NATION

PASSWORD

American Politics XI: No Moe Roe(Likely, Anyway)

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Will the likely SCOTUS ruling on Dobbs v. Jackson change the dynamics of the Midterms?

Yes
145
59%
No
32
13%
A Bit of Both
41
17%
Don't Know
27
11%
 
Total votes : 245

User avatar
Celritannia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18400
Founded: Nov 10, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Celritannia » Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:49 pm

Moroniland wrote:
Celritannia wrote:So facts are left-wing now?
Just because an academic source says something doesn't make it a fact. Academics said all kinds of racist stuff before your tribe took over the academy and your tribe doesn't have any kind of monopoly on the truth which their tribe didn't.
Celritannia wrote:There's a reason they don't allow "original research".
There are multiple reasons, some of which are politically suspect but some which aren't. That wasn't a criticism: it was just pointing out what Wikipedia does.


That's because, with time, information gets corrected. Now, there are far stricter standards to ensure facts remain objective. Interpretation of facts though can vary.

Because Wikipedia wants to make sure the information provided is accurate, thus sources are necessary to back up a claim.
Otherwise, anyone can say random shit like zombies are real, or werewolves exist.

My DeviantArt
Obey
When you annoy a Celritannian
U W0T M8?
Zirkagrad wrote:A person with a penchant for flying lions with long tongues, could possibly be a fan of Kiss. Maybe the classiest nation with a lion with its tongue hanging out. Enjoys only the finest tea.

Nakena wrote:NSG's Most Serene Salad
Citizen of Earth, Commonwealthian, European, British, Yorkshireman.
Atheist, Environmentalist

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87233
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:49 pm

The Jamesian Republic wrote:
Forsher wrote:
Who in their right mind has turned American politics into childhood nostalgia that they only now fear is being incinerated in the name of an endless cycle of disposable playthings, while the privileged elite plan the destruction of the agents of change that threaten to destabilise the status quo.

Well, I mean, the real problem with this is the childhood nostalgia, if you put it like that...

Speaking of childhood nostalgia, the movie America needs right now is a sequel to Swing Vote.


See the explanation I made a few posts back.
Anyway what was Swing Vote about?


It was movie about a Presidential election coming down to the vote of one person.

User avatar
The Jamesian Republic
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14526
Founded: Apr 28, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Jamesian Republic » Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:50 pm

San Lumen wrote:
The Jamesian Republic wrote:
See the explanation I made a few posts back.
Anyway what was Swing Vote about?


It was movie about a Presidential election coming down to the vote of one person.


Okay. Never heard though but sounds interesting.
Become an Independent. You’ll see how liberating it is.
My Political Beliefs: The Jamesianist Manifesto
General Theme
Special Theme

User avatar
The United Penguin Commonwealth
Minister
 
Posts: 3478
Founded: Feb 01, 2022
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The United Penguin Commonwealth » Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:50 pm

Moroniland wrote:
Nora Xent wrote:The thing is. Not the onion is an unofficial thing ran by people who probably love the Onion, Also the Onion is funnier anyways lol.
"Not the Bee" does have official status with the Babylon Bee company, sure. But it isn't one of their satires: it's news.


If you need evidence that Critical Race Theory, the LGBT movement, climate worship, or abortion are rooted deeply in religious thought, look no further.

How then are we to live among the pagans?


if this isn’t satire, than it’s extraordinarily crappy news.
linux > windows

@ruleofthree@universeodon.com

User avatar
Archinstinct
Diplomat
 
Posts: 854
Founded: Jan 21, 2021
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Archinstinct » Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:52 pm

The United Penguin Commonwealth wrote:
If you need evidence that Critical Race Theory, the LGBT movement, climate worship, or abortion are rooted deeply in religious thought, look no further.

How then are we to live among the pagans?


if this isn’t satire, than it’s extraordinarily crappy news.


Indeed.
Don't care, didn't ask.
Still a member of NAFO, because I enjoy drinking the tears of neo-nazi russian terrorists and their supporters.
Deblar wrote:If even Switzerland is opposing your imperialist invasion, you know you've fucked up

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87233
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:52 pm

The Jamesian Republic wrote:
San Lumen wrote:
It was movie about a Presidential election coming down to the vote of one person.


Okay. Never heard though but sounds interesting.


There are far better political comedy films. One of the best is Man of the Year starring one of the greatest comedians of all time Robin Williams.

User avatar
The Jamesian Republic
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14526
Founded: Apr 28, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Jamesian Republic » Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:53 pm

San Lumen wrote:
The Jamesian Republic wrote:
Okay. Never heard though but sounds interesting.


There are far better political comedy films. One of the best is Man of the Year starring one of the greatest comedians of all time Robin Williams.


I might check it out sometime.
Become an Independent. You’ll see how liberating it is.
My Political Beliefs: The Jamesianist Manifesto
General Theme
Special Theme

User avatar
Moroniland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 552
Founded: May 14, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Moroniland » Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:54 pm

YuriFornia wrote:And discriminating against adopters because they happen to be same-sex should be allowed because?
Because we don't have a common goal of what adoption is for on a fundamental level. We lack a shared answer to the question, "Why have adoption?" There's just no agreement there at all.

But this isn't uncommon. I mean we don't agree on what numerous other institutions are for either. Like we don't agree on what the military is for.
YuriFornia wrote:The discrimination being referred to has nothing to do with who you choose to date or not to date,
Yet.
YuriFornia wrote:but with businesses and the like refusing to do business with LGBT people because of their sexuality or gender identity.
So that you can force artistic creativity at the point of a policeman's gun. Bake the cake or else.

In fact, all of the big companies publicly support all of your nonsense. All of them. All of it. This is about trying to destroy small businesses and only small businesses in communities you dislike.
YuriFornia wrote:The government dictating that you cannot discriminate on who you date would be knocked down by the courts faster than you can say Loving v. Virginia
I'm an atheist with regards to the god they teach in law school. Ultimately, lawsuits are money fights. They follow the Golden Rule: "Whoever has the gold makes the rules." Pack the courts with judges who support whatever it is you want and the courts will rule however you want. Law is a myth. Precedent doubly so.
I believed this before my side got a SCOTUS majority and I believe it still.
YuriFornia wrote:Or can you source that gay adoption is actually harmful?
Of course the definition of "harmful" depends on what your philosophy of life is. When Jews circumcise their male babies, is that harmful? Different customs will be considered harmful or beneficial based entirely on who is judging them to be so.
"The wise man knows how little he knows."
-- Socrates

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87233
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:55 pm

Moroniland wrote:
YuriFornia wrote:And discriminating against adopters because they happen to be same-sex should be allowed because?
Because we don't have a common goal of what adoption is for on a fundamental level. We lack a shared answer to the question, "Why have adoption?" There's just no agreement there at all.

But this isn't uncommon. I mean we don't agree on what numerous other institutions are for either. Like we don't agree on what the military is for.
YuriFornia wrote:The discrimination being referred to has nothing to do with who you choose to date or not to date,
Yet.
YuriFornia wrote:but with businesses and the like refusing to do business with LGBT people because of their sexuality or gender identity.
So that you can force artistic creativity at the point of a policeman's gun. Bake the cake or else.

In fact, all of the big companies publicly support all of your nonsense. All of them. All of it. This is about trying to destroy small businesses and only small businesses in communities you dislike.
YuriFornia wrote:The government dictating that you cannot discriminate on who you date would be knocked down by the courts faster than you can say Loving v. Virginia
I'm an atheist with regards to the god they teach in law school. Ultimately, lawsuits are money fights. They follow the Golden Rule: "Whoever has the gold makes the rules." Pack the courts with judges who support whatever it is you want and the courts will rule however you want. Law is a myth. Precedent doubly so.
I believed this before my side got a SCOTUS majority and I believe it still.
YuriFornia wrote:Or can you source that gay adoption is actually harmful?
Of course the definition of "harmful" depends on what your philosophy of life is. When Jews circumcise their male babies, is that harmful? Different customs will be considered harmful or beneficial based entirely on who is judging them to be so.


How is gay adoption harmful?

User avatar
Moroniland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 552
Founded: May 14, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Moroniland » Fri Apr 15, 2022 4:58 pm

Celritannia wrote:That's because, with time, information gets corrected.
Also with time, regimes change. What happened there is that a regime which prided itself on being "anti-racist" got control of the academic institutions, so of course nothing racist was allowed. It's the same with every controversial issue, although race does seem to be the clearest example because of how utterly impossible it is to get any anti-egalitarian conclusions allowed to count as genuine research, despite egalitarianism ultimately not being evidence-based.
Celritannia wrote:Because Wikipedia wants to make sure the information provided is accurate, thus sources are necessary to back up a claim.
Those two things have little in common with one another.
Celritannia wrote:Otherwise, anyone can say random shit like zombies are real, or werewolves exist.
Since they already are doing both those things, (zombies being your political opponents and werewolves being Furries) these seems like unfortunate examples for your argument.
Last edited by Moroniland on Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The wise man knows how little he knows."
-- Socrates

User avatar
Moroniland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 552
Founded: May 14, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Moroniland » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:01 pm

San Lumen wrote:How is gay adoption harmful?
The purpose of adoption is to rebuild broken families. Gay couples aren't families. Therefore, "gay adoption" doesn't serve the purpose of adoption. That's harmful because the purpose of adoption is good, so failing to serve it is bad. Also, gays are evil so their influence in society should be limited as much as possible in general in order to contain the spread of the evil and their influence over a child would be quite enormous.
Last edited by Moroniland on Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"The wise man knows how little he knows."
-- Socrates

User avatar
Port Caverton
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5210
Founded: Oct 01, 2021
Ex-Nation

Postby Port Caverton » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:03 pm

Moroniland wrote:
San Lumen wrote:How is gay adoption harmful?
The purpose of adoption is to rebuild broken families. Gay couples aren't families. Therefore, "gay adoption" doesn't serve the purpose of adoption. That's harmful because the purpose of adoption is good, so failing to serve it is bad. Also, gays are evil so their influence in society should be limited as much as possible in general in order to contain the spread of the evil and their influence over a child would be quite enormous.

the fuck? Why are gays evil? And how are gay couples not families?
"My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."

User avatar
Nora Xent
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1336
Founded: Oct 02, 2021
Ex-Nation

Postby Nora Xent » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:04 pm

Port Caverton wrote:
Moroniland wrote:The purpose of adoption is to rebuild broken families. Gay couples aren't families. Therefore, "gay adoption" doesn't serve the purpose of adoption. That's harmful because the purpose of adoption is good, so failing to serve it is bad. Also, gays are evil so their influence in society should be limited as much as possible in general in order to contain the spread of the evil and their influence over a child would be quite enormous.

the fuck? Why are gays evil? And how are gay couples not families?

He is a mormon. Mormons believe all kind of crazy shit.

User avatar
Celritannia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18400
Founded: Nov 10, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Celritannia » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:04 pm

Moroniland wrote:
Celritannia wrote:That's because, with time, information gets corrected.
Also with time, regimes change. What happened there is that a regime which prided itself on being "anti-racist" got control of the academic institutions, so of course nothing racist was allowed. It's the same with every controversial issue, although race does seem to be the clearest example because of how utterly impossible it is to get any anti-egalitarian conclusions allowed to count as genuine research, despite egalitarianism never being evidence-based.
Celritannia wrote:Because Wikipedia wants to make sure the information provided is accurate, thus sources are necessary to back up a claim.
Those two things have little in common with one another.
Celritannia wrote:Otherwise, anyone can say random shit like zombies are real, or werewolves exist.
Since they already are doing both those things, (zombies being your political opponents and werewolves being Furries) these seems like unfortunate examples for your argument.


Congratulations, I have never put someone on ignore this quick for absolutely absurd post stupidity before.

My DeviantArt
Obey
When you annoy a Celritannian
U W0T M8?
Zirkagrad wrote:A person with a penchant for flying lions with long tongues, could possibly be a fan of Kiss. Maybe the classiest nation with a lion with its tongue hanging out. Enjoys only the finest tea.

Nakena wrote:NSG's Most Serene Salad
Citizen of Earth, Commonwealthian, European, British, Yorkshireman.
Atheist, Environmentalist

User avatar
YuriFornia
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 62
Founded: Mar 27, 2022
Ex-Nation

Postby YuriFornia » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:05 pm

Moroniland wrote:
YuriFornia wrote:And discriminating against adopters because they happen to be same-sex should be allowed because?
Because we don't have a common goal of what adoption is for on a fundamental level. We lack a shared answer to the question, "Why have adoption?" There's just no agreement there at all.


:roll:

But this isn't uncommon. I mean we don't agree on what numerous other institutions are for either. Like we don't agree on what the military is for.


Yeah, I'm not going to play the whole "we don't agree on what x is for" game, thank you. There is broad agreement on these topics, and that's enough for me.

Yet.


Okay, show that anyone is seriously advocating for this in anything approaching a borderline meaningful amount.

So that you can force artistic creativity at the point of a policeman's gun. Bake the cake or else.


Welcome to living in a society. There are certain things taht you have to do, especially if you open a public business. Discrimination has been regulated (and in a lot of cases, banned) since Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States, and said regulations and bans have expanded over time.

In fact, all of the big companies publicly support all of your nonsense. All of them. All of it. This is about trying to destroy small businesses and only small businesses in communities you dislike.


Strawman. I just don't want people discriminated against because of their immutable qualities.
I'm an atheist with regards to the god they teach in law school. Ultimately, lawsuits are money fights. They follow the Golden Rule: "Whoever has the gold makes the rules." Pack the courts with judges who support whatever it is you want and the courts will rule however you want. Law is a myth. Precedent doubly so.
I believed this before my side got a SCOTUS majority and I believe it still.


And I don't buy that in the least. But please, prove that all of that's the case.

Of course the definition of "harmful" depends on what your philosophy of life is. When Jews circumcise their male babies, is that harmful? Different customs will be considered harmful or beneficial based entirely on who is judging them to be so.
[/quote]
So, you play semantics instead of offering evidence. Good to know that you have no actual proof that gay adoption results in, say increase in mental illness, decrease in academic or job performance, or worse life outcomes overall. How's that for a definition of harm?
Last edited by YuriFornia on Fri Apr 15, 2022 6:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Neu California's living room PC puppet. How much use it'll see I don't know

User avatar
YuriFornia
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 62
Founded: Mar 27, 2022
Ex-Nation

Postby YuriFornia » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:06 pm

Moroniland wrote:
San Lumen wrote:How is gay adoption harmful?
The purpose of adoption is to rebuild broken families. Gay couples aren't families. Therefore, "gay adoption" doesn't serve the purpose of adoption. That's harmful because the purpose of adoption is good, so failing to serve it is bad. Also, gays are evil so their influence in society should be limited as much as possible in general in order to contain the spread of the evil and their influence over a child would be quite enormous.

Gay couples are families. Prove otherwise.
Neu California's living room PC puppet. How much use it'll see I don't know

User avatar
Moroniland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 552
Founded: May 14, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Moroniland » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:07 pm

San Lumen wrote:Congressman Tom Suozzi (D-NY) who is challenging incumbent Governor Kathy Hochul in the primary called the “Don’t say Gay “ bill reasonable in a recent interview.
Yeah, that's because it is. Don't go into a lot of detail about sex with K-3rd graders. That's all this is. A giant nothingburger which shouldn't even be controversial. It shouldn't have any actual effect on schools. I mean we shouldn't even be debating this. If we were debating something like banning gay teachers or some other policy of consequence then I could see that being controversial, but what the hell. We don't want schools pushing Christian ideas about sexuality in K-3 either. Just don't do sex at that level. Why is that even controversial!?
Last edited by Moroniland on Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The wise man knows how little he knows."
-- Socrates

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87233
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:07 pm

Moroniland wrote:
San Lumen wrote:How is gay adoption harmful?
The purpose of adoption is to rebuild broken families. Gay couples aren't families. Therefore, "gay adoption" doesn't serve the purpose of adoption. That's harmful because the purpose of adoption is good, so failing to serve it is bad. Also, gays are evil so their influence in society should be limited as much as possible in general in order to contain the spread of the evil and their influence over a child would be quite enormous.


excuse me? You mean to tell me my friend in college didn't have a real family and that his parents were evil? How dare you. They are the only family he's ever known and he turned out just fine.

User avatar
YuriFornia
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 62
Founded: Mar 27, 2022
Ex-Nation

Postby YuriFornia » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:09 pm

Moroniland wrote:
San Lumen wrote:How is gay adoption harmful?
The purpose of adoption is to rebuild broken families. Gay couples aren't families. Therefore, "gay adoption" doesn't serve the purpose of adoption. That's harmful because the purpose of adoption is good, so failing to serve it is bad. Also, gays are evil so their influence in society should be limited as much as possible in general in order to contain the spread of the evil and their influence over a child would be quite enormous.

Are you trying to get yourself banned again?
Neu California's living room PC puppet. How much use it'll see I don't know

User avatar
Moroniland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 552
Founded: May 14, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Moroniland » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:11 pm

San Lumen wrote:excuse me? You mean to tell me my friend in college didn't have a real family and that his parents were evil? How dare you. They are the only family he's ever known and he turned out just fine.
Yeah, that's what I said and I'm not convinced that very many people in general are "turning out fine" these days.
We just have a totally different and fundamentally incompatible set of moral values. (assuming you have any: I'm assuming you do although that isn't necessarily safe) What does it mean to be a good person? Our society lacks a basic agreement about that.
I mean you'd think Mother Theresa. There would be an example of a good person. But no, she must be cast down because reasons. Martin Luther King Jr? Womanizer. There just aren't any good people around anymore. In recent history, I can't name one.
Last edited by Moroniland on Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"The wise man knows how little he knows."
-- Socrates

User avatar
Necroghastia
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 12734
Founded: May 11, 2019
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Necroghastia » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:12 pm

Moroniland wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Congressman Tom Suozzi (D-NY) who is challenging incumbent Governor Kathy Hochul in the primary called the “Don’t say Gay “ bill reasonable in a recent interview.
Yeah, that's because it is. Don't go into a lot of detail about sex with K-3rd graders. That's all this is. A giant nothingburger which shouldn't even be controversial. It shouldn't have any actual effect on schools. I mean we shouldn't even be debating this. If we were debating something like banning gay teachers or some other policy of consequence then I could see that being controversial, but what the hell. We don't want schools pushing Christian ideas about sexuality in K-3 either. Just don't do sex at that level. Why is that even controversial!?

What is it with you people and assuming anything LGBT related is any more sexual than cishet stuff lol
The Land of Spooky Scary Skeletons!

Pronouns: she/her

User avatar
Moroniland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 552
Founded: May 14, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Moroniland » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:14 pm

Necroghastia wrote:What is it with you people and assuming anything LGBT related is any more sexual than cishet stuff lol
If by "cishet" you mean normal human sexual reproduction by which we all got to be here, then we don't want a lot of details about that in K-3rd grade either. How about let's not sexualize children, neither with gayness nor with anti-gayness. Just don't talk about it, at least not until 4th grade. Why is that so hard?
Last edited by Moroniland on Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The wise man knows how little he knows."
-- Socrates

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87233
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:14 pm

Moroniland wrote:
San Lumen wrote:excuse me? You mean to tell me my friend in college didn't have a real family and that his parents were evil? How dare you. They are the only family he's ever known and he turned out just fine.
Yeah, that's what I said and I'm not convinced that very many people in general are "turning out fine" these days.
We just have a totally different and fundamentally incompatible set of moral values. (assuming you have any: I'm assuming you do although that isn't necessarily safe) What does it mean to be a good person? Our society lacks a basic agreement about that.
I mean you'd think Mother Theresa. There would be an example of a good person. But no, she must be cast down because reasons. Martin Luther King Jr? Womanizer. There just aren't any good people around anymore.


Don't dodge a response with meaningless drivel like this. How are gays evil? What supposed influence does having a single parent whose gay or two dads or mons have on a child?

I have real world experience with someone who had two dads. He turned out perfectly fine. You have yet to provide a single shred of evidence other than bigotry and vague answers.

User avatar
HISPIDA
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8638
Founded: Jun 21, 2021
Anarchy

Postby HISPIDA » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:16 pm

Moroniland wrote:
San Lumen wrote:excuse me? You mean to tell me my friend in college didn't have a real family and that his parents were evil? How dare you. They are the only family he's ever known and he turned out just fine.
Yeah, that's what I said and I'm not convinced that very many people in general are "turning out fine" these days.
We just have a totally different and fundamentally incompatible set of moral values. (assuming you have any: I'm assuming you do although that isn't necessarily safe) What does it mean to be a good person? Our society lacks a basic agreement about that.
I mean you'd think Mother Theresa. There would be an example of a good person. But no, she must be cast down because reasons. Martin Luther King Jr? Womanizer. There just aren't any good people around anymore. In recent history, I can't name one.

hear me out: people can still be good people even if they have bad traits

gandhi was a racist and a pretty creepy dude but he was still influential in getting the british out of india

lenin was a poor economist and rude but he helped create the first socialist state in history

martin luther king, jr. was a womanizer and an adulterer but he still spearheaded one of the greatest movements for basic rights in western history
Algerstonia did nothing wrong. Hold Moderators accountable. (she/they)
"We have liberated Europe from fascism, and they will never forgive us for it." - Georgy Zhukov (purportedly)
read my iiwiki
free palestine. trans rights are human rights. no war but class war
Victory Day: February 23, 2022

User avatar
Necroghastia
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 12734
Founded: May 11, 2019
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Necroghastia » Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:16 pm

Moroniland wrote:
Necroghastia wrote:What is it with you people and assuming anything LGBT related is any more sexual than cishet stuff lol
If by "cishet" you mean normal human sexual reproduction by which we all got to be here, then we don't want a lot of details about that in K-3rd grade either. How about let's not sexualize children, neither with gayness nor with anti-gayness. Just don't talk about it, at least not until 4th grade. Why is that so hard?

how is mentioning that someone has two dads sexualizing children lol
The Land of Spooky Scary Skeletons!

Pronouns: she/her

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aserlandia, Australian rePublic, Awesomeland, Bovad, Ceilikkell, Corporate Collective Salvation, Cynedryca, DataDyneIrkenAlliance, Elejamie, Google [Bot], Ifreann, Ioudaia, Jolthig, Kingdom of the Indus, Merien, Neanderthaland, Nu Elysium, Nyoskova, Ovstylap, Partisan Italy, Siluvia, Stellar Colonies, Trump Almighty, Unmet Player, Utquiagvik

Advertisement

Remove ads