Don't need to. You quoted from the Wiki article I linked to and already read. There is no mention of a book ban anywhere. Are you unable to understand that???


According to Genesis, God created mankind as binary. But then, using their free will, Adam and Eve ate from the tree and opened up unlimited possibilities, including for human sexuality.You are still dodging the question. Your silly speculation from Genesis, affirmed NOWHERE in the Bible and actually contradicted MANY places in the Bible, is not an answer.


Why shouldn't porn be available? All LGBT issues and pov should be available.At least you are now on record as believing that children should read porn. Amazing.

Don't need to. You quoted from the Wiki article I linked to and already read. There is no mention of a book ban anywhere. Are you unable to understand that???

Please reread my post when I first mentioned Matt Krause.

You are still dodging the question. Your silly speculation from Genesis, affirmed NOWHERE in the Bible and actually contradicted MANY places in the Bible, is not an answer.
Sooooooo, what transpired when they ate of the forbidden fruit?


At least you are now on record as believing that children should read porn. Amazing.
Wow! Please quote my saying that.

Please reread my post when I first mentioned Matt Krause.Enough of this garbage. This is what you posted. "Texas lawmaker Matt Krause has a list of 850 books that he believes should be banned." That is a false statement which you cannot verify.


Sooooooo, what transpired when they ate of the forbidden fruit?Sin. Ruin. Separation from God. Destruction. War. Hatred. Violence. Lying. Sexual sin. Should those be considered normal as well?


Wow! Please quote my saying that.Here it is. "Why shouldn't porn be available?" It would be available to be READ!

If you are going to continue this childishness, I'll be out. Get serious or go do something else.

And why are you afraid to answer this question? "Do you think students should be told that homosexuality is not genetically based? That there is no evidence of a genetic base for TG? That men and women are clearly made for heterosexual activity and not homosexual? Should they be told those things?"

Enough of this garbage. This is what you posted. "Texas lawmaker Matt Krause has a list of 850 books that he believes should be banned." That is a false statement which you cannot verify.
Your Wikipedia link says that.

Sin. Ruin. Separation from God. Destruction. War. Hatred. Violence. Lying. Sexual sin. Should those be considered normal as well?
Normal? I said unlimited possibilities.

Here it is. "Why shouldn't porn be available?" It would be available to be READ!
You or your kids or wife or grandkids have never read (or looked at) porn?

If you are going to continue this childishness, I'll be out. Get serious or go do something else.
I'm beginning to side with Athos.

First off, my apologies. I got carried away with a couple of my comments.

The link does not even mention a ban. Period. Why you continue with that is just beyond me. You were flat wrong and are too proud, I guess, to admit it.

I've done a number of things that were wrong. I don't recommend them to others as you do with this. And to suggest that porn be made available to children ("Why shouldn't porn be available?") is sick beyond description.


I said unlimited possibilities.For bad and sinful activities. That is true. But you are trying to link that to homosexual behavior and suggest it is allowed because, of all things, the fall of man in Genesis. It's truly a bizarre, desperate argument.

You're siding with Athos?. I can see that for sure. You both cannot admit when you are wrong.

And you are still afraid to answer this question. "Do you think students should be told that homosexuality is not genetically based? That there is no evidence of a genetic base for TG? That men and women are clearly made for heterosexual activity and not homosexual? Should they be told those things?"

First off, my apologies. I got carried away with a couple of my comments.
Thank you.

The link does not even mention a ban. Period. Why you continue with that is just beyond me. You were flat wrong and are too proud, I guess, to admit it.
His list is to have evidence so a ban can be established. Google "Matt Krause 850" (without quote marks).

I've done a number of things that were wrong. I don't recommend them to others as you do with this. And to suggest that porn be made available to children ("Why shouldn't porn be available?") is sick beyond description.
Please quote me where I said porn should be available to children.

For bad and sinful activities. That is true. But you are trying to link that to homosexual behavior and suggest it is allowed because, of all things, the fall of man in Genesis. It's truly a bizarre, desperate argument.
Not only for bad and sinful activities. The universe was perfect before the Fall. It isn't now.

You're siding with Athos?. I can see that for sure. You both cannot admit when you are wrong.
That's because we aren't. Our words and their meanings get twisted, too often deliberately.

And you are still afraid to answer this question. "Do you think students should be told that homosexuality is not genetically based? That there is no evidence of a genetic base for TG? That men and women are clearly made for heterosexual activity and not homosexual? Should they be told those things?"
I have too many good friends and a few relatives who don't fit your strict binary rule. I'm betting you do too.

His list is to have evidence so a ban can be established.That is pure conjecture. It has never been established and your own links provide not one shred of evidence. Once again you are providing a classic example of my principle that your ideology is driving you rather than any evidence you can find. Can you see that you have done so repeatedly just this afternoon alone?


Please quote me where I said porn should be available to children.OK. For the third and final time, here it is. "Why shouldn't porn be available?" The context was schoolchildren. You are guilty.


That's because we aren't. Our words and their meanings get twisted, too often deliberately.See what I mean? And that is not what happens with you. You write something and then when it's quoted, you try and extricate yourself from your own trap. It would be fairly easy to simply say, "That's not what I meant to say. I meant that xxxxxxx." Instead, you seem to think you can talk your way out of it. Not working at all.


I have too many good friends and a few relatives who don't fit your strict binary rule. I'm betting you do too.You are still dodging the question. It has all the appearance of intellectual cowardice. Perhaps you can give a better explanation of your running from this question. And by the way, I was not putting forward any rule at all. I was referring to very plain and clear evidence from science which you seem to be afraid of. Why is it that libs always want to follow the science until, of course, they don't like where the science is leading them?

That is pure conjecture. It has never been established and your own links provide not one shred of evidence. Once again you are providing a classic example of my principle that your ideology is driving you rather than any evidence you can find. Can you see that you have done so repeatedly just this afternoon alone?
Just as I figured...

OK. For the third and final time, here it is. "Why shouldn't porn be available?" The context was schoolchildren. You are guilty.

See what I mean? And that is not what happens with you. You write something and then when it's quoted, you try and extricate yourself from your own trap. It would be fairly easy to simply say, "That's not what I meant to say. I meant that xxxxxxx." Instead, you seem to think you can talk your way out of it. Not working at all.
Wow! Do you knit and crochet too? Maybe are part of the church quilting group?

You are still dodging the question. It has all the appearance of intellectual cowardice. Perhaps you can give a better explanation of your running from this question. And by the way, I was not putting forward any rule at all. I was referring to very plain and clear evidence from science which you seem to be afraid of. Why is it that libs always want to follow the science until, of course, they don't like where the science is leading them?
Please get to know some LGBT+ community members, especially transgender women, and listen to their life stories.

Please get to know some LGBT+ community members, especially transgender women, and listen to their life stories.Still running. You're at about the five mile marker now.


Just as I figured...

Wow! Do you knit and crochet too? Maybe are part of the church quilting group?More examples of what I said earlier. It bears repeating. "Many people just blindly accept whatever they read as long as it feeds a particular ideological narrative. It's the ideology that is, in their view, important. Truth has become cheap." So when you are cornered by your own words, rather than admit being wrong or even just clarifying your meaning, we instead get comments such as those.

Well, this thread has hopefully come to a merciful end.

Still running. You're at about the five mile marker now.
So you refuse to learn. And hear the heart-breaking stories. And you claim to have been in education.

Psssst

So you refuse to learnI have learned to spot a person running from a question. "Do you think studen ts should be told that homosexuality is not genetically based? That there is no evidence of a genetic base for TG? That men and women are clearly made for heterosexual activity and not homosexual? Should they be told those things?"

I have quite a number of friends who are in addiction to drugs or alcohol. I worked with a guy one time who was a convicted child molester. Probably my best friend on this earth has had two serious bouts with alcoholism and nearly died the first time. I know a number of people who smoke. Have another friend and former student who is battling with serious mental illness. I had a relative who died as the result of drug and alcohol abuse. I have another relative who is gay and a few who lived as gay men when they were young but now have abandoned that lifestyle. I've known people who were homeless by choice and others who committed adultery. The list of disorders goes on and on. I can say I love them all and hope the best for them, but I would never be so unloving to them as to suggest that their life choices are just hunky dory and simply the result of all of those "infinite possibilities" which we can now "enjoy" as a result of the fall. I would not suggest that they just are what they are and there is no hope for change. I tell them all the same thing, that Jesus Christ is still changing lives! That might not align with the political philosophies of some people, but it does align with the Gospel.

Back on topic, saw this today. Will take a wild guess that this person will not end up on any liberal blacklist.

"Ocasio-Cortez staffer calls Israel a 'racist European ethnostate' that was built on 'stolen land'"


"Israel is a racist European ethnostate built on stolen land from its indigenous population!" Altamimi wrote on Christmas Eve, according to a screenshot obtained by Fox News Digital.

Altamimi’s comments were in response to a post he shared from an account with the handle "Let’s Talk Palestine,'' which claimed there is a "racial hierarchy" in Israel.

"This reveals the principle underpinning Israeli apartheid: It’s not about where you’re born," the shared post reads. "It’s about whether you’re Jewish or non-Jewish. Your ethnicity determines your rights [and] level in the racial hierarchy."

"Israel is an exclusive ethnostate, established to serve one ethnic group at the expense of another," the post continued.


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-staffer-israel-ethnostate-stolen-land