11-year-old girl eviscerated the religious right with six simple words

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2020/05...eviscerated-religious-right-six-simple-words/

 

Um... if it was "none of our business" then they should not have done the interview for that article in the magazine.

Rather than coming across as some clever quip from a child years beyond her age in wisdom, this actually comes across as some asinine ignorant comment from an immature person, like something that would come from someone who wanted to eat her cake and have it too. You can't partake in a widespread public article about some cutting edge social phenomena that's a bit controversial, and then expect to be immune from all criticism. If she didn't want to be in the spotlight, maybe she should be blaming her parents.

 

The left loves to take it's positions from 10 year olds though.

Common theme.

 

Whose business was it, if not readers of the magazine?

 

Maybe you could get AOC and Greta to put together a think tank.

 

Never trust anybody over 13.

 

The comment was directed at the million moms, not the readers

 

If the Million Moms are not the readers, who cares if they boycott?

Sounds to me like some of them are/where the readers, and the magazine made it their readers 'business'.

 

I agree with her statement.

Further to adopt a child who has no parents or heads unfit parents is a selfless act.

It's like protesting food donations, are donating money to cancer research.

I think these so-called Christian people shredded themselves.

This young lady just wants peace. So for Christ's sakes let her have it.

If you want to boycott the magazine cancel your subscription if you didn't have a subscription you don't matter to them.

 

Well she's right it is none of your business.

If you take issue with the magazine printing the article your business is with the magazine and the editor.

If you take issue with a gay couple adopting children, go adopt children so a gay couple can't.

 

Once they were in an open publication, unfortunately they placed themselves in other people's business.

 

When the right everyone should.

If you take issue with the magazine your issue is with the magazine.

If you take issue with gay people adopting children go adopt children so gay people can't.

 

If the readers have an issue with the magazine the issue is with the magazine.

 

~ The majority of people are not at all interested is anyone else's sexuality. It is none of our business - until it is pushed in front of us with bells and lights.

 

I'm not disagreeing.

I'm simply suggesting it's amusing that the people who want to control the way everyone thinks gets upset when questioned, and pointing to the fact that the left tends to adopt ideas postulated by pre-teens.

 

So any article about a heterosexual couple that adopts a child is pushing heterosexuality in our face with bells and lights?

Why is it that people who aren't heterosexual are far more tolerant of you doing that than you are?

Perhaps they aren't the snow flake.

 

If the kid is right, it shouldn't matter what side of the political spectrum it's coming from.

The left does use kids. I don't think they're doing it in this case.

 

Delete

 

Especially if they get elected prez and have the mind of a 2 yr old.

 

Thats why they boycotted the magazine... right?

 

~ Most prefer rain instead of snow ✔

 

If they were I don't this kid would be telling them is none of their business.

 

If an article about a family in a family-oriented magazine means they are pushing something in front of you with bells on it then you are the Snowflake.

You don't have to read the article you don't have to subscribe to the magazine.

 

I think it's hilarious our president lives rent-free in your mind

 

Allow me to chime in here . Mo one wants to control how anyone think. I for one, just want people to think. And as far as ideas postulated by pre teens goes, Many of those pre teens have more to offer than certain adults