 |
Have you ever seen a poor person create a job, mass produce a product, buy an expensive luxury item that causes increased employment or production, or increase GNP?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Tom said it well... I've never worked for a poor person.
Elliot
How are you enjoying the tax cuts to the rich?Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
Hope you get back on your feet soon.
Thank you for your well-wishes, NK. I AM on my feet. My current 9-5 job is to find a job, but it IS a job, nonetheless.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Those tax cuts are the very thing that is going to get me back into the work force. Those tax cuts represent the money that will be used for my salary, rather than sucked up by the bottomless pit called government. Without those tax cuts, I would not have any hope of finding a job.
Like Tom and I said before, I've never worked for a poor person. RICH people create jobs, and the more money put back in the hands of the rich, the more jobs they create... either directly through their own businesses, or indirectly by buying the goods and services that will be built and provided by those who are not yet employed but will be when the demand for their goods and services increases. Without those tax cuts you criticize, the demand for goods and services won't increase, and I will remain unemployed.
I'm hoping against hope that Obama sees the light and makes MORE tax cuts. Otherwise I may not see employement against for a while.
Does that answer your question about how I see tax cuts for the "rich"?
Elliot
Nope, you danced around the facts that the tax cuts happened before you lost your job, not just recently.Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
Please read what I said again. Towit:Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
"I'm hoping against hope that Obama sees the light and makes MORE tax cuts. Otherwise I may not see employement again for a while."
In other words, I am HOPING FOR MORE TAX CUTS TO PEOPLE WHO CREATE JOBS SO THAT THEY CAN HOPEFULLY CREATE ONE FOR ME.
Is that clear enough now?
How do you expect them to work for you when they failed for you?
Why do you assume tax cuts are the reason he (or anyone else) lost his job?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
The same reason he assumes it will be his saving grace I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
THEY didn't fail for me. THEY kept me employed for several years.
What failed was the government's actions vis-à-vis intervention in banks. The reason that I was laid off from the Bank I was working for is that BANKS are hurting because the government decided to force them to make bad loans that they (including me, as a credit analyst and credit officer) didn't want to make. If not for those bad loans, banks would be lending money right now. They never would have been hurt by those bad loans. They would still need people like ME to do their lending for them.
In other words, it's government intervention and government social engineering that caused this mess, not the tax cuts.
The tax cuts actually kept me employed for a period while the entire mess was unfolding, (since 2005 or so, when Bush and McCain first brough it up to Congress but were brushed off as overly alarmist). If not for the tax cuts, a whole bunch of bankers would have been laid off YEARS ago as banks dipped into capital to reserve against loan losses. The tax cuts gave the banks something else to tap into before the bank had to fire me in order to tap into my salary to set up adequate loan loss reserves. Because of the tax cuts, I got a break for several months if not years. MORE tax cuts would re-open the job market for me as they did after the 9/11 economic downturn, the S&L crisis, and all the other times that tax cuts have increased employment.
Elliot
I guess I'd rather live in a place where I didn't have to rely on the rich getting tax cuts to stay employed. To each his own.
You guess wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
There are sound economic principles that explain how tax cuts prime an economic pump, increase employment rates and productivity, and keep jobs from being lost.
There are NO economic principles (sound or otherwise) that can explain how a tax cut results in the loss of jobs or increases in unemployment. Even Keynes didn't make that claim, and he was a government-interventionalist economist.
The only "reasonable" anti-tax-cut argument is that the government needs the money in order to run things. However, the Laffer Curve clearly demonstrates the fallacy of this argument... and proves that the more you cut taxes, the more the government actually takes in because of increased VOLUME in the economy. People pay lower tax RATES, but more in absolute dollars because the amount that they end up earning is larger in the aggregate and more people are employed and paying taxes.
In any case, nobody argues that tax cuts cause more unemployment. MOST people (including those who are anti-tax-cut) understand that lower taxes increase employment and spending.
Elliot
Would you be this angry and upset if you got your way? No. You'd be telling the people that do want this curriculum to suck it up and accept it.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
The fact is that you can't please everyone. Someone is going to be angry. So, what do you do? You either accept the schools decision or you find another school.
It may not be easy, although here in Canada it really is a no brainer, Catholic schools are funded by taxpayers, we all pay, doesn't matter if you're Catholic or not, at least in my Province. That's why my parents sent me to Catholic school.
Public school yes, we pay fees, but if you can't afford $160/year for your child to attend then maybe you shouldn't have children.
I realize that people are suffering through hard times, but what does that have to do with your original post? The question is, do you have to accept their agenda? The answer is no, find someplace that does teach what you want taught, or home school. If you can't afford to do that then yes, accept it.
Prop 8 caused a lot of stir. There are a lot of people that think that gay marriage should be allowed, I'm one of them. Will I get my way? No. Would it stop me if I was gay? No. I'd go somewhere where gay marriage was accepted.
You can't expect everyone to conform to your wishes, to go by your standards and morals.
Well, if you can find such a place, let me know.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
And FYI, Canada isn't it. Canada's economy works on the same principles as the American economy. If they cut taxes, unemployment goes down, same as ours.
Elliot
What is it with you people calling me angry? Just what exactly in that post was angry, WANT in capital letters? It's called emphasis, and I'm concerned, not angry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
I'm not in Canada and neither is this school district. In most districts you can go to the taxpayer funded public school in your neighborhood, home school or pay through the nose for a private education. You don't get any other choices.Quote:
The fact is that you can't please everyone. Someone is going to be angry. So, what do you do? You either accept the schools decision or you find another school.
It may not be easy, although here in Canada it really is a no brainer, Catholic schools are funded by taxpayers, we all pay, doesn't matter if you're Catholic or not, at least in my Province. That's why my parents sent me to Catholic school.
Not counting all of the other taxes that fund schools, roughly 70 percent of our property taxes go to the local school district, and that's a lot more than $160 a year.Quote:
Public school yes, we pay fees, but if you can't afford $160/year for your child to attend then maybe you shouldn't have children.
Why are you asking me? You're the one that suggested if we don't like it to change schools. I'm the one telling you that's not so simple in this country.Quote:
I realize that people are suffering through hard times, but what does that have to do with your original post? The question is, do you have to accept their agenda?
LOL, let's say this district is going to offer a required course in fundamental Baptist values, do you still feel the same way?Quote:
The answer is no, find someplace that does teach what you want taught, or home school. If you can't afford to do that then yes, accept it.
Exactly, I'm not expecting that and never have. Schools should abide by that principle even more so.Quote:
Prop 8 caused a lot of stir. There are a lot of people that think that gay marriage should be allowed, I'm one of them. Will I get my way? No. Would it stop me if I was gay? No. I'd go somewhere where gay marriage was accepted.
You can't expect everyone to conform to your wishes, to go by your standards and morals.
Well, then, let's be sure not to anger anyone by giving in on principles, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
Sorry, Altenweg, but that isn't a very good argument. The fact that me "getting my way" is going to make someone else angry is NOT a reason for me to stop trying to do what I think is right. Giving in doesn't make things better, it just gives you tire treads on your chest where you get run over by those on the other side of the issue.
Or you work to change the policy. For some reason that option seems to escape people.Quote:
So, what do you do? You either accept the schools decision or you find another school.
Interesting. Here in the USA, you pay local real estate taxes to support the local public school system, whether you are in that system or not, but G-d forbid the public school system that we are paying for should ever mention "god", "creation", or "bible" in its curriculum, even though the majority of taxpayers paying for the school system are religious and want creation taught in the schools... and sex ed NOT to be taught. Whereas in your system, the RELIGIOUS schools, with religious curricula, are supported by your tax dollars and nobody would argue that creationalism shouldn't be taught in a christian school. I think there's something wrong with OUR system, not yours, at least in this area.Quote:
It may not be easy, although here in Canada it really is a no brainer, Catholic schools are funded by taxpayers, we all pay, doesn't matter if you're Catholic or not, at least in my Province. That's why my parents sent me to Catholic school.
In the USA, a comment like that could get you flamed on a public board like this one. Even though you are 100% right. After all, such a comment could be seen as racist, because it's only people of certain races that fall into such a category of people having children they can't afford. Of course the reality is that the comment isn't racist, but an accusation of "racism" is much easier to do than to argue the merits of your point.Quote:
Public school yes, we pay fees, but if you can't afford $160/year for your child to attend then maybe you shouldn't have children.
Or work within the system to change the policy. That too is a viable option.Quote:
I realize that people are suffering through hard times, but what does that have to do with your original post? The question is, do you have to accept their agenda? The answer is no, find someplace that does teach what you want taught, or home school. If you can't afford to do that then yes, accept it.
Ahhh... but the vast majority of gay-rights advocates do not want to just accept it. They instead file lawsuits that are put before activist judges who legislate from the bench, despite the fact that the law is CLEARLY not what the judges have ruled, and despite the fact that the majority doesn't want it. They hijack the system when it becomes to inconvenient to work within the system.Quote:
Prop 8 caused a lot of stir. There are a lot of people that think that gay marriage should be allowed, I'm one of them. Will I get my way? No. Would it stop me if I was gay? No. I'd go somewhere where gay marriage was accepted.
The more reasonable advocates, the ones who understand and respect the law simply try to work within the legal system to change the minds of the people and the legislators. I can respect that even if I disagree with the position. They are working to change the system. They are not HIJACKING the system.
No. But you can work to change their minds from within the system. And that is what I and the other conservatives on this board are advocating. And part of that is to point out where the current status quo is failing the students, the parents and the nation as a whole. THAT is what we are doing here... pointing out the failures and explaining why the status quo must change. I think that's a perfectly legitimate response to an institutionalized issue that we do not agree with.Quote:
You can't expect everyone to conform to your wishes, to go by your standards and morals.
Elliot
Homosexuals can have a family. And the school is teaching kids about the different kinds of family. They are teaching fact. They aren't telling all the little boys to kiss each other. The are interested in teaching facts; which I agree with. I agree that children should be tolerant of their peers. And yes, the parent should teach them this.. But they aren't doing their job. I think that someone needs to step in.
I just look back at some of my great grandparents who were racist and intolerant, and feel bad for them. And honestly that is how your grandchildren are going to look back at you. Times are changing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by h_leann_b
Why is it that every time the issue of homosexuality, abortion or sex education comes up we get this claim? Are they doing their job or are they just not doing it to your liking? I think it's mostly the latter.Quote:
And yes, the parent should teach them this.. But they aren't doing their job. I think that someone needs to step in.
My only grandchild was the victim of an abortion, he/she won't be looking back at me at all.Quote:
I just look back at some of my great grandparents who were racist and intolerant, and feel bad for them. And honestly that is how your grandchildren are going to look back at you. Times are changing.
4Quote:
) I am against sex education within the school system. I am against it because it is an abrogation of my rights and responsibilities as a parent. I am all for PARENTS teaching their kids about sex. That is part of the job of a parent. I am against it being taught by the school system, especially when what the schools are teaching is contrary to what I am teaching my children.
If YOU are teaching your children about sex ed, that's great. Unfortunately for varied reasons we can't count on all parents to do that. Should society reap the fall out of that? Or is school an opportunity to learn more than just "reading, writing, and rithmatic"? I think school should prepare children to live in our society. To shelter kids is a disservice to them and society. What is the problem with your child getting a 2nd round of sex ed, if you are also teaching them at home? The facts are the facts, right? What would they teach that is contrary to what you teach them? Or do you leave out parts that you don't want them to know? Believe me, they WILL be exposed to everything somewhere along the way. Wouldn't you rather it be accurate?
Quote:
So in answer to your question, I'm not against sex ed. I'm against sex ed being taught by the school system. It should be taught by me to my children and by you to your children.
I think the key word here is SHOULD. Well SHOULD doesn't cut it. We can't count on SHOULD. It is not reliable.
I didn't say that they couldn't have a family. I said that they cannot have children on their own without 3rd party intervention of some sort.Quote:
Originally Posted by h_leann_b
Aren't they? If they are saying that gay families are "just like everyone else", isn't that the same as saying that "kissing other boys is okay" because it's no different than "kissing girls"? And if they are teaching this to MY child and I don't think that it is okay, isn't that a usurpation of my parental rights?Quote:
And the school is teaching kids about the different kinds of family. They are teaching fact. They aren't telling all the little boys to kiss each other.
No they are not. They are teaching an opinion... that a gay family is "just the same" as a traditional family. That is NOT a factual statement because from a biological perspective the two are NOT the same. Ergo, it is NOT a fact, it is an opinion.Quote:
The are interested in teaching facts; which I agree with.
Who are YOU to make that decision? Who makes the decision of whether parents are failing at their job because they teach an opinion or beliefe that is different from YOURS? I don't want someone to "step in" and teach tolerance for something that I do not believe should be tolerated.Quote:
I agree that children should be tolerant of their peers. And yes, the parent should teach them this.. But they aren't doing their job. I think that someone needs to step in.
Perhaps my children and grandchildren will see me that way. BUT IT IS NOT YOUR JOB TO CHANGE THAT. It is THEIR decision how to view me, not yours. Nor is it your job to try to "counteract" what I want my kids to learn and live by.Quote:
I just look back at some of my great grandparents who were racist and intolerant, and feel bad for them. And honestly that is how your grandchildren are going to look back at you. Times are changing.
You are trying to use the power of government (in this case the public school system) to push YOUR beliefs on my kids, and I resent it. You do not have the right to brainwash my kids into thinking that homosexuality is "all right" when I don't believe that it is. The government doesn't have that right.
How about instead of trying to teach kids about the environment and tolerance of homosexuality and stuff that doesn't belong in the school system, we instead try to teach kids reading, writing and arithmatic... subjects that we are lagging behind in as compared to every other developed country in the world, because we're too busy teaching kids about the environment and acceptance of gay sexuality. Perhaps if we taught kids to read and write, our employees will end up being competitive with their foreign counterparts. OUR SCHOOLS ARE FAILING and the last thing we need are more excuses to waste time on stuff that doesn't help our kids get a friggin job.
Elliot
Hello again, El:Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
Here's where you guys go wrong. You apparently think homosexuality is a learned behavior. That's why you have to steer clear of 'em, cause learning what they do MIGHT cause some little kid to turn homo...
It's the same stuff you think about sex education. You think sex is learned too, and if you just don't teach 'em about it, they won't do it...
It's the same stuff about condoms... You think that if you don't teach kids about condoms, and you tell them not to, they won't have sex...
You're dreamin...
Like the kid who got cheated out life saving chemo by his mother, the kids of rightwingers need to be UNprogrammed at school, by the WRONGHEADED and backwards notions about sex harbored by the right wing.
excon
Ex is right being gay is not learned. My uncle is gay he watched me all the time as a kid guess what I'm not gay. Here is a little light read for you describing how a gay man's brain looks a lot like a woman's brain.
A Gay Man's Brain Looks a Lot Like a Straight Woman's Brain | 80beats | Discover Magazine
All right, this is getting out of hand. For some reason, as soon as someone says that "being gay isn't learned", somehow everyone believes it.
Sorry, but there is no strong evidence to prove that fact.
There is a guy by the name of Dr. Patrick Carnes, a PhD (psychology) who specializes in sexual addictions and abnormalities. He has written many books on the subject of sexual addictions, and his seminal work is called "Out of the Shadows", and describes sexual addition.
Within his writings he speaks about the "arrousal template" of his patients, and how, in most cases, he can trace a person's arrousal template to specific incidents from the patients' pasts. That is, how a person is sexually arroused today is affected by what they have experienced in the past.
A person who is arroused by S&M or bondage might have experienced being tied up as a child, or even just seen pictures or read stories of someone else being tied up. It doesn't even have to be in a sexual context. However, within their minds the act of being tied up or tying up others became sexually arousing.
A woman who tends to find herself in multiple abusive relationships may have had abusive parents who treated her the same way her significant other does now. Or her teachers might have told her she was a bad girl who needs to be punished, and she believed it. Or she may have had an experience that linked abuse with acceptance... a close "friend" who had emotional power over her by treating her like crap. In any case, past experience leads to current behaviors.
A homosexual might have seen someone of the same sex who for some reason was sexually arousing. Again, the context may not have been sexual, but the link between same-sex and sexual arousal was built on that "template".
The evidence of this is annecdotal at this point. There is, to my best knowledge, no solid evidence of the "arrousal template" concept based on hard numbers. It's hard to get hard numbers on this stuff because the topic is so touchy. But it is a hypothesis that most therapists of patients in abusive relationships accept as valid. They use that information to understand their patients better. And at least in the cases put forth by Carnes, the hypothesis seems to hold true for the vast majority of patients.
What this means is that homosexuality is NOT necessarily a "natural", unlearned behavior, but most likely also has an experiential component.
Spit, if you like stuff about brainscans, I suggest that you check out the works of Dr. Daniel Amen. What he has found using live SPECT scans is that sex addicts, drug addicts, food addicts, bulemics, anorexics, and people suffering from body dysmorphia all have similar brain scans. Interesting stuff, and important too, because what it means is that there is a similarity between sexual "abnormality" and other forms of mental illness and addiction. There is a similar split between the frontal lobe and the cortex. Which means there is a split between the part of the brain that makes decisions and the part that has memories and critical thinking processes. If we can cure one, we might be able to find cures for the others. And if we find the CAUSE of one, we might be able to find the causes of the others. Wild stuff.
Elliot
Thanks ET I am going to look it up.
I don't care if homosexuality is learned or not, public schools have NO business undermining parental rights. Freedom is messy, remember? If you don't like that I teach my kids traditional values then I have 3 words for you. Get over it.
Quote:
Do you also say that hetero couples that can't have their own bio children aren't a real family.Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
"Kissing other boys" is not something a son would do or not do based on what they were taught. If a son is gay, he is likely to eventually kiss another boy. If he is not gay, he will not be kissing another boy. What sex you are attracted to is not taught. It is felt and nothing you do or don't do is going to sway their sexual preference. A FULL education about sex can only be beneficial to everyone. Keeping STDs at bay, unwanted pregnancies at bay, and abortions down. Looks like you would be all over that.Quote:
Aren't they? If they are saying that gay families are "just like everyone else", isn't that the same as saying that "kissing other boys is okay" because it's no different than "kissing girls"? And if they are teaching this to MY child and I don't think that it is okay, isn't that a usurpation of my parental rights?
I agree with you. They are NOT the same. BUT, they are just as valid. Love and commitment can be the same as any hetero couple. The ability to raise happy healthy children can be the sameQuote:
No they are not. They are teaching an opinion... that a gay family is "just the same" as a traditional family. That is NOT a factual statement because from a biological perspective the two are NOT the same. Ergo, it is NOT a fact, it is an opinion.
Once again, no matter what they "learn". They will be what they are. Be it straight or gay. You have no control over that.Quote:
Perhaps my children and grandchildren will see me that way. BUT IT IS NOT YOUR JOB TO CHANGE THAT. It is THEIR decision how to view me, not yours. Nor is it your job to try to "counteract" what I want my kids to learn and live by.
I hope and pray that you don't have a child or other family member that is gay. I have a feeling that you would be singing a different tune. Kind of like Chaney.Quote:
You are trying to use the power of government (in this case the public school system) to push YOUR beliefs on my kids, and I resent it. You do not have the right to brainwash my kids into thinking that homosexuality is "all right" when I don't believe that it is. The government doesn't have that right.
Or how about giving our children all the benefit of a well rounded education. I agree that to improve on reading writing and arithmatic is very important . Just as important is how to get along in this world with all kinds of people. They will be living in a world occupied with lots of different people with different beliefs. Do you think they can somehow escape this reality?Quote:
How about instead of trying to teach kids about the environment and tolerance of homosexuality and stuff that doesn't belong in the school system, we instead try to teach kids reading, writing and arithmatic... subjects that we are lagging behind in as compared to every other developed country in the world, because we're too busy teaching kids about the environment and acceptance of gay sexuality.
There is getting a "friggin job," and then there is keeping a job. Pickens are going to be slim if you continue to shun people that are different from you and being so intollerant is only going to hurt your children.Quote:
Perhaps if we taught kids to read and write, our employees will end up being competitive with their foreign counterparts. OUR SCHOOLS ARE FAILING and the last thing we need are more excuses to waste time on stuff that doesn't help our kids get a friggin job.
Elliot[/QUOTE]
That's mighty condescending and presumptuous.Quote:
Originally Posted by cozyk
They'll also be in a world filled with people pushing their values on them. My home is supposed to be a refuge where we can shield them from values and behaviors we find detrimental to their well-being - where we can guide them as a loving parent should. That is not the school's job. Period.Quote:
Or how about giving our children all the benefit of a well rounded education. I agree that to improve on reading writing and arithmatic is very important . Just as important is how to get along in this world with all kinds of people. They will be living in a world occupied with lots of different people with different beliefs. Do you think they can somehow escape this reality?
I can't wait to see Elliot's response to this, but I wonder why you're so intolerant of our values. That tolerance things cuts both ways.Quote:
There is getting a "friggin job," and then there is keeping a job. Pickens are going to be slim if you continue to shun people that are different from you and being so intollerant is only going to hurt your children.
[/QUOTE]Quote:
I can't wait to see Elliot's response to this, but I wonder why you're so intolerant of our values. That tolerance things cuts both ways.
I'm not intolerant of your values. I'm intolerant of your intolerance of what seems like everything coming and going. You are intolerant of Democrats, Obama, Planned Parenthood, Schools teaching sex ed, abortion, gays, gay marriage, gay rights, and CNN.
It wouldn't surprise me if I could add gun control, evolution, and non- christians to that list. Am I correct?
It seems you will only tolerate what you think is right. Anything else should be prohibited.
Your comments obviously suggest otherwise. You seem to think my values aren't good enough, they must be corrected in the public schools. What's funny here is I don't expect my values to be taught to your kids. Raise them how you want, let us do the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by cozyk
I'm intolerant of PP for sure, but I get along fine with the libs around me. I've had many gay friends and even some relatives. What I am intolerant of is people forcing an agenda down my throat. I think you are, too.Quote:
I'm intolerant of your intolerance of what seems like everything coming and going. You are intolerant of Democrats, Obama, Planned Parenthood, Schools teaching sex ed, abortion, gays, gay marriage, gay rights, and CNN.
Now you're just being an a$$.Quote:
It wouldn't surprise me if I could add gun control, evolution, and non- christians to that list. Am I correct?
It seems you will only tolerate what you think is right. Anything else should be prohibited.
[/QUOTE]Quote:
Now you're just being an a$$.
And you are avoiding the question.
And you are avoiding the question.[/QUOTE]
The difference between you and I is I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, I don't judge you for things not in evidence. I deserve the same courtesy.
But what I don't get is that you cry murder about abortions. Genocide in fact. The numbers are startling you say. SO obviously the parents in your country aren't teaching what you say they should be. Something is wrong. Sure, you guys do it, but obviously some people aren't. So, someone's got to do something haven't they? Why not do it a controlled environment like school? Then maybe you won't have to put up with the genocide for much longer.
You guys always want it both ways. Ooops sorry, I'm not implying your bi-sexual. Just confusing!
How is teaching someone about life pushing values? I know its been a long time since you guys went to school but gee, I can tell you school and what you learn from your time in school is a helluva lot more the 3 R's.
[/QUOTE]Quote:
The difference between you and I is I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, I don't judge you for things not in evidence. I deserve the same courtesy.
I believe you have given me my answer by refusing to answer it.
That's just what I thought.
You are against just about everything .
What benefit of a doubt are you giving me? I don't know what you are talking about.
I'll put it this way, you are so wrong about me it's pathetic. Seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by cozyk
Then you didn't read my post. I said "I don't judge you for things not in evidence."Quote:
What benefit of a doubt are you giving me? I don't know what you are talking about.
I don't think so. Why so mysterious? You know what? Forget it, your posts say it all.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
No she's not. One only has to look at the threads you've started and the posts you make. It's not rocket science to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Are you talking to me, Skell? I have called it murder and genocide but that's far from my usual arguments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skell
Skell, doesn't anyone ever stop to consider that the mindset that Planned Parenthood, NARAL, Hollywood and the mainstream media have cultivated in the last 20 years or so IS the problem? It's not that parents haven't taught their kids, but when they spend 8 hours a day in a school environment that promotes that mindset and when sex is thrown in their faces at every turn, parents face an uphill battle. Add peer pressure and you have a powerful mix working against you as a parent. And you and I both know we can't just shield them from life.Quote:
SO obviously the parents in your country aren't teaching what you say they should be. Something is wrong. Sure, you guys do it, but obviously some people aren't. So, someone's got to do something haven't they? Why not do it a controlled environment like school? Then maybe you won't have to put up with the genocide for much longer.
You guys always want it both ways. Ooops sorry, I'm not implying your bi-sexual. Just confusing!
The majority of public school teachers and school administrators are anything but conservative. The teachers unions are decidedly liberal. Planned Parenthood works closely with districts on sex ed curriculum. Planned Parenthood strongly advocates "empowering" children in their sexuality and not only crusades for the right of minors to have abortions and birth control without parental consent, they've been know to act on that in violation of the law. That is the "controlled environment" our public school students "learn" in so as a conservative I am justified in objecting to leaving such things to the schools.
Trust me Skell, these people have no intention of "teaching someone about life," they want to mold young minds to their satisfaction and don't give a rip about what the parents want. The evidence to that effect is clear, they know it is a controversial issue, it has nothing to do with providing a useful education and they have no intention of allowing parents to opt out.Quote:
How is teaching someone about life pushing values? I know its been a long time since you guys went to school but gee, I can tell you school and what you learn from your time in school is a helluva lot more the 3 R's.
^This. You are right.Quote:
Originally Posted by cozyk
Really? I personally think that like NK, you just like to goad conservatives rather than engage in or continue a meaningful discussion and you only see what you want to see. Then you have the audacity to tell me what I believe in such a negative, intolerant, insensitive way, again based on facts not in evidence. So what do your posts say about you?Quote:
Originally Posted by cozyk
I'll say it again very clearly, you are so wrong about me it's pathetic. Seriously. There's nothing mysterious about that and I feel no need to justify myself to you any further. Think what you like cozyk, your posts say plenty about you.
It must be rocket science, it sure seems to be above your pay grade.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Maybe genocide is a bit inaccurate . Infanticide is a more accurate term.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:54 PM. |