HomeskillitMoorman

It's not. It's also met so many times with "well do you want to go back to the drought years???" As if these are the only two options. With a decline in playoff success the last two years while the coach on his side of the ball has been given an elite level of resources and has failed us tremendously every single year in the playoffs. I understand what you're saying but I do think it's more complicated than that. There is an expectation of going all the way when you have an elite QB.

If nothing else it'll be fun times. It's only going to get more intense if we have another disastrous McDermott Meltdown.

You should really keep your constant homophobic crying and whining and victimhood about LGBTQ and Pride in the Politics section. Nobody's forcing you to be gay or celebrate anything. I have a LOT of issues with Christianity and the Church and how a lot of that community operates...but I have no problem with Pegula or McD himself celebrating themselves being Christian. That's their right, just like it is someone who is gay and wants to celebrate the freedom to do so and have simple things like marriage available to them that they didn't for the longest time. I'm not being forced to be Christian or celebrate Christianity just because they are, just like you aren't being forced to be gay or celebrate gayness. I have the option to not read or seek more information out about Sean's Christian beliefs, you have the option to do the same about anyone else. If McDermott is happier because of his Christianity or Saleh is because of his Muslim-(ness?) and if they want to talk about it and create prayer circles before and after games in front of everyone, I don't think it matters what I think of any of it, rock on. Same if someone wants to wear a Pride patch. It could literally be this simple if everyone was willing to do that.

There was no need to do this with McD. We can't win a SB with this guy.

It's amazing to me that either side still believes in the polls

You've seriously held a stock for 6 years with a -1.25% loss? And you're just holding it? You could literally just throw that in like Apple or Microsoft and get at least a 30% return just about every year, with the low end probably being in the 20's. Over a 6 year period those companies have to be giving you at least a 200% return if not considerably more. You could even put it into a ridiculously safe ETF and get at least 10-15% on the year if you wanted no risk at all. This message appalls me.

One of the issues I have is this though, people keep trying to make anything about homosexuals into a trans conversation. I completely agree with not pushing kids on any kind of surgeries or even pushing a certain ideology onto them to push them into thinking they are something they may not be. I do believe that religious people do the same exact thing though, the conservatives just don't have a problem with that because they agree with that ideology. So for them it's not the indoctrination that's the actual issue, it's the subject matter. I think at that point they should just say that. Someone else brought this up about the "intended" way of things...you seem to at least be more practical about it when you say when they are old enough to follow their personal feelings they can go for it...OK, I don't really have a problem with that. I don't also think it's a problem if a parent simply doesn't push them in any direction and tells their kid it's OK to be straight or gay, whatever ends up happening. A question I have is lets say someone who has same sex attraction actually agrees with you or whoever else about the "intended" way of life, that if for example if it is a woman that simply is not attracted to men and does not want a male partner even if she acknowledges it was likely meant for her to be with a man. What exactly is that person supposed to do at that point? I don't remember any kind of seminal moment where I as a male chose to be attracted to females. It was just there at some point. But what I do know is I would not be able to change it. If the script was flipped and it was the "natural and intended" thing to be with a same-gender partner, I would absolutely not be able to force myself or somehow change my attraction to males. I guess I'm just not sure what impact the whole "this is the intended way of life" spiel would have.

Of course not, I have major issues with both sides, not just one

The Catholic Church has not paid the proper price for its cover up and scandals...it literally is STILL protecting Priests that abused children today, as we speak. Some are still on their income with money from an institution that isn't even taxed. You turn it into me saying we should look the other way on the group that's pushing trans surgeries on kids when I have said about a million times here than I'm against that. But I also have the ability to call everyone out on all sides. If I looked up the history of your posts, am I going to see you calling out all sides or is it going to be at least 95% if not more directed at one side? I won't even do it, I'll just let you answer yourself. This is political for you, it has nothing to do with kids being sexualized because if it was, you would be attacking it on all sides. It's a simple as that. I'm not anti-Christian or Catholic, in fact a lot of my argument here is that we shouldn't judge anyone who wave a Pride flag and lump them in with the small group of extremists that are pushing agendas on kids the same way we shouldn't judge all Catholics or Christians by their church's corrupt actions that are probably driven by a small percentage of their entirety as well. If you did an honest critique of what the composite your posts look like, you would see a blatant agenda of calling out one side and having a blind eye to the other. I'm Independent. I think both political parties are corrupt and in some cases downright evil. I don't believe many liberals and conservatives even know what those things really mean. But the big divide and people blaming the other side while enabling their own side is EXACTLY what the elites that you claim you hate want from you. You are literally acting like their pawn.

Getting rid of McDermott doesn't mean we're rebuilding. There are so many examples of teams that fired a coach that couldn't get them over the top and hired someone new that got them there. Some coaches just don't have it in them to go all the way. McDermott is one of them.

He’s already not there for the entirety though

What are you hearing about it?

He's not wrong about the defense part. McDermott has had incredible resources poured into his defense and has been a major disappointment with it, especially against good competition.

This is so silly. Why do you conflate someone being critical of McDermott to their overall outlook on life? There could be people who are very optimistic people that don't like McDermott as a coach or people that are very negative about life that love him as a coach. Also, this whole thing about "positive" threads...is that what a fun message board would be for you, where everyone just thinks the exact same thing as you? That sounds really boring to me. I'm really glad there's people that have different opinions. It can also challenge what I think because I choose to be open-minded and don't go into a thread or create one because I'm aiming for it to be positive or negative. But it would be flat out boring as hell if everyone just thought the same exact thing about everything.

I think someone would have to be a really good Kamikaze candidate to shift the way campaigns work. I'm not sure there are enough open-minded people who haven't already decided who they're going to vote for that exist for that to happen.

That's not the issue, there should be outrage to the abusers on both sides. But the expectations the people affiliated with these groups on both sides has become inherently different. People who are affiliated with Pride in any way are being lumped in with the offenders much more than the Catholic who still chooses to go to and promote the Catholic Church. Look at some of these threads here themselves, anyone who is even just an adult gay person in a consensual relationship with another gay person is being labeled as perverse because of the extremists on their side. Who is doing that to Catholic Church members? I'm not saying people should, I'm saying there is a double standard here.

I think it's kind of funny. I don't even think Christie was a hired gun though, I think he's doing this just because of his own personal grudges...which makes it even better. I don't even think he's wrong really, Trump did do him dirty.

But for some reason, not all Christians and Catholics are lumped in with them. As they shouldn't be. But anyone who waves a Pride flag is lumped in with the worst of their group. That's what the context was behind that, if you actually read what people are saying in between your postings of propaganda.

Unless of course, it's Pastors and Priests coming for their kids...then that side stays silent

Well the first part is good, I'm glad you don't judge all who wear the Pride flag. The rest of this basically proves my point. You're being reductionary now and making this specifically about reading books to 1st graders or promoting irreversible sex change (which I agree both are very wrong and I'm against). You're saying you want to see a loud and stern condemnation of the veteran leaders in the LGBTQ community for the sexualization of children. Fair enough. But this is the SAME EXACT THING, if not much worse, that the Catholic Church is guilty of. There ARE receipts of Priests sexually abusing little boys and received protection, room, and board from the Catholic Church, and yet people still go to that church, adorn their gear, and PROMOTE it. Why is it that in your eyes, the members of the LGBTQ community have to shoulder the responsibility of excommunicating the disgusting extreme MORESO than the members of the Catholic Church in excommunicating theirs?? There are Christian pastors who have done the exact same thing, where is the outrage from this side about that? I'm not saying you're defending it, I'm saying you have very selective outrage and that it's politically driven. The Conservative media and the people that follow them are guilty of the exact same thing the Liberal media and their followers are. Are you denying that if someone went through your history, there would be lots of posts about Trans stuff but hardly any if at all about things that happen on the other side? I'm not going to do it, I'll just take your word for it. From all the people here like yourself and the others that constantly post about Trans issues from the Conservative side, do you think there was any talk here about the almost 700 kids that were found to be sexually abused by Priests in Baltimore a few months ago? I have no issue saying that many of the leaders of the Left and Right or the LGBTQ+ and the Churches disgustingly protect their own in the face of some of the worst things humans can do to each other. Many people here will quote or post things from Matt Walsh who thinks anyone who even associates with Pride is disgusting...this is someone who publicly promotes the Catholic Church...the Church that protects KNOWN child abusers. I'm not saying you have used him...but how does this make any sense?? There's a clear double standard here. If you guys care about protecting the kids so much, why is it only from very specific things that only come from the political opposition? That's the disturbing part here, this isn't about the kids for a lot of you here, it's about political partisanship.

I disagree that it's "perverse" by definition. The one I found is "showing a deliberate and obstinate desire to behave in a way that is unreasonable or unacceptable", I don't think that's what two same-gender people having sex is. Maybe you do or you have a different definition of the word, I don't know. But let me ask you again...what if someone who is homosexual actually agrees with you that heterosexuality is the "natural order", but they don't have that attraction, they themselves are simply naturally attracted to the same gender and it didn't happen by choice and they are simply seeking a same-sex adult consensual relationship? What exactly do you want or expect for them to do? From the origins of it, I don't think it was necessarily a celebration of being gay, moreso a celebration that you could be gay and still have the same rights and be treated like anyone else. Have a small, very loud faction of that group made demands for more? Yes, but unfortunately people are lumping in the entire community as that because of them. You can make any "group" look bad if you judge them all by the extremists within it, whether it's religious, political, even sports fanbases, literally anything. And again, I agree about pushing ideologies onto kids being wrong, I've said that consistently. To your other thing about "phobic", the difference is if I don't like Taylor Swift, I don't say she's somehow perverse if she's not actually doing something perverse, I just don't like her music. It's different if you say two dudes having sex is gross to you personally. A gay person might feel the exact same way that two opposite gender people going at it in their minds is gross.

Everyone who makes the “lesser of two evils” vote is part of the problem though. And yes, I do realize I’m calling the majority of the country part of the problem.

This dudes married to Cheryl from Curb Your Enthusiasm...that might be enough to get my vote!

To call it "sexually perverse" is homophobic. When did I argue that the biological design for human procreation isn't heterosexuality? That doesn't mean homosexual relationships are wrong, just like it's not wrong for heterosexual couples to not have kids if they don't want to. Nobody owes it to anyone else to procreate, there is no obligation for anyone to do that. Also, if someone is gay and they agree that is the biological design...do you think that changes their attraction?

I said homophobe because you literally called a homosexual relationship "sexually perverse". What's perverse about 2 consenting same-gender adults having sex? Lets say for a second that someone who is homosexual agreed with you that it's not the "natural norm". Would that change who they personally are naturally attracted to? Would you be able to change your sexual attraction on a dime? For someone who is in that position, what does acknowledging that do? I would agree that we largely are not in times where safe spaces are needed anymore. But we're not that far removed from when they were for people that were gay. And it literally hasn't even been a decade since they finally got the right to marry across the board. The whole thing was created to fight for those rights and give people those safe spaces when they were more needed and what they do now is probably more of a celebration of how far things have come. Although when listening to people like you, I think they probably second-guess how far we as people have actually come. You're attaching the extremists that target kids to anyone who is gay or on any part of the LGBTQ+ spectrum. I haven't defended any of that and actually agree with people about that being wrong. You called it "sexually perverse" even when it had nothing to do with kids because you think it's intrinsically perverse. It doesn't matter if I think it should be celebrated or if it deserves its own month. We live in a free country. You're not being forced to attend Pride parades. You're not being forced to be gay or go to gay weddings. You are free to start a grassroots movement if you want to celebrate something you like for a month if you want to, or you don't have to. You are free to sit back and whine about the things you don't like as well, which you are exercising. So really what's the problem?