lawmaker wants gay bullying guns concealed in schools

[Drewbie]

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/lawma...011/09/12/26851

[Gee Whillickers]

WTF?!?!?!

Seriously, just WTF????!!!

That is all.

[DKStories]

Yes, Christians need more protections. The way things are going they won't be able to bully or beat up on gays in public anymore and we all know that would be a sin.

[Cole Parker]

I love it when these guys crawl out from under the leaves, out of the dark cracks they've been hiding in. Shining light on their craziness, letting ordinary people hear their lunacy, is the best thing that can happen. It makes their aberrant and hateful thoughts so transparent, and at the same time makes what they hate and fear seem so much more mainstream.

Do you think this guy has a chance of being re-elected? Hard to imagine. Even people in Tennessee have moral principles.

C

[Cole Parker]

Maybe he thinks the concealed weapons are to protect the straights from the ravaging gay kids.

C

[Camy]

This HAS to be satirical.

[DKStories]

Just so you don't think it's only in those states - here's some creep from California:

I hardly think bullying is a real issue in schools.

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/09/19/3...ition-bullying/

Um, on a sidenote - yes that is Orly Taitz in the picture. The Birther Queen herself who is considering competing with Michael Reagan (son of Ronald Reagan) for the honor of trying to defeate DiFi (Dianne Feinstein - California's senior senator, former mayor of San Francisco and the woman who had George Moscone's head in her lap after Mayor Moscone and Harvey Milk were shot by Dan White).

[DKStories]

The 10% figure comes from the decades-old Kinsey study. The 3% figure comes from Census data and some other studies. The lower figure reflects gay men only (and is much smaller giving the other side a perception of having a stronger argument). They can use that figure and be technically correct depending on the study they base it on. Some of the studies have been debunked, others have had the researchers state that anti-gay people are misusing their study, and so on and so forth. One big common theme in the newer studies with lower figures is that they depend largely on self-identification in a non-blind survey. That means people being asked know they can be tracked back down if they say yes...ergo many won't say "I'm gay".

Kinsey's critics point out his study was based on prison populations and not the general public - so every number out there is suspect.

What can be shown, especially by the US Census data is that the number of self-identified gay people is growing. There are more gay couples reported in almost all areas of the United States than before. As the society becomes more open and accepting, we will find more people being open about who they are. Here's a link for a decent survey done that shows 1990/2000 data.

http://www.avert.org/gay-people.htm

[Bruin Fisher]

Hmm, no need to legislate to protect only 3% of the population? Leaving aside the question of whether the 3% figure is accurate, this is empty reasoning!

If even a tiny minority is in danger and legislation could protect them without compromising the rights of the majority, then such legislation should be passed. NOT only to protect the minority, but to give the majority a ruling about what is and what is not acceptable. Legislation tells the entire population what the judiciary considers right and wrong.

There may be a small minority who criminally bully gays, but they are the tip of an iceberg of people who are to a greater or lesser extent homophobic. When the legislature or the government give a clear lead, in this case that homophobic bullying is illegal, it deters not only the violent bullies but also the much bigger number who are casually homophobic and give the bullies tacit permission for their behaviour.

[Cole Parker]

Mother Teresa of Calcutta, speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington DC Thur, 3 Feb 94.

And Jesus will answer them, "Whatever you neglected to do unto one of these least of these, you neglected to do unto Me!"

If the number they believe to be true is 3%, in that 3% are a great number of children who are bullied and cannot defend themselves, aren't they among 'the least of these'? And aren't the people turning their backs on these children, dismissing them as of no account, as people who don't matter, supposedly hardcore Christians? Who supposedly follow the teachings of Jesus Christ?

C

[DKStories]

Mother Teresa of Calcutta, speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington DC Thur, 3 Feb 94.

And Jesus will answer them, "Whatever you neglected to do unto one of these least of these, you neglected to do unto Me!"

If the number they believe to be true is 3%, in that 3% are a great number of children who are bullied and cannot defend themselves, aren't they among 'the least of these'? And aren't the people turning their backs on these children, dismissing them as of no account, as people who don't matter, supposedly hardcore Christians? Who supposedly follow the teachings of Jesus Christ?

C

Bah! Don't you knw the lovey-dovey Jesus Christ has fallen out of favor with modern Christians? Now it's all about going Old Testament or Apostle Paul on anyone who does not fit their narrow definitions - all while waiting for John's Revelations to come to pass...

Jesus Christ has almost nothing to do with modern Christianity.

[Cole Parker]

Jesus Christ has almost nothing to do with modern Christianity.

Ain't that the truth!

C

[Gee Whillickers]

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

--Mahatma Gandhi

[colinian]

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

--Mahatma Gandhi

What a fantastic quote! Thanks, Gee.

Colin