Catholic School Board
Although I know that Catholicism has roots in homophobia, the fact that such ideals are placed in schools is unbelievable. A couple years ago, a teacher of mine (not naming for confidentiality reasons) had a student that did a slideshow on gay rights for the project they all had to do. The teacher stood up for his project even though the school took strong issue with it. In the next couple of weeks the teacher got fired... Not only that but the school said she had to resign or they would make it very hard for her to find a job. The reason for doing so is that they didn't want anybody to know that it was because of gay rights.
This is just one of the many moments where the catholic school board has been strongly homophobic and nobody bats an eye. The worst part is, I'm pretty sure it's illegal. If the same thing happened about racism, the school would be brought to justice but just because it's sexuality, there's some "wiggle room". It's even in tests, on my end of year test it literally said that homosexuals can't get into heaven because they can't appreciate life. smh.
This is just one of the many moments where the catholic school board has been strongly homophobic and nobody bats an eye. The worst part is, I'm pretty sure it's illegal. If the same thing happened about racism, the school would be brought to justice but just because it's sexuality, there's some "wiggle room". It's even in tests, on my end of year test it literally said that homosexuals can't get into heaven because they can't appreciate life. smh.
Comments117
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
They claim to be against gays yet they are all for raping little boys. How odd.
Gay+priest=gay priest, simple really
Funny, but true.
Bless O Lord, his staff of life,
Cuz this holyroller ain' got no wife,
instead this gay priest gets his joy,
from butthumpin' the po' altarboy...
And watch out - when AspiePie (the pedo/cat rape porn lover/magic pony lust perv) says he/she/it/whatever gets to fuck with you - it means in the buttmushical sense.
Bless O Lord, his staff of life,
Cuz this holyroller ain' got no wife,
instead this gay priest gets his joy,
from butthumpin' the po' altarboy...
And watch out - when AspiePie (the pedo/cat rape porn lover/magic pony lust perv) says he/she/it/whatever gets to fuck with you - it means in the buttmushical sense.
You back... Now I get to fuck with you again...
Its only religion and philosophy i've retired from
You will be harder to fuck with but I enjoy a challenge!
But they don't support raping little boys. That's the difference.
But they do it anyway.
? well yeah but I'm talking about christian principles not individuals actions
And I'm talking about the Priests who can't keep their dicks out of kids.
But saying that doesn't have much of a point. You're just sayin it.
Many of those priests are pedophiles.
View all replies
Ughs, gettired of people being accused of being 'homophobic' just because they don't agree with the practice -,-. Do you people understand what the heck that word means? The end part refers to 'fear', in other words, Homophobia translates into the fear of gays. People who disagree with gays (such as me) do not fear them, we just disagree with how they are going about the process. Seriously, stop accusing people of being fearful when they aren't.
You no doubt also "disagree" with people being Jewish. Why don't more Christians feel the need to voice this opinion alongside their opinion on gays?
Got no problems with Jewish people, I happen to know a few actually and they are quite good at their jobs. Which is why I disagree with the amount of hatred they get.
As far as gays are concerned, my negative opinion of them has more to do with their desire to force others to accept them; how they desire to live their lives and such is of no concern of mine, so long as they do not attempt to force it onto me (already had someone try that in the military, which is why I don't have a very favorable view of gays, having another male try and screw me while I am taking a shower isn't exactly a pleasant thought. And yes, I am well aware that this is an isolated incident, but it ain't easy getting over something like that.)
As far as gays are concerned, my negative opinion of them has more to do with their desire to force others to accept them; how they desire to live their lives and such is of no concern of mine, so long as they do not attempt to force it onto me (already had someone try that in the military, which is why I don't have a very favorable view of gays, having another male try and screw me while I am taking a shower isn't exactly a pleasant thought. And yes, I am well aware that this is an isolated incident, but it ain't easy getting over something like that.)
I see.
I now disagree with straight sex, since I know several women who have been raped by men.
I now disagree with straight sex, since I know several women who have been raped by men.
Hey if that's your choice, good on ya. Doesn't change the fact that people are losing their livlihood due to a group of militants who feel that it is their place to force private citizens to accept them.
So you disagree with homosexuality, or you disagree with the law forcing private Christian institutions to change their traditions?
I'm sure you'd be against the law forcing a priest to conduct a Jewish wedding. Would you then identify yourself as "I disagree with people being Jewish?"
I'm sure you'd be against the law forcing a priest to conduct a Jewish wedding. Would you then identify yourself as "I disagree with people being Jewish?"
First off, stop making assumptions.
I disagree with how the LGBT group is currently going about their movement. I also disagree with them going to the government and essentially trying (and in cases succeeding) to force private *hint: PRIVATE* businesses to serve them. It would be a completely different story if the business was owned by the government, but businesses are not - and the ones being targetted are privately operated - which means they are allowed to decide how *they* want to run their businesses.
Not to mention that this shows just how hypocritical the government really is. I'll give you an example, here in Vegas we have several black only businesses that won't serve white people. We also have a few Muslim businesses that won't serve Christians. So, why is it that the government is *only* going after businesses that won't serve gays? Hmmm? If the so called 'anti-discrimination laws' are supposed to prevenet discrimination, then why is our government not enforcing them fairly? This is why I do not agree with what is going on. IF, and I stress, IF - the law was being enforced fairly and equally across the board then I take another look at these bakeries; but as it stands the law isn't being fairly enforced.
Although one thing I will mention, several of these bakeries that had their calls recorded by these militants were never INFORMED that they were being recorded (which, in some states, is required by LAW in order to be used in court) I'll give you yet another example. In Nevada, you are not allowed to record a phone conversation without *first* informing the other party of doing so. Well, a few months ago a gay couple did just that by recording a conversation they had with a bakery here and attempted to use it against them by claiming discrimination, however, because they didn't inform the bakery that they were recording said call the case got thrown out and now that gay couple is facing charges.
I disagree with how the LGBT group is currently going about their movement. I also disagree with them going to the government and essentially trying (and in cases succeeding) to force private *hint: PRIVATE* businesses to serve them. It would be a completely different story if the business was owned by the government, but businesses are not - and the ones being targetted are privately operated - which means they are allowed to decide how *they* want to run their businesses.
Not to mention that this shows just how hypocritical the government really is. I'll give you an example, here in Vegas we have several black only businesses that won't serve white people. We also have a few Muslim businesses that won't serve Christians. So, why is it that the government is *only* going after businesses that won't serve gays? Hmmm? If the so called 'anti-discrimination laws' are supposed to prevenet discrimination, then why is our government not enforcing them fairly? This is why I do not agree with what is going on. IF, and I stress, IF - the law was being enforced fairly and equally across the board then I take another look at these bakeries; but as it stands the law isn't being fairly enforced.
Although one thing I will mention, several of these bakeries that had their calls recorded by these militants were never INFORMED that they were being recorded (which, in some states, is required by LAW in order to be used in court) I'll give you yet another example. In Nevada, you are not allowed to record a phone conversation without *first* informing the other party of doing so. Well, a few months ago a gay couple did just that by recording a conversation they had with a bakery here and attempted to use it against them by claiming discrimination, however, because they didn't inform the bakery that they were recording said call the case got thrown out and now that gay couple is facing charges.
View all replies
Phobias can include irrational aversions, not just fear.
And then there is the thing about words having colloquial meanings.
And then there is the thing about words having colloquial meanings.
It may be derived from fear but homophobia's definition is much different.
The literal definition is "The dislike and/or prejudice of homosexual people".
Don't act like you know what it means.
Also please explain why you disagree with the "practice" of homosexual love.
The literal definition is "The dislike and/or prejudice of homosexual people".
Don't act like you know what it means.
Also please explain why you disagree with the "practice" of homosexual love.
I don't mind if two men wanna screw each other, or two females wanna have sex, that's up to them. What I don't agree with is them targetting Christian businesses INTENTIONALLY and then forcing them out of business through the use of the government. That's what I disagree with.
Also, I do know what phobia means, which is why I find it rather disgusting that people accuse those who disagree with gays are somehow being afraid of them.
Also, I do know what phobia means, which is why I find it rather disgusting that people accuse those who disagree with gays are somehow being afraid of them.
So what you disagree with is homosexual people reacting to being attacked by the christian religion. Right I think I got it.
Also you just proved that you don't know what homophobic means. Phobic and homophobic are two different things. The word homophobic has developed into a word used to describe people that dislike gays. It's literal meaning is now rarely used. If you would like me to use different words though I could always say "Stupid entitled peices of shit that think they have a right to say things that are strongly against homosexuality and expect nobody to be offended because 'it's just their opinion'"
Also you just proved that you don't know what homophobic means. Phobic and homophobic are two different things. The word homophobic has developed into a word used to describe people that dislike gays. It's literal meaning is now rarely used. If you would like me to use different words though I could always say "Stupid entitled peices of shit that think they have a right to say things that are strongly against homosexuality and expect nobody to be offended because 'it's just their opinion'"
Awesome job, you just showed me that you really aren't interested in civil discourse. About what I'd expect from someone with little to no understanding of the dangers of what is going on with this movement. Now, your hurting my brain, so take care - maybe in the future you'll wake up and realize that the gay movement's constant usage of the government to BULLY private businesses will end up creating a very bad precedent in the future.