As much as I dislike anti-gay, racism, etc, I have to say everyone has a right to their own opinion and I would fight for their right to speak freely, even if I disagree, as I expect the same right. That being said, this forum is not a "public" forum as it is commercially operated and privately owned and therefore has the right to place rules to reduce hostility and unnecessary attacks to help the forum maintain stability. When it comes to whether or not someone should be allowed to post "homophobic" (I quote as what may or may not be considered homophobic can be a gray area) remarks I say err on the side of caution. If you truly wish to convey your belief, you will acknowledged the large gay community on this forum and use tact to provide your feelings in a manner in which this community can acknowledge and potentially respect (regardless of agreement). To do otherwise would show lack of interest in discussion, merely the need to flaunt your opinion to instigate others. Mods will always side with homosexuals in an instance of potentially "hostile" posts in regards to homosexuality as the defense of ones' being is more valuable than of ones' opinion.

In response to op, it is important when creating law to be extremely clear in definition. While absolution is near impossible, this one is far to vague. If you wish to prevent children from being exposed to homosexuality in school, then it should specify. Propaganda can range from gay pride rallies to two men holding hands at a public park. How does this apply to content that is intended for adults, but could be accessed by children? Keeping true to the site, I'll use an example in video games. Should a game like Mass Effect be banned because it can potentially have homosexual relationships even though it is intended for a mature audience? How about flamboyant non-sexual gaming characters like Tingle? Its simply absurd. This bill potentially sets up a form of segregation and is easily a stepping stone for more serious restrictions.

@salnax
what about hunting wild animals?
why is it inhumane? pigs would probably like it

point is it's all a judgement call on different behaviors, everyone has their own opinion
don't impose your's on my children

Actually, on the topic of the animal subject, killing and eating animals has a purpose, having them spayed, nuetered, has a purpose. Having sex with animals has no purpose ...

I see you ignored the question about what you would do if your child turned out to be gay/lesbian.


Scenario A) you've got sex education that bans talk on homosexuality, your children are ... happy? No, you're happy ... but that struggling in the closet kid in the corner is terrified and scared noone is addressing how he's feeling, all because you don't want your children to know about homosexuality ...

Scenairio B) you've got sex education that explains homosexuality and that it's OK. The in the closet gay kid feels better about himself and feels he can talk to someone about it, and your kid ... well, probably doesn't give a fuck, you meanwhile ... rage at home because you don't want this 'belief' (really, it sounds soooo stupid calling it that but ok) taught to your children.

Bravo, so selfless of you.

'no, you simply cant come up with an inteligent argument against it. Why is gay sex alright if, sex between man and pet isnt? im sure pets quite enjoy the sex.'

I just did, there is no purpose to it, it's just an act of cruelty. And how do you know a pet would enjoy it?? scratch that, I don't want to know.

Outside of a few rednecks, people don't really approve of hunting nowadays. It's part of the morality society has created. The only instances where hunting is socially acceptable nowadays is when a human's livelihood is at stake (because we value humans over other animals, fair enough) or when not hunting the animals leads to more destruction (such as when hunting seasons are declared on invasive and unchecked species).

Maybe pigs would like to be fucked. However, we can't really ask them about it. Pigs can't talk.

The problem with "not imposing views" is that this is only possible in a society where nobody teaches eachother about anything. What if I don't want my kid to hear about American History, because I find the treatment of African slaves of the 1700's offensive? I can't ask the teachers at school to never bring up the topic. They have a duty to inform and educate. Some things, at very least, have to be acknowledged and explained.

That's not to say that homosexuality needs to be endorsed. It does, however, need to be explained to kids, or they are going to be bamboozled by 10% of the population. And the problem with outlawing "Gay Propaganda" is that anything can be called propaganda, one way or the other.

Just because there isn't consent doesn't mean there isn't purpose.

A lot of this is common sense, right and wrong, you're just delving into any example you can to prove your point.

There doesn't need to a be point to gay sex.

No, you just proving over and over you cant come up with an argument.

i never said i knew, and said i bet. based off the fact pets llike humans, and pets like sex.