Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 134: Mars Ain't the Kind of Place to Raise Your Kids

(+) Yeah! (+)

History has always been extremely unrepresentative of most people at any given time or place, because most people do not do things that are important enough to their world to become part of history. Even kings with tremendous impact can be lost to history if their successor hates them and tries to erase them from the records.

Example: Rome beat Carthage at war, and, as a result, lasted 600+ years longer and became a much bigger and more powerful empire, and had a much bigger impact on the world. As a result, much more history has been written about Rome than Carthage. Is that fair? Is that wrong?
---

I wish I was transgender so I could make a band called transgender riot squad

red sox 777 posted...

Even kings with tremendous impact can be lost to history

Donald's biggest fear is becoming Ozymandias...yet his biggest goal is to make Obama become Ozymandias.
---

Ashethan posted...

Eddv posted...

I have actually forgotten whether womens history month is October or May and they are why.

It's in March.

And Susan G. Komen has little to nothing to do with Women's History Month. They're the breast cancer people.

Yeah but deep down they're the pink "women rule" people.

Like maybe its a defect on my part but I associate americas busted feminism with them
---

For what it's worth, I don't think Canada has black history month or women's history month, and seems to do fine.

But Canada tends to just teach a lot of British history, which...well, Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria cover a gigantic number of highly influential years.
---

metroid composite posted...

For what it's worth, I don't think Canada has black history month or women's history month, and seems to do fine.

But Canada tends to just teach a lot of British history, which...well, Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria cover a gigantic number of highly influential years of British history.

To be fair i am way way more iffy on women's history month.

Women do just fine - finer based on whether they grew up filthy rich or not like most people.

Canada on the other hand, does not have to live with the legacy of their country being built on the backs of slave labor and the intentional creation of a black underclass that followed.
---

Paratroopa1 posted...

I wish I was transgender so I could make a band called transgender riot squad

Cisgender Quiet Squad
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Paratroopa1 posted...

I wish I was transgender so I could make a band called transgender riot squad

Cisgender Quiet Squad

You just wasted an amazing topic title.
---

Since I'm not reading hundreds of posts of people trying to teach a child who is unwilling to learn anything about the world around them, have we discussed this at all?

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/910233426866950176

Exclusive: Trump using campaign, RNC funds to pay legal bills from Russia probe https://t.co/d1zpj62xGz

---

http://www.wtae.com/article/police-pregnant-woman-revived-with-narcan-overdoses-again-40-minutes-later/12272763
---

Eddv posted...

metroid composite posted...

For what it's worth, I don't think Canada has black history month or women's history month, and seems to do fine.

But Canada tends to just teach a lot of British history, which...well, Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria cover a gigantic number of highly influential years of British history.

To be fair i am way way more iffy on women's history month.

Women do just fine - finer based on whether they grew up filthy rich or not like most people.

Canada on the other hand, does not have to live with the legacy of their country being built on the backs of slave labor and the intentional creation of a black underclass that followed.

True, but we've been pretty bad towards First Nations people.
---

https://twitter.com/distrumpia/status/910212105726394368

This is the greatest threat of all time
---

Corrik getting attacked by cultists for an opinion that most people have. Imagine my shock.

Teaching sex to underaged children is creepy, wrong, and immoral. I don't care if they're being taught about sexuality that's straight, gay, or whatever else. Kindergarten kids aren't thinking about that stuff normally and have it forced on them by nutjobs.

I know the left is incapable of common sense at this point, but you can both accept gay people and not want sexuality taught to children.

UltiXX posted...

Corrik getting attacked by cultists for an opinion that most people have. Imagine my shock.

Teaching sex to underaged children is creepy, wrong, and immoral. I don't care if they're being taught about sexuality that's straight, gay, or whatever else. Kindergarten kids aren't thinking about that stuff normally and have it forced on them by nutjobs.

I know the left is incapable of common sense at this point, but you can both accept gay people and not want sexuality taught to children.

I don't think they can like understand that they are the minority opinion regarding it. Like, it isn't 50/50. It's a straight up less prevalent opinion.

It is okay to have minority opinions but saying they are a child, you feel bad for their kids, stupid, idiot, bigot, piece of shit, etc because their opinion is different than yours when most peoples is different than yours... is again comparable to an over-righteous religious... fanatic.

They can't grasp that I think because they honestly think this little far left bubble is actually how everything in life is.
---

So apparently some new study came out regarding climate change, and right wingers like Breitbart are using it to push a narrative that climate change is a hoax. Even though the study outright says "Yes, the 'point of no return' doomsayers are wrong, but only because it's still possible to combat climate change if the whole world gets onboard with the required changes." All they take from the paper is "YEAH! Climate change isn't gonna kill us for sure! Don't need to cut back on carbon emissions! Suck it liberals!"
---

And you both honestly can't grasp that being in the majority does not make you correct on this matter.

You're both intolerant of people who make you feel icky. Get over it.
---

Are you kids having fun in your little far right bubble?

Play nice now, no roughhousing~
---

oh nice, we're now using the "most people think i'm right so i'm right" logic?

"most people" thought hitler was "right" at one point too.
---

charmander6000 posted...

Eddv posted...

metroid composite posted...

For what it's worth, I don't think Canada has black history month or women's history month, and seems to do fine.

But Canada tends to just teach a lot of British history, which...well, Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria cover a gigantic number of highly influential years of British history.

To be fair i am way way more iffy on women's history month.

Women do just fine - finer based on whether they grew up filthy rich or not like most people.

Canada on the other hand, does not have to live with the legacy of their country being built on the backs of slave labor and the intentional creation of a black underclass that followed.

True, but we've been pretty bad towards First Nations people.

So have we - worse even what with the genocide and all - and like they maybe get a token mention of our atrocities towards them at thanksgiving.
---

Corrik posted...

UltiXX posted...

Corrik getting attacked by cultists for an opinion that most people have. Imagine my shock.

Teaching sex to underaged children is creepy, wrong, and immoral. I don't care if they're being taught about sexuality that's straight, gay, or whatever else. Kindergarten kids aren't thinking about that stuff normally and have it forced on them by nutjobs.

I know the left is incapable of common sense at this point, but you can both accept gay people and not want sexuality taught to children.

I don't think they can like understand that they are the minority opinion regarding it. Like, it isn't 50/50. It's a straight up less prevalent opinion.

It is okay to have minority opinions but saying they are a child, you feel bad for their kids, stupid, idiot, bigot, piece of shit, etc because their opinion is different than yours when most peoples is different than yours... is again comparable to an over-righteous religious... fanatic.

They can't grasp that I think because they honestly think this little far left bubble is actually how everything in life is.

Why does an opinion being a majority make it valid?
---

Corrik this post is the reason why most people were getting upset with you last night. It's not any of the reasons you guys are citing now. It took me 400 posts of reading to realize that you didn't view trans people as subhuman, because you were so ineffective in communicating what you were actually trying to say.

Edit: changed "everyone" to "most people" because yeah this probably doesn't actually describe everyone

JeffreyRaze posted...

Corrik posted...

JeffreyRaze posted...

JeffreyRaze posted...

Corrik, do you consider being abnormal and/or unnatural to be a bad thing? Do you think being called either or both is insulting?

I do not think it is a bad thing. I think it is a matter of fact thing.

I think it is no different than someone saying I have blue eyes or someone saying I walk abnormally due to my miniere's disease.

Okay, to understand where everyone else in the thread is coming from, you need to realize that in common parlance abnormal/unnatural carries negative connotations. Calling someone abnormal is an insult as far as the majority of the world is concerned.

---

Peace___Frog posted...

And you both honestly can't grasp that being in the majority does not make you correct on this matter.

You're both intolerant of people who make you feel icky. Get over it.

You should be able to grasp that someone not agreeing with you doesn't make them wrong or a lesser person as your rampant insults indicate you feel.

"Omg be 'tolerant' of everyone the way I say you should be or I will call you names and try my best to insult you as much as I can... in the name of tolerance"

You are like a walking contradiction.
---

Another thing missing from yesterday's discussion is whether Corrik thinks if there is an appropriate age group to talk about the existence of trans- (and homo- I guess) sexuals and what age that would be.
---

charmander6000 posted...

Another thing missing from yesterday's discussion is whether Corrik thinks if there is an appropriate age group to talk about the existence of trans- (and homo- I guess) sexuals and what age that would be.

When you do sex ed in school with parent notification and the ability to opt out if you wish to teaxh your child it yourself.

10-13 years old range imo. I would go with 12.
---

Peace___Frog posted...

And you both honestly can't grasp that being in the majority does not make you correct on this matter.

You're both intolerant of people who make you feel icky. Get over it.

The irony of this post is hilarious. Liberals are the most hateful, intolerant people on the planet.

Corrik you never answered the question about how you want gay couples to be around kids. Should they hide their relationship?
---

Also I would like to see the source that your opinions are majority ones.
---

The problem I have with Corrik and Ulti's "majority opinion" fallacy is that it creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. The majority believes homosexuality and transgenderism are abnormal. They don't want this kind of abnormal thing to be exposed to kids. Kids, impressionable as Corrik describes in his justification for sheltering them from controversial ideas, grow up without properly understanding homosexuality and transgenderism. They come to believe the subject is abnormal, and the cycle continues.
---

Corrik posted...

You are like a walking contradiction.

this is fucking rich
---

Peace___Frog posted...

Corrik posted...

You are like a walking contradiction.

this is fucking rich

It's true.
---

the obvious straw man in that stupid "i'm a tolerant liberal" meme ulti used to post over and over again is that liberals aren't advocating absolute tolerance. obviously we shouldn't tolerate the ideas of fucking nazis and racists.
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

the obvious straw man in that stupid "i'm a tolerant liberal" meme ulti used to post over and over again is that liberals aren't advocating absolute tolerance. obviously we shouldn't tolerate the ideas of fucking nazis and racists.

What is extreme about a common opinion?
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

fucking nazis and racists.

Akon told me this still counts.
---

Corrik posted...

Mr Lasastryke posted...

the obvious straw man in that stupid "i'm a tolerant liberal" meme ulti used to post over and over again is that liberals aren't advocating absolute tolerance. obviously we shouldn't tolerate the ideas of fucking nazis and racists.

What is extreme about a common opinion?

Racism in the south was and still is a common opinion. That doesn't mean it's suddenly acceptable.
---

Corrik posted...

What is extreme about a common opinion?

nothing necessarily, but a common opinion can be extreme/wrong. hitler being a great guy used to be a "common opinion."
---

Hell, in 1958, only 4% of Americans approved of interracial marriage. That's an EXTREME minority opinion. Does that mean the 96% disapproval was right because it was the common opinion?
---

There is nothing abnormal about gay/trans people, and you won't find me saying I don't accept them. They're awesome to hang out with. It's cute for libs like Peaf to have no reading comprehension and miss this part in their neverending quest to play victim politics. If you're a good person, you're welcome to be my company. I don't care who you are.

But I don't want sex of ANY kind taught to underaged children. None of it. Kids don't even know or care what sex is, but we have no common sense idiots out there who think gender reassignment should be taught to 3 year olds.

Most people thought that library in NYC was idiotic for having a drag queen talk to kids, because most people are aware it was idiotic. Leftists can pretend all they want that it's normal to tell kids about this sort of thing, but if's not. Deal with it.

And the reasons your opinions aren't the majority is because you've allowed 60 million babies to get murdered since Row v Wade. The current state of the public hating you and your entire agenda is your own doing.

Espeon posted...

Hell, in 1958, only 4% of Americans approved of interracial marriage. That's an EXTREME minority opinion. Does that mean the 96% disapproval was right because it was the common opinion?

Of course majority opinion isn't always correct, hence why I just said the people who don't accept gays are flat-out wrong. There's a huge difference between that and teaching 5 year olds about anal sex and fisting in public schools. Why do you think parents get outraged every time it comes out that a school did this without parental consent? Teaching sex is the parent's job. The end.

No one was saying we should teach that, though. Maybe read the topic before getting outraged like a liberal.
---

Anyone following this Jimmy Kimmel vs. Congress thing?
---

Who the fuck is talking about teaching sex to Kindergartners?
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

the obvious straw man in that stupid "i'm a tolerant liberal" meme ulti used to post over and over again is that liberals aren't advocating absolute tolerance. obviously we shouldn't tolerate the ideas of fucking nazis and racists.

---

Ulti thinks homosexual relationships is an inherently sexual topic but heterosexual relationships are a-OK
---

scarletspeed7 posted...

Anyone following this Jimmy Kimmel vs. Congress thing?

No, what's going on?
---

Imagine how much further your party would go and hiw more cohesive it would be if half the party wasn't literally dying on hills like forcing 5 year olds to have to learn about transgender people.
---

scarletspeed7 posted...

Anyone following this Jimmy Kimmel vs. Congress thing?

No, got a link you like?
---

Peace___Frog posted...

scarletspeed7 posted...

Anyone following this Jimmy Kimmel vs. Congress thing?

No, what's going on?

Kimmel had one of the co-signers of the current bill on his show (Bill Cassidy), and Cassidy essentially said that any family going through what Kimmel's is going through will be covered. Kimmel has been pushing healthcare equality for a while now after discovering how expensive his son's condition is to remedy; it's not really a selfish thing - it's sort of an "eyes have been opened, and I'm rich. Imagine how bad this is for non-millionaires" situation.

Kimmel read the new bill and blasted Cassidy for lying to him on the air earlier in his opening monologue last night. Cassidy is pissed.
---

Who ever said "forcing?"
---

HaRRicH posted...

scarletspeed7 posted...

Anyone following this Jimmy Kimmel vs. Congress thing?

No, got a link you like?

http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/20/media/jimmy-kimmel-health-care/index.html?sr=twCNN092017jimmy-kimmel-health-care1236PMStory
---

Corrik posted...

charmander6000 posted...

Another thing missing from yesterday's discussion is whether Corrik thinks if there is an appropriate age group to talk about the existence of trans- (and homo- I guess) sexuals and what age that would be.

When you do sex ed in school with parent notification and the ability to opt out if you wish to teaxh your child it yourself.

10-13 years old range imo. I would go with 12.

Fair enough, however teaching someone sex-ed at age 12 is a bit late. Girls typically get their first period between the ages 10-15 so to teach them sex-ed when around half the female class has already shown physical signs of puberty is illogical.

It would be like writing a final exam and then being taught the course. The information is nice, but they could have used it earlier.
---