SCOTUS

The odds are excellent that you will leave this forum hating someone.
Bart
Posts: 2267
Joined: Mon May 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Bart »

Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:52 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:48 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:37 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:32 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:29 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:09 pm
a fan wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 1:39 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:35 am
Any comment from Petey? Or OS, or any of the numerous posters I'm thinking of just now?


This decision was correct, and I’m pretty militant about church-state separation. This wasn’t coercive.

Coach Kennedy won on free exercise and free speech grounds. One man kneeling alone does not establish a government church.

Coach Kennedy literally told students who asked to join him, “This is a free country. You can do what you want.”

It is telling who disagrees, the 3 DNC-sponsored justice’s! Libs believe that a 30 second individual prayer after a high school football game constitutes the establishment of a state-sponsored church. :lol: :lol:
Except he wasn't "kneeling alone." Sotomayor included a picture for people like you. Jesus, what a maroon.
He was kneeling alone when he began. Others joined him in later games with zero coercion.

The justices got it right.
It appears that you didn't play sports in high school. Or you are just really this dumb. I'm going with the latter.


If it’s your contention that a player would feel obligated to participate in a prayer in order to get playing time, I’d actually point the finger at you as one who doesn’t understand sports. Leftists assume the world is a political ladder; it’s why they excel, for instance, at corporate backstabbing. Meritocracy is a Republican’s game. Good coaches don’t give a flying frig what your religion is; they’re interested in your forty yard time, conditioning, and strength.
So it's both: didn't play HS sports and you're dumb as a bag of hammers and not as useful? Just stop.
Mootional……a term used by both of my kids in college relation to things done outside of practice….mandatory optional or moptional.
Seacoaster(1)
Posts: 4097
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2022 6:49 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Seacoaster(1) »

Bart wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:59 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:52 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:48 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:37 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:32 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:29 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:09 pm
a fan wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 1:39 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:35 am
Any comment from Petey? Or OS, or any of the numerous posters I'm thinking of just now?


This decision was correct, and I’m pretty militant about church-state separation. This wasn’t coercive.

Coach Kennedy won on free exercise and free speech grounds. One man kneeling alone does not establish a government church.

Coach Kennedy literally told students who asked to join him, “This is a free country. You can do what you want.”

It is telling who disagrees, the 3 DNC-sponsored justice’s! Libs believe that a 30 second individual prayer after a high school football game constitutes the establishment of a state-sponsored church. :lol: :lol:
Except he wasn't "kneeling alone." Sotomayor included a picture for people like you. Jesus, what a maroon.
He was kneeling alone when he began. Others joined him in later games with zero coercion.

The justices got it right.
It appears that you didn't play sports in high school. Or you are just really this dumb. I'm going with the latter.


If it’s your contention that a player would feel obligated to participate in a prayer in order to get playing time, I’d actually point the finger at you as one who doesn’t understand sports. Leftists assume the world is a political ladder; it’s why they excel, for instance, at corporate backstabbing. Meritocracy is a Republican’s game. Good coaches don’t give a flying frig what your religion is; they’re interested in your forty yard time, conditioning, and strength.
So it's both: didn't play HS sports and you're dumb as a bag of hammers and not as useful? Just stop.
Mootional……a term used by both of my kids in college relation to things done outside of practice….mandatory optional or moptional.
Gotcha; and understood. Thanks.

If we wanted to actually have a discussion about this case, try this question: Based on the Bremerton case, where is the line? Say there is an Eighth Grade teacher who, after the kids recite the rote and largely meaningless Pledge, just needs to immediately follow it with the Lord's Prayer in order to center him/herself for the demands of the rest of the day? Assume he/she is absolutely in earnest; that is, he/she really believes it helps get her/him through the day. Is this OK? Can the school direct him or her not to do so? Twelve and 13 year old Christians, Jews, Muslims and None of the Aboves in the classroom.

Get ready for the test cases that push the envelope here. The whole purpose of the SCOTUS is to stabilize what the law is. This Clown Crowd of culture warriors does exactly the opposite. The Roberts Court will go down in history as the most divisive Court in history.
Seacoaster(1)
Posts: 4097
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2022 6:49 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Seacoaster(1) »

ggait wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:54 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 1:40 pm Some rare good news, with Thomas filling his role as Culture Warrior in Chief.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/27/politics ... index.html
Seems like Clarence is willing to revisit any and all long since settled precedents.

We’ll except maybe Loving v. Virginia. 😉

Time for scotus term limits!
Hah! +1,000,000.
User avatar
youthathletics
Posts: 14435
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by youthathletics »

Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:36 am
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:49 am
dislaxxic wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:20 am Supreme Court Just Ruled in Favor of the Praying High School Football Coach

Next time we meet, i'm going to gather my middle school lacrosse team around the crease after games and chant Koranic verses. Any kid that refuses can take a hike...

..
Might be informative and save one of the kids. Oh the shock and awe of having someone pray for safety, health, and playing injury free.
It is apparent you have no idea what you are talking about, if this is the takeaway from allowing an authority figure (based on his personal sense of "free exercise"), who allocates jobs and playing time, to coerce through action children to accept his tacit "ministry" of performative Christianity. This one overrules a case that has stood since 1962. You plainly have an adventuring, activist, reactionary Court allocating "constitutional rights" based on their own religiosity. In a way, this one is worse than Roe, because there really was nothing wrong with the existing "law of the land."

Matthew 6:5-6.
Speculative, counselor, you are implying prejudice on the part and heart of the coach, with none provided.

Matthew 18:20
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
Seacoaster(1)
Posts: 4097
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2022 6:49 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Seacoaster(1) »

youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:11 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:36 am
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:49 am
dislaxxic wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:20 am Supreme Court Just Ruled in Favor of the Praying High School Football Coach

Next time we meet, i'm going to gather my middle school lacrosse team around the crease after games and chant Koranic verses. Any kid that refuses can take a hike...

..
Might be informative and save one of the kids. Oh the shock and awe of having someone pray for safety, health, and playing injury free.
It is apparent you have no idea what you are talking about, if this is the takeaway from allowing an authority figure (based on his personal sense of "free exercise"), who allocates jobs and playing time, to coerce through action children to accept his tacit "ministry" of performative Christianity. This one overrules a case that has stood since 1962. You plainly have an adventuring, activist, reactionary Court allocating "constitutional rights" based on their own religiosity. In a way, this one is worse than Roe, because there really was nothing wrong with the existing "law of the land."

Matthew 6:5-6.
Speculative, counselor, you are implying prejudice on the part and heart of the coach, with none provided.

Matthew 18:20
I've read the record on appeal, something you and Neil seem to have avoided.

And 2 or 3 voluntarily "gathered in His name" is a far cry from using one's position as a public employee and authority figure to coerce children to mutter at midfield.
Peter Brown
Posts: 12878
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:19 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Peter Brown »

a fan wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:55 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:42 pm
a fan wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:39 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:31 pm Since a fan cuts up posts to lose the dialogue to recast threads (a very dishonest practice btw), I’ll repost my previous post to keep things honest in replying to him.

If the football players were forced to pray at midfield, you’d have a point. They weren’t, and you don’t.

On the other hand, the very young children in school with gender queer theory instruction and drag Queen story hours are forced to participate. There’s no out. They are quite literally trapped inside a classroom and the LGBTQIA nonsense is an actual part of the curriculum.

:roll: :roll:
:lol: So now you're fine with government employees discussing gender theory so long as they tell the kids that it's optional to hear what they say?

:lol: You're LYING, Pete. You'd lose your mind if that happened. "Well, we told the children that they were welcome to leave". :lol: Right.


BTW, my obviously closeted friend.......the drag Queen story hours have happened at Libraries, not schools. And naturally, you told us that that was wrong, and shouldn't be allowed.
Actually you’re wrong. Most of the complaints by parents have been precisely because there was no notification nor out.
:lol: Libraries don't have doors? And what's the "out" at the Football game, Pete? If I'm a taxpayer, I have to sit there and watch prayer on my taxpayer field, by my employee that I'm paying to pray to kids.

But you don't care, because you approve of the indoctrination.




You’re not serious, right?!? We are talking about kids as young as 3. You want them to just head on outside as if they don’t have a care in the world? Even when a teacher tells them they need to be in the classroom? Ayfkm?
User avatar
youthathletics
Posts: 14435
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by youthathletics »

SCLaxAttack wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:22 am
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:49 am
dislaxxic wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:20 am Supreme Court Just Ruled in Favor of the Praying High School Football Coach

Next time we meet, i'm going to gather my middle school lacrosse team around the crease after games and chant Koranic verses. Any kid that refuses can take a hike...

..
Might be informative and save one of the kids. Oh the shock and awe of having someone pray for safety, health, and playing injury free.
Surely you can see the difference between:

“Have good game, boys. Play hard but play safe”, and:

“Lord bless us today and allow us and our competitors to stay safe and healthy through Christ, our lord and savior, amen,”

Saint Anthony’s, fine. Garden City, NFW.
Actually, I'd prefer the latter. I've been doing something like this for two decades with my teams'. Never once has a parent or complaint come in, actually the opposite.....and note of thanks. When the coaches actions back their charchter...one can only respect where it came from.

A local public school, Westminster HS, here in Markland actually had scripture on the tail of their shooting shirts years ago. They were also state champs multiple years, while wearing them. No complaints. I suppose it helps that you were not around. ;)
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
User avatar
youthathletics
Posts: 14435
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by youthathletics »

Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:15 pm
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:11 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:36 am
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:49 am
dislaxxic wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:20 am Supreme Court Just Ruled in Favor of the Praying High School Football Coach

Next time we meet, i'm going to gather my middle school lacrosse team around the crease after games and chant Koranic verses. Any kid that refuses can take a hike...

..
Might be informative and save one of the kids. Oh the shock and awe of having someone pray for safety, health, and playing injury free.
It is apparent you have no idea what you are talking about, if this is the takeaway from allowing an authority figure (based on his personal sense of "free exercise"), who allocates jobs and playing time, to coerce through action children to accept his tacit "ministry" of performative Christianity. This one overrules a case that has stood since 1962. You plainly have an adventuring, activist, reactionary Court allocating "constitutional rights" based on their own religiosity. In a way, this one is worse than Roe, because there really was nothing wrong with the existing "law of the land."

Matthew 6:5-6.
Speculative, counselor, you are implying prejudice on the part and heart of the coach, with none provided.

Matthew 18:20
I've read the record on appeal, something you and Neil seem to have avoided.

And 2 or 3 voluntarily "gathered in His name" is a far cry from using one's position as a public employee and authority figure to coerce children to mutter at midfield.
So help us out.....he cut, suspended minutes b/c of complaints or b/c little johnnie was not the star player? Can't wait to hear how horrible he was.....

COerce children? :lol: :lol: You can not conflate the two without finding guilt on his behalf....again, speculative, see me in my chambers seacoster. :lol: You guys are just being fussy for the sake of being fussy, now knock it off. ;)
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
Seacoaster(1)
Posts: 4097
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2022 6:49 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Seacoaster(1) »

youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:19 pm
SCLaxAttack wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:22 am
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:49 am
dislaxxic wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:20 am Supreme Court Just Ruled in Favor of the Praying High School Football Coach

Next time we meet, i'm going to gather my middle school lacrosse team around the crease after games and chant Koranic verses. Any kid that refuses can take a hike...

..
Might be informative and save one of the kids. Oh the shock and awe of having someone pray for safety, health, and playing injury free.
Surely you can see the difference between:

“Have good game, boys. Play hard but play safe”, and:

“Lord bless us today and allow us and our competitors to stay safe and healthy through Christ, our lord and savior, amen,”

Saint Anthony’s, fine. Garden City, NFW.
Actually, I'd prefer the latter. I've been doing something like this for two decades with my teams'. Never once has a parent or complaint come in, actually the opposite.....and note of thanks. When the coaches actions back their charchter...one can only respect where it came from.

A local public school, Westminster HS, here in Markland actually had scripture on the tail of their shooting shirts years ago. They were also state champs multiple years, while wearing them. No complaints. I suppose it helps that you were not around. ;)
Or the folks who would rather not display religious quotes, etc., on their children's sleeves are too cowed by the seeming prevailing ethos to take on the issue, embarrass their kids. It's fun, sometimes, to have a perspective that isn't glued to your normative notions of God in life.
Seacoaster(1)
Posts: 4097
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2022 6:49 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Seacoaster(1) »

youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:25 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:15 pm
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:11 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:36 am
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:49 am
dislaxxic wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:20 am Supreme Court Just Ruled in Favor of the Praying High School Football Coach

Next time we meet, i'm going to gather my middle school lacrosse team around the crease after games and chant Koranic verses. Any kid that refuses can take a hike...

..
Might be informative and save one of the kids. Oh the shock and awe of having someone pray for safety, health, and playing injury free.
It is apparent you have no idea what you are talking about, if this is the takeaway from allowing an authority figure (based on his personal sense of "free exercise"), who allocates jobs and playing time, to coerce through action children to accept his tacit "ministry" of performative Christianity. This one overrules a case that has stood since 1962. You plainly have an adventuring, activist, reactionary Court allocating "constitutional rights" based on their own religiosity. In a way, this one is worse than Roe, because there really was nothing wrong with the existing "law of the land."

Matthew 6:5-6.
Speculative, counselor, you are implying prejudice on the part and heart of the coach, with none provided.

Matthew 18:20
I've read the record on appeal, something you and Neil seem to have avoided.

And 2 or 3 voluntarily "gathered in His name" is a far cry from using one's position as a public employee and authority figure to coerce children to mutter at midfield.
So help us out.....he cut, suspended minutes b/c of complaints or b/c little johnnie was not the star player? Can't wait to hear how horrible he was.....

COerce children? :lol: :lol: You can not conflate the two without finding guilt on his behalf....again, speculative, see me in my chambers seacoster. :lol: You guys are just being fussy for the sake of being fussy, now knock it off. ;)
Fussy. You really don't understand the issue here, or don't want to because it all bends into your Magic Santa World.
User avatar
youthathletics
Posts: 14435
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by youthathletics »

Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:28 pm
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:25 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:15 pm
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:11 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:36 am
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:49 am
dislaxxic wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:20 am Supreme Court Just Ruled in Favor of the Praying High School Football Coach

Next time we meet, i'm going to gather my middle school lacrosse team around the crease after games and chant Koranic verses. Any kid that refuses can take a hike...

..
Might be informative and save one of the kids. Oh the shock and awe of having someone pray for safety, health, and playing injury free.
It is apparent you have no idea what you are talking about, if this is the takeaway from allowing an authority figure (based on his personal sense of "free exercise"), who allocates jobs and playing time, to coerce through action children to accept his tacit "ministry" of performative Christianity. This one overrules a case that has stood since 1962. You plainly have an adventuring, activist, reactionary Court allocating "constitutional rights" based on their own religiosity. In a way, this one is worse than Roe, because there really was nothing wrong with the existing "law of the land."

Matthew 6:5-6.
Speculative, counselor, you are implying prejudice on the part and heart of the coach, with none provided.

Matthew 18:20
I've read the record on appeal, something you and Neil seem to have avoided.

And 2 or 3 voluntarily "gathered in His name" is a far cry from using one's position as a public employee and authority figure to coerce children to mutter at midfield.
So help us out.....he cut, suspended minutes b/c of complaints or b/c little johnnie was not the star player? Can't wait to hear how horrible he was.....

COerce children? :lol: :lol: You can not conflate the two without finding guilt on his behalf....again, speculative, see me in my chambers seacoster. :lol: You guys are just being fussy for the sake of being fussy, now knock it off. ;)
Fussy. You really don't understand the issue here, or don't want to because it all bends into your Magic Santa World.
Moving on...thanks for giving me your time and perspective, it is appreciated.
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
a fan
Posts: 17713
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:05 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by a fan »

Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:16 pm You’re not serious, right?!? We are talking about kids as young as 3. You want them to just head on outside as if they don’t have a care in the world? Even when a teacher tells them they need to be in the classroom? Ayfkm?
:lol: Nope. That's what YOU are arguing, Pete. So long as it's "optional", and (snicker) the teacher says "this is optional, you don't have to be here", you're telling me it's fine to go right ahead and indoctrinate away.

Of course, this isn't what you're saying at all. It's fine to indoctrinate if you like what they're saying. If you don't like what they're saying...out comes the whining.




What's hilarious This football coach is on my dime. His school and the State he's in gets funds from the Federal Government.

So this man is on the .gov payroll, AT WORK, preaching to kids.

And gee whiz, what a "coincidence" that the Justices who voted to allow this are all Christians.

It's a Miracle!!! :lol:
Typical Lax Dad
Posts: 32140
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Typical Lax Dad »

youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:25 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:15 pm
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:11 pm
Seacoaster(1) wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:36 am
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:49 am
dislaxxic wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:20 am Supreme Court Just Ruled in Favor of the Praying High School Football Coach

Next time we meet, i'm going to gather my middle school lacrosse team around the crease after games and chant Koranic verses. Any kid that refuses can take a hike...

..
Might be informative and save one of the kids. Oh the shock and awe of having someone pray for safety, health, and playing injury free.
It is apparent you have no idea what you are talking about, if this is the takeaway from allowing an authority figure (based on his personal sense of "free exercise"), who allocates jobs and playing time, to coerce through action children to accept his tacit "ministry" of performative Christianity. This one overrules a case that has stood since 1962. You plainly have an adventuring, activist, reactionary Court allocating "constitutional rights" based on their own religiosity. In a way, this one is worse than Roe, because there really was nothing wrong with the existing "law of the land."

Matthew 6:5-6.
Speculative, counselor, you are implying prejudice on the part and heart of the coach, with none provided.

Matthew 18:20
I've read the record on appeal, something you and Neil seem to have avoided.

And 2 or 3 voluntarily "gathered in His name" is a far cry from using one's position as a public employee and authority figure to coerce children to mutter at midfield.
So help us out.....he cut, suspended minutes b/c of complaints or b/c little johnnie was not the star player? Can't wait to hear how horrible he was.....

COerce children? :lol: :lol: You can not conflate the two without finding guilt on his behalf....again, speculative, see me in my chambers seacoster. :lol: You guys are just being fussy for the sake of being fussy, now knock it off. ;)
The Church should be the State….we wouldn’t have the problems that we have in this country if that were the case! We need to put Jesus you in the schools.
“You lucky I ain’t read wretched yet!”
Typical Lax Dad
Posts: 32140
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Typical Lax Dad »

“You lucky I ain’t read wretched yet!”
Typical Lax Dad
Posts: 32140
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Typical Lax Dad »

“You lucky I ain’t read wretched yet!”
a fan
Posts: 17713
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:05 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by a fan »

a fan wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:55 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:42 pm
a fan wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:39 pm
Peter Brown wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:31 pm Since a fan cuts up posts to lose the dialogue to recast threads (a very dishonest practice btw), I’ll repost my previous post to keep things honest in replying to him.

If the football players were forced to pray at midfield, you’d have a point. They weren’t, and you don’t.

On the other hand, the very young children in school with gender queer theory instruction and drag Queen story hours are forced to participate. There’s no out. They are quite literally trapped inside a classroom and the LGBTQIA nonsense is an actual part of the curriculum.

:roll: :roll:
:lol: So now you're fine with government employees discussing gender theory so long as they tell the kids that it's optional to hear what they say?

:lol: You're LYING, Pete. You'd lose your mind if that happened. "Well, we told the children that they were welcome to leave". :lol: Right.


BTW, my obviously closeted friend.......the drag Queen story hours have happened at Libraries, not schools. And naturally, you told us that that was wrong, and shouldn't be allowed.
Actually you’re wrong. Most of the complaints by parents have been precisely because there was no notification nor out.
:lol: Libraries don't have doors? And what's the "out" at the Football game, Pete? If I'm a taxpayer, I have to sit there and watch prayer on my taxpayer field, by my employee that I'm paying to pray to kids.

But you don't care, because you approve of the indoctrination.
Aaaaand, as usual, Petey runs away, unable to justify his fake position.
a fan
Posts: 17713
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:05 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by a fan »

youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:49 am Might be informative and save one of the kids.
This is VERBATIM why teachers and counselors want to teach kids that being gay is ok. Suicides and misery through the roof. Non stop bullying, both verbal and physical.

Might help your understanding to ponder on that.
User avatar
youthathletics
Posts: 14435
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by youthathletics »

a fan wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 5:16 pm
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:49 am Might be informative and save one of the kids.
This is VERBATIM why teachers and counselors want to teach kids that being gay is ok. Suicides and misery through the roof. Non stop bullying, both verbal and physical.

Might help your understanding to ponder on that.
+1 Thank you.
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
a fan
Posts: 17713
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:05 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by a fan »

youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 6:17 pm
a fan wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 5:16 pm
youthathletics wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:49 am Might be informative and save one of the kids.
This is VERBATIM why teachers and counselors want to teach kids that being gay is ok. Suicides and misery through the roof. Non stop bullying, both verbal and physical.

Might help your understanding to ponder on that.
+1 Thank you.
Thank you for sharing YOUR perspective.

I'm the guy who wouldn't bat an eye at your Lax Tshirt example. But I AM a guy who would make doggone sure that if that was ok in the community....so would a rainbow on that shirt. Or a BLM sticker. If the INTENT is to support our kids, and make them feel loved and protected? Sign me up.

The question I'd like you to ponder is: would your community support that same Rainbow Tshirt without complaint. If the answer is yes, good on ya. If the answer is "no" (and we both know that's a no-go in many of our communities)....now you know why the left is fighting for their rights, and in many cases, fighting for their lives.
User avatar
old salt
Posts: 17508
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:44 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by old salt »

a fan wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:07 am
old salt wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 9:27 am
Typical Lax Dad wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 9:25 am
old salt wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 9:22 am
Typical Lax Dad wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 9:17 am …..Reduced to 40% to offset the 401K type match that was implemented. Not sure what you are poor mouthing about. I said nobody that I know complained about retiring after 20 years in. Lived in a town where one of the few opportunities was on am Air Force Base. My best friend retired from the USAF and went into private security.
Not poor mouthing at all. Responding to the cheap shot that tax dollars were needed to pay for it.
I didn’t bring up tax dollars (this time). Another colleague’s son is a top gun fighter pilot. I am going to ask him how quickly is he leaving (if he hasn’t already) to go to work for United.
Read the thread before you butted in. I was responding to the cheap shot that " our money " is needed to pay for "your pension".
:lol: That's what you think happened? Who made it personal first, OS? Who snidely brought up what I do for a living?

If you think my return of fire was a cheap shot....you owe me an apology for starting it with your own cheap shot.

I thought your comment was made in jest, to give me a hard time....so I returned the favor. Didn't know you had ill intent.
What are you talking about ? I'm not sure what you do for a living. Do you get paid to troll this forum ?
Post Reply

Return to “POLITICS”