Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsFriday, December 4, 2009
Homo Kentlake High School: A Learning Institution
Posted by Dominic Holden on Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:05 PM
Slog tipper Kevin points us to the The Falcon Flyer, the Kentlake High School's newspaper, which has a piece on the perils of giving gay people rights:
The recently approved Referendum 71 puts the norms of Washington’s society and culture at risk. Homosexual activists and proponents of the bill welcome the changes that accompany the bill, but are blind to the negative consequences that will ensue.Domestic partnerships will be a slippery slope. There exists doubt that homosexual couples will be content with their “partnerships” for long. They will fight for marriage and ruin the sacredness of the timehonored institution. Marriage has traditionally been affiliated with religion. Christians, Jews, Sikhs, Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, and followers of other religions each have their own marriage customs—none of them include the joining of two people of the same sex. ...
Allowing gay partnerships will also increase the number of long-term homosexual relationships. When people are in committed relationships, they want kids. The following studies seem to suggest that homosexuals are less suited for parenting.
Egads, "increase the number of long-term committed relationships"! Soon the gays will be volunteering for the block watch, contributing to homeless charities, and publicly be committing other good deeds! Suppress them before their true intentions of raising families are exposed! But to prove that gays are a menace to child rearing—if only every child could be raised by Britney Spears or an equally qualified heterosexual—the writer whips out this bulletproof fact from the reliable Family Research Institute:
The average life span of gay men that died of AIDS (which was the majority), was only 39 years, while the average life span of straight men was 75 years.
Not to agree with the anti-gay Family Research Institute, but I'm not surprised that gay men with AIDS, on average, die younger than most straight men. But I'll also go out on a twig here and guess that people with AIDS, on average, die younger than folks without AIDS. Just a hunch. Either way, if a couple is qualified to raise a child—a decision that should be made by the proper adoptions groups and parents—neither a phony "research" institute nor a high-school student have any business standing in their way.
Anyhow, the author is being eviscerated in comments. Meanwhile, another student has a piece praising Referendum 71.
1
Dominic, are you aware that homosexual males, at 1.7% of the population, are responsible for 59% of all new AIDS cases in America?
2
@1: Therefore, they should not be married?
Also, African American's have higher rates of sickle cell anemia.
Also, African American's have higher rates of sickle cell anemia.
4
Gays are only 1.7% of the population? Yeah sure they are.
I wonder what the % of new AIDS cases by legally married same-sex couples. That would be interesting.
I wonder what the % of new AIDS cases by legally married same-sex couples. That would be interesting.
5
All I know is I'm doing my part to teach the second graders (they learn so fast it's a joy) the Homo Agenda (not the radical version just the generic one). As I've mentioned in the past here on SLOG they will know the difference between Prada and KMart-Martha Stewart or WalMart (Str8 folks haven't a clue, hence WallMart is their store of choice). One of the main tenants of the Homo Agenda is of course to totally destroy marriage and replace it with AppleTini like drinks and other mixed booze cocktails (the mixed drink is the only nod to mixed sex marriage allowed). So that KentLake H.S. student was right on the mark. As soon as all Americans are treated equally (Gay, Str8, Black, White, Male, Female) per that filthy perversion of a rag known as the Constitution, all that will be left of America will be Broadway Show tunes, hair products, and fabulous garden parties. Please if you care about the children don't let that happen.
6
sorry the adults were talking over your heads, girls. not talking about marriage. Dom was musing about the effect of AIDS on homosexual life span.
7
Oh man, i love it when people quote paul cameron, because then you get to remind them that Cameron actually tells parents to encourage their teenagers to engage in heterosexual sex play as a method of warding off homosexuality!
I blogged about this a couple years ago: http://www.urbanhonking.com/holymoly/pro…
I blogged about this a couple years ago: http://www.urbanhonking.com/holymoly/pro…
8
I wish you motherfuckers with your Gay Agenda would learn the difference between Eastern and Pacific time. I keep missing all the meetings. At this rate I'm NEVER going to get to be a gay.
9
Kentlake should STFU and spend more time working on their own problems. I grew up in that area, and the king shit kids at the suburb/rural schools all go to the same Mormon/crazy Christian churches (speaking in tongues, anyone?). These kids are parroting what they hear at home and church, while on Friday and Saturday nights, they're drinking under the powerlines and fucking sans protection, because protection is a tool of the devil.
So homophobe it up, Kentlake. Once you escape Covington, you'll realize that attitude gets you nowhere in the big city.
So homophobe it up, Kentlake. Once you escape Covington, you'll realize that attitude gets you nowhere in the big city.
10
If you really want to excel as a Privileged Person® you need to learn to value data, statistics, research studies and empirical evidence above all things, but especially above Lived Experience©.
http://www.derailingfordummies.com/#opin…
11
I bet gay men with terminal cancer also die younger than the average straight man.
PS. Civil unions are not good enough. Only marriage is equal. So at least you're right about something.
PS. Civil unions are not good enough. Only marriage is equal. So at least you're right about something.
12
I think teh gays should infiltrate churches and indoctrinate the homosexual agenda into their kids during Sunday school. Besides, they probably need some people who won't rape their children at church.
13
Whoa, what's up with John McKellar and his self-loathing club? He thinks it's RUDE that gays want to push some legislation though to be able to get married! How gauche!
14
Um, is an article in a high school newspaper really news enough to link to on Slog? Even an anti-gay-marriage one that makes stupid arguments? This seems to me like the sort of point-counterpoint thing that happens all the time in high school newspapers.
I mean, teenagers have strong opinions, and many haven't totally refined their debate skills, so, it's not exactly shocking that the kid's article has some totally refutable arguments. It's probably a better idea to stick to cutting down the arguments people like Maggie Gallagher than some random kid. I know, I know, we need to fight ignorance everywhere it exists, but let the kids work it out on their own (the counterpoint guy seemed to do okay, right?) rather than involve a blog with the readership of Slog. The last thing we want is for Fox News to get ahold of something like the comments "eviscerating" a high school kid, and make him into some Carrie Prejean-esque figure.
I mean, teenagers have strong opinions, and many haven't totally refined their debate skills, so, it's not exactly shocking that the kid's article has some totally refutable arguments. It's probably a better idea to stick to cutting down the arguments people like Maggie Gallagher than some random kid. I know, I know, we need to fight ignorance everywhere it exists, but let the kids work it out on their own (the counterpoint guy seemed to do okay, right?) rather than involve a blog with the readership of Slog. The last thing we want is for Fox News to get ahold of something like the comments "eviscerating" a high school kid, and make him into some Carrie Prejean-esque figure.
15
Diabetics die earlier, on average, too.
So do obese people.
They're still allowed to get married.
And I love the way these guys sling around their assumptions about the marriage traditions of other religions. My religion has been marrying same-sex couples from the get-go, in every place it's been made legal. If freedom of religion is so damned important, why aren't the Shambhala Buddhists allowed to perform legal marriages, in accordance with our religious beliefs?
So do obese people.
They're still allowed to get married.
And I love the way these guys sling around their assumptions about the marriage traditions of other religions. My religion has been marrying same-sex couples from the get-go, in every place it's been made legal. If freedom of religion is so damned important, why aren't the Shambhala Buddhists allowed to perform legal marriages, in accordance with our religious beliefs?
16
Marriage hasn't been a religious institution since it fell under the regulation of the government. The sanctity of marriage disappeared hundreds of years ago.
17
@6- Just because you take on the attitude of someone who is much smarter than everyone else doesn't mean you're smarter than everyone else. The fact you constantly repeat stupid shit points to quite the opposite conclusion.
Alas, sometimes I can't help myself from feeding the trolls.
Alas, sometimes I can't help myself from feeding the trolls.
18
So long as the Bigot in Chief Barack Obama and the Democrats (the second most homophobic party in the United States) give cover to this crap by defending legal apartheid and second class status of lgbt people in this country, these bigots will have all the back up they need to continue to bash us. Defend Obama and the Democrats and you're defending gay bashing.
19
"Domestic partnerships will be a slippery slope. There exists doubt that homosexual couples will be content with their “partnerships” for long. They will fight for marriage and ruin the sacredness of the timehonored institution."
Next thing you know, the gays will want divorce too.... Wait, make that domestic dissolution - divorce is reserved for timehonored institutions like marriage.
Next thing you know, the gays will want divorce too.... Wait, make that domestic dissolution - divorce is reserved for timehonored institutions like marriage.
21
14
Julie, cut Dom some slack-
besting some HS sophmore in a debate he didn't realize he was having is a big deal to a drop-out like Dominic.
Julie, cut Dom some slack-
besting some HS sophmore in a debate he didn't realize he was having is a big deal to a drop-out like Dominic.
22
@20 - Not unfair. Clearly the kid's argument are illogical and not very well thought out... just... well, it seems like Slog has bigger fish to fry than some high school kid. That's all.
23
they put this article behind a login/password lockdown. Interesting that all the other opinions from the school e-paper are available.
24
I read that article. It is a ridiculous piece of bull shit. Not a single statement in it made any real, logical sense. Just the same old bigotry. To be fair though there was a pro-Ref 71 piece right next it. They were trying to do a pro-con thing. So don't blame Kentlake or the Falcon Flyer, just the author.
25
As a student of kentlake I was down right offended that such self-righteous bullshit could come from anyones mouth. I'm pleased to inform you the they took it off the papers webpage by request of the author. He got so many complaints from peers that he folded his hand. A small triumph for gay rights, to get such swift response even out here in the sticks.
27
Ok, take a nice long look at that article. Look on the left bar. Now, I know that reading might be hard for you, but notice that the article is under the OPINION section. I know that you have every right to disagree with a 15 year old kid, but what gives you the right to attack them personally because you disagree with them? It's a triumph because you suppressed free speech by swearing on a SCHOOL'S website?
I don't give a damn if you disagree with what he wrote, but what gives you the right to stop someone from saying their opinion in their own school newspaper? And you, Mr Holden, are a total ass. You're trying to make a serious argument, and attacking a whole school because of one person's, no, one CHILD'S opinion? What the hell is wrong with you? You're trying to rouse up everyone that reads what you write to hate an entire school because you disagree with an opinion article that a student there did? Now you're probably going to delete my comment for arguing with you, but see, you have every right to do that, seeing as this is your article. But the writer of the article that you're attacking has every right to say what he wants in his own school newspaper, and you have no right to try to get it taken down. That's called the first amendment. Ever heard of it? Well, it's what let's this site say half the crap that it does. Free speech can't only go one way.
What the hell is wrong with all of you.
I don't give a damn if you disagree with what he wrote, but what gives you the right to stop someone from saying their opinion in their own school newspaper? And you, Mr Holden, are a total ass. You're trying to make a serious argument, and attacking a whole school because of one person's, no, one CHILD'S opinion? What the hell is wrong with you? You're trying to rouse up everyone that reads what you write to hate an entire school because you disagree with an opinion article that a student there did? Now you're probably going to delete my comment for arguing with you, but see, you have every right to do that, seeing as this is your article. But the writer of the article that you're attacking has every right to say what he wants in his own school newspaper, and you have no right to try to get it taken down. That's called the first amendment. Ever heard of it? Well, it's what let's this site say half the crap that it does. Free speech can't only go one way.
What the hell is wrong with all of you.
28
@27 FTW.
Attacking a publication for allowing unpopular opinions to be expressed on it's pages is a precarious and shortsighted position for people/entities in the "press" business.
Even for a biased credulous hack uninformed steaming pile of warm shit like Dominic/Slog.
Attacking a publication for allowing unpopular opinions to be expressed on it's pages is a precarious and shortsighted position for people/entities in the "press" business.
Even for a biased credulous hack uninformed steaming pile of warm shit like Dominic/Slog.
29
@27. The first amendment says "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech." It does not, in fact, say that anybody can say whatever they want, at any time, without consequences. This kid wrote a poorly-argued opinion piece, that, if @25 is to be believed, made him unpopular with his peers, and so he wanted the article taken down. Nothing about this situation has anything to do with the first amendment.
30
Your Homosexual Agenda hard at work-
making sure that children in public school can not hold or express opinions not approved by Queer Big Brother.
making sure that children in public school can not hold or express opinions not approved by Queer Big Brother.
31
Since I go to kentlake, I know that the article was taken down because words like "bullshit" and "cunt" were put on the comments of a school website by the fine member base of this publication.
32
Oh, and @29, the end of the article here says "Anyhow, the author is being eviscerated in comments." It sounds like Dominic likes the fact that you people are trying to get an article on another website taken down. How can you say that that isn't trying to squash free speech?
Do you support this?
Do you support this?
33
@31 - if that were true, why wouldn't they just have deleted and closed the comments and left the original article up? It's obvious that either (1) the author wanted the article itself taken down because it was attracted negative attention from his peers and people outside the high school community or (2) the school wanted it taken down because of the negative attention. Neither of which has anything to do with free speech. "Free speech" means that it is not illegal to say whatever you want to say (with the standard "fire!" and "I have a bomb"-type exceptions). It does not mean that people can't tell you that your opinion is stupid and that you are an idiot. AND, it does not mean that a high school paper has to publish whatever it is that you want to write.
And, to your point @32. How is commenting on an article "trying to get it taken down"? Really? Pointing out that someone's opinion is ill-informed does not mean they're trying to get it taken down. And, if you'd read my earlier comments, you'd see that I don't actually agree with Slog linking to the article. I think the high school community should have dealt with it themselves.
And, to your point @32. How is commenting on an article "trying to get it taken down"? Really? Pointing out that someone's opinion is ill-informed does not mean they're trying to get it taken down. And, if you'd read my earlier comments, you'd see that I don't actually agree with Slog linking to the article. I think the high school community should have dealt with it themselves.
34
Well, nobody at the school actually reads the newspaper. :P It wasn't the author's choice to get it taken down though, I can guarantee that. And if the school wanted it taken down because of what you people said, can you really blame them? There were people commenting that wanted the whole school shut down because of one person's opinion.
The other thing is that you aren't only attacking the author (I'm not referring directly to you, "Julie in Eugene", with the you. More the idiots that decided to curse on a school website. You're actually one of the few people here with an actual argument), you're attacking the whole school in your comments. You people can't seem to understand the thought that someone could form an opinion that is different then yours by them self. It obviously has to come from the "EVIL ANTI-GAY AGENDA GROUP BLARG BLARG BLARG". You want him to keep an open mind to your side when you refuse to keep an open mind to his fears.
The other thing is that you aren't only attacking the author (I'm not referring directly to you, "Julie in Eugene", with the you. More the idiots that decided to curse on a school website. You're actually one of the few people here with an actual argument), you're attacking the whole school in your comments. You people can't seem to understand the thought that someone could form an opinion that is different then yours by them self. It obviously has to come from the "EVIL ANTI-GAY AGENDA GROUP BLARG BLARG BLARG". You want him to keep an open mind to your side when you refuse to keep an open mind to his fears.
35
lol
He stated an opinion and couldn't take the heat for it.
I wonder if it was like that a few decades ago for gay rights?
Welcome to our world, little boy. If you don't have the balls to stand up for what you believe in and what you say, you'll end up taking it back. That's just how it works. If I put a piece about gay rights in my school's newspaper I fully expect some people to start throwing 'faggot' (true but offensive) and other words at me. But I'm certainly not going to rescind anything.
He stated an opinion and couldn't take the heat for it.
I wonder if it was like that a few decades ago for gay rights?
Welcome to our world, little boy. If you don't have the balls to stand up for what you believe in and what you say, you'll end up taking it back. That's just how it works. If I put a piece about gay rights in my school's newspaper I fully expect some people to start throwing 'faggot' (true but offensive) and other words at me. But I'm certainly not going to rescind anything.
37
The original article will be going back up once the comments (only the ones completely inappropriate for a high school publication and student-run website) are taken down.
Yes, his OPINION article could have made some stronger, less offensive, arguments. However, I'm surprised that everyone's so quick to attack a teenage boys views on gay-rights and then the entire school itself. Becuase of course, having one student believe something means that the whole school is corrupt. I mean, The Falcon Flyer didn't even print the other side of it! No pro R-71.
Oh wait, yes they did.
Yes, his OPINION article could have made some stronger, less offensive, arguments. However, I'm surprised that everyone's so quick to attack a teenage boys views on gay-rights and then the entire school itself. Becuase of course, having one student believe something means that the whole school is corrupt. I mean, The Falcon Flyer didn't even print the other side of it! No pro R-71.
Oh wait, yes they did.
38
Can you really blame the school? I guess they didn't expect this attack seeing as they had both sides of the argument up on their website.
39
I guess the school didn't see all of the attacks coming. As a gay reader I certainly would have, but you've both got points there.
40
I mean, I don't really agree with the article itself, but still, attacking a school, and a high schooler, is just low. Especially my school, and my friend.
41
Well, I agree with you on one thing, youareallidiots. Attacking the school is stupid – the school did everything right in my opinion. It gave students a chance to run their own paper and voice their opinions on key topical issues (both a pro and a con side). This kid learned the lesson that his arguments were offensive and not very well thought-out. Maybe he’ll either (1) change his opinion or (2) do a better job justifying it next time. Which is pretty much the exact purpose of a high school paper. And, I don’t blame the school for taking down the letter (or putting it behind a login or whatever it was that they did). A high school paper should be a somewhat insulated environment – at the very least, students should be free to write (and learn) without risking the wrath/flames of the entire internet.
Attacking this person for his opinions? Well, I don’t actually have a problem with that, provided the “attacks” are at least reasonably civil. I didn’t read many of the comments when the link was still live, but hopefully at least a few of them pointed out the flaws in his logic rather than just calling him a dumbass.
Attacking this person for his opinions? Well, I don’t actually have a problem with that, provided the “attacks” are at least reasonably civil. I didn’t read many of the comments when the link was still live, but hopefully at least a few of them pointed out the flaws in his logic rather than just calling him a dumbass.
42
Well, most of the comments were "I hope you have gay children" and "I'm going to mail this to your boss in 20 years". Basically none of the attacks were "reasonably civil". There wasn't even arguing or disagreeing. There was just anger and hate.
43
I think its stupid that somebody would right that. It hurts other people that are gay and make them hate themselves. Its who they are. The whole aids thing is wrong to because more straight people have the disease more than the gays. You cant get rid of the gays because they aint leaving. Get over it.
44
I agree with rv94. It's just who they are. They shouldn't be downgraded because they are that way, whether they are born that way or not. Why do we care so much? They don't hurt anyone or do anything to change our world. Many of us live our lives and nothing changes because you see two gay men walking down the street holding hands. There has been gay people since the beggining of time. Whoopdy do. If you're strait then good for you. If you're gay okay that's just who you are. I personally think that all these laws that put rules on if they can be married, join the army, or run for president are the dumbest things I've ever heard of. They are good people. I have several gay and bi friends and not once have I been corupted. EVER. I've known them all my life. I am 15 now and just fine. They're nice, and very sweet and normal. So people back off. They have the RIGHT to be alive, get married and have kids. If they didn't God wouldn't have put them on the face of the Earth. Think about that. And they are good parents, spouses, and friends. Chillax. I personally am not gay but I know gay men and they're great friends. They're normal human beings living their lives and not disturbing anyone. So just back off and let them live their lives like the rest of us. Gay men, lesbian women, bisexuals and transgenders are human beings too.
45
#43 and #44 are forgetting that the article was about Ref. 71, it wasn't a rant that gay people are bad. In fact the author was assigned the article, agreed to take the negative and researched and wrote an article. Was it perfect? No. Did he make inappropriate insinuations that should have been edited out? Yes. Is he a student who has been helping to produce a newspaper in 1 period a day for 3 months...3 issues? Yes. That said, this journalism class has learn much by having been picked up by The Stranger...what they can and can't do in opinion articles, what they should and shouldn't say, can they stand behind what they write, that they can't assume that their little school newspaper is shut off from the rest of the world, and that adults are sometimes more inappropriate than high school students. Sure they had to take down the article and the comments for awhile; they had to think and address a new situation. Thanks for the lessons; the paper is only going to grow from them and the author certainly will as well. One last comment, never having posted a comment on a blog before, this is sure a safe way to get one's thoughts thrown into the heap, in fact it makes me think that the author is the brave one, the rest of us didn't even sign our names.
46
"what they can and can't do in opinion articles"
Isn't that kind of a conflict in terms? I'm not backing the author's stance, just that it wasn't wrong for the article to be written and printed.
Can you agree that the existence of the article isn't a bad thing, regardless of how you might disagree with it?
Isn't that kind of a conflict in terms? I'm not backing the author's stance, just that it wasn't wrong for the article to be written and printed.
Can you agree that the existence of the article isn't a bad thing, regardless of how you might disagree with it?
47
Absolutely he had the right to write it. What he can't do is manipulate statistics or use inappropriate language that suggests an underlying adgenda if he wants to be taken seriously.
48
Well, then my quarrel isn't with you. It's with idiots that think that they have a right to control everything.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
Announcing The Stranger's Tournament of Dunces! Who's the Dumbest Representative in the State House? by Christopher Frizzelle
-
Survey Says: Cyclists Would Rather Give Up Sex Than Their Bikes by Bethany Jean Clement
-
Stranger Tournament of Dunces, Match 3: Rep. Mark Hargrove vs. Rep. Norma Smith by Eli Sanders
-
Rachel Maddow Uncovered the Secret Ron Paul Strategy by Paul Constant
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (48) RSS