Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Clint N. Suhks
Hmm... saying the practice of perversion is good...NOT DISRUPTIVE. saying the practice of perversion is wrong...YES DISRUPTIVE. Did you bump your head before you wrote that?

Are you really so incapable of imagining how, in today's P.C. world -- especially on either coast -- it's entirely possible that one viewpoint would cause disruption while the other would not?

Do you even know what the word "arbitrary" means?

IF the pro-homo expression is NOT disruptive and the anti-homo expression IS disruptive, there's NOTHING ARBITRARY about the application of the policy.

Now, go bump your head on that for a while before you spout off again.

47 posted on 04/18/2005 11:20:57 AM PDT by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]


To: newgeezer

Therefore I suppose the way to shut up anyone that a particular group doesn't agree with is to become disruptive and place the blame on the other students.


53 posted on 04/18/2005 11:45:30 AM PDT by CSM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson