• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'Missing' Man Sought by Gay Pal Is Willingly Undergoing Counseling, Family Says

Actually, they will. If you show up to a school acting irrational and 'making a big scene', chances are they will simply call the law on you before you harm a child.

I live in the south, too. And your right to act irrational and show up to a school making a 'big scene' which could be construed as potentially harmful does not trump my right to send my child to a safe, public institution. Nor does location have much to do with it. I imagine folks in the north wouldn't want you acting irrationally and exposing their children to some potential harm simply because of your particular angry mood that day, either.

Either way, good luck with your lawsuit if you wish to put this to the test.

I have the right to act just as irrationally as I want when addressing my kids' educational concerns.
 
I have the right to act just as irrationally as I want when addressing my kids' educational concerns.

Um... Bro, that depends. If your "irrational" behavior is perceived as threatening, or disruptive of normal operations, then yeah they will call the law on you. It's called "disturbing the peace", as Gates found out.

At any rate, I've had better luck in dealing with my son's teachers and counselors and etc by mostly staying cool and speaking rationally, no matter how POed I was. Once in a while, letting a subtle hint of quiet anger find its way into your voice and demeanor gets a lot more milage than ranting and raving. :mrgreen:
 
Um... Bro, that depends. If your "irrational" behavior is perceived as threatening, or disruptive of normal operations, then yeah they will call the law on you. It's called "disturbing the peace", as Gates found out.

At any rate, I've had better luck in dealing with my son's teachers and counselors and etc by mostly staying cool and speaking rationally, no matter how POed I was. Once in a while, letting a subtle hint of quiet anger find its way into your voice and demeanor gets a lot more milage than ranting and raving. :mrgreen:

Where did I ever say that I wasn't going to be cool when dealing with my kids' teachers? That seems to be an auto-assumption being made here.

I did, however, lose my cool when dealing with one elementary school principle a few years ago, when I suspected one of my kids was being molested by a member of the faculty. She threatened to call the cops and I dared her to do so. I told her I would call them for her, if she wanted to handle it that way. I was purdy un-hinged that day, I must admit.
 
Intimidating them, so as to make them afraid to express their opinion is, though. That's the whole motive with the Libbos labeling: racist, homophobe, xenophobe, etc. It's used to scare people into keeping their opinion to themselves.

Using that line of thought, then conservatives calling libs christian bashers, traitors, and (gasp!) communists is also an attempt to intimidate them to make them afraid to express their opinions.
 
Post a link, or let is go. If you have to ask, then you obviously don't have anything to back up your point of view.


But, I will tell you now that neither Buddhism, nor Hinduism condone homosexuality. Buddhism doesn't address it one way, or another, but does say that you must approach religion based on what you believe to be true. Hinduism condemns homosexuality the same way Christianity and Islam do. However, just like Christianity, Hindusim is interpreted in different ways and some Hindus accept homosexuality as being ok.

You still gonna post a link?

Actually, I believe the Catholic church (the religion I was raised in) characterizes homosexuality as an "objective disorder," but that being gay in and of itself is not a sin. What is sinful is engaging in homosexual acts.
 
I have the right to act just as irrationally as I want when addressing my kids' educational concerns.

You'll also be arrested for such behavior if you choose to do it at a school, as your actions could be construed as dangerous. Being upset is one thing; anger and behaving irrationally is another.


Where did I ever say that I wasn't going to be cool when dealing with my kids' teachers? That seems to be an auto-assumption being made here.

No, you used the term 'irrational' (irrational definition | Dictionary.com). You have the right to drive to the school and behave rationally when talking to the faculty. If you can act respectfully, chances are someone will listen to you. If you go in acting irrational, then they'll simply call the law on you.
 
Last edited:
I'm really skeptical that this young man has willingly gone into "counseling."
 
Using that line of thought, then conservatives calling libs christian bashers, traitors, and (gasp!) communists is also an attempt to intimidate them to make them afraid to express their opinions.

Christian bashers and traitors, yes. Communist is accurate, however, because all Liberal support Socialist/Facist/Communist ideology in some way, shape, or fashion.
 
You'll also be arrested for such behavior if you choose to do it at a school, as your actions could be construed as dangerous. Being upset is one thing; anger and behaving irrationally is another.




No, you used the term 'irrational' (irrational definition | Dictionary.com). You have the right to drive to the school and behave rationally when talking to the faculty. If you can act respectfully, chances are someone will listen to you. If you go in acting irrational, then they'll simply call the law on you.


I doubt I'll be arrested. I can only be arrested if I show that I'm willing to cause someone on the premises bodily harm. Talking sternly to a faculty member can't be construed as dangerous.

That candy ass attitude ain't gonna get you no where.
 
I doubt I'll be arrested. I can only be arrested if I show that I'm willing to cause someone on the premises bodily harm. Talking sternly to a faculty member can't be construed as dangerous.

Sternly? No. Irrationally? Most definitely.

Your previous posts indicated you'd 'raise hell' or act irrationally. You do that, they'd call the law. If you can act rationally - as i've said all along - then someone will probably listen to what you have to say. If you can't, you'll do your complaining behind bars.

In any case, i'll assume your previous posts were overblown and your choice of vernacular was badly chosen, if your last post was what you really meant to say.
 

Sternly? No. Irrationally? Most definitely.

Your previous posts indicated you'd 'raise hell' or act irrationally. You do that, they'd call the law. If you can act rationally - as i've said all along - then someone will probably listen to what you have to say. If you can't, you'll do your complaining behind bars.

In any case, i'll assume your previous posts were overblown and your choice of vernacular was badly chosen, if your last post was what you really meant to say.

Well, you know as well as I do that, "raise hell", has a very broad meaning, unless, of course, you're narrowing the term's meaning to suit your argument.

So, how many kids do you have?
 
Well, you know as well as I do that, "raise hell", has a very broad meaning, unless, of course, you're narrowing the term's meaning to suit your argument.

No, your 'broad meaning' was narrowed down when you wrote this little gem: "I have the right to act just as irrationally as I want when addressing my kids' educational concerns." (post #101)

Now, in the privacy of your own home, I don't care how irrational your behavior gets. But you take it to a public school facility - which is what your posts implied - then I do care. So does everyone else with children at that school.

As I said, that'll land you behind bars.
 
Last edited:
Except that your broad meaning was narrowed down when you wrote this little gem: "I have the right to act just as irrationally as I want when addressing my kids' educational concerns."

Now, in the privacy of your own home, I don't care how irrational your behavior gets. But you take it to a public school facility - which is what your posts implied - then I do care. So does everyone else with children at that school.

As I said, that'll land you behind bars.

How many kids do you have?
 
How many kids do you have?

Currently, two. At one point I had 10 (can you believe it?!?), but I gave eight of them to my neighbor because he has more property than me. His fence is also in better shape, so they won't escape. A few years ago I had my first kid get out of the fence, and the little fella almost got hit by a car. Scared me so bad I considered putting him on a leash, but I just kept him out in the barn with the doors closed at night. It got awfully dark out there, but he was always okay the next day when i'd check up on him.

Nine more kids followed. I kept the youngest two and gave the others away. My neighbor took them off my hands for free because he always wanted kids. He plans on milking them, whatever that means. Hopefully he'll wait until they're older before he does something like that, but hey, who am I to judge? They're his kids now, after all. As long as he treats 'em good, he can do what he wants.
 
Last edited:
Currently, two. At one point I had 10 (can you believe it?!?), but I gave eight of them to my neighbor because he has more property than me. His fence is also in better shape, so they won't escape. A few years ago I had my first kid get out of the fence, and the little fella almost got hit by a car. Scared me so bad I considered putting him on a leash, but I just kept him out in the barn with the doors closed at night. It got awfully dark out there, but he was always okay the next day when i'd check up on him.

Nine more kids followed. I kept the youngest two and gave the others away. My neighbor took them off my hands for free because he always wanted kids. He plans on milking them, whatever that means. Hopefully he'll wait until they're older before he does something like that, but hey, who am I to judge? They're his kids now, after all. As long as he treats 'em good, he can do what he wants.


Ok, so you don't have any children? Go have a child and I promise, your perspective about what's irrational and what isn't will change.
 
Ok, so you don't have any children? Go have a child and I promise, your perspective about what's irrational and what isn't will change.

Not hardly. My perspective on what constitutes rational and irrational behavior is based on the textbook definitions of rational and irrational, which every other rational individual familiar with the terms understands them to mean. Definitions of words do not miraculously change when you have children; irrational is still gonna mean irrational regardless of how many pups you squeeze out.
 
Not hardly. My perspective on what constitutes rational and irrational behavior is based on the textbook definitions of rational and irrational, which every other rational individual familiar with the terms understands them to mean. Definitions of words do not miraculously change when you have children; irrational is still gonna mean irrational regardless of how many pups you squeeze out.

Have a kid and then we can talk about it. Until then, you're talking without the full knowledge of the appropriate perspective.
 
Have a kid and then we can talk about it. Until then, you're talking without the full knowledge of the appropriate perspective.

Nice try. Definitions of words do not change based on perspective. But let's put this to the test and take the very word that seems to be giving you the most trouble in this thread - irrational.

The definition of irrational (irrational definition | Dictionary.com)

1. without the faculty of reason; deprived of reason.
2. without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment.
3. not in accordance with reason; utterly illogical: irrational arguments.
4. not endowed with the faculty of reason: irrational animals.
5. Mathematics. a. (of a number) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two integers.
b. (of a function) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two polynomials.

6. Algebra. (of an equation) having an unknown under a radical sign or, alternately, with a fractional exponent.
7. Greek and Latin Prosody. a. of or pertaining to a substitution in the normal metrical pattern, esp. a long syllable for a short one.
b. noting a foot or meter containing such a substitution.

1. The definition of irrational from the perspective of those who do not have children:

1. without the faculty of reason; deprived of reason.
2. without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment.
3. not in accordance with reason; utterly illogical: irrational arguments.
4. not endowed with the faculty of reason: irrational animals.
5. Mathematics. a. (of a number) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two integers.
b. (of a function) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two polynomials.

6. Algebra. (of an equation) having an unknown under a radical sign or, alternately, with a fractional exponent.
7. Greek and Latin Prosody. a. of or pertaining to a substitution in the normal metrical pattern, esp. a long syllable for a short one.
b. noting a foot or meter containing such a substitution.

2. The definition of irrational from the perspective of who do have children:

1. without the faculty of reason; deprived of reason.
2. without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment.
3. not in accordance with reason; utterly illogical: irrational arguments.
4. not endowed with the faculty of reason: irrational animals.
5. Mathematics. a. (of a number) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two integers.
b. (of a function) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two polynomials.

6. Algebra. (of an equation) having an unknown under a radical sign or, alternately, with a fractional exponent.
7. Greek and Latin Prosody. a. of or pertaining to a substitution in the normal metrical pattern, esp. a long syllable for a short one.
b. noting a foot or meter containing such a substitution.


Conclusion: The definition is unchanged regardless of how many children one has

So, about that perspective issue...the definitions still look the same to me. How about you?
 
Last edited:
Have a kid and then we can talk about it. Until then, you're talking without the full knowledge of the appropriate perspective.

This has always been my least favorite poor response on message boards. It's used in all sorts of discussions... 'You can't make an informed opinion on abortion unless you're a woman!' 'You can't understand racism unless you're a minority!' 'You have no business debating gays in the military unless you've served in a combat unit!'

And on and on it goes...

:doh
 
I'm now old enough to be a grandmother, and I can truthfully say that not once in my life has anyone tried to "recruit" me to become a lesbian. Not once. However, I've turned down my share of unwanted sexual propositions from men.

Look Birdzeye, I did what I could okay?
I even tried to send Guerrilla Lesbian Mafia (in training) flirts after you, okay?
For some reason they failed miserably.
No toaster oven for them!



Have a kid and then we can talk about it. Until then, you're talking without the full knowledge of the appropriate perspective.

Whilst I'm not a huge fan of the tactic your current opponent is using, (browbeating someone over one particular usage of a word) I do feel an urge to step in here, because I am a parent.

I've raised or am helping raise 7 kids. (no, not the goat kinds)

And yeah, had I been in the position of thinking there was a molester working at any of my children's schools, I'd of been up there behaving all kinds of irrationally. <-----chose that word on purpose.

However....when it comes to matters of curriculum and such, I've always rather believed that unless they are teaching any of my children to rise up against the US, or that 2+2 is suddenly 19 and gravity means things fall in an upwards fashion...
I've got the option of influencing my child better at home than the teacher does and if I go make a loud noise unto the teacher/principal or school board,it might in fact intrigue my child so much that they'd become more interested in something than I'd otherwise like.

Plus, since I'd of made a big ol' stink about it---they'd know I didn't like it and try and hide it from me.

My two cents.

That and about 5 more dollars and you can have Starbucks!
 
Whilst I'm not a huge fan of the tactic your current opponent is using, (browbeating someone over one particular usage of a word) I do feel an urge to step in here, because I am a parent.

There's no browbeating going on in this thread. We communicate here through the written word, so if you write something along the lines of "I can go act irrationally at a school and not get arrested for it because it's my right to do so", then make the claim that the term 'irrational' definitively changes based on one's perspective, that's not being subjected to browbeating. That's just being flat-out incorrect. If you meant something different, you should write something different.

In my defense, I even told him that I would assume his previous usage was not what he meant to say in post #110 on this thread, when I said, "i'll assume your previous posts were overblown and your choice of vernacular was badly chosen, if your last post was what you really meant to say." This was in turn followed by his defense of the term's use and a rather accusatory query that I may be changing the definition to suit my argument.

Regardless, my point stands. Any adult acting irrationally at a public school will at the least be escorted off the premises if they are very lucky; most of the time, they'll simply be arrested. Please keep in mind that I am using the term 'irrational' as per the actual definition of the word. But since I am a rather generous fellow, I will certainly give my opponent the benefit of the doubt once again, and assume that his choice of wording in post #101 was a simple bad selection of vocabulary.
 
Last edited:
Singularity;1058159595]Nice try. Definitions of words do not change based on perspective. But let's put this to the test and take the very word that seems to be giving you the most trouble in this thread - irrational.

The definition of irrational (irrational definition | Dictionary.com)

1. without the faculty of reason; deprived of reason.
2. without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment.
3. not in accordance with reason; utterly illogical: irrational arguments.
4. not endowed with the faculty of reason: irrational animals.
5. Mathematics. a. (of a number) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two integers.
b. (of a function) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two polynomials.

6. Algebra. (of an equation) having an unknown under a radical sign or, alternately, with a fractional exponent.
7. Greek and Latin Prosody. a. of or pertaining to a substitution in the normal metrical pattern, esp. a long syllable for a short one.
b. noting a foot or meter containing such a substitution.

1. The definition of irrational from the perspective of those who do not have children:

1. without the faculty of reason; deprived of reason.
2. without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment.
3. not in accordance with reason; utterly illogical: irrational arguments.
4. not endowed with the faculty of reason: irrational animals.
5. Mathematics. a. (of a number) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two integers.
b. (of a function) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two polynomials.

6. Algebra. (of an equation) having an unknown under a radical sign or, alternately, with a fractional exponent.
7. Greek and Latin Prosody. a. of or pertaining to a substitution in the normal metrical pattern, esp. a long syllable for a short one.
b. noting a foot or meter containing such a substitution.

2. The definition of irrational from the perspective of who do have children:

1. without the faculty of reason; deprived of reason.
2. without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment.
3. not in accordance with reason; utterly illogical: irrational arguments.
4. not endowed with the faculty of reason: irrational animals.
5. Mathematics. a. (of a number) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two integers.
b. (of a function) not capable of being expressed exactly as a ratio of two polynomials.

6. Algebra. (of an equation) having an unknown under a radical sign or, alternately, with a fractional exponent.
7. Greek and Latin Prosody. a. of or pertaining to a substitution in the normal metrical pattern, esp. a long syllable for a short one.
b. noting a foot or meter containing such a substitution.


Conclusion: The definition is unchanged regardless of how many children one has

So, about that perspective issue...the definitions still look the same to me. How about you?

Life isn't defined by a dictionary.



This has always been my least favorite poor response on message boards. It's used in all sorts of discussions... 'You can't make an informed opinion on abortion unless you're a woman!' 'You can't understand racism unless you're a minority!' 'You have no business debating gays in the military unless you've served in a combat unit!'

And on and on it goes...

:doh


Well, we're talking about the difference between parent's and non parent's. Anyone who has a kid, even an adopted kid, can tell you your perspective changes dramatically after you become a parent. I know mine did.




Whilst I'm not a huge fan of the tactic your current opponent is using, (browbeating someone over one particular usage of a word) I do feel an urge to step in here, because I am a parent.

I've raised or am helping raise 7 kids. (no, not the goat kinds)

And yeah, had I been in the position of thinking there was a molester working at any of my children's schools, I'd of been up there behaving all kinds of irrationally. <-----chose that word on purpose.

However....when it comes to matters of curriculum and such, I've always rather believed that unless they are teaching any of my children to rise up against the US, or that 2+2 is suddenly 19 and gravity means things fall in an upwards fashion...
I've got the option of influencing my child better at home than the teacher does and if I go make a loud noise unto the teacher/principal or school board,it might in fact intrigue my child so much that they'd become more interested in something than I'd otherwise like.

Plus, since I'd of made a big ol' stink about it---they'd know I didn't like it and try and hide it from me.

My two cents.

That and about 5 more dollars and you can have Starbucks!

I agree with all of that, except that I don't like Starbucks. The original comment I was referring to was about teaching homosexuality in public schools. The classroom is no place for that and it would motivate me to show up at school raising hell about it.
 
Last edited:
Well, we're talking about the difference between parent's and non parent's. Anyone who has a kid, even an adopted kid, can tell you your perspective changes dramatically after you become a parent. I know mine did.

I understand quite well how our perspectives differ based on our life experiences. I've seen my brother, sister, and many friends become totally irrational in response to matters involving their kids. I'm certain other parents and non-parents can relate to that perspective. The perspective of witnessing otherwise rational adults turn into pin-headed lunatics when it comes to their own children.

As it happens, your previous post implied that those without kids can't legitimately engage in discussion about certain issues on this forum because of their lack of appropriate 'perspective.'

My experience would seem to lead me to exactly the opposite conclusion. However, I'll give most parents the benefit of the doubt and assume they can put their prejudices aside while posting on this forum.

:2wave:
 
Last edited:
Forgive me father, for I have sinned: Sometimes I enjoy feeding trolls. :mrgreen:
 
Back
Top Bottom