Quote:

---

It doesn't need to be a law. Let the ISDs take care of it.

---

Districts like FWISD have proven they aren't run by intelligent, responsible adults. Sad, really.

RWWilson said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Point is, sexuality is very complex. There's all sort of research being done on what makes people tick, and sexuality is one topic.

To act like you know when gay men ON THIS THREAD are telling you their experience is different than what you're stating, is peak narcisisistc behavior. You're basically telling me how I am and what happened to me, and I'm telling you're wrong.

Most gay men will tell you the same thing. They weren't abused, and they always knew they were gay or different in some way.

---

When someone cites statistical evidence, they are not making declarations about your specific circumstances. That is, in fact, very narcissistic to assume. Those statistics merely indicate there must be a significant environmental component to homosexuality. The same goes for the statistic indicating over 20% of Gen Z identifies as LGBTQ+. We do know that the natural inclination, the very purpose and biological operation of our sexual reproductive system, inclines toward heterosexuality. That is the norm. Anything else is abnormal. We should desire normal for children.

Those statistics evidencing environmental determination of sexuality are especially important in the context of what young children are being taught. Do we want to create an environment that leads to biological normal sexual relations or sexual relations which obviate the very purpose of our sexual reproductive system?

---

Your evidence is mostly made up and cherry picked by nut jobs or very dated studies.

I've been having these debates on this board since the year 2000. Just because you're next man up, doesn't mean I have to entertain. I mean, are you really here to have a debate? There's other threads where you basically talk about how gays are predatory pedofiles without fail. How could we ever find common ground?

Look man, I'm sorry about your brother, but gays aren't the enemy. You're blinded by anger and emotion. Honestly, you give me the creeps and I think I may know you personally?

TXAGFAN said:

---

RWWilson said:

---

Children aren't born gay, they are, by and large, recruited to the LGBTQ+. The statistics are clear. How else to explain Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation. You may be born more or less masculine or feminine, but you aren't "born that way".

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11501300/

---

This stat again and damaging and false premise that most gay men are molested. They weren't.

Get a new schtick and take your derail somewhere else. As a gay man I can't even fathom how people think you can be recruited into this or would choose this life.

---

It's still a choice

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

tehmackdaddy said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Nope. So much wrong in this. I think you just make stuff up. I wasn't molested, at all... not even a hint of itl. Most will tell you the same.

I do find that bisexual men were often abused as children...

---

So, likely heterosexual boys (as is the statistical norm) were abused and now have confusions about their sexuality.

That's the logical conclusion to your statement.

And people wonder why there is a parental resistance to opening up sexual topics to children from teachers and drag queens.

---

That's quite a leap you've made. Getting raped as a child and sexual education are not comparable.

---

Not a leap at all.

Exposing children to sex leads to their confusion.

That is what you said, even if you didn't realize it.

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

RWWilson said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Point is, sexuality is very complex. There's all sort of research being done on what makes people tick, and sexuality is one topic.

To act like you know when gay men ON THIS THREAD are telling you their experience is different than what you're stating, is peak narcisisistc behavior. You're basically telling me how I am and what happened to me, and I'm telling you're wrong.

Most gay men will tell you the same thing. They weren't abused, and they always knew they were gay or different in some way.

---

When someone cites statistical evidence, they are not making declarations about your specific circumstances. That is, in fact, very narcissistic to assume. Those statistics merely indicate there must be a significant environmental component to homosexuality. The same goes for the statistic indicating over 20% of Gen Z identifies as LGBTQ+. We do know that the natural inclination, the very purpose and biological operation of our sexual reproductive system, inclines toward heterosexuality. That is the norm. Anything else is abnormal. We should desire normal for children.

Those statistics evidencing environmental determination of sexuality are especially important in the context of what young children are being taught. Do we want to create an environment that leads to biological normal sexual relations or sexual relations which obviate the very purpose of our sexual reproductive system?

---

Your evidence is mostly made up and cherry picked by nut jobs or very dated studies.

I've been having these debates on this board since the year 2000. Just because you're next man up, doesn't mean I have to entertain. I mean, are you really here to have a debate? There's other threads where you basically talk about how gays are predatory pedofiles without fail. How could we ever find common ground?

Look man, I'm sorry about your brother, but gays aren't the enemy. You're blinded by anger and emotion. Honestly, you give me the creeps and I think I may know you personally?

---

I've done nothing here but cite studies and statistics. You have done nothing more than engage in ad hominem, bring my family members into it, and attempt to derail the thread. The thread is about proposals limiting introduction of LGBTQ+ material to young students. All legitimate studies now show that environment plays a very large role in sexuality. If you have evidence to the contrary we would all be happy to look at it.

What does Kari Lake have anything to do with this thread?

It may come as a surprise to you but you would probably like Kari a lot she is a big supporter of the LGBTQ. Did I get all the letters right ? It's hard to keep up before long all 26 letters will be there

But you mention her because it makes you feel better because since she lost the race you think it's a quick disparaging comment to me that you keep at your disposal

RWWilson said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

RWWilson said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Point is, sexuality is very complex. There's all sort of research being done on what makes people tick, and sexuality is one topic.

To act like you know when gay men ON THIS THREAD are telling you their experience is different than what you're stating, is peak narcisisistc behavior. You're basically telling me how I am and what happened to me, and I'm telling you're wrong.

Most gay men will tell you the same thing. They weren't abused, and they always knew they were gay or different in some way.

---

When someone cites statistical evidence, they are not making declarations about your specific circumstances. That is, in fact, very narcissistic to assume. Those statistics merely indicate there must be a significant environmental component to homosexuality. The same goes for the statistic indicating over 20% of Gen Z identifies as LGBTQ+. We do know that the natural inclination, the very purpose and biological operation of our sexual reproductive system, inclines toward heterosexuality. That is the norm. Anything else is abnormal. We should desire normal for children.

Those statistics evidencing environmental determination of sexuality are especially important in the context of what young children are being taught. Do we want to create an environment that leads to biological normal sexual relations or sexual relations which obviate the very purpose of our sexual reproductive system?

---

Your evidence is mostly made up and cherry picked by nut jobs or very dated studies.

I've been having these debates on this board since the year 2000. Just because you're next man up, doesn't mean I have to entertain. I mean, are you really here to have a debate? There's other threads where you basically talk about how gays are predatory pedofiles without fail. How could we ever find common ground?

Look man, I'm sorry about your brother, but gays aren't the enemy. You're blinded by anger and emotion. Honestly, you give me the creeps and I think I may know you personally?

---

I've done nothing here but cite studies and statistics. You have done nothing more than engage in ad hominem, bring my family members into it, and attempt to derail the thread. The thread is about proposals limiting introduction of LGBTQ+ material to young students. All legitimate studies now show that environment plays a very large role in sexuality. If you have evidence to the contrary we would all be happy to look at it.

---

Your statistics usuallt aren't backed up with where you got it from, and when they are, they are very suspicious sources.

You brought your family into it when you shared your brother was raped and now messed up in the head. I mean, what else would fuel this nonstop crusade you're on? It's just a lot of anger man, it must be exhausting.

LegalDrugPusher said:

---

What does Kari Lake have anything to do with this thread?

It may come as a surprise to you but you would probably like Kari a lot she is a big supporter of the LGBTQ. Did I get all the letters right ? It's hard to keep up before long all 26 letters will be there

But you mention her because it makes you feel better because since she lost the race you think it's a quick disparaging comment to me that you keep at your disposal

---

Well, considering you've brought me up in a thread I wasn't on for like the 6th time, with one of them you drunkenly calling me "monkeypox ballerstaf" on a thread I wasn't on in yet another one of your moronic homophobic rants, I'd say all bets are off.

You've been taking a lot of L's in this board, even among the far right posters. You've been wrong about nearly everything.

Stop bringing me up in threads I'm not on.

Kvetch said:

---

So are some people just born as puppy play gimps, or is that a desire that they choose and cultivate over time until they feel it is a part of their identity?

---

@Baller. Just curious how you answer this based on your recent comments on this thread.

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Why do kids that age need to discuss sexuality at all? I support this bill.

---

Because an increasing number of girls are getting their first period in 3rd or 4th grade.

They need to know that they can get pregnant now and how to avoid it.

---

DAFUQ? 8 and 9 yrs old?

Not to derail, but this seems like a troubling trend that may deserve its own thread.

---

It can be.

I have theories on reasons, but nothing provable

I was in HS when I got my first period.

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

LegalDrugPusher said:

---

What does Kari Lake have anything to do with this thread?

It may come as a surprise to you but you would probably like Kari a lot she is a big supporter of the LGBTQ. Did I get all the letters right ? It's hard to keep up before long all 26 letters will be there

But you mention her because it makes you feel better because since she lost the race you think it's a quick disparaging comment to me that you keep at your disposal

---

Well, considering you've brought me up in a thread I wasn't on for like the 6th time, with one of them you drunkenly calling me "monkeypox ballerstaf" on a thread I wasn't on in yet another one of your moronic homophobic rants, I'd say all bets are off.

You've been taking a lot of L's in this board, even among the far right posters. You've been wrong about nearly everything.

Stop bringing me up in threads I'm not on.

---

My wins are way more than my losses on election predictions. Way more but you and the rest of the haters want to focus on the few Ls because y'all want to create a narrative and hope that no one will know the truth so y'all can get away with it.

Tanya 93 said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Why do kids that age need to discuss sexuality at all? I support this bill.

---

Because an increasing number of girls are getting their first period in 3rd or 4th grade.

They need to know that they can get pregnant now and how to avoid it.

---

DAFUQ? 8 and 9 yrs old?

Not to derail, but this seems like a troubling trend that may deserve its own thread.

---

It can be.

I have theories on reasons, but nothing provable

I was in HS when I got my first period.

---

GMOs

LegalDrugPusher said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

LegalDrugPusher said:

---

What does Kari Lake have anything to do with this thread?

It may come as a surprise to you but you would probably like Kari a lot she is a big supporter of the LGBTQ. Did I get all the letters right ? It's hard to keep up before long all 26 letters will be there

But you mention her because it makes you feel better because since she lost the race you think it's a quick disparaging comment to me that you keep at your disposal

---

Well, considering you've brought me up in a thread I wasn't on for like the 6th time, with one of them you drunkenly calling me "monkeypox ballerstaf" on a thread I wasn't on in yet another one of your moronic homophobic rants, I'd say all bets are off.

You've been taking a lot of L's in this board, even among the far right posters. You've been wrong about nearly everything.

Stop bringing me up in threads I'm not on.

---

My wins are way more than my losses on election predictions. Way more but you and the rest of the haters want to focus on the few Ls because y'all want to create a narrative and hope that no one will know the truth so y'all can get away with it.

---

I have no idea what you're talking about. You're on another planet.

frenchtoast said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Why do kids that age need to discuss sexuality at all? I support this bill.

---

Because an increasing number of girls are getting their first period in 3rd or 4th grade.

They need to know that they can get pregnant now and how to avoid it.

---

DAFUQ? 8 and 9 yrs old?

Not to derail, but this seems like a troubling trend that may deserve its own thread.

---

It can be.

I have theories on reasons, but nothing provable

I was in HS when I got my first period.

---

GMOs

---

Eh. Probably

Another epic F16 disaster. The purpose of the thread was to discuss/debate proposed legislation in Texas pertaining to topics of sexuality in public grades schools.

First major derail was TXAGFAN declaring our schools suck anyway and therefore it's a waste of time when we have bigger problems. So now we have to take a dive in to what is really driving the problems in our schools, instead of staying on the topic of said legislation.

From there it devolves in to another deep dive on what makes gays tick. Personal insults ensue. We're nowhere close to the original topic. Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria.

Perfect.

I guess.

The bill restricting these discussions in the classroom through fifth grade seems reasonable to me.

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

LegalDrugPusher said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

LegalDrugPusher said:

---

What does Kari Lake have anything to do with this thread?

It may come as a surprise to you but you would probably like Kari a lot she is a big supporter of the LGBTQ. Did I get all the letters right ? It's hard to keep up before long all 26 letters will be there

But you mention her because it makes you feel better because since she lost the race you think it's a quick disparaging comment to me that you keep at your disposal

---

Well, considering you've brought me up in a thread I wasn't on for like the 6th time, with one of them you drunkenly calling me "monkeypox ballerstaf" on a thread I wasn't on in yet another one of your moronic homophobic rants, I'd say all bets are off.

You've been taking a lot of L's in this board, even among the far right posters. You've been wrong about nearly everything.

Stop bringing me up in threads I'm not on.

---

My wins are way more than my losses on election predictions. Way more but you and the rest of the haters want to focus on the few Ls because y'all want to create a narrative and hope that no one will know the truth so y'all can get away with it.

---

I have no idea what you're talking about. You're on another planet.

---

Then provide the truth then buddy so you can bring me down to planet earth

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

LegalDrugPusher said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

LegalDrugPusher said:

---

What does Kari Lake have anything to do with this thread?

It may come as a surprise to you but you would probably like Kari a lot she is a big supporter of the LGBTQ. Did I get all the letters right ? It's hard to keep up before long all 26 letters will be there

But you mention her because it makes you feel better because since she lost the race you think it's a quick disparaging comment to me that you keep at your disposal

---

Well, considering you've brought me up in a thread I wasn't on for like the 6th time, with one of them you drunkenly calling me "monkeypox ballerstaf" on a thread I wasn't on in yet another one of your moronic homophobic rants, I'd say all bets are off.

You've been taking a lot of L's in this board, even among the far right posters. You've been wrong about nearly everything.

Stop bringing me up in threads I'm not on.

---

My wins are way more than my losses on election predictions. Way more but you and the rest of the haters want to focus on the few Ls because y'all want to create a narrative and hope that no one will know the truth so y'all can get away with it.

---

I have no idea what you're talking about.

---

That says more about you than LDP

This is ridiculous. China, Russia, etc are not training pansies and easy wins.

Our education system is beyond woke

Our military is getting woke.

Our country is not building. It's on the count down.

Agsrback12 said:

---

This is ridiculous. China, Russia, etc are not training pansies and easy wins.

Our education system is beyond woke

Our military is getting woke.

Our country is not building. It's on the count down.

---

And yet instead of talking about real issues, you're all crying in the corner over drag queens.

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Agsrback12 said:

---

This is ridiculous. China, Russia, etc are not training pansies and easy wins.

Our education system is beyond woke

Our military is getting woke.

Our country is not building. It's on the count down.

---

And yet instead of talking about real issues, you're all crying in the corner over drag queens.

---

The drag queens are part of the issue he's talking about…

A culture in decay creates womanish men and mannish women. A strong society develops people to live into their biological strengths. It doesn't reject reality for a dystopian post-modern wasteland.

You don't have children so the idea of protecting children from harmful propaganda probably isn't that important to you. Children are easily swayed and will follow modeled behavior, good or bad. It is reasonable to suggest that schools and teachers should model preferred behavior for children.

If you want to make the case that homosexuality is preferable to heterosexuality, you are free to do so. I've not seen anyone make the argument, much less a compelling argument.

Urban Ag said:

---

Another epic F16 disaster. The purpose of the thread was to discuss/debate proposed legislation in Texas pertaining to topics of sexuality in public grades schools.

First major derail was TXAGFAN declaring our schools suck anyway and therefore it's a waste of time when we have bigger problems. So now we have to take a dive in to what is really driving the problems in our schools, instead of staying on the topic of said legislation.

From there it devolves in to another deep dive on what makes gays tick. Personal insults ensue. We're nowhere close to the original topic. Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria.

Perfect.

I guess.

---

The argument boils down to whether children are positively or negatively affected by LGBTQ+ theory and propaganda. Homosexuals will say, "it does no harm". My contention is that environment, training, and modeling greatly influence future behavior of children and we should thus encourage normal male/female relations and discourage other "abnormal" relations. I suspect most people agree and that bothers homosexuals.

You don't get to define what is and isn't a real issue for the rest of us.

For a moment, try seeing things from a different perspective than yours. We are talking about things going on in public education that affect OUR KIDS. Not your kids, OUR KIDS. Issues don't get more real to most parents than that.

You should not be surprised when you lecture parents and are countered vigorously. In fact you should expect it.

I completely agree. I just think the thread gets blown out on derails when opening the door up as to the "why". You're making solid points by sticking to your guns in regards to the environment and influences kids face. It's so basic in that regard, don't let it get drug down in to tangents that really don't have to do with the topic. IMO.

Urban Ag said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

kids today can't read , use proper grammar or do math, but BY GOD!!!!!!! they know their pronouns and when to use them

---

This post made in sarcasm speaks to how stupid the dialogue on this is. The fraction of teachers who step outside of bounds this law proposes are not the issue in Texas' education system, which ranks 34th (various measures for education all seem to place Texas in bottom half). In Florida I thought this legislation was a waste of time; but they're rated significantly higher at #3 in the same ranking I just looked at for Texas (US News and World Reports) so they may have some time to deal with smaller issues.

Embarrassing. State that says they care about kids does nothing meaningful to help them relative to other states.

---

Ok. Hate to break this to you but I will.

We share the longest border with a dysfunctional third world failed country of any state in the union.

We literally educate Mexico, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala, and everyone else that comes across.

We are not comparable to any other state in that regard, not even California. Texas faces a unique and ultimately broken education system that can't be fixed in the current political climate (that you vote for).

My wife, who has spent her entire career in public education, was just telling me today about how brushing up on her spanish in recent months was really helping her help other teachers with the huge influx of third world kids in her school - direct result of the democrat sanctioned border disaster.

Measure Texas schools that are predominantly American native born and/or legal immigrant students (India) and we do just fine (outside the deep metro areas of a certain demo). In fact, we are quite competitive. The 10% rule is a boon to neighboring states and the southeast who offer in state college tuition for all those great Texas students that don't make the top 10% because their high school is just that competitive. Tennessee is currently courting my oldest son with scholarship offers (he's on the 10% bubble). My buddy's daughter just got a full ride academic to Bama (she's right at the 12% mark at Liberty Hill).

Don't be too embarrassed. Us good parents and the good educators we partner with are doing our best in an impossible situation but we'll be fine.

---

You are correct.

And that doesn't even consider what the rating system is checking. Is the rating system exclusively for reading, writing and arithmetic?

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Quote:

---

It doesn't need to be a law. Let the ISDs take care of it.

---

Most Districts like FWISD have proven they aren't run by intelligent, responsible adults. Sad, really.

---

CoachO_08 said:

---

RWWilson said:

---

This will face opposition from LGBTQ+ crowd using the same tactics they have for 30 years, The entire strategy is based on 1) "we are born this way", 2) "heterosexuality is no more desirable than homosexuality" and 3) "if you think otherwise you are a bigot who is victimizing others".

In their 1989 book, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the '90s, the gay authors wrote: "In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector. . . . The public should be persuaded that gays are victims of circumstance, that they no more chose their sexual orientation than they did, say, their height, skin color, talents, or limitations. . . . Gays should be portrayed as victims of prejudice."

To their credit, their planned propaganda campaign was very successful. Now it is time to roll it back.

---

The "we are born this way" narrative really takes a hit when you look at things like this:

---

As I see it there are only 2 possibilities based on the statistics (note: if they are accurate).

The genetic makeup in people is mutating at an extraordinary fast rate, unseen in the history of mankind, or the propensity for gay behavior may be learned for a significant % of the population.

I am sure some people are born gay and it is in their genetic make up, but the increase on a relatively short span of time is unusual to say the least.

I wonder if that study would hold for other nations.

Agthatbuilds said:

---

A quick read through the bills don't actually ban anyone from speaking about lgbtq stuff.

It's more about schools not instructing on the topic and disallowing schools from keeping issues from parents.

---

So just like the original "don't say gay" bill. It said no such thing.

The bill disallowed inappropriate sexual information being shared by teachers with kindergartners, and a few lower grades.

The Democrats branded it as "Don't Say Gay"
Which should make you wonder - why do the democrats want to sexualize little kids? Florida didn't buy that bull****, and neither will Texas.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Agthatbuilds said:

---

https://www.kxan.com/news/texas/texas-bills-aim-to-eliminate-gender-identity-sexual-orientation-topics-in-the-classroom/?utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=t.co

Quote:

---

HB 631, filed by House Rep. Steve Toth (R-The Woodlands), said discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity aren't allowed in the classroom from kindergarten through fifth grade. Meanwhile, HB 1155, filed by House Rep. Jared Patterson (R-Frisco), would restrict discussion of these topics from kindergarten through eighth grade.

---

It's absurd this even needs to be a law.

---

It doesn't need to be a law. Let the ISDs take care of it.

---

That's a no. Isds cannot be trusted as proven by their general behavior.

I think aisd's pride parade or rrisd sending home girl athletes to change so a boy could change in their locker room are good examples of why isd's can't be allowed to dictate their own policy on this front

RWWilson said:

---

You don't have children so the idea of protecting children from harmful propaganda probably isn't that important to you. Children are easily swayed and will follow modeled behavior, good or bad. It is reasonable to suggest that schools and teachers should model preferred behavior for children.

If you want to make the case that homosexuality is preferable to heterosexuality, you are free to do so. I've not seen anyone make the argument, much less a compelling argument.

---

Wow. The arrogance of you once again trying to tell me how I feel about something. I care quite a bit about children. My nieces and nephews, my friends' children, and three children I am the godfather of from friendships made in high school and college.

Who do you think you are?

I also can see that you've all been gobbling up the far right talking points that they want you to gobble up so you don't keep your eye on the real **** going on in our country.

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

RWWilson said:

---

You don't have children so the idea of protecting children from harmful propaganda probably isn't that important to you. Children are easily swayed and will follow modeled behavior, good or bad. It is reasonable to suggest that schools and teachers should model preferred behavior for children.

If you want to make the case that homosexuality is preferable to heterosexuality, you are free to do so. I've not seen anyone make the argument, much less a compelling argument.

---

Wow. The arrogance of you once again trying to tell me how I feel about something. I care quite a bit about children. My nieces and nephews, my friends' children, and three children I am the godfather of from friendships made in high school and college.

Who do you think you are?

I also can see that you've all been gobbling up the far right talking points that they want you to gobble up so you don't keep your eye on the real **** going on in our country.

---

Homosexuality is not approved by God. That's not a "far right" talking point. It's a fact. Nobody hates your because you're gay. But we absolutely disapprove of your choice to live that lifestyle and especially any part you play in trying to normalize it because those attempts aid to push that notion into our children.

You've been presented with a ton of facts and data that make it clear this is happening, but you deny it because you don't want to believe it.

TaxLawAg said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

RWWilson said:

---

You don't have children so the idea of protecting children from harmful propaganda probably isn't that important to you. Children are easily swayed and will follow modeled behavior, good or bad. It is reasonable to suggest that schools and teachers should model preferred behavior for children.

If you want to make the case that homosexuality is preferable to heterosexuality, you are free to do so. I've not seen anyone make the argument, much less a compelling argument.

---

Wow. The arrogance of you once again trying to tell me how I feel about something. I care quite a bit about children. My nieces and nephews, my friends' children, and three children I am the godfather of from friendships made in high school and college.

Who do you think you are?

I also can see that you've all been gobbling up the far right talking points that they want you to gobble up so you don't keep your eye on the real **** going on in our country.

---

Homosexuality is not approved by God. That's not a "far right" talking point. It's a fact. Nobody hates your because you're gay. But we absolutely disapprove of your choice to live that lifestyle and especially any part you play in trying to normalize it because those attempts aid to push that notion into our children.

You've been presented with a ton of facts and data that make it clear this is happening, but you deny it because you don't want to believe it.

---

Ooh here we go with the all encompassing trump card to get out of any argument.

GOD SAID SOOOOOOOO. REEEEEEEEEE

Agthatbuilds said:

---

https://www.kxan.com/news/texas/texas-bills-aim-to-eliminate-gender-identity-sexual-orientation-topics-in-the-classroom/?utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=t.co

Quote:

---

HB 631, filed by House Rep. Steve Toth (R-The Woodlands), said discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity aren't allowed in the classroom from kindergarten through fifth grade. Meanwhile, HB 1155, filed by House Rep. Jared Patterson (R-Frisco), would restrict discussion of these topics from kindergarten through eighth grade.

---

It's absurd this even needs to be a law.

---

I'm definitely good with it. But geez, could we pass some bills to get Texas schools a little higher in rankings in education quality. I think we're 33 currently. I'm all for protecting the kids…but could we step up the quality of education

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

TaxLawAg said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

RWWilson said:

---

You don't have children so the idea of protecting children from harmful propaganda probably isn't that important to you. Children are easily swayed and will follow modeled behavior, good or bad. It is reasonable to suggest that schools and teachers should model preferred behavior for children.

If you want to make the case that homosexuality is preferable to heterosexuality, you are free to do so. I've not seen anyone make the argument, much less a compelling argument.

---

Wow. The arrogance of you once again trying to tell me how I feel about something. I care quite a bit about children. My nieces and nephews, my friends' children, and three children I am the godfather of from friendships made in high school and college.

Who do you think you are?

I also can see that you've all been gobbling up the far right talking points that they want you to gobble up so you don't keep your eye on the real **** going on in our country.

---

Homosexuality is not approved by God. That's not a "far right" talking point. It's a fact. Nobody hates your because you're gay. But we absolutely disapprove of your choice to live that lifestyle and especially any part you play in trying to normalize it because those attempts aid to push that notion into our children.

You've been presented with a ton of facts and data that make it clear this is happening, but you deny it because you don't want to believe it.

---

Ooh here we go with the all encompassing trump card to get out of any argument.

GOD SAID SOOOOOOOO. REEEEEEEEEE

---

First of all, I and many others have made a host of valid points on this issue and presented you with many facts and figures, but your response is always the same. You're not the most intelligent guy, and you've demonstrated that here for years (and before that).

But it says a lot about you that you're mocking someone's deference to God, and makes your personal reconciliation on this issue (for purposes of self-preservation) all the more obvious.