More Shame n' Judgement Please

originally posted by: chadderson
a reply to: buster2010

A person can 'love' their same gender the same way they can 'love' a child, or even an inanimate object. Opening the door to let a little bit in, is inevitably going to let the rest in down the road; in my opinion.

Well opinions are like aholes everyone has one. Two consenting adults is far different than a adult forcing himself on a child. Pedophilia is a mental illness homosexuality is not a mental illness. This is the same propaganda that religious people spout in an attempt to get others to live by their dogma.

a reply to: buster2010

Yes two consenting adults is far different than one consenting adult influencing a child. However, claiming homosexuality should be embraced in the same fashion as heterosexuality is where PC went wrong.

Homosexuality is only a mental illness if the homosexual was not born that way, and simply adopted it through societal pressures. Otherwise I would classify it as a developmental birth defect.

a reply to: chadderson

Here is a simple idea that goes against "political correctness" and solves all of the problems.

Everyone needs to mind their own damn business.

Teach your children to mind their own business.

The problems you are talking about would be easily avoided if people did what they had to do, without worrying about such trivial things as gays and transgenders, and went on their merry way. The way this narrative has been created makes it seem like transgenders, etc, are going around pulling their junk out and forcing people to look at their goods. That is absurd.

It's funny that we are told that we shouldn't shelter our children and make them in to sensitive little "snowflakes", as is the popular term used these days, but then we have people like this that become outraged and want to shelter the children.....because they are sensitive little snowflakes.

Again, everyone needs to mind their own.

originally posted by: nullafides
Because, you know...go ahead be openly non-PC in today's world.

Let's just see how far it gets you.

Look what it's done for Donald Trump! The less "PC" he is, the more people ADORE him. I haven't seen him being "forced" to do or say anything. He is disrespectful and insulting to women, Mexicans, Muslims, the disabled, Iowans, blacks, POWs, Jews... on and on... He's no victim of political correctness.

I AM a bit politically incorrect. I speak frankly, and sometimes harshly. I have addressed several topics here on ATS and in my life, in a non-PC way, and have NEVER "gotten in trouble", lost a job, or been "forced" to do or say anything that I didn't want to. I am not a victim.

a reply to: introvert

So if you had a daughter that shared a locker room with a young boy, you would tell your daughter to mind her own business? Tell her not to look at his penis, and that even though he may look at her naked body, she should mind her own business? Turning away from the problem does not help anyone, it makes the situation more deeply rooted and hard to solve when it rears its head further down the road.

a reply to: chadderson

However, claiming homosexuality should be embraced in the same fashion as heterosexuality is where PC went wrong.

The reason why homosexuality was ostracized is only because of religion. Throughout the ages the only people that had problems with homosexuals were religious people the rest of society accepted them. So telling the religious institutions that we have had enough of your bigotry against homosexuality is one the things the PC crowd got right not to mention our constitution says everyone has equal rights.

Homosexuality is only a mental illness if the homosexual was not born that way, and simply adopted it through societal pressures.

So now society forces people to become homosexuals??

Otherwise I would classify it as a developmental birth defect.

You do know medical science says you are wrong that it isn't a birth defect.

a reply to: chadderson

Homosexuality is only a mental illness if the homosexual was not born that way, and simply adopted it through societal pressures. Otherwise I would classify it as a developmental birth defect.

I'm going to bow out because I've got to go, but before you can come to grips with any of this, you must first accept that you are incorrect in your assessment of these matters. You are wrong.

But if you hold to this thinking, how does it change the sociology of the situation? Newflash: It doesn't. It is a social issue, and IF it becomes a problem, especially in high schools, then we will figure out to handle it in a way that neither demographic is emotionally scarred for life. Have a little faith.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Still waiting on your response to my question a couple posts ago. Are you intentionally ignoring it because it would put you in the wrong? Changing the subject to avoid what I had to say would indicate that is the case.

Just so you know, and do not have to expel the frustration and effort, until you can answer my question about the locker room I will not address any further posts you contribute to my thread.

a reply to: chadderson

So if you had a daughter that shared a locker room with a young boy, you would tell your daughter to mind her own business?

Isn't that the job of a parent?

a reply to: buster2010

It is ostracized because it is counter-intuitive to human biological function. It has nothing to do with religion in my instance, and furthermore you cannot prove it is the case for others either.

Society (PC) is trying to force us to view homosexuality the same way as heterosexuality, which is wrong.

The medical science you are attempting to cite as a credible reference is the same medical science paid for by the ones with an agenda, it cannot be taken as truth.

a reply to: ladyinwaiting

Can you explain to me how I am wrong in thinking this? It is apparent that homosexuality is counter-intuitive to human biological function.

a reply to: chadderson

So if you had a daughter that shared a locker room with a young boy, you would tell your daughter to mind her own business?

Yes.

We have to prepare our children to deal with the inevitable awkward life moments and, as a general rule, minding your own business is one of the most important things you can teach them.

I've spent a lot of time in locker rooms over the course of my life and I can tell you stories about what I've seen. But I still minded my business. I'm doing just fine. I'm not scarred for life.

Also, the sort of scenario you are talking about would be incredibly rare. We don't need to reinvent the wheel for something that has a very small statistical chance of happening.

a reply to: buster2010

The job of the parent is to PROTECT their child. Protection from forced exposure of the opposite sex, in this instance.

a reply to: introvert

Well you are certainly entitled to your own opinion. However, young children have a hard time "minding their own business" especially in the face of the opposite sex organs. I believe children need protection and education on the matter instead of forced exposure to it.

You do not have co-ed locker room experience, do you? I know I don't, and I am thankful for it.

The schools in my community are being sued for millions of dollars.. the issue is here right now. The "small chance" you speak of is HAPPENING.

originally posted by: chadderson
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Still waiting on your response to my question a couple posts ago.

What do you want to know about locker rooms?

My position is virtually the same as Introvert's. If people would mind their own freaking business and stop obsessing on other people's personal and private lives, the world would be a much better place.

originally posted by: chadderson
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Are you intentionally leaving out locker rooms? Locker rooms was the premise of the argument anyway, bathrooms came second.

So do you advocate forcing the exposure of the opposite sex upon children via allowing a "transgender" to use the same facility as non-trans children, or not?

edit: The article you provided is nothing but PC jargon that does not even come close to influencing my current stance. It is still wrong to have unisex bathrooms for children. Where would the urinals go? Do we do away with that technology now?

For someone with such heavy influence on this website your arguments hold no water at all. You average 167 stars per post, according to your statistics, I wonder if that comes with being a shill?

Ad Hominem attacks on BH's tenure here as a member are not helping your side of the debate. To the rest of us it looks as though you have nothing to counter her points, so you attack her instead. If you would actually read the article she posted, and look at the links in red. There is research to back up what the author is saying, that is relevant to your exchange.

a reply to: chadderson

However, young children have a hard time "minding their own business" especially in the face of the opposite sex organs.

That's because parents are not teaching them to mind their business. Most adults can't mind their own either.

I believe children need protection and education on the matter instead of forced exposure to it.

My children, my decision on how to protect them and educate them.

Mind your own business.

a reply to: chadderson

Society (PC) is trying to force us to view homosexuality the same way as heterosexuality, which is wrong.

Two people loving each other is wrong?

It is ostracized because it is counter-intuitive to human biological function.

Let me guess it's because they cannot reproduce right? So people who do not want to have children should not be allowed to fall in love right? People that are sterile should also not be allowed to fall in love right?

The medical science you are attempting to cite as a credible reference is the same medical science paid for by the ones with an agenda, it cannot be taken as truth.

Medical science is far more credible than some mythical sky God telling people that homosexuality is bad.

a reply to: buster2010

Being counter-intuitive to the human biological function simply shows it is a defect. People can love anything they want to.

originally posted by: chadderson
a reply to: buster2010

The job of the parent is to PROTECT their child. Protection from forced exposure of the opposite sex, in this instance.

Then build a cell and lock them up because that is the only way you can protect them from forced exposure of the opposite sex. The job a a parent is not only to protect but to instruct and teach them what is happening in the world and how to deal with it.