I'm going to homeschool my kids, if I ever have any

Originally posted by whobdamandog
No offense..but should we really be talking with 3 year olds about sexuality? I mean damb..I really think some common sense should be used in these topics. The whole idea of "accepting all lifestyles" I think has been blown out of proportion in the US. I believe everyone should be more "tolerant" yes..but as far as "accepting" I don't know about that..

Anyway..the Public schools really shouldn't have to be involved in this kind of subject. Parents should be teaching their kids this stuff. I hate when government forcefully mandates these teachings...and then tries to pass themselves off as being neutral on the subject..If they really want to be neutral..just don't bring it up at all..and let Parents decide what's best for their children.

But, the point is that parents aren't teaching about these things at home. I know that this is a touchy subject in America today. But what about tomorrow? The people on this board who have a problem with homosexuality will think I'm insane for saying this, but if parents won't teach acceptance and equality, then maybe the public school system should. No, I don't think that students at the age of three should be taught anything about sexuality..homosexual, heterosexual, bi, etc. But, there comes a time when these things will be brought to their attention. And besides, do you think the parent that hates gays is going to refrain from using words like f*cking F*g! or queer mother f*cker in front of their kids, no matter what the childs age is? Maybe the influence of the forced acceptance in the public school system could act as a counter weight in the development of their personality and opinion towards homosexuality. I would say that the greatest hurddle that gays have to overcome is "normal" people understanding the aspect that we are part of normal life. I'm not going to debate the meaning of the word normal. But, it is a fact that gays exist. You could kill us all, but there will be more. We're never going to go away. As a result, that means we are part of the everyday world.

Actually, frankly, I totally disagree that parents should be able to veto what their children are taught. I think that's a terrible idea.

Education is a legal responsibility and it is broader than just literacy.

A major problem in this world is lack of tolerance, and it should be taught at an early age.

If parents don't want that- I don't think public services should care a tiny toss about their wishes. It is not their right to dictate mandatory state education. That is the whole point of education being divorced from the family.

I think schools teaching tolerance of homosexuality is fine, just not that early. Give em a few more years, till they can truly understand the situation.

I don't see the value of waiting. People learn the bases of these values at a very early age. It is hardly as if these are sophisticated, in-depth discussions about the nature of sexuality- it is simply the creation of an environment where tolerance is normal.

If the kids are too young to understand what homosexuality is, they can't really be tolerant of it no matter what.

But they can be tolerant of difference- seeing nothing inherently wrong about a family with two fathers, for example. The hows and whys of that situation, you can look at that later, but the NORMALITY of it, you can learn at very early age.

But if you tell them sometimes two dad's love eachother instead of a mom and a dad, of course they are going to be curious of the why's and how's. Little kids never just accept "because they just do" as an answer, that's why people make up lies about storks bringing babies and all that nonsense.

Sorry, but actually, kids DO respond to a tolerant environment- they will see it as normal.

If you have books for the kids of that age with heterosexual parents in, it is endemically prejudiced to exclude any with homosexual ones in. That is drawing a difference of validity which invites intolerance.

It's not different. They are both valid. There is no reason to quarantine kids from it. If they are given no reason to think it is different they won't question it.

Then you can get onto the matter of sexuality itself come sex ed time.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Sorry, but actually, kids DO respond to a tolerant environment- they will see it as normal.

If you have books for the kids of that age with heterosexual parents in, it is endemically prejudiced to exclude any with homosexual ones in. That is drawing a difference of validity which invites intolerance.

It's not different. They are both valid. There is no reason to quarantine kids from it. If they are given no reason to think it is different they won't question it.

Then you can get onto the matter of sexuality itself come sex ed time.

But, the problem comes when little Billy goes home and tells his dad that his teacher was talking about a little girl with two daddies. It isn't the kid that has to know more, it's the parents. The parents will ask what the teacher said, why the teacher said it and if little Billy knows WHY the little girl has two daddies. Little Billy is going to wonder why, but like so many things in life, kids just wonder. So, the school might not tell little Billy that the little girl has two daddies because there is such a thing as homosexuality and what that implies, but the parents know why the little girl has two daddies. That's where the shit storm starts. And few teachers are going to rick their job to teach tolerance. That is why I applaud the superintendant in this story. Even though there was no teacher responsible for the kid getting the book, but he still refused to side with the parent who wanted the child to be sheltered. Society as a whole is going to have to change. And if society isn't willing to change for the better, then why not force it to change?

As long as most kids have heterosexual parents and have been around mostly heterosexuals, homosexuality will appear different no matter how many books the kids read.

I see where you're going, maybe you could have books or whatever with two dads instead of a mom and a dad or whatever but even if you did I doubt the kid would even think about the fact that they are gay unless you directly told them so. What I mean is that if a kid sees two male parents in a book, they still aren't going to grasp the fact that they are supposed to be just like a mom and dad and will probably just assume they are good friends. Therefore, the kid really still wouldn't be any more prepared for tolerance of homosexuality because they still haven't grasped the fact that they are supposed to love each other like their moms and dads do.

I'm not saying it couldn't work, just that I think it would most likely just lead to confusion and more questions. I think a better age would be about 3rd-4th grade.

Originally posted by Afro Cheese
As long as most kids have heterosexual parents and have been around mostly heterosexuals, homosexuality will appear different no matter how many books the kids read.

That's where the parents have to come into play. When they see two guys walking down the street holding hands, don't cover your kids eyes or move to the other side of the street. Let the kid see. The big problem here is that parents are afraid to be parents. They don't want to answer questions.

It reminds me of this parenting helpline thats out there now. If you can't raise kids, then you shouldn't be a parent. It seems to me that parents in this day and age have just as much growing up to do as the kids their failing at raising.

Yeah I agree society needs to stop considering it to be "taboo." I think it'll happen in time. I mean 50 years ago you couldn't say pregnant on TV, now look at us..

............
Do you see now what the 60's has done?

Originally posted by PVS
its amazing. you can tattoo the truth on their forheads and they'll still post with an arguement based entirely on assumption and not fact.
god forbid we should all take the time to read the article and know what the topic is about.

Maybe you should take a little bit of your own advice..check out an excerpt from the article...

Parker, who is a member of the Article 8 Alliance, which supports the ouster of four judges on the state's Supreme Judicial Court who ruled in favor of same-sex marriage, demanded that the book be removed from the school library and that his son be pulled from discussions about homosexuality whether they are in planned lessons or arise spontaneously.

Perhaps you should "re-read" before you "assume" I'm arguing something that's not mentioned. The man clearly asked for his child to be "pulled" from discussions involving the sexual topics. Now answer my question...why is that an unreasable request? And how the hell would or could a topic such as human "sexuality" come up in a normal/"spontaneous" discussions during "Elementary School"?

As far as the man's demand to pull the book from the school..I thought about it for a while..and believe that he really wasn't being all that unreasonable. After all..he is a "taxpayer" and his money..like the rest of us "hardworking" American's money goes to fund the public eduction system.

I believe another postee stated that the Goverment should have the right to mandate/teach various lifestyles so that children learn to "accept them". If that's the case, then the Government should also have a unit teaching various religious doctrines as well right?

God forbid you answer that question..the minute any one even see's something reminiscent of any "Religious" doctrine in the schools now a days...some nutcase will go in as this man did..with the same drive and passion..and demand that the government pull the book from the school..hell if I do recall...I believe this has already happened...it goes both ways my friend. My point is that the Government should not be "mandating/determining" which lifestyles are acceptable...and which one's are not. This is a free nation..and we should all be allowed to teach or children what "we want" to teach them..as long as we're not breaking any laws or infringing upon any one else's personal rights in the process.

Originally posted by whobdamandog
Maybe you should take a little bit of your own advice..check out an excerpt from the article...

Perhaps you should "re-read" before you "assume" I'm arguing something that's not mentioned in the article. The man clearly asked for his child to be "pulled" from discussions involving the sexual topics. Now answer my question...why is that an unreasable request? And how the hell would or could a topic such as human "sexuality" come up in a normal/"spontaneous" discussions during "Elementary School"?

As far as the man's demand to pull the book from the school..I thought about it for a while..and believe that he really wasn't being all that unreasonable. After all..he is a "taxpayer" and his money..like the rest of us "hardworking" American's money goes to fund the public eduction system.

I believe another postee stated that the Goverment should have the right to mandate/teach various lifestyles so that children learn to "accept them". If that's the case, then the Government should also have a unit teaching various religious doctrines as well right?

God forbid you answer that question..the minute any one even see's something reminiscent of any "Religious" doctrine in the schools now a days...some nutcase will go in as this man did..with the same drive and passion..and demand that the government pull the book from the school..hell if I do recall...I believe this has already happened...it goes both ways my friend. My point is that the Government should not be "mandating/determining" which lifestyles are acceptable...and which one's are not. This is a free nation..and we should all be allowed to teach or children what "we want" to teach them..as long as we're not breaking any laws or infringing upon any one else's personal rights in the process.

👆 ✅ 👆

I hope someone gives you an honest response and responds to what you have said instead of snaking around your points. That was articulated very well man
WHOB- 😖mart:

Originally posted by moviejunkie23
👆 ✅ 👆

I hope someone gives you an honest response and responds to what you have said instead of snaking around your points. That was articulated very well man
WHOB- 😖mart:

Thanks..but you know the nature of these boards. No one ever comes up with a direct/honest reply..lol...

Originally posted by whobdamandog
Thanks..but you know the nature of these boards. No one ever comes up with a direct/honest reply..lol...

Yea i have noticed that, though are allot of people on here as well that seem to make good points and meet you at yours as well. First thing that comes to mind is while i was chatting about one thing awile ago me and Afro Cheese had a differnce on a topic and Afro Cheese seemed to be actually listening to what i posted and had some good points of his own to bring to the table.

Anyway i shoudn;t divert this thread to get away from the subject at hand, I would like to hear a well thought out opposing view to that last point because i think you hit the bullzeye, at least for my point of view

Originally posted by whobdamandog
And how the hell would or could a topic such as human "sexuality" come up in a normal/"spontaneous" discussions during "Elementary School"?

Originally posted by whobdamandog
As far as the man's demand to pull the book from the school..I thought about it for a while..and believe that he really wasn't being all that unreasonable. After all..he is a "taxpayer" and his money..like the rest of us "hardworking" American's money goes to fund the public eduction system.

What about taxpayers who don't mind if their children know of alternative family structures? As for the taxpayer, all taxpayers money is funneled in some aspect to public education. The 80 year old widow, who doesn't have children pays for public education. My parents paid taxes for public education, despite the fact that I went to private school my whole life. So, my parents paid for two educations. One of which I didn't benefit from.

Originally posted by whobdamandog
I believe another postee stated that the Goverment should have the right to mandate/teach various lifestyles so that children learn to "accept them". If that's the case, then the Government should also have a unit teaching various religious doctrines as well right?

First of all, I hate the term lifestyle. Second, there is a seperation of church and state. If you want your kids to learn about religion, then send them to private school, where they are allowed to teach anything they want.

Originally posted by whobdamandog
God forbid you answer that question..the minute any one even see's something reminiscent of any "Religious" doctrine in the schools now a days...some nutcase will go in as this man did..with the same drive and passion..and demand that the government pull the book from the school..hell if I do recall...I believe this has already happened...it goes both ways my friend. My point is that the Government should not be "mandating/determining" which lifestyles are acceptable...and which one's are not. This is a free nation..and we should all be allowed to teach or children what "we want" to teach them..as long as we're not breaking any laws or infringing upon any one else's personal rights in the process.

It does not go both ways. Yes, this is a free nation. I have no problem with people believing in god. In fact, I wouldn't have a problem with the aspects of different religions being taught in public schools. But, not at the expense of open mindedness. But, you can't just teach about christianity. If religion is going to be taught in school, it can't just be christianity.

Originally posted by whobdamandog
Maybe you should take a little bit of your own advice..check out an excerpt from the article...

Perhaps you should "re-read" before you "assume" I'm arguing something that's not mentioned. The man clearly asked for his child to be "pulled" from discussions involving the sexual topics. Now answer my question...why is that an unreasable request? And how the hell would or could a topic such as human "sexuality" come up in a normal/"spontaneous" discussions during "Elementary School"?

a whole lotta backpeddling. you said that it was instructed in the kids class:

Originally posted by whobdamandog
No offense..but should we really be talking with 3 year olds about sexuality?....

...I hate when government forcefully mandates these teachings...and then tries to pass themselves off as being neutral on the subject..If they really want to be neutral..just don't bring it up at all...

you made a false assumption and thats that. so no need to get all defensive. im glad you finally read the article though

Yes he did read the article, and he also pointed out there was variables from it that were additional to the book. Something that allot of people in this thread are trying to ignore.