//Therefore I don't believe ALL kids should be indoctrinated with a gay ideology//

What on earth is a gay ideology?

//This isn't because I'm some anti-gay / pro religious nut-job, which I'm not.//

I never said you were pro-religious.

//Nor am I actually the most gullible man in space and time//

I have yet to see any evidence to support that hypothesis.

//It's simply because I do not believe these kinds of things should be forced upon young kids or discussed at length by people other than parents.//

What, that there are queer people in the world? Well, gosh, we wouldn't kids to learn that. Any other groups of people you think educators should lie to kids about and pretend don't exist? I vote for Scientologists and conspiracy theorists: because if we just sweep them under the rug and pretend they're not there they'll just go away, right Armchair Critic?

//that system is indoctrination of children with a biased sexual agenda//

Teaching kids that being queer is okay is a 'biased sexual agenda'? Oh dear. You've really let the cat out of the bag there, haven't you? So much for not hating queers.

I don't support this system of indoctrination of children with a biased hand-dominance agenda pushed onto kids who aren't ready for it because of a few kids in a minority group who are just as likely raised by left-handed parents. We shouldn't be teaching kids that left-handedness is okay just because a handful of those disgusting freaks claim that they deserve the same respect as us normal right-handed people. I don't mind if they practice their nasty left-handed perversions in private, but once they asking to be treated the same way as normal people they've crossed a line.

//whom are just as likely raised by same sex parents//

What does anybody's parenting have to do with anything?

//If gays think that's ok, they've crossed the line//

What line have they crossed?

//Give me a system that works that doesn't rely on 'retraining' the minds of others in such a way that says "It's not us gays that own the problem, it's everyone else."//

What problem do gays 'own'? Being queer? That's not a problem, Armchair Critic.

The fact that you think it is tells me exactly what kind of unpleasant little toad you are.

//The second they start promoting the idea that its everyone else's fault for acknowledging they are different instead of them for actually being different//

And now you're going to blame the victim. Nice. Because homophobia is all really the queer's fault for being queer in the first place, right Armchair Critic?

Toni Lavis:

“The fact that you think it is tells me exactly what kind of unpleasant little toad you are.”

The fact that you say this tells us what a gutless coward you are. Dismissing someone like that is a refusal to deal with his arguments for no other reason than that you think he is a toad. You have tried to respond to some of his arguments but you also dismiss him as a toad.

Dismissing him as a toad gives you an excuse to avoid having to deal with his arguments. It is the same thing with labelling people as homophobic. “I do not have to argue with you because you are clearly incapable of seeing reason. You are blinded by the dark mist of your homophobia” Just label someone and then slink off into your own little world where there is no opposition to your views.

If you do not agree with the toad then you have two options. You can just ignore him or you can engage with his arguments and just his arguments. You do neither when you call him a toad. You are interested in his arguments to a point where you are confident in your arguments but then you resort to trying to dismiss him as a person not worthy of rational argument.

You either hide behind the purpose of the forum, which is to exchange arguments, in order to belittle him because you are too afraid to engage with his arguments or you do not have the courage of your convictions that he is indeed incapable of rational argument in which case you would ignore him. Either way you are a coward.

Poirot,

I know that you are trying to divert this into an issue about guns, however, the difference in weapon would have meant fewer casualties, but would not have changed the motivation nor have prevented the attack.

Notably automatic weapons and explosives are not available in France or Belgium either, but were smuggled in.

Look everyone,
There's always another angle to every argument.
I could argue that the reason people are killed in mass shootings is because they were unarmed.

But you guys are all missing the elephant in the room.
I think you have all ignored it long enough and its time to take things seriously.
Respectfully, you can all make fun of me being a conspiracy theorist all you want but don't deprive yourself of the knowledge you need to become informed.

Paul Craig Roberts worked in the Whitehouse under Reagan and he openly questions whether the Orlando Shooting event actually occurred.
When people with this much respect start saying things like this its time to take the idea a little more seriously than if I'd said it alone.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/06/14/my-several-million-readers-are-unable-to-help-me-prove-the-official-story/

THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THE EVENT ACTUALLY OCCURRED.
Sorry for using caps, but it's really about time you ALL took the blinkers off.
Don't you all realise you're being had by these events?
And acting exactly the way they want you to act.

Focussed on this 'nothing' issue (You can't bring back the dead if there were people killed) and arguing amongst yourself over petty aspects of an event which may have been staged?

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/06/20/orlando-wrap-up-paul-craig-roberts/

I told you all nearly 2 weeks ago this thing stunk, and that was just at first glance.
Why do you think I said it?
Will not the possibility of being taken for a fool not prompt you people to investigate properly?

You people need to get out of your deluded dream states.
And you should be insulted it come from a tin-foil hat wearer like me.

The term 'conspiracy theorist' was coined so that regular people like many of you wouldn't look at certain things, and remain useful idiots.

SM,

Where's the link?