Children are safer at drag shows than in church

Not for nothing

Super Anarchist
3,689
901
jupiter
FDR, would have been banned from schools in Florida.
also Hoover(FBI) was known to be a transvestite
 

SloopJonB

Super Anarchist
71,078
13,864
Great Wet North
I remember in 1958 there was a centennial celebration in our neighbourhood park. One of the performances was a hula dance by a bunch of the dad's dressed up in grass skirts, bras etc. etc. Full Polynesian drag.

Somehow, despite the embarrassment, we kids survived with our psyches and sexuality intact.
 

Mike G

Super Anarchist
8,936
3,318
Ventura County, CA
I would just like to say that although it's horrible that people use their religion to gain access and trust of children, and did unspeakable things to them probably scarring them for life, I do not hold whatever religion Alan H belongs to responsible because Michelangelo, who painted stuff.
 

Voyageur

Super Anarchist
4,690
1,244
On The Borderline
That's so unfair. Why aren't you publishing about the kids abused at Drag shows?
grooming is, hugely, much worse. if you, looked at photos of the 1/6 tourists, you would understand, what i am trying to get, at.
1675039066996.png

and the jogger, which bathroom? obviously no balls.
1675039136083.png
 

Alan H

Super Anarchist
3,736
997
SF Bay Area
Hey Keith, I see your post about the Texas pastors who abused kids. That's horrific. If it's true, I hope those motherfuckers spend the next 30 years in Federal prison.

Hey, did you see this one, about a Catholic church in Texas housing recent immigrants?


Hey, did you see this one about the church in Martha's Vinyard that took care of the immigrants that Ron DeSantis sent from Florida?


Hmmmm...wow. A church that supports gun control. Those Catholic guys must've taken some time off from sodomizing everyone within reach to make some statements about gun control.

Really? MORMONS banning guns? Who'd a thunk it?


Wow...nonchurch Christian street ministry has been operating in Seattle for 50 years, housing and feeding homeless people but you've never heard of it.

 

Alan H

Super Anarchist
3,736
997
SF Bay Area
I would just like to say that although it's horrible that people use their religion to gain access and trust of children, and did unspeakable things to them probably scarring them for life, I do not hold whatever religion Alan H belongs to responsible because Michelangelo, who painted stuff.
All you allow yourself to see is the bad, as I've pointed out in this thread. You, and most people here in PA, equate the good, if you even consider that there might be any, with "Hitler made good roads". You're impervious to any good that gets done, you absolutely refuse to see it, even though it's right in front of your face.

I can't MAKE you see it, but your refusal to acknowledge the good that's there, right along with the bad, doesn't mean the good stuff doesn't exist.

I'm not going down this road again, here on SA-PA. I've pointed out twenty times that 1.) yes, there's terrible stuff, but there is also good, like all human institutions and 2.) that just because some Christians do awful stuff; carry AR-15's and march around with red baseball caps on, or worse....like abuse kids, does not mean that all Christians do those things.

...but almost nobody in PA can bring themselves to understand those two incredibly simple points. It's like it would just KILL most of you to admit that those two facts are true. Most of you just refuse to even consider it. Most of the time PA'ers change the subject or deflect, or move on to something totally unrelated. It happens over and over and over again, and it boggles my mind, but I'm not responsible for this degree of closed-mindedness.
 
Last edited:

Lark

Supper Anarchist
9,884
1,929
Ohio
All you allow yourself to see is the bad, as I've pointed out in this thread. You, and most people here in PA, equate the good, if you even consider that there might be any, with "Hitler made good roads". You're impervious to any good that gets done, you absolutely refuse to see it, even though it's right in front of your face.

I can't MAKE you see it, but your refusal to acknowledge the good that's there, right along with the bad, doesn't mean the good stuff doesn't exist.

I'm not going down this road again, here on SA-PA. I've pointed out twenty times that 1.) yes, there's terrible stuff, but there is also good, like all human institutions and 2.) that just because some Christians do awful stuff; carry AR-15's and march around with red baseball caps on, or worse....like abuse kids, does not mean that all Christians do those things.

...but almost nobody in PA can bring themselves to understand those two incredibly simple points. It's like it would just KILL most of you to admit that those two facts are true. Most of you just refuse to even consider it. Most of the time PA'ers change the subject or deflect, or move on to something totally unrelated. It happens over and over and over again, and it boggles my mind, but I'm not responsible for this degree of closed-mindedness.
‘Look at us being decent people. We hardly ever bugger children.’ I think your defense needs a little work If you want to hold religious behavior as superior to human behavior in general. If Christians behave no better then agnostics, what’s the point of tithing and hanging around in churches on sailing days?
 

Alan H

Super Anarchist
3,736
997
SF Bay Area
‘Look at us being decent people. We hardly ever bugger children.’ I think your defense needs a little work If you want to hold religious behavior as superior to human behavior in general. If Christians behave no better then agnostics, what’s the point of tithing and hanging around in churches on sailing days?
It's like you didn't even read what I wrote....at all. Where did I claim that "religious behavior" is superior to human behavior in general? Where? How many times have I written that religious history is chockablock with horrific shit...like Texas pastors abusing kids? Ten? Twenty? Fifty?

And then you go and change the subject AGAIN, to go off on tithing and hanging out in church on sailing days.... UTTERLY IGNORING the two simple points I have tried to make at least twenty times in two different threads here on PA.

It's incredible. If I tattooed those two points on your eyeballs you STILL couldn't see them, and if you did, you'd A.) deny that they existed and B.) try to change the subject again. I'll say this, though. Thanks for the perfect example you just posted, of how impossible it is to communicate even the simplest idea about "religion" here in PA.
 

Mike G

Super Anarchist
8,936
3,318
Ventura County, CA
Sometimes, when EVERYBODY is just not able to see YOUR point, either it's not really a valid point, or your way of communicating it is off.

Like the old joke where the lady calls her husband as he's driving home from work..
"Honey...be careful...I saw on the news there's a wrong-way driver on the 405 freeway."
Husband replies "It's not just one, it's everybody driving the wrong way."
 

Alan H

Super Anarchist
3,736
997
SF Bay Area
Sometimes, when EVERYBODY is just not able to see YOUR point, either it's not really a valid point, or your way of communicating it is off.

Like the old joke where the lady calls her husband as he's driving home from work..
"Honey...be careful...I saw on the news there's a wrong-way driver on the 405 freeway."
Husband replies "It's not just one, it's everybody driving the wrong way."
Or maybe, just maybe, I'm talking to a population of people who aren't nearly as open-minded as they think they are...'cause you know, laying out points like this:

1.) ---------- 2.) -----------

is really not that hard to understand, and that's exactly what I did, four posts up..'Matter of fact, Mike G. I bet you don't even know what points 1.) ---- and 2.) ---- are, despite me writing them uncountable many times, and even after FYT laid them out for Clean.... Clean didn't "get" them, either.

But you know, while it seems completely insane to me, in the big scheme of things, it doesn't really matter very much. So carry on, Mike G and Lark and most of the rest of y'all. Two, three, maybe four folks have actually figured out what those points are and why they're relevant to the OP's title of this thread.
 
Last edited:

Fah Kiew Tu

Curmudgeon, First Rank
10,661
3,645
Tasmania, Australia
Or maybe, just maybe, I'm talking to a population of people who aren't nearly as open-minded as they think they are...'cause you know, laying out points like this:

1.) ---------- 2.) -----------

is really not that hard to understand, and that's exactly what I did, four posts up..

You're preaching to the willfully ignorant, sorry, but the crowd here has its fixed ideas and nothing is going to change them.

They do the same shit to firearms owners despite the statistics on actual abuse. Same as religion, the abusers don't get a pass and certainly shouldn't, but the statistics clearly say that the overwhelming majority of firearms owners are peaceful, law abiding citizens who happen to own guns.

Funny thing is, YOU keep saying that you're anti-gun yourself. Kind of funny while you're bitching about how a very small percentage of religious people abusing kids gets everyone tarred with the abuser brush.

As an Aussie I have no skin in this game and think it's funny, but - I have no skin in the game, so I can.

FKT
 

Alan H

Super Anarchist
3,736
997
SF Bay Area
You're preaching to the willfully ignorant, sorry, but the crowd here has its fixed ideas and nothing is going to change them.

They do the same shit to firearms owners despite the statistics on actual abuse. Same as religion, the abusers don't get a pass and certainly shouldn't, but the statistics clearly say that the overwhelming majority of firearms owners are peaceful, law abiding citizens who happen to own guns.

Funny thing is, YOU keep saying that you're anti-gun yourself. Kind of funny while you're bitching about how a very small percentage of religious people abusing kids gets everyone tarred with the abuser brush.

As an Aussie I have no skin in this game and think it's funny, but - I have no skin in the game, so I can.

FKT
Yeah, the "gun issue" is complex. I completely understand why gun owning folks get pissed off when they get tarred with the same brush as murderers. Yes, I support massively more restrictive gun laws, but at least I can see that "the other side" has a reasonable argument. I can recognize that there are huge numbers of responsible, reasonable, law abiding gun owners who would be affected by seriously stronger gun and ammunition laws.

The difference is that I can recognize:

1.) The issue is not black and white. One side of the argument is not ALL RIGHT and the other side is ALL WRONG. There are lots of gun owners who do good work in their communities and who are serious about gun safety and security. I recognize that.

2.) That millions of reasonable, decent, law abiding gun owners exist, and they don't like being painted with one brush that makes every gun owner out to be a mindless, bloody murderer.

But here on PA, the majority of respondents to these threads, you being a remarkable exception, cannot do the same, if the topic is religion instead of guns. They just can't. It seems SO simple, and yet.....

But whatever. It is what it is.
 

Fah Kiew Tu

Curmudgeon, First Rank
10,661
3,645
Tasmania, Australia
But here on PA, the majority of respondents to these threads, you being a remarkable exception, cannot do the same, if the topic is religion instead of guns. They just can't. It seems SO simple, and yet.....

But whatever. It is what it is.

Yep. Ask Tendentious Tom on that one. I read his contributions to the civil asset forfeiture, qualified immunity and abuse of eminent domain with interest. Mainly to recognise and react if there's any suggestion that that shit gets introduced here.

Yet here - crickets. Because Tom is such a tiresome PITA over his pwecious 22LR people I'd EXPECT as self-identified 'liberals' to be screaming about such egregious abuse say nothing. Because they can't bring themselves to agree with Tom on anything, ever. In fact Tom lives in Olsonist's head as deeply embedded as it's possible to be such that Olsonist has to keep mentioning Tom all the time. That's pretty funny and I do wonder if Olsonist realises how much Tom owns him.

Anyway...

I spent a lot of my life designing software and databases so I tend to think in terms of predicate logic, set theory and the like. I can distinguish between 'ALL', 'SOME', 'FEW', 'ONE' and 'NONE' (though SOME and FEW are value judgements of course absent a definition on percentages or similar). A lot here can't - they automatically equate 'A FEW' with 'ALL' and proceed accordingly.

You're not going to change their minds because either they can't change their opinions (al la Meli) or are unwilling to do so for fear of losing face.

Shrug.

This place is an entertaining & ongoing shit-fight as far as I'm concerned and worth little emotional investment.

FKT
 

Fah Kiew Tu

Curmudgeon, First Rank
10,661
3,645
Tasmania, Australia
If Alan just keeps ignoring folks, eventually he won’t have anyone to chat with but FKT. Ah well.
Yeah well I only agree with him that all religious people aren't child abusers.

I'm firmly in the camp of taking all tax exemptions off of them or at best treating them like any other not for profit charity and insist they stay out of politics, including preaching political sermons.

FKT
 

Goodvibes

under the southern cross I stand ...
1,554
478
Women were not allowed to be on the stage because it was considered "dangerous." Men played male characters as well as female characters! "The Greeks believed that allowing women to perform publicly would be too dangerous and that having men portray them neutralized the danger."

to get around that the Euros created Ballet and got them to wear as little as possible and do the splits as ofter as possible. Trained them to get on their toes till they bled and deformed to make it more affective.
 
Top