BellaOnline Forums News and Politics Gay/Lesbian News Breeders - the new N word

That is Liz, and she and I were at the MBGLTACC 2006 conference in South Dakota over the last weekend.

Thats us saying goodbye on Sunday afternoon. She's awesome, str8, with 3 kids but very supportive of the glbt community. She went to the conference to better educate herself on how she can be a better ally to the glbt community. I totally respect her for that!

BTW, that's the Midwest Bisexual Gay Lesbian Transgender Allied College Conference. It's the largest collegiate glbt conference in the US.

Jase ;0)

The whole topic of this thread is regarding "breeders" ( heterosexuals) in a gay/lesbian news forum ( homosexual). So naturally when you have BOTH in the same thread you are encouraging debate. My last post was in response to Megan's post on page 1. You are threatening to censor me simply because you DISAGREE with my views. I am threatening NO ONE. Megan DID threaten me on page one and she has received no warning. Of course, she agrees with your view. Censoring my silent words on a computer screen because you disagree with them says one of two things. Either you fear what I say or you are interested in silencing those who disagree with your view. I do not fear anyone's views and am more than willing to engage them. If you are incapable or unwilling to defend your views then they may not be worth defending. The essence of freedom is tolerating views you disagree with. Is there freedom of speech on this forum or not? Freedom cannot exist where censorship reigns.

Yes, but the point was that this topic was not about the pros and cons of sin and homosexuality. It was about the term breeders that turned into a personal attack on a member. I couldn't allow that and I hope you understand. I think it is obvious you did due to the recent more toned down responses in other topics on the forum.

Thanks!

Jase ;0)

(sorry have been having computer problems with posting abilities for a couple weeks.. so forgive me for posting about this so late ;0))

I stand by what I said that some people should be steralised at birth.There are so many unwanted children out there who are suffering because their "looser parents" dont give a toss about them.

What - do you think these types of people have a right to have kids? Who are you kidding?

you have to have a licence to keep a dog in some places and its just so sad the same does not apply to potential parents out there.

You get a license for a dog because it's a priviledge to have a dog( especially in the city). It is your right to have a child.

How do you determine who should be steralised at birth? How can you possibly know what sort of a person they will turn out to be or how their life will work out? Who are these 'types of people'? Just because a baby is born into a poor family doesn't mean they should have their right to bear children removed, that's social engineering and extremely distasteful. I have to agree with texasdave on this one, everyone has a right to have a child. If they turn out to be bad parents then obviously the state can intervene, but at least give people a chance!

I must agree with Divided. It is that sort of thing that leads to abuses by the state. Absolute power is a weapon of mass destruction in the hands of government.

The thing is, many of the CFers fling "breeder" out as a derogatory term for all moms--this after complaining about, and getting sympathy from moms on the forums--about moms referring to CFers as "barren", etc.

That's what burns.

****deleted due to forum violations (spamming)****

Breeders thats why i got on this site,, My fish are livebearing maniacs. they are "breeders". Hence, the name Platysaplenty.