I had no idea (caution gay thread)

[Guest bkelm18]

No, I certainly don't. Teach them to be themselves. THey don't need someone steering them on that course though.

I really doubt theres an epidemic of teachers who are pushing kids to be gay.

[Guest MilitiaMan]

It's always the thief that claims he hates being stolen from, the liar that hates being lied to and from what I see here the idiot that hates idiocy.

[Guest ThePunisher]

My faith in humanity takes a dive off a cliff every time I realize there are people among us whose brain produces such ridiculous nonesense as this.

As usual your cynicism and sarcasm is up to par. For an educated person, you obviously haven't been keeping up with what's going on with school curriculums across the country.

[Chucktshoes]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but isn't sex-ed usually reserved for middle school students and only taught with permission from the parents?

If you wait until middle school for Sex Ed, you have waited too long. It is not uncommon for kids to start puberty at 8 or 9 years old. <I blame our heavy consumption of processed foods.> These days kids are already getting pregnant in middle school, you have to move sex ed to late elementary school.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but isn't sex-ed usually reserved for middle school students and only taught with permission from the parents?

That was many years ago.

[Chucktshoes]

A lot of people are ok with homosexuality until it has an effect on their kids. For example, it is ok until the school gay curriculum is shoved upon their kids in kindergarten saying being gay is normal. How confusing is that for 4 or 5 year old kids. And it is ok until the gays start predatoring out their kids at early ages. Everything is always ok until it affects them directly, and if homosexuality is ever deemed normal by our society, then it's just a matter of time before you are affected by the consequences.

When you bring out the "gay predator" meme this sums it up for me. Due to family history, I am quite familiar with sexual predators and the stats behind them and I can tell you it isn't the homos preying on the kiddies. It is the straight family friend or relative that is doing that damage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLUoRXrYhHc

Edited September 4, 2012 by Chucktshoes

[TripleDigitRide]

I have a 13-year-old daughter in 8th grade (middle school), and she claims that, at no time, has any faculty member told them that it was or wasn't OK to be gay. She says that she doesn't recall the subject ever being discussed.

[strickj]

If you wait until middle school for Sex Ed, you have waited too long. It is not uncommon for kids to start puberty at 8 or 9 years old. <I blame our heavy consumption of processed foods.> These days kids are already getting pregnant in middle school, you have to move sex ed to late elementary school.

I agree but that wasn't the question though.

Can not say that I've actually heard of it in grades K-5. Well, 'cept from those that fear teachers are teaching kindergarteners to be gay that is.

And I believe it's law just about everywhere for written parental permission to be given.

[TripleDigitRide]

One thing is for sure, many religious folks and them homosexuals have at least one thing in common; they love cramming stuff down someone's throat.

[Guest ThePunisher]

I have a 13-year-old daughter in 8th grade (middle school), and she claims that, at no time, has any faculty member told them that it was or wasn't OK to be gay. She says that she doesn't recall the subject ever being discussed.

It may have not reached your schools curriculum here yet, but in some states this is the case. Ever heard of incrementalism. Local school boards need to be closely monitored by the local parents.

[G27]

A study is more knee jerking than you claim I was, crimson. It may be a study, but a study like that is only an

approximation, unless you get a huge sample of the population.

You should know better.

I should know better? LOL

Everything regarding a breakdown of the human race is an approximation. Everything. Sometimes you guys crack me up, as if an estimation based on a good segment of the population doesn't actually extrapolate to the whole...

Seriously, I'm laughing aloud here.

Edited September 4, 2012 by crimsonaudio

[Guest ThePunisher]

When you bring out the "gay predator" meme this sums it up for me. Due to family history, I am quite familiar with sexual predators and the stats behind them and I can tell you it isn't the homos preying on the kiddies. It is the straight family friend or relative that is doing that damage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLUoRXrYhHc

You must have lived a sheltered and protected life growing up. And you must have your head in the sand now if you think there are not gay predators out there. But admitting so would tarnish the gay image, wouldn't it.

[G27]

So, I think I've got it - but just so we're clear here - the majority of those who are against a federal recognition of a homosexual union feel that way because of the bible, is that right?

[Major Kong]

All I've gotten from reading most of this thread is that the people who believe in gay marriage will not be swayed in their opinion and the people who don't believe in gay marriage will not be swayed in their opinion.

Is everyone talking just to hear themselves talk or do you really believe you're going to change someone else's mind on a topic this polarizing?

[Chucktshoes]

Sheltered? What part of "due to family history" do you not understand. Let me be a little more specific, due to personal and family history. Think on that for a minute before you formulate tour next response Pedophilia has zero to do the victim's gender and all about the sickness of predator. I never said that there weren't gay pedophiles, they do exist. What I can say is that when looking at the files of convicted child molesters, less than 1% self identify as gay or lesbian, regardless of the gender of the child victim.

By the numbers, the youth leader at your church or a scout leader is more likely to diddle your kid than a gay teacher.

[Guest ThePunisher]

I really doubt theres an epidemic of teachers who are pushing kids to be gay.

You can google "sex and gay curriculums" and find many other articles of schools implementing these curriculums.

Fox News Digital Network Fox News

Gay Curriculum Proposal Riles Elementary School Parents

Published May 22, 2009

FoxNews.com

"And Tango Makes Three," about two gay penguins who raise a baby peguin, is the basis for grade school teachings on gay and lesbian lifestyles.

Next Slide Previous Slide Email

Share

inShare0

A group of parents in a California school district say they are being bullied by school administrators into accepting a new curriculum that addresses bullying, respect and acceptance -- and that includes compulsory lessons about the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community that will be taught to children as young as 5 years old.

The parents from the Unified School District in Alameda, a suburb of San Francisco and Oakland, say these issues are best learned at home and most definitely are not age-appropriate for elementary school children.

The parents are also angry that they will not be allowed to keep their children out of the classes.

“I believe these children are far too young to be learning about what these issues mean,†said Alaina Stewart, who has three children who attend elementary school in Alameda. “These are adult issues and they are being thrust upon the children.â€

But the school board says otherwise, and its attorneys say that if the curriculum is adopted, the parents will have no legal right to remove their children from class when the lessons are being taught.

"By not allowing kids to opt out," says David Kirwin, who has two children in the system, "the school district is violating a First Amendment right for those who have a religion that doesn't support homosexuality."

The proposed curriculum will include a 45-minute LGBT lesson, once a year from kindergarten through fifth grade. The kindergartners will focus on the harms of teasing, while the fifth graders will study sexual orientation stereotypes.

The move toward the new curriculum began two years ago, when teachers noticed that even kindergarten students were using derogatory words about sexuality, such as “fag.â€

“Students reported feeling bullied,†said Kirsten Vital, superintendent of the Alameda Unified School District. “This work is in response to teachers asking for tools to combat name-calling and bullying at school.â€

Among the course materials that could be added to the curriculum is "And Tango Makes Three," a children’s book about gay penguins struggling to create a family. The book has been banned in some areas of the country.

In response to the controversy surrounding the proposed curriculum, the school board has held two public debates this month.

One parent told FOXNews.com an “overwhelming†majority of parents spoke out against LGBT instruction at one of the meetings, but that public opinion had little impact.

“The chairman of the school board repeatedly claimed to the audience that the curriculum is evenly supported and opposed,†said a parent named David, who asked that his last name be withheld.

“I am beginning to lose confidence of the board, as it seems to have a preconceived political agenda and not truly represent their constituent’s opposition to the curriculum,†he said.

But other parents say they are in full support of the proposed curriculum.

“Our schools are a reflection of our community and world,†said Marianne Bartholomew-Couts. “From a very early age, children should see what exists in the world.â€

Michael Williams, another parent, thinks LGBT issues will come up anyway, and that teachers should be prepared. “The teachers would have the tools under the new curriculum to help kids respond appropriately,†he said.

California is no stranger to the controversy surrounding gay issues. Last November, voters passed Proposal 8, which overturned a Supreme Court ruling and banned gay marriage in the state.

The situation in Alameda is no different from the statewide ballot initiative: it has caught the attention of several organizations on both sides of the issue.

Ryan Schwartz, National Outreach Manager for GroundSpark—a non-profit organization that seeks justice in education—told FOXNews.com that teachers are responsible for creating an environment where students can feel comfortable and learn. Teaching the golden rule won’t cut it, he said.

“Instead of having to police the schoolyard for bullying,†said Schwartz, “this curriculum is designed to prevent it from the beginning.â€

But other groups think the new curriculum is not balanced in whom it protects.

“Under law, there are five categories of protected classes when it comes to discrimination,†explained Karen England, a spokeswoman for the Capitol Resource Institute, an organization that advocates conservative policy on social issues.

"The curriculum focuses on only one subgroup protected under anti-discrimination laws: sexual orientation.â€

England said she believes Alameda's curriculum committee has purposely excluded religion, even though it is one of the protected classes. “This indicates an agenda is being pushed, as opposed to an altruistic attempt to teach tolerance,†she said.

Members of the school board will vote on Tuesday whether to adopt the new curriculum. Vital, the superintendent, would not comment on the expected outcome.

“No matter what the outcome is, we need to do some work as a community to come together around issues of diversity, acceptance and understanding of one another,†she said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.c...l#ixzz25XkMElVf

Edited September 4, 2012 by ThePunisher

[mav]

you also have folks like me who are not gay but who firmly think that the gay community should have equal rights. Mostly, that means I would see any and all laws/tax codes / etc that are for married couples removed entirely so the government can get 100% out of the issue: if there are no bonuses for marriage, then everyone is equal. The other direction (making laws to say who can marry who and when and where and so on) is too much government involvement at too deep a level. Getting 100% out of the issue and away from it is the only way that I can see it actually working out. Then, after that, if the gay community wants special treatment, we can stamp that "denied" and move on.

You are pretty much spot on. Getting government totally out of people's personal relationships is the best way to go. Unfortunately, it will never happen. The only other alternative I can see is get out of the "marriage" business. Keep "marriage" in the church and community and allow civil unions for everyone, both gay and straight. The government should no longer recognize "marriage," only the civil union.

If a community or church won't marry a gay couple then that is really tough s**t for that couple. They can move to somewhere that will if it bothers them that much. However, the state should not be able to deny the same couple a civil union. If the civil union is the only thing the government recognizes, what difference does it make? None.

Edited September 4, 2012 by mav

[strickj]

The kindergartners will focus on the harms of teasing,

So this is where you get the though that kindergartners are being taught to be gay?

[Links2k]

My faith in humanity takes a dive off a cliff every time I realize there are people among us whose brain produces such ridiculous nonesense as this.

It gave me a good laugh, but sadly, he is serious. I would rather live in a world full of everything that scares these guys than walk around living under the "American Taliban" as someone called them earlier.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

So, I think I've got it - but just so we're clear here - the majority of those who are against a federal recognition of a homosexual union feel that way because of the bible, is that right?

Who said they were against a federal recognition of a civil union? No, you don't quite have it, yet.

Edited September 5, 2012 by 6.8 AR

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You are pretty much spot on. Getting government totally out of people's personal relationships is the best way to go. Unfortunately, it will never happen. The only other alternative I can see is get out of the "marriage" business. Keep "marriage" in the church and community and allow civil unions for everyone, both gay and straight. The government should no longer recognize "marriage," only the civil union.

If a community or church won't marry a gay couple then that is really tough s**t for that couple. They can move to somewhere that will if it bothers them that much. However, the state should not be able to deny the same couple a civil union. If the civil union is the only thing the government recognizes, what difference does it make? None.

That's good enough for me!

[Smith]

It gave me a good laugh, but sadly, he is serious. I would rather live in a world full of everything that scares these guys than walk around living under the "American Taliban" as someone called them earlier.

Its doable. Move to Iran, Palatine, or Afghanistan!

Amazing how many places this thread has gone.

[thundersnow]

Freedom and equality can not be legislated. If you want freedom and equality take government out of the equation.

Well said!

[G27]

Who said they were against a federal recognition of a civil union? No, you don't quite have it, yet.

OK, so you guys ARE in favor of the federal government recognizing the civil union, granting the same rights and benefits as a traditional marriage?

[Links2k]

Its doable. Move to Iran, Palatine, or Afghanistan!

Amazing how many places this thread has gone.

No, some people are afraid of plenty of things right here in the good ole U.S. of A. I put my life on the life for this country and lost a bit of hearing in the process. I think that I'll stick around and watch the chickens come home to roost.

If just one of the things that you guys are afraid of comes to fruition it will be worth it just to watch some of you freak out.

Edited September 5, 2012 by LINKS2K