Officer won't sign order for troop pro-homosexual indoctrination

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by CayceFan
I'll trust that you went and looked at the post to get the exact phraseology (I'm far too lazy and apathetic). However, I don't think that is what he implied. My support of his statement stems from my understanding that he meant a abnormal (retarded) genetic trait.

I have no idea what the rest of the nonsense you posted is supposed to mean.

Retarded does not mean abnormal. Why would you assume someone meant something completely different with the words they used than what those words mean? How do you make "retarded" mean abnormal? To retard is to slow down.

"To slow down" - Yes that is an acceptable definition.

If we had 1000 tops spinning and one of them was slower than the other 9999 (or retarded) it could also be consider not normal (or abnormal) in comparison to all the other little tops.

Originally posted by CayceFan

"To slow down" - Yes that is an acceptable definition.

Yeah, that is THE definition.

If we had 1000 tops spinning and one of them was slower than the other 9999 (or retarded) it could also be consider not normal (or abnormal) in comparison to all the other little tops.

Having cancer is not normal either but that does not change the word cancer to mean abnormal. Albinos are not normal, that does not mean that Albino means abnormal. Retarded does not mean abnormal, just because something being retarded is abnormal. Having 11 fingers is abnormal. Having 11 fingers will make you abnormal. That does not change the meaning of polydactyl to abnormal. How do you even trick your mind into making that make sense?

On my street, most houses are white. There is one blue house. That blue house is abnormal. Blue does not mean abnormal. Retarded does not mean abnormal. Sorry if using words correctly really messes some of you up.

reply to post by CayceFan


So what you're saying is that there is a sexual orientation pyramid?

And where are you on this pyramid?

Oh, well... guess that's.... convenient.

Feel better about yourself yet?

Originally posted by arbitrarygeneraiist
reply to post by CayceFan

 

Let me ask you this. If a woman is infertile and incapable of bearing a child, would you consider it to be appropriate to call that woman pregnantly-retarded? Because saying such a thing is within the same realm as how KDM called homosexuals genetically-retarded.

I don't think it would be the best way to convey her inability to conceive no. I didn't say that the poster conveyed his idea in the best manner possible I only asked that we not overlook the subject of his post based on his grammar. I understood perfectly what he meant and don't feel he meant to misuse the word retard. Having said that your comparison is not really the same maybe you should have said reproductively retarded or something similar.

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by CayceFan

"To slow down" - Yes that is an acceptable definition.

Yeah, that is THE definition.

If we had 1000 tops spinning and one of them was slower than the other 9999 (or retarded) it could also be consider not normal (or abnormal) in comparison to all the other little tops.

Having cancer is not normal either but that does not change the word cancer to mean abnormal. Albinos are not normal, that does not mean that Albino means abnormal. Retarded does not mean abnormal, just because something being retarded is abnormal. Having 11 fingers is abnormal. Having 11 fingers will make you abnormal. That does not change the meaning of polydactyl to abnormal. How do you even trick your mind into making that make sense?

On my street, most houses are white. There is one blue house. That blue house is abnormal. Blue does not mean abnormal. Retarded does not mean abnormal. Sorry if using words correctly really messes some of you up.

edit on 29-12-2010 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)

You're not "messing" me up. But thanks for the concern.

What is the point you are trying to make? Are you upset that I didn't use the word abnormal the way you want me to? What does any of this have to do with the subject the poster brought up in that if all the human race were gay we would fade away!?

Beings you are a fan of using words correctly maybe you should re-word your post to not read "That is THE definition" as if to imply there is only one definition.

Originally posted by Brood
reply to post by KDM_Souljah

 

You're attacking people for misunderstanding what you wrote?

Why don't go you through the dictionary yourself like a big boy before you post?

edit on 29-12-2010 by Brood because: (no reason given)

yes that is a correct assumption, i am attacking people for misunderstanding me becuase i was the victim of this in the first instance and every other reply has been the same directed at me , also if i point out that a person is attacking me for words i did not say then it is not me who has the problem, i will go and read a dictionary when you can actualy read the whole thread instead of puting in comments when you dont know all the facts

get it together man

Originally posted by Brood
reply to post by CayceFan

 

So what you're saying is that there is a sexual orientation pyramid?

And where are you on this pyramid?

Oh, well... guess that's.... convenient.

Feel better about yourself yet?

What are you talking about????

I'm feeling fine thanks! I hope that was a sincere gesture.

reply to post by CayceFan


I have already adressed this and coincidentally in that post I predicted that you would continue babbling on about it as if you had a point in the first place.

When has homosexuality EVER posed a threat to the population of ANY species of ANYTHING?

Because it has saved THOUSANDS if not MILLIONS of populations of different species of animals stay in check, and humans!

Originally posted by KDM_Souljah

Originally posted by Brood
reply to post by KDM_Souljah

 

You're attacking people for misunderstanding what you wrote?

Why don't go you through the dictionary yourself like a big boy before you post?

edit on 29-12-2010 by Brood because: (no reason given)

yes that is a correct assumption, i am attacking people for misunderstanding me becuase i was the victim of this in the first instance and every other reply has been the same directed at me , also if i point out that a person is attacking me for words i did not say then it is not me who has the problem, i will go and read a dictionary when you can actualy read the whole thread instead of puting in comments when you dont know all the facts

get it together man

I read your whole post.

It was babble based on no facts, just like I told you it was before, and easily debunked in about 14 seconds.

Sorry if you can't emotionally handle being completely wrong , "Souljah", but that's really not my problem.

You are the one that needs to "get it together".

...And the "it" is the actual information on the things that you think you are arguing about.

Originally posted by CayceFan
You're not "messing" me up. But thanks for the concern.

LMAO!!!

OK, read SLOWLY.

I never said I WAS MESSING ANYONE UP. I said using words correctly seems to be messing you up. So, when you respond to something I never said, tell me. Does that prove or disprove my assetion that words are confusing you?

Seriosuly. If you want to defend your use of words incorrectly, at least respond to what I actually wrote, showing you can read words.

What is the point you are trying to make? Are you upset that I didn't use the word abnormal the way you want me to? What does any of this have to do with the subject the poster brought up in that if all the human race were gay we would fade away!?

No it was the word "retarded" I had an issue with. My point is that you can find all kinds of stupid ways to pretend retarded means something other than what it actually does. That just makes you wrong though.

Beings you are a fan of using words correctly maybe you should re-word your post to not read "That is THE definition" as if to imply there is only one definition.

No, not really.

Originally posted by CayceFan
"To slow down" - Yes that is an acceptable definition.

If we had 1000 tops spinning and one of them was slower than the other 9999 (or retarded) it could also be consider not normal (or abnormal) in comparison to all the other little tops.

Obviously you confused yourself with all these crazy variables. Let me show you what is wrong with your "logic"

If we hadd 1000 tops spinning one of them was a different color than the other 999 (or blue) it could also be considered not normal (or abnormal) in comparison to all the other little tops.

Now I just used your same logic. So if retarded means abnormal, so does blue. Get it?



P.S. If you have 1000 and you subtract 1, you do not get 9999. Math can be as fun as English.

well i can only but feel sympathy that you cannot for medical reasons not have children, you are straight and have love and sex with a man. thats how people are supposed too be in the realms of normality do things,im sorry you can enjoy those things that make life worthwhile.

Gay people unlike you and i mean the majority have vital sex organs that work and however hard man on man or woman n woman try they cant have a baby

and when i mean the realms of normality i mean how man and woman have sex and make a baby before that gets twisted

Originally posted by Sinnthia
P.S. If you have 1000 and you subtract 1, you do not get 9999. Math can be as fun as English.

edit on 29-12-2010 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)

Are we sure the thread title isn't "Anti-homosexuality is directly tied to lack of education".

Originally posted by KDM_Souljah
well i can only but feel sympathy that you cannot for medical reasons not have children, you are straight and have love and sex with a man. thats how people are supposed too be in the realms of normality do things,im sorry you can enjoy those things that make life worthwhile.

Well it's a good thing that we haven't been doing things in your acclaimed "realm of normality" or we would be so overpopulated that we would have ran out of resources centuries ago.

Oh, and gays don't need to be able to make children, they're too busy taking care of the irresponsible heterosexuals' children.

Gay people unlike you and i

Um..

mean the majority have vital sex organs that work and however hard man on man or woman n woman try they cant have a baby

So what? If everyone thought like you... that every time you have sex you should be procreating... this planet would have so many damn problems...

Seriously,(

reply to post by KDM_Souljah


Are you expressing sympathy for my condition or are you trying to say you are sorry that you said people who do not reproduce are suicidal, genetic retards? I came to grips with my life. I still have an issue with being called a retard because if it. It bothers me even more to be called a retard because of it in some odd justification that gays are all bad simply because they produce the same amount of offspring as I do. If you really feel bad, perhaps re-think your stance on the gay being so bad just because it makes no babies. Find something else to hang on to.

Originally posted by Brood
reply to post by CayceFan

 

I have already adressed this and coincidentally in that post I predicted that you would continue babbling on about it as if you had a point in the first place.

When has homosexuality EVER posed a threat to the population of ANY species of ANYTHING?

Because it has saved THOUSANDS if not MILLIONS of populations of different species of animals stay in check, and humans!

edit on 29-12-2010 by Brood because: (no reason given)

Let that serve as proof as to how little I care about your opinion. (the fact that I didn't read/care what you say you've already addressed)

Originally posted by CayceFan

Originally posted by Brood
reply to post by CayceFan

 

I have already adressed this and coincidentally in that post I predicted that you would continue babbling on about it as if you had a point in the first place.

When has homosexuality EVER posed a threat to the population of ANY species of ANYTHING?

Because it has saved THOUSANDS if not MILLIONS of populations of different species of animals stay in check, and humans!

edit on 29-12-2010 by Brood because: (no reason given)

Let that serve as proof as to how little I care about your opinion. (the fact that I didn't read/care what you say you've already addressed)

So you're being selectively ignorant or intentionally insolent?

Either way, growing up is the solution.

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by CayceFan
"To slow down" - Yes that is an acceptable definition.

If we had 1000 tops spinning and one of them was slower than the other 9999 (or retarded) it could also be consider not normal (or abnormal) in comparison to all the other little tops.

Obviously you confused yourself with all these crazy variables. Let me show you what is wrong with your "logic"

If we hadd 1000 tops spinning one of them was a different color than the other 999 (or blue) it could also be considered not normal (or abnormal) in comparison to all the other little tops.

Now I just used your same logic. So if retarded means abnormal, so does blue. Get it?



P.S. If you have 1000 and you subtract 1, you do not get 9999. Math can be as fun as English.

edit on 29-12-2010 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)

Yeah...feel good about yourself because I typed an extra 9 in my reply!

I'm glad your reading my post...it shows you are interested.

Forget about the spinning tops. Let me speak more clear. Being gay is abnormal. There ya go!

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by CayceFan
You're not "messing" me up. But thanks for the concern.

LMAO!!!

OK, read SLOWLY.

I never said I WAS MESSING ANYONE UP. I said using words correctly seems to be messing you up. So, when you respond to something I never said, tell me. Does that prove or disprove my assetion that words are confusing you?

Seriosuly. If you want to defend your use of words incorrectly, at least respond to what I actually wrote, showing you can read words.

What is the point you are trying to make? Are you upset that I didn't use the word abnormal the way you want me to? What does any of this have to do with the subject the poster brought up in that if all the human race were gay we would fade away!?

No it was the word "retarded" I had an issue with. My point is that you can find all kinds of stupid ways to pretend retarded means something other than what it actually does. That just makes you wrong though.

Beings you are a fan of using words correctly maybe you should re-word your post to not read "That is THE definition" as if to imply there is only one definition.

No, not really.

What are you wanting to split hairs? The fact of the matter is that you're not messing me up, maybe you often give yourself too much credit?

"No, not really" - I'm glad we agree there are more than one definition/uses to many words.

reply to post by CayceFan

Originally posted by CayceFan
Forget about the spinning tops. Let me speak more clear. Being gay is abnormal. There ya go!

To argue a point after it has just been proven wrong and give the proof in the freaking quote...

...absolutely ripe...

I don't even have to argue with you people because you argue with yourselves.

Unbelievable.