Teen Lesbian to attend White House instead of prom!

[Joe Williams]

Funny how you get all outraged about a teenage attention whore not being able to push her homosexual agenda on those who aren't interested, and get your rocks off telling us how full of hate and how close minded you are.

Yet, you seem to enjoy your own brand of close minded, bigoted hatred and intolerance. Are you blind to it, or merely hypocritical? Not that it matters, I suppose, since hypocrisy may not be a problem to a person who has no moral code aside from whatever one they may (or may not) have made up for themselves.

 

[Denny347]

Funny how you get all outraged about a teenage attention whore not being able to push her homosexual agenda on those who aren't interested, and get your rocks off telling us how full of hate and how close minded you are.

Yet, you seem to enjoy your own brand of close minded, bigoted hatred and intolerance. Are you blind to it, or merely hypocritical? Not that it matters, I suppose, since hypocrisy may not be a problem to a person who has no moral code aside from whatever one they may (or may not) have made up for themselves.

C'mon Joe, settle down and take a breath. We seemed to have been getting along well lately, no need to mess it up now. I have no hate for anyone. I really do not think I'm closed minded at all, I'm rather open minded (I am siding with the homosexual). Moral code and religion do not need to be linked. You can be quite moral (a good person) and not be a deitest. I must have hit a nerve by your retort to my postings.

 

[Joe Williams]

C'mon Joe, settle down and take a breath. We seemed to have been getting along well lately, no need to mess it up now. I have no hate for anyone. I really do not think I'm closed minded at all, I'm rather open minded (I am siding with the homosexual). Moral code and religion do not need to be linked. You can be quite moral (a good person) and not be a deitest. I must have hit a nerve by your retort to my postings.

Didn't hit a nerve, you tweaked my sense of irony.

 

[XMil]

If she did go out of her way to make this public, I'm glad for her.

Change does not happen when people sit quietly in the back of the bus.

 

[Captain Bligh]

...Gay/Lesbians are now on the list of those who think they are entitled to special treatment.

How is going to the prom like everyone else special treatment?

 

[redneckmedic]

Change does not happen when people sit quietly in the back of the bus.

Oh good, more of this hope and change talk again, I can't wait.

 

[techres]

The point I am making is that if we say it is ok for the school to dictate that this girl has to wear a dress and date a boy then we also have to accept that the school could dictate that boys have to wear dresses and date other boys. I don't want the school or the government to have this kind of power.

^ This

 

[Dashman010]

But, your argument is irrelevent because that's not what happened. She didn't just "show." She created as big a stink as she could beforehand, and crapped all over her friends and classmates to push an agenda nobody cared about beforehand.

If she'd just shown up and gotten crapped on, I may have some sympathy for her. Instead, she's an attention whore, and she's gotten exactly what she wanted. Unlike the friends who trusted her, and that she screwed over.

You know, this is a rather twisted view. Like any prom, you have to go get tickets, and when you get them, you tell them who you're going with. When the girl told the school who she was going with, that's when the incident started. So, who created the stink? The school. They are the ones who said "no," we aren't going to let you come to a prom with another girl. They didn't give a reason or say that it would cause a disturbance, they just said no.

Let me ask you this. If you went to get your LTCH and the state police said "No," would you file a lawsuit to get your rights? And if the state police, in response to your suit revoked everyone's LTCH rights, would it be right for me to blame you for that loss because you were trying to vindicate your rights? Would you be an attention whore? My guess is that you'd answer these last two questions in the negative, and yet you are asserting that this young girl wanting to do what everyone else gets to do makes her an attention whore.

Further, she didn't screw anyone over. The school did. The school didn't have to cancel the prom. Instead, the political correctness that has become academia cancelled a annual event because they didn't want to have to deal with two lesbian girls. And the girls are to blame? That's a twisted view of reality, IMHO. If there ever was a proper example of the word "over-reaction," the school just showed us what it looks like.

 

[Benny]

You know, this is a rather twisted view. Like any prom, you have to go get tickets, and when you get them, you tell them who you're going with. When the girl told the school who she was going with, that's when the incident started. So, who created the stink? The school. They are the ones who said "no," we aren't going to let you come to a prom with another girl. They didn't give a reason or say that it would cause a disturbance, they just said no.

Let me ask you this. If you went to get your LTCH and the state police said "No," would you file a lawsuit to get your rights? And if the state police, in response to your suit revoked everyone's LTCH rights, would it be right for me to blame you for that loss because you were trying to vindicate your rights? Would you be an attention whore? My guess is that you'd answer these last two questions in the negative, and yet you are asserting that this young girl wanting to do what everyone else gets to do makes her an attention whore.

Further, she didn't screw anyone over. The school did. The school didn't have to cancel the prom. Instead, the political correctness that has become academia cancelled a annual event because they didn't want to have to deal with two lesbian girls. And the girls are to blame? That's a twisted view of reality, IMHO. If there ever was a proper example of the word "over-reaction," the school just showed us what it looks like.

GREAT post. Reps inbound.

 

[Bubba]

You know, this is a rather twisted view. Like any prom, you have to go get tickets, and when you get them, you tell them who you're going with. When the girl told the school who she was going with, that's when the incident started.

+1 to most of your post, but the incident started sooner than this. The school sent a memo to students giving the ticket info and the same memo also gave the rule that dates must be the opposite sex. I can't rule out that this girl was being all about her sexuality in the hallways, prompting the school to take preemptive action, but as far as documentation goes, the school started the war before McMillen even had a chance to ask about taking her girlfriend to the prom.

 

[downzero]

+1 to most of your post, but the incident started sooner than this. The school sent a memo to students giving the ticket info and the same memo also gave the rule that dates must be the opposite sex. I can't rule out that this girl was being all about her sexuality in the hallways, prompting the school to take preemptive action, but as far as documentation goes, the school started the war before McMillen even had a chance to ask about taking her girlfriend to the prom.

Sounds like a content-based distinction on who can attend the event. No wonder the judge issued an injunction enjoining the school from enforcing that.

 

[onviousluu]

Glad she got the last laugh... This is a good thing...

 

[Benny]

Glad she got the last laugh... This is a good thing...

I wouldn't exactly call it a laugh.

Hundreds of students missed their prom because of her...Unless that was her intent, in which she can die in a fiery car crash tomorrow and I'd probably chuckle.

 

[JBusch8899]

I wouldn't exactly call it a laugh.

Hundreds of students missed their prom because of her...Unless that was her intent, in which she can die in a fiery car crash tomorrow and I'd probably chuckle.

Actually, the rest of her class held a private event funded by the student body parents, and neglected to invite her to the same. Oops.

Look back in the thread a bit to find it.

 

[Benny]

Actually, the rest of her class held a private event funded by the student body parents, and neglected to invite her to the same. Oops.

Look back in the thread a bit to find it.

OK good...At least the innocent bystanders had their prom...I wonder why she wasn't invited?

While I've read a ton of this thread, it's WAY too big for me to go back and look for it, so I'll just take your word for it that it happened.

 

[Beau]

I think the entire Christian fight against homosexuality at this point in history is frivolous... not wrong, frivolous. The school missed its chance to actually make a larger impact on morality anyhow... if that was their intent to begin with, as I think it was.

The schools stance: We don't want homosexuality at our school prom because we are taking the side that its wrong and we don't want our student exposed or subjected to it.

The Bible's stance: Homosexuality is a sin of the flesh. No different than premarital sex, adultery, divorce, sodomy, ext.

ERGO:

The school will cancel prom because prom leads to premarital sex and we want to protect our students from sexual immorality.

CHRISTIANS WAKE UP! Premarital Sex and Divorce are destroying this country, the church, and our values significantly faster than homosexuality. Let's get our priorities straight!

I would say they are all doing it at the same speed. This nation seems to accept all three equally.

Just call it what it is: homophobia.

Okay, I'm a homophobe. But the dictionary defines it as an unreasoning fear. I'd say my fear is quite reasoned.

C'mon Joe, settle down and take a breath. We seemed to have been getting along well lately, no need to mess it up now. I have no hate for anyone. I really do not think I'm closed minded at all, I'm rather open minded (I am siding with the homosexual). Moral code and religion do not need to be linked. You can be quite moral (a good person) and not be a deitest. I must have hit a nerve by your retort to my postings.

I used to think the same way. That line of thinking is wrong. Without God there is no moral code other than what an individual or society dictates. An individual or society can change their mind at any moment to suit there purpose or desires. I also guess it depends on what you consider a good person.

And just to be clear. I do not hate homosexuals. I disagree with their choice and believe it to be immoral and a sin.

 

[downzero]

And just to be clear. I do not hate homosexuals. I disagree with their choice and believe it to be immoral and a sin.

And what if it's not a choice?

There seems to be quite a bit of evidence to suggest that sexual orientation is not a choice at all.

I don't know about you, but I tend to think they're right.

Bring Lindsay Lohan (pre-crack) somewhere, strip her naked, and get a bunch of men to line up to spank her naked ass. Find a man who doesn't get aroused from this, and I don't care who you are, that man is gay and nothing will cause him to "choose" women over men.

I don't know about you, but I didn't "choose" to be straight. It seems that religion is far more of a "choice" than sexual orientation.

I'd love to hear your "reasoning" for homophobia as well.

 

[Beau]

And what if it's not a choice?

There seems to be quite a bit of evidence to suggest that sexual orientation is not a choice at all.

I don't know about you, but I tend to think they're right.

Bring Lindsay Lohan (pre-crack) somewhere, strip her naked, and get a bunch of men to line up to spank her naked ass. Find a man who doesn't get aroused from this, and I don't care who you are, that man is gay and nothing will cause him to "choose" women over men.

I don't know about you, but I didn't "choose" to be straight. It seems that religion is far more of a "choice" than sexual orientation.

I'd love to hear your "reasoning" for homophobia as well.

Your not understanding what I'm saying. I did not say that someone could not be born with an attraction to the same sex, the opposite sex, children, the elderly or animals even. A person may very well be born that way. But they still have a choice to make. Do they choose to follow their lusts or do they reject the sin and choose to follow the morals set forth by our Creator? If we try to make up our own morals then we are in trouble. Oh wait! We do, and we are!

Did you know that our founding fathers, along with all the other great things their wisdom gave us, did not allow homosexuals in the military? If a person was found to be a homosexual they were drummed out. Why? Because they knew that homosexuality was an immoral act and a sin. They also did not allow abortion. I find it sad that you seem to embrace the documents that our founders gave us yet disregard those Christian principles upon which this nation was founded that you disagree with. I guess those principles are as outdated as the 2ND Ammendment.

It really bothers me that you called me hatefull. I have already said that I am not hatefull. I do not hate homosexuals. Jesus told us that we should love others as we love ourselves. I may not always like myself because of my sin but I don't hate myself. Just as I may not like the sin of homosexuality but I don't hate the person practicing it.

As far as belief in God being more of a choice than homosexuality I think your right. It's much easier to believe there is no God because that enables us to pursue that which is against God. This of course is exactly what Lucifer wants. He wants to destry humanity and God. He thinks he's going to win, ?

I think my reasoning for homophobia has been stated. But in case you still don't understand I'll explain. I do not fear the person that is homosexual. I fear the immorality that is protrayed by openly homosexual people. Sin breeds more sin. I guess you could call me a heterophobe as well. I fear the sin that is being practiced by umarried couples and the graphic displays that we see every time the idiot box is turned on.

Every generation becomes more immoral than the one before it. Society tells itself that it is becoming more free. What they mean is that they are becoming free of God. Do you honestly think that the newest generation is better off than the ones before it? I don't. It is further from God though. It will only get worse. Each generation makes up their own morals. Those morals are always less restrictive than the ones from the previous generation.

Not only do we need to get back to the original intent of the documents made by our founders, we need to get back to the principles they used to write those documents.

 

[downzero]

I think you'd be surprised just how wrong you are about the framers, who intentionally left out all mentions of morality, sin, and our "creator" in our Constitution.

I'd also point out the flaws in your assessment of our theology, but I'd rather leave that one alone for the time being.

Gays have been hiding who they were for centuries. It doesn't mean that there were fewer of them 200+ years ago, or that they didn't serve in the military. It just means that they had to hide it better than they do today.

And I still maintain that your choice to accept Christ remains nothing other than a worldly choice. There's strong evidence that the same is not true of sexual orientation.

 

[Eddie]

Your not understanding what I'm saying. I did not say that someone could not be born with an attraction to the same sex, the opposite sex, children, the elderly or animals even. A person may very well be born that way. But they still have a choice to make. Do they choose to follow their lusts or do they reject the sin and choose to follow the morals set forth by our Creator? If we try to make up our own morals then we are in trouble. Oh wait! We do, and we are!

Did you know that our founding fathers, along with all the other great things their wisdom gave us, did not allow homosexuals in the military? If a person was found to be a homosexual they were drummed out. Why? Because they knew that homosexuality was an immoral act and a sin. They also did not allow abortion. I find it sad that you seem to embrace the documents that our founders gave us yet disregard those Christian principles upon which this nation was founded that you disagree with. I guess those principles are as outdated as the 2ND Ammendment.

It really bothers me that you called me hatefull. I have already said that I am not hatefull. I do not hate homosexuals. Jesus told us that we should love others as we love ourselves. I may not always like myself because of my sin but I don't hate myself. Just as I may not like the sin of homosexuality but I don't hate the person practicing it.

As far as belief in God being more of a choice than homosexuality I think your right. It's much easier to believe there is no God because that enables us to pursue that which is against God. This of course is exactly what Lucifer wants. He wants to destry humanity and God. He thinks he's going to win, ?

I think my reasoning for homophobia has been stated. But in case you still don't understand I'll explain. I do not fear the person that is homosexual. I fear the immorality that is protrayed by openly homosexual people. Sin breeds more sin. I guess you could call me a heterophobe as well. I fear the sin that is being practiced by umarried couples and the graphic displays that we see every time the idiot box is turned on.

Every generation becomes more immoral than the one before it. Society tells itself that it is becoming more free. What they mean is that they are becoming free of God. Do you honestly think that the newest generation is better off than the ones before it? I don't. It is further from God though. It will only get worse. Each generation makes up their own morals. Those morals are always less restrictive than the ones from the previous generation.

Not only do we need to get back to the original intent of the documents made by our founders, we need to get back to the principles they used to write those documents.

I have no problem with a person believing that one kind of sexuality or another is a sin. People should be free to form their own religious beliefs. My problem starts when a religious belief pours over into politics and becomes a law. If something is a sin then that means that god is going to take care of it and god doesn't need our help in punishing people. I have no problem with an individual going up to someone and talking to them and explaining why they think that what someone else is doing is wrong, they just need to keep it on a private level.