Father makes stand against LGBT

[Otter]

That's perfectly acceptable for me. If someone leads a movement to progress their affiliation that's perfectly acceptable. But outside of that there's no reason to put labels on someone because of their orientation. Also I never was talking about religion. It's ignorant people that immediately assume that just because someone is standing up for someone against LGBT that they are automatically religious.

Well, they do put label on everything though. A black man did this, a woman did that, a hispanic etc. Its unavoidable.

 

[Shinobi Train]

At least someone has the balls to speak their mind...I had given up hope and thought I was the only one not castrated.

 

[LolaxXx]

Theres no harm in learning about it. The more u know about anything the better

 

[SilverSlick]

I agree.

 

[Huang]

Spoiler

You must be registered for see links

A father in California is making a stand against LGBT education in school. He states that there's no reason for such a heavy learning emphasis on people that fall into the category of LGBT just because of their sexual orientation. I agree 100% with him. Just because you have a different affiliation when it comes to attraction doesn't make you anymore special then anyone else. Your deeds are not better, you getting married isn't special, you adopting/"having" kids is not a special moment ect. There's no reason for all this attention to go out for a minority just because they are different in regards to attraction. I have no issue with people learning about LGBT but they should learn about that specific person due to his contribution to society not because he was affiliated with LGBT. You go to school to learn about math, science, reading, grammar ect not LGBT.

I don't agree, the world is still filled with a lot of ignorant and bigotted parents. Education on social groups teaches kids not to be asocial discriminating little douchebags.

 

[Unbiased]

I don't agree, the world is still filled with a lot of ignorant and bigotted parents. Education on social groups teaches kids not to be asocial discriminating little douchebags.

It's bigotry to say someone is bigoted. It's the parents job to raise their kids not the school

 

[YowYan]

agreed.

 

[Wang]

Well, you should tell your dad to be more open minded

 

[Typhon]

“If someone has made an important contribution and that person happens to be classified as LGBT — then by all means, let’s teach our children about that person — but not because of that person’s sexual identity group,” Wasbin reportedly added.

I can't disagree with that statement.

If the schools want to teach about LGBT during *** Ed. or even Bio, then by all means do so. But there's no need to start labeling historical figures by their sexual orientation. If it isn't important to the material, there's no need for it.

 

[Unbiased]

“If someone has made an important contribution and that person happens to be classified as LGBT — then by all means, let’s teach our children about that person — but not because of that person’s sexual identity group,” Wasbin reportedly added.

I can't disagree with that statement.

If the schools want to teach about LGBT during *** Ed. or even Bio, then by all means do so. But there's no need to start labeling historical figures by their sexual orientation. If it isn't important to the material, there's no need for it.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^This is everything that need's to be said about the situation. Labeling based on orientation is irrelevant data that serves no purpose but to differentiate ourselves based on our external differences.

 

[cptenn94]

I have no issue with lgbt people. I do have an issue with their choice. While i am against their choice, i will never treat them any differently than other people. (in regards to treating them with respect and dignity. Nobody is perfect, and just because they partake in a practice that i find kinda disgusting, again, i will not treat them worse at all. That said, human sexuality, is not something to be taught by schools.(at least 100% not in middle or below. You should not be taught to be gay or straight or anything at all. Human sexuality can be taught in college and maybe upper levels of high school. And when it is taught, it should not be anything more than to respect a persons choices.(no beauty of being gay, or being in love with same *** bs(again, people are entitled to their opinions, and when a teacher would teach on a subject like this, it should simply be to accept the others choice, NOT to try to justify or promote it.


In short the father is correct. The only teaching in schools, about sexual orintation should be to not persecute others opinions, and to tolerate opinions that differ. Schools should not teach or promote any type of sexual orientation. That is not to much to ask for, and is perfectly reasonable. Private schools are allowed to teach whatever they like, but i prefer that if they teach their opinion, that they also teach tolerance, and humanity for those that have different opinions.

My policy as a christian, is to love everybody regardless of their thoughts and beliefs, and anything else about them. My personal policy, is to try my best to follow the christian policy and to treat everybody with respect and love and dignity. Im entitled to say that what you may do is wrong,etc, but i wont judge you for it. I judge all people by their character, not by anything else. And lastly, i dont condemn people.

The only gay people i have an issue with, are the ones that try to promote and justify their choice, and the ones that try to get their choice to be ACCEPTED, instead of tolerated. I dont go around saying anything about why being straight is so much better, or that its love etc. I just live the way i want, regardless of who may disagree, or agree. If you want to be gay fine, if you want to be straight fine, its your life. Just because you make a choice doesnt mean that i have to like it. I just have to tolerate it.

Let me give you an example from one of the things that annoys me. People driving the same speed on the left lane as someone on the right lane. They are causing a car backup, and we people who want to go the speed limit or above have to go slower than that because of the guy on the left lane. I dont have to accept him for driving that way, only tolerate it. I will tolerate it and honk my horn so he wil move and we all go past, because there will be some that will not tolerate, and could do something dangerous, and ultimately hurt him.

Simply, spreading acceptance of a lifestyle or a person, is almost as bad as spreading hate of a lifestyle, or pf a person. Spreading tolerance, however is what is fine.

I will finish this by repeating this one more time. While i think the lgbt lifestyle is wrong and disgusting, I judge a person by their character, not by what they are. I will love all people, even if i hate some of their actions and choices. There are evil straight people and evil lgbt people. There are also good lgbt and good straight people. And also nobody is perfect, and everybody does some wrong things in their life. Its not my place to say this is more wrong than that.


And to the subject of the thread. Simply it is not a public schools place to teach homosexuality, or heterosexuality. The most they should teach about sexuality is tolerance of others choices. Not to accept one or the other.

Teach about our similarities, not our differences. Teach us to respect each other no matter what.

That is what the public school should teach, not what is right and wrong. It is the parents job to teach what is right and wrong, and the child, once an adult can decide to believe what they want. Public schools take people of all faith color sexuality etc, so they should not teach one lifestyle is better than an other. Just tolerance of others who live differently. Private schools are allowed to teach opinons, as they can choose who they want in their schools.(ex girls prep school, boys prep choice of gender.)

honestly this is very reasonable

here is an example of a teacher teaching about *** ed, and covering sexuality.( this is just what i think a teacher should say)

"....and that is how kids are made. Now there are other methods of ***............ and just as there are those who are attracted to members of the other gender, there are some who are attracted to members of the same gender. There are those that are attracted to members of both genders, and those who attempt to switch genders. There is only one thing you need to know about them. While they may live differently from each other, and some may dislike the others choices, you should respect the person regardless. It is not my place to teach what is right and what is wrong, but my place to teach about this stuff. So if you encounter someone who is of a sexuality you may think is wrong or right, treat the same as you treat all other people."

something to that effect. the ......... means that the teacher drifted off to talk about other stuff. The teacher is free to have his/her own opinion, but when she is educateing children, she should not teach her opinions. As long as she/he teaches the greater teaching of tolerance, then she/he is free to say something like" so while i personally dont think that *insert lifestyle here* is right, i will treat them just like i would some one with a different lifestyle. I may not like how they live, but i will tolerate them."

keep in mind 2 things about these examples. 1 i am not to great at fully conveying what i think, and 2 that those examples, are not exactly what should be said, but the gist of it.



I apologize for getting off topic, but i felt it was neccesary, because it explained where i am coming from.

 

[cptenn94]

It's bigotry to say someone is bigoted. It's the parents job to raise their kids not the school

agreed

“If someone has made an important contribution and that person happens to be classified as LGBT — then by all means, let’s teach our children about that person — but not because of that person’s sexual identity group,” Wasbin reportedly added.

I can't disagree with that statement.

If the schools want to teach about LGBT during *** Ed. or even Bio, then by all means do so. But there's no need to start labeling historical figures by their sexual orientation. If it isn't important to the material, there's no need for it.

Agreed, it shouldnt matter what someones race or sexuality was/is. It is their character and deeds that matter.

 

[cptenn94]

Then perhaps they shouldn't teach about women's suffrage or freedom of slaves because they were once (and some still argue, myself included) second class citizens just as LGBTQ are now. It's change in our country. It's called history. And guess what kids go to school to learn as well....HISTORY. Plus, our schools barely teach anymore. We are falling behind every other country. And it's sad. SOOOO that argument will become valid when our schools go back to TEACHING.

I can agree with the schools falling behind stuff for sure, but honestly lgbt are not anywhere close to second class citzens. Actually look back at how women and colored people were treated, and realize that the way lgbt are NOWHERE close to being treated that way. There are still those today who are racist, and think women only exist to cook etc. But they are not allowed to act on it. If they become violent and hostile and harm a person, they get in trouble for it. The ONLY "right" that lgbt are truly denied is "marriage". And that even depends on what state you live in. The main trouble that comes from them wanting to get married, is they want to force different religious groups, who may believe that their lifestyle, is morally wrong, to do something that they find immoral. If the lgbt community ONLY pushed for having the state change its defintion of marriage to include them, and to allow them them to be recognized by the state as married, then most states wouldve passed it. You need to understand that sexuality IS STRICTLY A LIFESTYLE. NOT WHO YOU ARE. Please stop trying to compare it to womens sufferage and slavery. It is not even close. Women and slaves were treated as literally subhuman. They were forced to do certain things and were thought to be only a little more intellegent than a gorilla. They were treated as ANIMALS. So movements were formed to get them treated as being equal to people. It didnt matter what they accomplished, or could do, they were not treated equally. The only reason that some people are still treated as "second class citizens" is because people KEEP TALKING ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES THAT SHOULDNT MATTER. They attribute feats such as "the first black man to do...." or " the first woman to..." they highlight about race gender, and now apparently sexuality. Teaching things like this only teaches how we are different. Apparently unlike you, when i look at someone is see only a man and a woman. I dont see a black person a white person, a green person a blue person just a person. I dont see a gay person a bi person a trans person, or a straight person. I see a person. I judge someone by their character, and accomplishments. Not by anything else. I treat people equally no matter what. I treat all people with dignity and love. I dont classify. I may disagree with the lgbt lifestyle and thing it is wrong, but i realize noone is perfect and it is the lifestyle they chose. I still wont treat them differently. But the one thing that gets me angry is when you people try to compare the lgbt movement to the sufferage and slavery movements. The lgbt is not being treated even close to being subhuman, or like animals. They are treated as being different, which they are and possibly their LIFESTYLE as being wrong. Everybody is different, you think that people there are people who are annoying to you. So you treat them a bit differently , and likely if you can you avoid them. Then you best friend, you try to hang around. You treat them differently. You likely treat a murderer differently than you do a saint. So if you are gonna argue that treating others differently, is wrong, then argue that children adults elders prisoners saints etc are all being treated as second class citizens, because they are treated differently. I have yet to see ANY lgbt be treated anything close to subhuman. which unless they are treated as subhuman, they do not qualify as being the same as the slavery and sufferage movements. In all honesty, most of the super wealthy are treated much worse than any of the lgbt comunity. They are the closest thing to subhuman(based on all the hate of them i see) as our society is treating them. Celebrities are treated as more of objects than they are people. Many of them have to go to extreme lengths just to get a bit of privacy. If any of them want to get intimate with their spouse, they have to worry that someone may have a telescopic lense, or someone planted a camera somewhere to get a video or picture.

Simply i treat people based on their character. And while i may disagree with how somepeople live their lifestyle i will treat them all the same.

If you still think that lgbt are "second class citizens" then my advice for you is to stop trying to point out how they are different to people, point out how they are the same to people. Because if you are saying about how they are different, essentially, you are the reason they are different.

Math, History, English, and Science are all that need to be taught in schools. Nothing more and nothing less. ***-ed should be done by parents anyways.

agree that it is parents job to teach *** ed...southpark had a good episode highlighting this. Schools the only thing they should teach about the matter, is tolerance of those who disagree with how you think.

 

[Unbiased]

agreed



Agreed, it shouldnt matter what someones race or sexuality was/is. It is their character and deeds that matter.

Exactly but because their a homosexual they automatically feel that every little action they take is "news worthy" when it's not.

 

[kmrasengan]

I agree, and man i wish yubel saw this thread. it would be so much fun.

 

[Sasunarufan13]

Exactly but because their a homosexual they automatically feel that every little action they take is "news worthy" when it's not.

I don't think they assume every action of them is news worthy. They just want to be acknowledged for their important deeds like all the other people in the history books, instead of being kept out of the books because of their orientation.
Plus I'm not sure if they demanded for this kind of thing to happen. Didn't the higher ups just decide that they should be included without hearing what they thought of it? It has been a while since I last read the article, so I'm not sure how it was decided.

 

[Unbiased]

I don't think they assume every action of them is news worthy. They just want to be acknowledged for their important deeds like all the other people in the history books, instead of being kept out of the books because of their orientation.
Plus I'm not sure if they demanded for this kind of thing to happen. Didn't the higher ups just decide that they should be included without hearing what they thought of it? It has been a while since I last read the article, so I'm not sure how it was decided.

All I know is that there's a huge emphasis on homosexuality for grade schoolers when it's something that has not been scientifically proven to be normal.

 

[daking]

Spoiler

You must be registered for see links

A father in California is making a stand against LGBT education in school. He states that there's no reason for such a heavy learning emphasis on people that fall into the category of LGBT just because of their sexual orientation. I agree 100% with him. Just because you have a different affiliation when it comes to attraction doesn't make you anymore special then anyone else. Your deeds are not better, you getting married isn't special, you adopting/"having" kids is not a special moment ect. There's no reason for all this attention to go out for a minority just because they are different in regards to attraction. I have no issue with people learning about LGBT but they should learn about that specific person due to his contribution to society not because he was affiliated with LGBT. You go to school to learn about math, science, reading, grammar ect not LGBT.

be a good person
be like jesus

 

[Hyouban shin]

It's bigotry to say someone is bigoted. It's the parents job to raise their kids not the school

It's also society's job, and school is part of society. If it were a parent's job only, then children would always be exactly like their parents, which is untrue. And, it's bigoted to say someone who's bigoted is bigoted.

 

[Sasunarufan13]

All I know is that there's a huge emphasis on homosexuality for grade schoolers when it's something that has not been scientifically proven to be normal.

Wait, grade school - how old are the students then? Sorry, I don't use that term where I live so I'm always confused when I see it.

And scientifically proven to be normal ... Are you talking about homosexuality? Because science has proven it isn't illness and it is normal. It's an orientation like being straight is. Don't see why being straight should be considered the only normal norm and the rest not. I mean there have been gay people since at least the time of the ancient Rome and Greece.