QUICK LINKS
"Big Brother Olympia On Steriods"
Senator Tim Sheldon (D) told me this morning that the Senate passage of Sex-Ed Bill SB 5297 this week was, “big brother Olympia on steroids.” As you can imagine, a good number of Republicans agreed, but in the end, there were not enough Senators who care about the kids.
Senator Val Stevens (R) told me this morning that, “If this bill becomes law, I would recommend that parents carefully reconsider allowing their child to be influenced by a system that is sending a double message.”
Senate Bill 5297 eliminates the opportunity for schools to teach abstinence education, unless they present the “medically correct” curriculum that will be developed by the state superintendent of public instruction. The “medically correct” sex-ed will be Planned Parenthood endorsed curriculum like that used in the Seattle schools.
It is not a done deal yet, but here is the problem.
Planned Parenthood, NARAL and the gay-activist groups Equal Rights Washington essentially have their hands all over this bill.
First, they support a good number of your legislators – I believe there is a pay back factor and these folks want this bill to become law.
Senator Tim Sheldon told me if this bill becomes law, “Planned Parenthood will be asking for millions more in a few weeks to begin implementing the program.”
The further problem is that these folks have created a process that virtually eliminates abstinence education from becoming “medically correct.”
Here’s how it works. In order to be medically and scientifically accurate, it must be verified and supported (in its research) by peer review. Abstinence education can not get into peer review journals because the journals are controlled by far left secularist organizations that do not allow the abstinence people to publish. Thus eliminating abstinence-only education.
Senator Dan Swecker said in his floor speech that his concern about this bill is its “Catastrophic unintended consequences.” (Click here to read his press release). “What this will mean,” he said, “is that kids who were getting the benefit of some age-appropriate information will be denied access to that information.”
Senator Val Stevens also told me, “I have been concerned about the F.L.A.S.H. curriculum since it was introduced to High School curriculum in Seattle. Now it appears that it will be taught to the 4th grade. If it was unacceptable to high school students, it is unconscionable for 4th graders.”
If you are not aware of the F.L.A.S.H. program, go to King County Public Health or click here. Be aware that the King County information is designed to put this curriculum in its most favorable light. Be sure to read all the Lesson Plans, particularly for grades 11 and 12.
Senator Sheldon also told me, “Gary, I’ve been here for 17 years and my party has gone way out of control with this bill, usurping rights and responsibilities of local school boards to represent their constituents.” He said, “It is taking away the people’s rights.”
SB 5297 will now go before the House of Representatives for consideration.
This is a time when we must speak.
Please call and write your State Representatives and ask them to vote against SB 5297. Click here for contact information regarding Washington State Representatives. Legislative Hotline: 1.800.562.6000.
Also, be sure to vote on our new poll. I have been told that many legislators pay attention to the Faith & Freedom poll numbers. Click here to go to the poll.
_________________________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom
Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.
45 Comments:
I know that any honest person with integrity could work through Gary's deceptive spin and provide some details. I look forward to hearing that.
I know when I hear Gary's statement that "legislators don't care for children" this is a total hogwash. Therefore, I know there is a LOT of deception in his statements.
Thanks,
In Christ,
Human
Obviously legislators who vote for this kind of bill do not care for children or they wouldn't support it ... regardless of their political party!
Lawmakers who are bought and paid for by the likes of Plannedparenthood, NARAL and ERW are not pro children. Are you nuts.
Gary is right
That is exactly right 12:18
Why does NARAL and Planned Parenthood have more to say about what my kid learns in Kitsap County then the parents do .
If FFN was making policy you would hear about it and editorilized in all the liberal mouth pieces . Look to the filth is stated about them for just disagreeing .
This is another sad day in Olympia .
Frankly, I wish sex ed could be left up to the parents. Why does the public school system need to teach children in elementary school about sex at all?
And I agree with 12:18 PM. We need to revise laws that allow lawmakers to be bought in the first place!
Anon 2:42
With this comment I agree - leave religion and sex AT HOME.
In fact, what does government have to do with educating children AT ALL - you made 'em, you raise - don't come to me stealing my money to take care of your kid!!
As noted, Human is a true ultra-conservative (vs. the phonies running around on this site) - limited government is good government!
Amen!
Unfortunately, there are children that will not get appropriate sex education at home due to a dysfunctional homelife. If they don't get the information from school then they'll more than likely get it from their peer's or boyfriend/girlfriend.
I'm sure it is true that children may not get "appropriate" sex ed at home. However, I think the previous post was commenting on "elementary" children. Sadly, there probably has always been children who didn't get "appropriate" education. What scares me is who deems what is "appropriate."
Gary's is the same mindset that would rather have women dying of cervical cancer than immunize agianst HPV. The thing is when your abstinence only kids get kocked up, or get HIV becuase they didn't know about contraception or safer sex practices, it's all of us who end up footing the bill.
First of all the legislature isn't ramming sex down the throats of our kids. Parent's have to give permission for participation in sex-ed. If they don't, the kids don't take the class.
There is nothing authoritarian in this bill, besides not allowing people to misinform students about contraception and sexuality (in a biological and not moral sense), which when we honestly consider the health issues involved with sexual activity is something that the state has the authority to mandate.
Sex-ed has nothing to do with morality, parents are still the number one influence in their child's life. There is nothing in the bill that prohibits parents from teaching their children anything, including homophobia and abstinence.
I find it strange that some think that educating children and adolescents accurately about how their bodies work means that we don't care about them, and is somehow immoral.
Is teaching people about other health and body issues immoral?
Is teaching people about how to prevent the spread of flu immoral?
If not then why is teaching about sex (a basic function of biology) immoral?
Randall is also totally dishonest in this post.
His use of the quote from Sen. Stevens implies that graphic sex-ed is being taught to 4th graders; but then Gary points us to the 11th and 12th grade curriculum, which contains the frank discussions of how the body responds sexually, and of course the descriptions of homosexuality and gender identity. Which means that 4 graders are not being taught such things. Personally I found it very tame.
Oh ya, one other thing. His use of the term "Big Brother" does not really work as an analogy to the government in Olympia. In 1984, the Party (symbolized by Big Brother) seeks to repress and totally extinguish the sex urge; which is surely closer to the Dominionist position of Mr. Randall.
Pardon my ignorance here, but exactly which Party in 1984 symbolized Big Brother? How do you know they seek to extinguish the sex urge? I think calling Mr. Randall a Dominionist is a little extreme don't you think?
It always amazes me that by raising concerns over what public schools are allowed to teach our children about lifestyles that we as parents do not approve, those of us who are concerned are suddenly Dominionist. What happened to all that teaching about keeping an open mind, about accepting individual choices and belief systems? Does it all go away when one disagrees?
Pam ,
If you taught your child lying was wrong , and the teacher stated :
Lying to some is wrong , to some its Ok ... Its up to you to choose .
Then the most vocal students approved of lying , most of the the peer pressure is going for lying being acceptable also , you would not call that neutral would you ?
That is how sex education appears to people who feel sex out of marriage is immoral ..
Nothing wrong with education Pam , and you really are mis stating the reasons for those opposed in this debate .
Almost all the curriculum from Planned Parenthood could be taught in the confines of marriage .
Sexuality defined by the state deals with gender , cross dressing , homosexuality and other sensitive issues .. All those issues have moral concerns around them .
But you win , but please don't expect people on the loosing side of the debate and numbers to see public education as respecting their views and values .
Sex education used to be taught in the privacy of one’s home — mothers teaching their daughters, fathers teaching their sons. Today the institution called “Public School” has taken on the role of teaching not only the act of creating babies but also the acts of giving pleasure, all ostensibly to create “safe and healthy people.”
According to the “Guidelines for Sexual Health Information & Disease Prevention” developed by the Washington State Department of Health and Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, sex education is defined as “teaching about sexuality,” and sexuality is defined as:
“… a significant aspect of a person’s life consisting of many interrelated factors including but not limited to sexual anatomy, physiology, growth and development; gender, gender identity and gender role/expression; sexual orientation and sexual orientation identity; sexual behaviors and lifestyles; sexual beliefs, values and attitudes; body image and self-esteem, sexual health; sexual (thoughts and feelings); relationship to others; (and) life experiences.”
Guided by their local community’s values, school districts, are currently responsible for determining the best way to teach these sensitive issues.
Many school districts do voluntarily choose to follow the state’s guidelines, but there are also those districts that choose to use a curriculum that includes teaching abstinence-only.
Two bills currently in our Legislature, SB 5297 and HB 1855, will prevent schools from responding to the needs of their communities and will impose a one-size-fits-all approach to teaching sexual values and attitudes.
The state-mandated approach goes beyond the purely medical aspects of sex and anatomy and offers various mixed messages on how to think about sex. The one message that cannot be taught, however, is “abstinence only.” Page 2 of the law requires that contraception instruction must be given along with the abstinence message. This is like telling a child to never play with matches but in the end showing that child how to correctly strike a match should he choose to play with matches.
The “Guidelines for Sexual Health Information & Disease Prevention” were not created through any scientific method but represent a consensus of pro-choice lobbyists such as Planned Parenthood, NARAL and the Safe Schools Coalition. Conservative groups and abstinence educators tried to be a part of the process, but they were denied access.
The two most common curricula that comply with the guidelines are “KNOW” and “FLASH.” KNOW is published by the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, while FLASH is created by Beth Reis and the Seattle/King County Health Department. FLASH is an online package found at: http://www.metrokc.gov/health/famplan/flash/
We can look at these worksheets and lesson plans for more information on what we can expect if the law passes. There appears to be no restrictions on the age at which to introduce various concepts of sexuality. We find chapters in the FLASH 4th-6th grade pages describing “sexual fluids” and words that would not pass the legislative e-mail filtering system. The 9th-10th Grade “Sexual Exploitation” chapters describe different rape situations and ask students to discuss sexual scenes that would receive ratings of “S” for sexual situations and “D” for sexual dialogue if they were made for TV. The 11th-12th Grade material has students doing several worksheets on the Kinsey homosexual continuum after admitting that the data was based on a flawed study.
I would urge you to review the pages of the FLASH examples. Decide for yourself the “medical accuracy” of the sexual situations the children are exposed to and consider the concept of a “medically accurate” morality or a “medically accurate” lifestyle.
HB 1855 and SB 5297 mandating a state-developed sex education curriculum for all public schools is bad law. These bills would take away local control for districts, and introduce teens and pre-teens to a world of sexuality and risky lifestyle decisions without any consideration for parental rights and family values.
Reps. Lynn Kessler, D-Hoquiam, and Kathy Haigh, D-Shelton, are sponsors of HB 1855. Contact your legislators now to oppose these bills. Protect our children! The legislative Hotline is 1-800-562-6000.
Linda Webb
Hoquiam
Thanks Linda
Okay the thing the everyone that opposes the sex-ed bill does not acknowledge is that there is no requirement for kids to take the course.
It is entirely up to the discretion of the parents.
So all of this talk about how the curriculum conflicts with the "values" of others is moot. If it does conflict with your family's values don't allow your child to attend. That includes home schooling, a viable option sought by many for a myriad of reasons.
This is why Randall's position, and those who also oppose this bill is fundamentally dishonest. They say it is about parents having control over what their kids are taught, but really it is about them controlling what ALL kids are taught.
They are the ones that want to remove parental control and put it firmly in the hands of a theocratic state.
This post has been removed by the author.
If you taught your child [some activity] was wrong , and the teacher stated :
[this activity] to some is wrong , to some its Ok ... Its up to you to choose.
Hmmm isn't that when the parents explain that you think it is wrong and explain why they think it is wrong to their children? If both points of view are legal and accurate then shouldn't a school for everyone teach people have both points of view?
So no, obviously if the parents want their kids to live thinking the world is different than it really is they should put them in a teaching environment where only their point of view is taught. You can't cripple all the kids world view just to facilitate yours, right? Or is the idea that people have a right to choose the real thing the parents think is untrue?
Again, it amazes me that any American would even think that they should be able to limit what is taught to only what they think is true, especially if that 'truth' is based on a religious belief.
Of course all this has nothing to do with this bill. This bill is because some sex education programs are basically making things up, particularly some of the abstinence-only programs. This bill doesn't make anyone teach anything, its just what they do teach has to be accurate and not just propaganda.
What parent who believes in truth and honesty would be against that?
Ohtur ,
So you would have no problem with say two points , one says homosexuality is a perversion , and the other point , homosexuality is normal being presented in a equal manner in a public school ..
Whats worse then idealogue , is one that can not admit it . You always have an answer then go backwards with logic to defend it . What a waste of a brillant mind .
Let the child decide what is healthy , how ice cream to eat , when to go to bed at night , how much homework he needs to do , if having sex at 15 is ok or not . . Yeah right .
Pam, Andrew,
You two have apparently brought the light that I was looking for - the reality is that Sex-Ed is totally optional, and parentally authorized.
Therefore, there are NO issues here - the parents are deciding whether they want their children to be subject to WHATEVER values/morals/reality that is being taught - I assume they will have reviewed and approved.
Thanks for clarifying and making the issue straight (no pun intended).
Once again we see heat but no light from the Radical Evangelical Right - out of control and dishonest.
Sincerely,
In the Lord of Glory who is both in control and totally honest,
Human
I was always amazed that our immoral public schools allowed the wonderful abstinence-only classes.
These classes were often the only way that abused children found words to know what was happening to them. Often these classes were the only teaching a girl ever got about the huge emotions of her sexuality. These classes actually spoke to young men with the words "self control"...as a good thing.
If this wonderful teaching will now be stopped, then God will raise up some other way to reach out with love and healing. Any voluteers? The need is great, the laborers are few.
Why ye seek light from the darkness ?
The class is not parentally authorized . The parent needs to authorize out of the class , as they can for any subject ..
Bif difference between opting out of class and opting in ..
That is light .
Someone above complained about the abstinance kids getting pregnant.
I listened to a woman from Life Choices speak on TV. She said that teaching abstinance really wasn't teaching abstinance.
They teach kids to enjoy each others bodies, shower together, cuddle naked etc.
If I couldn't be abstinance in those circumstances, how could any
hormone charged kid possibly.
Plus that is the exact same mindset that makes young girls think oral sex isn't really sex.
Anon 5:22
Thanks for the clarification. Since I am not deeply involved, I have no other way to know. In any event, I suspect you may be right and I appreciate your input.
Nevertheless, the point is that it is still an optional class. So it seems there is much to do here about what is really not a lot.
I don't have a problem with a Sex-Ed class teaching a variety of views of human sexuality as well as the history of sexuality from an academic standpoint. I think an intelligent debate would be profitable (though this is very dependent on the debate participants...).
If people could realize that our sexuality is a natural part of how God/nature made our bodies, and we can understand the dynamics thereof, we can take some of the mystic out of the whole thing and live a more healthy sexual lifestyle. My two cents...
So you would have no problem with say two points , one says homosexuality is a perversion , and the other point , homosexuality is normal being presented in a equal manner in a public school ..
You're moving the goal posts - the examples were 'wrong' or 'ok', not specific opinion based qualities. But I would actually expect a sex class to discuss that some feel that homosexuality is wrong or ok, or that sex outside of marriage is 'wrong or ok' or that sex that has no reproductive possibilities is 'wrong' or 'ok', or that that some hold that sex is beneficial and part of a healthy life and some don't and hosts of other of these types of discussions if they have the time. But I think the same should go for superstition, politics and the rest too actually - the idea that something can't be discussed in a school is sort of the antithesis of its very purpose isn't it?
Whats worse then idealogue , is one that can not admit it . You always have an answer then go backwards with logic to defend it . What a waste of a brillant mind.
Actually its just another example of the extreme stereotyping that inhabits your mind - you assumed what my answer would be before I even gave it and as usual you were wrong. You are the one that is arguing for an agenda, not me - I always differ to the truth whether it is to my advantage or not.
Let the child decide what is healthy , how ice cream to eat , when to go to bed at night , how much homework he needs to do , if having sex at 15 is ok or not . . Yeah right .
I took the 'you' to be generic not specific - 'you' as in you and your family. The school's job is to present the truth - if you want your child to only hold with a subset of it that's your job to explain why that is, not the schools. But we've been through this before haven't we?
This post has been removed by the author.
I have never heard of a sex-ed class being optional. I don't think most parents know that it is. My daughter-in-law that is a teacher says they don't advertise it.
You're moving the goal posts -
No actually you are . You promote a view point that teaching sex out of the confines of sex is OK ? The FLASH program teaches that . Planned Parenthood promotes a sexual bill of rights that promotes the view that you are ENTITLED to privacy for sex .
Sex out of the confines of sex is always wrong ... Always .. Some people have a view that it is OK . It is impossible to teach that in a neutral matter to both sides . It is impossible to teach that homosexuality is acceptable to be seen as a perversion while teaching the same class that is it is just another sexual expression .. The class leaves with a negative projected no matter what .
the idea that something can't be discussed in a school is sort of the antithesis of its very purpose isn't it?
A bit different when the teacher leads a discussion and the kidsd actually discuss it and the teacher monitors it .. I think you may agree ? nd I still have this old fashio0ned idea I hope my kidscan write better then I can , and learn about match , science , and history .. Just maybe in between learning how the whole population will die of Aids ...
I am not sure which will happen first , we all die of aids or starvation from global warming .
Actually its just another example of the extreme stereotyping that inhabits your mind -
My mind is a beautiful thing to waste ... Your truth apears very left sided ...
Let the child decide what is healthy , how ice cream to eat , when to go to bed at night , how much homework he needs to do , if having sex at 15 is ok or not . . Yeah right .
I took the 'you' to be generic not specific - 'you' as in you and your family. The school's job is to present the truth - if you want your child to only hold with a subset of it that's your job to explain why that is, not the schools. But we've been through this before haven't we?
As I said , homosexual sex is unhealthy , diseases , bacteria , suicides and diseases such as Aids result of it .
This is all true ... You could pile a bunch of truth in a category in a certain truthful way that it ends up not giving a very truthful picture .. Someone that always difers to the truth would not underrstand thatI guess.
Your hopeless , but I would not mind you on my side just once in a debate . I don't think it will happen ...
You promote a view point that teaching sex out of the confines of sex is OK ?
I am assuming you mean marriage? Of course it is 'ok' for some people - just as for some it is not 'ok, and anyone dedicated to the teaching of truth would agree that both opinions are valid, right?
The FLASH program teaches that.
It does? Or does it just not teach it is inherently bad?
Planned Parenthood promotes a sexual bill of rights that promotes the view that you are ENTITLED to privacy for sex .
Which has nothing to do with the discussion - of course it is a private decision - each person has to decide for themselves, you don't get to decide for others, right?
And again no one is talking about teaching that something IS a perversion, they would teach that some think it is a perversion. They are suppose to teach truth, not opinion.
Your truth apears very left sided
The middle always looks like that from the extreme right - presenting both points of view is the MIDDLE, presenting that people have a right to choose either end if they want is the MIDDLE.
As I said , homosexual sex is unhealthy , diseases , bacteria , suicides and diseases such as Aids result of it .
Actually you are talking about the risks of promiscuity, not 'homosexual sex'. But then when facts don't fit your agenda we know which one you'll choose.
Your hopeless , but I would not mind you on my side just once in a debate . I don't think it will happen ...
All you have to do is drop the agenda and agree that the very first right given to man by even your God was the right to choose, whether you think the choice is for good or for ill, and we might have somewhere to start having an agreement.
After that if we can agree that whatever the teach should be the truth and based on facts, not on agendas, and we could agree even more - but just that little bit would mean you wouldn't be against this legislation.
An observation on the new F&FN poll asking if abstinence should be taught in schools. 3% say it shouldn't but it made me chuckle, as most liberals and conservatives think that abstinence should be taught, the argument between the two is about what else should be also taught. It is only a few conservatives that think that this public health issue should be kept totally private - the 3% against are probably a pure sampling of F&FN supporters.
Just found it interesting ;)
What made me chuckle is the three percent who said it should not ..
Homosexual activists . It is only they who think sex is a reason for a parade .
just as for some it is not 'ok, and anyone dedicated to the teaching of truth would agree that both opinions are valid, right?
--------------------------------
Valid ? You have a right to that opinion , but it is not valid . Sex out of marriage is not a valid truth . Which is where we differ ,
Thats your agenda . You told me you look forward to the day my beliefs are extinquished by the public schools .. Forgot . ? According to the legislature it is not valid either , but they have parents who vote they are concerned about ..
------------------------------
The FLASH program teaches that.
It does? Or does it just not teach it is inherently bad?
==============================
No it teaches it is EQUAL in value.. Big difference . The moral value between sex out of the confines of marriage is equal to marriage . Coming from a adult in authority , to me that is a big statement for a kid to hear . A non neutral statement . values are never taught non neutral .
Planned Parenthood promotes a sexual bill of rights that promotes the view that you are ENTITLED to privacy for sex .
---------------------------------
Which has nothing to do with the discussion - of course it is a private decision - each person has to decide for themselves, you don't get to decide for others, right?
=================================
You think teaching kids they have a RIGHT to sex has nothing to do with what you call a discussion , , what are you going to do , provide them locks for their doors at tax payer expense .
----------------------------------
And again no one is talking about teaching that something IS a perversion, they would teach that some think it is a perversion. They are suppose to teach truth, not opinion.
-----------------------------------
By defintion it is perversion .. Homosexual sex is perverted . You have a problem with that ? That is truth . And you promote teaching that some think homosexuality is a perversion by a teacher ?
That is sad .. I believe you may want to rethink that . I sure would not . Thats not for a public school to promote one way or the other . Whats wrong with math ?
On what basis do you teach about about homosexuality ... There is no truth in public schools, everything is relative , nothing is right , nothing is wrong .. The only moral choice is a condom .
The morality never is allowed to have a foundation , and obviously morality in the Holy Bible , to you is an AGENDA . Hence proven by you , all who support this system have no respect for people who believe in the Chritian Faith and Jewish Faith and their traditions . Can you name me a country that has your beliefs supporting it ..
-----------------------------------
- presenting both points of view is the MIDDLE,
-----------------------------------
Wow that is warped . Let me see , teaching murder is ok and promoting life in the same classroom is the middle ? Your perspective of what is taught to your own child , is skewed . You obviously never had the experience . Your example of allowing the middle is why Hitler killed millions . You are in lala land . Waiting for sex till to marriage is a standard . It is not right or left . There is no middle . Its a belief system that promotes safety , health , and the standard itself lessens the amount of pre marital sex when it does occur . The fact is it still will occur . To teach about condoms makes sense to me , but no way is teaching values are valueless or just choices the middle of the road .
As I said , homosexual sex is unhealthy , diseases , bacteria , suicides and diseases such as Aids result of it .
================================
Actually you are talking about the risks of promiscuity, not 'homosexual sex'.
==================================
No I am talking about homosexual sex . Do you think topics such as fisting and other practices should be discussed in the classroom . Do you know the medical perspective of fisting is ? Promiscuity , that is your truth ? What is that , more then one partner in a year , two .. I mean just when does your highness decide ? Because its obviously you making these moral decisions .. All from your perspective , from your own experiences . The difference between Jeffry Dammer and you is he killed people . The fact of the matter is people do die from sex in our age ..
===============================
But then when facts don't fit your agenda we know which one you'll choose.
--------------------------------
You rather have people die and your misery expanded to others in the hopes that it will take some of your pain away . Thats the way I see it .
===============================
All you have to do is drop the agenda and agree that the very first right given to man by even your God was the right to choose, whether you think the choice is for good or for ill, and we might have somewhere to start having an agreement.
====================================
My God gave you the right to teach my kids your truths ? And I have the agenda ?.
================================
After that if we can agree that whatever the teach should be the truth and based on facts, not on agendas, and we could agree even more - but just that little bit would mean you wouldn't be against this legislation.
===================================
Thanks for respecting my views ,
... I get it , agree with you , no agenda
How very left of you .
10:03 PM, March 11, 2007
Seems like homosexuality is a perversion from the dictionary's definition .
1. unusual sexual practice: a sexual practice considered unusual or unacceptable
1. deviating from what is proper: deviating greatly from what is accepted as right, normal, or proper
2. relating to unusual sexual activities: relating to or practicing sexual activities considered unusual or unacceptable
3. distorted: misinterpreted or distorted
According to the latest polls , America is split on homosxuality .
Half fot acceptance , half against ..
This defintion then appears to be correct for half , thus it should be considered the middle ground for teaching in the public school as one of the truths ?
I think not ..
Mick, its like two different people use your account, a reasonable one and an insane one. Your note is a collection of red herrings and disconnected rants that exhibits an incredible fear of 'choice' as a basic concept.
We can never be on the same side of an issue if you think people don't have a right to choose.
Odd - but I have noticed the same thing re: Mick - hoping for the best.
Well human/oshtur i think you are full of hooey.
human-oshtur got a job yet?
Gosh an anonymous person thinks Human and I are full of hooey. Or is that Mick? Or Gary?
What does that even mean anyway?
Human has said he is an accountant or some such thing and I own a family business with my siblings, hence my being up so early ;)
Anonymous does your court appointed psychiatrist allow you to work at all?
Human is no accountant. Accountants don't spend all day goofing off on the internet.
Vishanti--I might have bought that he "owns' a family business" because he knew what the Dept of Rev is. But because he spends all day on here and has established himself as a chronic liar--I do not believe he has any job.
Silly I own the family business, not Human.
And Human as said he is an accountant - no Christian would call him a liar without proof. So you have some proof I assume?
The proof is that HUman is compulsively posting on this site all day long. No CPA wastes time like that--nor do they conduct themselves in manner he (you) does.
"Silly I own the family business, not Human."
uhhhh just what confused you on that? I didn't say human owns a family business. And I don't believe you do either.
The proof is that HUman is compulsively posting on this site all day long. No CPA wastes time like that--nor do they conduct themselves in manner he (you) does.
Ah the 'true Scotsman' argumentative fallacy. A classic. Of course a self-employed CPA could post all day long - how much time do you think it takes to write notes anyway?
A self-employed CPA wouldn't. I know plenty of them. Successful people stay focused and don't hang out harrassing others on websites. One post may take a few minutes--but well we know you don't stick to one post now don't we?
A self-employed CPA wouldn't.
Hopeless aren't you? Of course there are CPAs of all priorities as far as any activity.That you would arrogantly think you know how all 'self-employed CPAs' are just goes to show you have more than a couple screws loose.
Why not do everyone a favor and register a handle so we can sort your loony messages out from the sane anonymous posters more efficiently?
Post a Comment
<< Home