@coolfront
How about instead of trying to incite others just post plays and add positive contributions? I dont think anyone has issue with you trying to find an angle with a topic but when it turns in the other direction then that is why the thread was moved...this site isnt for that type of discussion.
no, you ran me off. You just can't handle what I posted is accurate. Tell me what lie I told. You let them poor mouth people who support Trump and if we retaliate, you throw the hammer down. Again what up there did I post that is not truthful? I'm sure others feel exactly the same way.
@Jarrett75
I asked if you were going to respond to the thread not that you are crying about how unfair things are. I dont recall saying you were a liar, rather you quickly fall to the insults and complaining angle when things dont go your way.
I dont care what party you like, what politics you believe in and what principals you follow, I care about how you and anyone posts content on this site and that you are keeping the rules and being respectful. You can live your life no problem, you just cannot make personal attacks, insults or break the rules. As mentioned so many times, if you feel someone is breaking the rules REPORT IT...that means you have clean hands in the report of course not that you instigated or broke the rules and then also report the person who was involved. Let the admin of the site take care of rule breakers, you do your best to make a positive contribution, steer clear of insults and degrading content and report when rules are broken.
The rest of your tirade is misplaced and biased because it does not go your way and you are looking for reasons to partisan blame.
GL
@wallstreetcappers
How about you not worry about my posts because you CLEARLY don't believe in FACTS. I'm sure you can find a whole echo chamber on Yahoos or Huffpoop or whatever fake news you read who believe in your fantasy world. I'm not the one who turned it in a different direction. Let's be real. It got moved because I posted a WINNER! There will be more to come...
@Raiders22
Reverse...
I am countering his position and saying that often times I do not believe that an automatic opposite attraction sexual disposition at birth is a FACT as he claimed, that for example a genetic male, or genetic female at birth is wired to only be attracted to the opposite sex. I think you misread the statement. I am saying there is not any way to say there is a FACT or proven conclusion on this topic.
What did you think I was suggesting?
I was just reading what you wrote and it struck me as odd. I would have thought you felt exactly the opposite. When you say you do not think it is genetic or inherent that implies you think there are other influencing factors and they can learn and choose that lifestyle. Meaning, if they are not born that way, it is not something that they cannot change or choose, etc.
@Raiders22
My words written were exactly what I meant, you just took the words in a different way than intended. I said as you quoted that no scientific fact that a disposition is inherent or genetic...that means the traditional conservative opposite sex viewpoint. I do not think that there is any fact that all males due to genetics are only attracted to females at birth, that there is no inherent fact that because a female is born thus she is attracted to a male and same for male to female.
What I wrote I meant 100% I just needed to extrapolate since there was confusion.
Sorry, THIRDPERSON. We just don't want to see " the Alphabet mafia" push their beliefs on our children, which is precisely their goal.
When as a society did we go from "accepting" the "rights" of these people to "promoting" their perverted behavior .
Yes, it is very confusing. I thought most Conservatives thought people were influenced or chose that lifestyle. I thought most on the Left say they were born that way or cannot help it. So, when you say there is no evidence they were born that way -- that is confusing. Good enough, I guess. 
@Raiders22
If you followed the chain of the thread you would see that the OP had the conservative position, so my reply was to his comment directly...and thus that there cant be a fact or science that without dispute can prove we are born to attract to the opposite sex only...so M to f and F to M, how is it possible that there can be factual genetic disposition? We are born with spiritual minds and individual characteristics there is no way his contention is logical and of course not factual or provable.
And to your point which you are trying to play me as you always do...I will go WITH your point (which was not my comment initially) that I think sexual attraction is fluid it can evolve, change, expand as our minds do and that means in all directions...so say someone is born with a genetic disposition for opposite sex attraction it does not mean they cannot evolve to same sex or both sex attraction at a different time in life..and I dont attribute that to grooming or social media rather that our minds can change as we take inputs and go through experiences..and the same goes for someone who might be born with a same sex disposition they might evolve in a different direction.
Our spirits/souls are too complex to pigeon hole based on DNA, our bodies are what are made from genetics but our spirits are not at all restricted based on our DNA or science.
@wallstreetcappers
I saw what your point was. It was just amazing that you dismissed the Left's usual view that they cannot 'help' it or that they were born that way. Weird to see you say they opt for it and can change -- no matter the reason.
Yes, I do not think you can 'prove' it scientifically, outside of isolating a gene, etc. Even then the Left would not accept that science because it would not promote their agenda, etc.
I was not 'playing' with you at all. It was just weird to see you say that is all.
As far as the grooming. Of course that is an outside influence that could change a young person -- they are easily influenced. Hard to dismiss that out of hand.
Fact checker Politifact found that experts in psychology and child development say there is no evidence that exposure to LGBTQ people makes children more likely to join them. Teaching about gender identity and sexual orientation in school is not grooming because it is done without intent to sexually abuse children.
This school topic is a bad one, I dont see that it is appropriate for an education system to introduce any topics like this from at least K-6, if the parents/family want to educate their kids that is their choice in their homes but I think any gender or sexual education should be kept completely out of lower education levels.
What would help more is to teach people to be nice and respect each other and focus on that, not gender differences or sexual orientation.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
