.
 
This reminds me of high school. All the chicks were part time lesbians, because it was cool somehow.

Just thought I would throw that out there.

carry on.

Adams
 
I think that if something like this really needs to be taught, it should not be in elementary school. It could potentially be too simplified. 'Boys/Girls who are best friends and don't like girls/boys.' That pretty much defines most elementary school kids. Doesn't anyone remember the He-man woman haters club? Spanky and The Little Rascals weren't gay but they do fit that grossly simplified description.

If they do go through with this I would be interested in the learning materials and resources the teachers would be using. I have a hunch that it would be very hard to properly explain homosexuality to a child not using the 'two buddies' example above.
 
Toleration of something does not mean approving of it or celebrating it, it means TOLERATING it. from mirriam webster

1: to endure or resist the action of (as a drug or food) without serious side effects or discomfort : exhibit physiological tolerance for
2 a: to allow to be or to be done without prohibition, hindrance, or contradiction b: to put up with <learn to tolerate one another>
Click to expand...

So I am totally TOLERANT of others lifestyle choices however the choice of what someone does in their bedroom belongs in their bedroom, not in my childs school.

The south park episode where Mr Garrison attempts to get fired by acting as horribly flamboyantly gay as he can (so he can sue the school system and not have to work at all) is a great illustration of this :D

Invalid Link Removed
 
Lemmiwinks!
 
If it's highschool and higher, then I have no problems with courses that simply illustrate that homosexuality is part of the mosaic of society.
 
SilentBob187 said:
I think that if something like this really needs to be taught, it should not be in elementary school. It could potentially be too simplified. 'Boys/Girls who are best friends and don't like girls/boys.' That pretty much defines most elementary school kids. Doesn't anyone remember the He-man woman haters club? Spanky and The Little Rascals weren't gay but they do fit that grossly simplified description.

If they do go through with this I would be interested in the learning materials and resources the teachers would be using. I have a hunch that it would be very hard to properly explain homosexuality to a child not using the 'two buddies' example above.
Click to expand...

I too would love to see the curriculum on this, as I am curious how it compared to the way I taught it. Bear in mind, that I taught it from an angle of minority and minority persecution.
 
This is what happens when the general people break their backs to bend over to appeal to minorities. I think the idea of home school, or selective private schooling just became solidified for me. :worried:

Our HS had enough gays as is, no one bashed em, no one treated em bad...

It should not be taught as an acceptable lifestyle. Accepting their existence in society is one thing, teaching its a proper and viable way is completely wrong.

Im going to school to be a teacher...I would toss my job before teaching this.
 
Zero V said:
This is what happens when the general people break their backs to bend over to appeal to minorities. I think the idea of home school, or selective private schooling just became solidified for me. :worried:

Our HS had enough gays as is, no one bashed em, no one treated em bad...

It should not be taught as an acceptable lifestyle. Accepting their existence in society is one thing, teaching its a proper and viable way is completely wrong.

Im going to school to be a teacher...I would toss my job before teaching this.
Click to expand...

Again, I have preached... Private schools do a better job at education for $7K a child a year, whereas it cost approx. 14-15K a year for a child to go to worthless public school. The irony is that you cannot opt out of that tax if you so choose private school. Gotta love that Iron Curtain type liberty.

Adams
 
I would be very riled.
 
DAdams91982 said:
Again, I have preached... Private schools do a better job at education for $7K a child a year, whereas it cost approx. 14-15K a year for a child to go to worthless public school. The irony is that you cannot opt out of that tax if you so choose private school. Gotta love that Iron Curtain type liberty.

Adams
Click to expand...

I would rather not get into the horrid taxing that goes on, and ever worse the complete incompetency for our government to waste that money.

The home school kids I have met, though a bit sheltered at first until their late teens(a good thing in America), are generally better learned and more dedicated to knowledge and its various forms.

The one of the problems with public schools is that they bend over at every complaint from a minority or new religious issue(or lack thereof). And thus a once stable system is nothing but a constant form of BOHICA just to keep up with all the regulations and BS that are involved in it.

And parents don't raise their kids right anymore in today's society. Some of the stuff they do, I would have paid dearly for.... the more respect goes out the window, the more people turn to alternative lifestyles and acting out like they do today.
 
DAdams91982 said:
Again, I have preached... Private schools do a better job at education for $7K a child a year, whereas it cost approx. 14-15K a year for a child to go to worthless public school. The irony is that you cannot opt out of that tax if you so choose private school. Gotta love that Iron Curtain type liberty.

Adams
Click to expand...

Statistically private schools are quite comparable to good schools. However, did you or anyone else ever wonder why certain public schools struggle? You dont see too many sp.ed kids in the private schools. Just as 1 reason. THings are not as black and white as people think
 
AE14 said:
Statistically private schools are quite comparable to good schools. However, did you or anyone else ever wonder why certain public schools struggle? You dont see too many sp.ed kids in the private schools. Just as 1 reason. THings are not as black and white as people think
Click to expand...

Define struggle. Economically, academically?

Adams
 
AE14 said:
Statistically private schools are quite comparable to good schools. However, did you or anyone else ever wonder why certain public schools struggle?
Click to expand...

no i've never wondered, as the answer is simple - the structure of the teachers union, combined with the political structure of the school boards rewards mediocrity, staying around a long time, and not rocking the boat rather than accomplishments. You can't fire a teacher who is a total looser, and because the system ends up with that much waste in it (since its run like a government system) you can't pay the teachers a decent wage.

A private school hires + fires teachers based on performance and ability, theres no such bullshit as "tenure" in private schools, and they know that their income is based SOLELY on parents being satisfied with the quality of education the children get - exactly the reverse of the public system where they get the same budget regardless of how well or poor of a job they do.
 
EasyEJL said:
no i've never wondered, as the answer is simple - the structure of the teachers union, combined with the political structure of the school boards rewards mediocrity, staying around a long time, and not rocking the boat rather than accomplishments. You can't fire a teacher who is a total looser, and because the system ends up with that much waste in it (since its run like a government system) you can't pay the teachers a decent wage.

A private school hires + fires teachers based on performance and ability, theres no such bullshit as "tenure" in private schools, and they know that their income is based SOLELY on parents being satisfied with the quality of education the children get - exactly the reverse of the public system where they get the same budget regardless of how well or poor of a job they do.
Click to expand...

True.... I am going to school for 6 years for a masters, and will start out in the 35-40K range probably..... after 6 years, I will likely be making that if I kept a job that entire time, and have seniority at a place.

I mean they do get summer and winter vacation though, which is a decent benefit. But every teacher I knew who had nice stuff worked a second job as well :worried:

Personally I love teaching(save for religious concepts unless to another religious person), so its less of a job than it is to some.
 
EasyEJL said:
no i've never wondered, as the answer is simple - the structure of the teachers union, combined with the political structure of the school boards rewards mediocrity, staying around a long time, and not rocking the boat rather than accomplishments. You can't fire a teacher who is a total looser, and because the system ends up with that much waste in it (since its run like a government system) you can't pay the teachers a decent wage.

A private school hires + fires teachers based on performance and ability, theres no such bullshit as "tenure" in private schools, and they know that their income is based SOLELY on parents being satisfied with the quality of education the children get - exactly the reverse of the public system where they get the same budget regardless of how well or poor of a job they do.
Click to expand...

my assumption is that you do not know why tenure was put in place originally. Due to parental influence, there needed to be a sense of security for teachers. Now, with that said, are their teachers who should be gone? Totally. However, saying that school boards and unions are based on rewarding mediocrity is downright foolish.
 
Zero V said:
I mean they do get summer and winter vacation though, which is a decent benefit. But every teacher I knew who had nice stuff worked a second job as well :worried:
Click to expand...

or go into administration or coaching
 
AE14 said:
However, saying that school boards and unions are based on rewarding mediocrity is downright foolish.
Click to expand...

I didn't say thats what they are based on, but it is what they do. Exactly as our state and federal government officials do. There is no direct responsibility for the quality of a teachers (or administrators) actions, and both the school boards and unions perpetuate that by doing all they possibly can to avoid a single member of their group being fired no matter how incompetent they are.

Its great that those things were originally started with such grand ideas, but its also obvious it hasn't worked out and we need to scrap those. Its the same reason most of america is afraid of a government run health care agency - our government has shown itself totally incapable of running anything in a financially responsible way, unlike private industries
 
AE14 said:
my assumption is that you do not know why tenure was put in place originally. Due to parental influence, there needed to be a sense of security for teachers. Now, with that said, are their teachers who should be gone? Totally. However, saying that school boards and unions are based on rewarding mediocrity is downright foolish.
Click to expand...

Unions only do one thing, and that is protect the weak. That is the reason that people who have made a stake in an industry aren't up in arms to start forming unions... so in a sense it does reward mediocrity. Why should get a sense of security? If they aren't up to standards, then there is the door. There is always a person fresh outta college ready and willing to start teaching in a dynamic environment. It makes teachers not want to take risks and come up with innovative ways to teach our youth... I mean why should they? Their job is there, it isn't going anywhere, you make the same money if your read line from line in the book instead of thinking new ways to grab that attention away from the damn ipod.

Adams
 
AE14 said:
or go into administration or coaching
Click to expand...

Well that is where my love for the weights comes in. I will be a PT when I am not teaching, which is still teaching just in a physical aspect :D

Coaching would be fun and worthwhile, to be able to even further a kid and give them more tools and drive. Then again I am the kind of coach who if I caught a kid using roids or something, he is off the team permamentally. So the school wouldnt like me :684:

Some coaches though are also teachers, and they SUCK at teaching. Had a math teacher I failed back in HS, took the same class with another teacher, got an A and slept half the time because his teaching was valid. Its all about how you express to the kids.
 
Actually I'm very heartened but this situation. Not about gay penguins being used to teach preschoolers about how wonderful gay people are, but at the nature of the objections. Most people wouldn't give a **** one way or the other it seems if the damn curriculum was kept to a more age appropriate level. That speaks a great deal to the level of tolerance that exists in this country for minorities while also showing most people still have a shred of common sense. I'm rather proud of my country today.
 
What was the name of that book they used to teach children in Great Britain about homosexuality? Wasn't it The King and...something. Like, The King and His Friend or The King and the C*ck...I don't know, something like that, but I'm serious. There was some children's book that made homosexuality out to be some amazing journey. A Christian parent presented outrage about it and the school told them to shut up, and then a Muslim parent presented outrage and they took it off the curriculum.
 
The notion that exposing a child to homosexuality will turn them into the "Dreaded Plague: teh Gayz1!" is patently false, from both a social and biological perspective, so we can square that away.

The concerns about the practical significance of teaching pre-schoolers complex sexual issues, though, is a most certainly valid concern; for my part, I would have apprehensions about this subject being raised at such an age, irrespective of the orientation therein. To the extent to which these sexual lessons should be discussed at this age - which is a debatable notion in-itself - they should be spoken about only re: social acceptability - that is, homosexuals are equal as persons, and they should not be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation alone; delving into the finer details, so to speak, of sex-in-general is a bit "taboo" when speaking about five year olds.
 
I agree mullet. It won't turn anyone into anything, and most certainly should not be discussed to young children. However, HS age students are more than capable of dealing with the topic.
 
AE14 said:
I agree mullet. It won't turn anyone into anything, and most certainly should not be discussed to young children. However, HS age students are more than capable of dealing with the topic.
Click to expand...

Why not just let it be taught during those sexual courses for 12 or 13yo. I mean, when else does it really need to be discussed? What's the purpose?

Frankly, I don't believe it needs to be discussed in the first place. It's not the job of the schools to do this, although it's becoming so because the parents no longer want the responsibility.

It's like that episode of South Park where they teach sex education to Ike's class and they can't even comprehend what the hell is being taught to them. Do these people really think 5yo are really even going to be able to understand what they're talking about? They just learned a year ago how to hold their own junk stable while they piss, and to them, that's all it's there for.

You've got confused little pre-schoolers with single parent Mom's and don't even know who or what a father is because theirs ran out on their mother, and now you're telling them that some kids have two fathers? WTF?
 
AE14 said:
I agree mullet. It won't turn anyone into anything, and most certainly should not be discussed to young children. However, HS age students are more than capable of dealing with the topic.
Click to expand...

Definitely. The emotional and intellectual maturity of a four year-old is not such that they will receive and digest this complex information in an appropriate manner.
 
Irish Cannon said:
What was the name of that book they used to teach children in Great Britain about homosexuality? Wasn't it The King and...something. Like, The King and His Friend or The King and the C*ck...I don't know, something like that, but I'm serious. There was some children's book that made homosexuality out to be some amazing journey. A Christian parent presented outrage about it and the school told them to shut up, and then a Muslim parent presented outrage and they took it off the curriculum.
Click to expand...

Biggest F'ing problem out there. The Christian ideals that guided this country is dead. I am not saying that everyone has to worship My God, but you can not argue that the moral laws laid down by religion are not the best for man and society. Idiots on personal vendettas have ruined this. Every year this country drifts more and more into darkness. At least in that case a Muslim family was able to get some say in and it worked...still BS though.
 
Zero V said:
Biggest F'ing problem out there. The Christian ideals that guided this country is dead. I am not saying that everyone has to worship My God, but you can not argue that the moral laws laid down by religion are not the best for man and society. Idiots on personal vendettas have ruined this. Every year this country drifts more and more into darkness. At least in that case a Muslim family was able to get some say in and it worked...still BS though.
Click to expand...

Well, that was in GB, but I have no doubt the same thing would have happened in the States.
 
Irish Cannon said:
Why not just let it be taught during those sexual courses for 12 or 13yo. I mean, when else does it really need to be discussed? What's the purpose?

Frankly, I don't believe it needs to be discussed in the first place. It's not the job of the schools to do this, although it's becoming so because the parents no longer want the responsibility.
Click to expand...

It is the responsibility of the school-in-general to provide the child-in-general with an education which prepares them for myriad circumstances, both intellectual and social, that they may encounter; this includes, in the latter portions of the educatory-cycle, complex issues like sexuality. And so, [homo]sexuality should be taught in schools because it exists, and students will most certainly encounter it at some level; for some, the issue will be a lived-through experience in their lives. Do you feel sexuality in general should not be discussed, or homosexuality in particular should not be discussed?

It's like that episode of South Park where they teach sex education to Ike's class and they can't even comprehend what the hell is being taught to them. Do these people really think 5yo are really even going to be able to understand what they're talking about? They just learned a year ago how to hold their own junk stable while they piss, and to them, that's all it's there for.

You've got confused little pre-schoolers with single parent Mom's and don't even know who or what a father is because theirs ran out on their mother, and now you're telling them that some kids have two fathers? WTF?
Click to expand...

I agree with all this, but it is an explicitly different issue than what you expressed above. It most certainly should be discussed at an age-appropriate level.
 
And there isn't apparently enough budgetary dollars to teach those highschoolers how to read and write and do math and science at an acceptable level, so there is no budgetary dollars to be wasted on "here's an alternative lifestyle" classes :)
 
EasyEJL said:
And there isn't apparently enough budgetary dollars to teach those highschoolers how to read and write and do math and science at an acceptable level, so there is no budgetary dollars to be wasted on "here's an alternative lifestyle" classes :)
Click to expand...

This is not a gay-preparatory class: it is exposing students to something they will most certainly encounter anyway in a controlled and scientific/intellectual context. As much as moral conservatives attempt to wish them collectively away, homosexuality, its proponents, and their rights exist; and so, they should be discussed in the same contexts as other minority rights. Plain and simple. Whether your moral standing accords homosexuality [in a social context] consideration, it exists, and shunning it in the classroom is a foolish concept. Insofar as it is age-appropriate to discuss, it should be discussed.
 
With an inability to teach children to do basic SCHOOL activities at an age/grade appropriate level, expanding the reach of what subjects they attempt and fail to reasonably and correctly teach students is moronic.
 
Zero V said:
but you can not argue that the moral laws laid down by religion are not the best for man and society.
Click to expand...
If you honestly beleive that then I urge you to read 'Letter to a Christian Nation' by Sam Harris. It's a very quick read and you can pick it up pretty cheap most places.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
This is not a gay-preparatory class: it is exposing students to something they will most certainly encounter anyway in a controlled and scientific/intellectual context. As much as moral conservatives attempt to wish them collectively away, homosexuality, its proponents, and their rights exist; and so, they should be discussed in the same contexts as other minority rights. Plain and simple. Whether your moral standing accords homosexuality [in a social context] consideration, it exists, and shunning it in the classroom is a foolish concept. Insofar as it is age-appropriate to discuss, it should be discussed.
Click to expand...

I think this is a large problem right here; grouping homosexuality as just another minority culture or race.

And I definitely don't believe it should be shunned in a classroom, and that goes for any topic or discussion, but I don't think it needs to be a part of curriculum.

A problem with so many teachers these days (I guess any time period) is that they love to push their own agenda and beliefs, and to many of these children, and even through high school and college (sadly), these students think teachers know EVERYTHING.

We had a guest speaker in one of my law classes recently and she received some serious verbal beatdown from me for trying to push her **** on me. We were on the topic of spanking children.
 
EasyEJL said:
And there isn't apparently enough budgetary dollars to teach those highschoolers how to read and write and do math and science at an acceptable level, so there is no budgetary dollars to be wasted on "here's an alternative lifestyle" classes :)
Click to expand...

hahah. I am one of the few who know what the heck a pronoun and verb are from my HS. Honestly it is appalling the literature level that is allowed to pass as acceptable in our nation.

HardTrainer said:
If you honestly beleive that then I urge you to read 'Letter to a Christian Nation' by Sam Harris. It's a very quick read and you can pick it up pretty cheap most places.
Click to expand...

Doubt it will change my stubborn mind lol. Its a hell of alot better than what we got today after it was stripped from what it used to be. Compare America from 1910 to 1960, then begin the stripping. And look at America today. Dont need a book to see obvious changes. America was dominately religious back in the the early to mid 1900's. Then a few ideas and rebellious desires kicked in, and what do you know. We are up to our ears in STDs, Homosexuals, a ruined economy, porn out the yin yang(which desensitizes people relationship/emotionally), and a lack of moral value as a whole.

Lets not get into that stuff though -.- If you followed the old ways, STD's would vanish.... that alone proves one way is wrong...
 
Zero V said:
Doubt it will change my stubborn mind lol.
Click to expand...
It's not necessarily about changing your mind. Knowing an argument and disagreeing is one thing, but being oblivious to the fact that a counter-argument to your POV even exists is an intellectually indefensible position.

Plus, look at this way, if you get into a discussion with an atheist (or whatever) he could very easily make you look like a fool in your ignorance. If you've already heard all his arguments before however, then you'll have a much better chance of standing your ground and not looking like a fool. Or alternatavely, try thinking of it as a test of faith. Expanding your own knowledge rarely puts you at a disadvantage.

And it really is a very short book, you could read it in under an hour.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
The notion that exposing a child to homosexuality will turn them into the "Dreaded Plague: teh Gayz1!" is patently false, from both a social and biological perspective, so we can square that away.
Click to expand...
The youth of today have girls playing lesbian who are not lesbians and boys playing gay who are not gay simply because it is an acceptable way of self expression and social exploration and a way to insert my social and biological confusion into a category that recognizes them as a minority class rather than just confused.

There are more and more gay and lesbian kids because it is a social choice to be gay or lesbian now whether you are or not. It has really very little to do with their sexual orientation anymore. Gay is the new cool.
 
I will say this Brian, I am around teenagers all the time, and never have seen what you are describing.
 
AE14 said:
I will say this Brian, I am around teenagers all the time, and never have seen what you are describing.
Click to expand...

College parties...I've seen enough of the lesbian thing, but I don't think guys are as eager. Haha.

But I do disagree that this needs to be taught. I just don't see it as necessary. There's lots of stuff people come in contact with throughout their life, and government schools do not need to address everything.
 
Irish Cannon said:
College parties...I've seen enough of the lesbian thing, but I don't think guys are as eager. Haha.

But I do disagree that this needs to be taught. I just don't see it as necessary. There's lots of stuff people come in contact with throughout their life, and government schools do not need to address everything.
Click to expand...

Again, when the schools can't manage to teach basic skills in academia, why are they trying to take over the parents job of teaching the child social skills?

I don't want to live in a "nanny state", thats not what this country was founded on. You can see the failure and senescence of the nanny states all across the world.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
I think putting a pseudo-logical facade on religious reasoning and jamming it down the throats of children who do not know better is a huge problem as well. However, that may not be particularly why you made that statement. Why do you not differentiate them? There may be a huge, stinking pile of irony afoot here.
Click to expand...

Can you ****ing read? I said the entire subject needs not be brought up. When did I ever imply that children should be forced my beliefs?

The irony is that you find yourself to be a ****ing Buddha of Anabolic Minds and every room you step in, but are quite honestly a pseudo-intellectual seeking answers in all of the wrong places.

You're such a ****ing fascist Canadian piece of trash. You think you have an answer to everything.

Maybe we'll cross paths one day. You may be Prometheus, but I'm Zeus, and I'm sure I don't need to remind you how the story ends. I'm sure you've read it.
 
Irish Cannon said:
Can you ****ing read? I said the entire subject needs not be brought up. When did I ever imply that children should be forced my beliefs?

The irony is that you find yourself to be a ****ing Buddha of Anabolic Minds and every room you step in, but are quite honestly a pseudo-intellectual seeking answers in all of the wrong places.

You're such a ****ing fascist Canadian piece of trash. You think you have an answer to everything.

Maybe we'll cross paths one day. You may be Prometheus, but I'm Zeus, and I'm sure I don't need to remind you how the story ends. I'm sure you've read it.
Click to expand...

You need to calm the fuck down, obviously. You have an issue with people who oppose your narrow-minded beliefs, and throw a tantrum like a child whenever that situation arises.

I can read, but can you? Before your piss-fight here, you may have read the question instead: why do you not differentiate homosexuals from other minorities?

Jesus Christ, it is the internet. You throw a fit like this when people disagree with you in class? I fucking hope not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top