This is Gay Recruitment

My opponent tells us there are students who self-identify as "gay" and expects us to believe this on face value. Also, he expects us to accept this as evidence the child was "born that way." I would ask my opponent this question. "Suppose the child self-identifies as a Ninja Turtle, do we start feeding him pizza topped with flies?"My opponent works on the assumption that all schools have "gay children" who are being bullied and discriminated against. He provides no evidence to back up this claim. And incidentally, when did bullying become a strictly gay thing and why do gay students allow themselves to be bullied in the first place? It would appear that this so-called bullying epidemic is yet another way gay activists like my opponent gain access to our schools. Gay activists like my opponent have no business in our schools labeling kids "homosexual" -- even if the kids self-identify as homosexual! Who thought this a good idea -- where's their science to support it?Does it come from the same gays who thought up "born this way?"Kids go through changes. The kid who self-identifies as gay today may self-identify as straight tomorrow. They should have that freedom, but the gay activists in our school have taken that freedom away from them. Now a kid is branded for life as homosexual because some gay activist we know nothing about informs his teacher and parents he's gay. Here's the bottom line, sir: stop exploiting our children. You are neither licensed, trained, nor in any other way qualified to be talking to children about their supposed sexual orientation. No one else in our school system does it -- what makes you think you should be?CDC STATSAnd young gay men accounted for 72% of all new HIV cases. My opponent needs to improve his research skills before challenging mine:In 2010, young MSM (aged 13-24 years) accounted for 72% of new HIV infections among all persons aged 13 to 24, and 30% of new infections among all MSM. http://www.cdc.gov... Finally, it should come as no surprise my opponent invokes African HIV in a debate that has nothing to do with African HIV. As we see in his willingness to exploit "gay teenagers" he resorts to misdirection rather than direct answers.Here's the question again, sir. This time give us a direct answer instead of your chicanery: "My opponent tell us gays have "long and healthy relationships", but if that is so, how does he explain 72.% of all new HIV cases are gay males?"Summation:My opponent deals in LGBT talking points not facts and introspection. In every instance above his rebuts have have been lifted word for word from the LGBT play book. He won't be able to defend his "gay teenagers" claim there's nothing in the LGBT playbook to support it. And dragging in African HIV whenever the question of America HIV comes up is the most shameless gay tactic there is. To sum up, all my opponent has done here is serve up lame LGBT talking points -- nothing new, original, or even interesting. If you're gay, you will of course vote for him anyway. But if you're not, do not be persuaded by his LGBT agenda half-truths, distortions, and outright lies. Gay activists are in our schools to recruit. They do this by labeling kids "homosexual" then grooming them. If this doesn't make you sick to your stomach wait until you have kids and when of them returns from school and announces "Good news, dad --I'm homosexual!"