DescentBB

Sergeant Thorne wrote:That's just what I mean. That's not me. I'm not stubborn, I have some very good reasons for my convictions on that matter.

What reasons? The only non-bigoted reason I've heard was that some people who heard a tale that God killed some people for being gay many, many years ago, and that some people who followed Jesus/God, dispite not being under the influence of Jesus/God, said that being gay was unholy.
Neither points are particularly valid though, because:
1: There's no reason to believe that some of the stories in the Old Testament are true, but others aren't. And I don't think you really believe that Adam and Eve were the first humans, and the world is flat.
2: People whose mentor was a God are not part of God themselves, they just learned from him. And considering how Jesus never said that being gay is unholy according to the Bible, I don't think he thought it to his apostles.

If I've missed anything, feel free to point it out.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:I'm very much against homosexuality, and I am not a bigot.

"I hate blacks but I'm not racist"

/me pukes.

If I had children…I would sure as hell would never let them go to public school. And if for some reason I did have to let them go to public school, I wouldn’t keep them home on a DOS I would send them to school with some educational literature such as “avoiding gay pedophiles”.


“1. stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own. “ LOL, that covers just about everyone I have ever known.

Spidey wrote:1. stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own. “ LOL, that covers just about everyone I have ever known.

The key phrase beingstubborn and complete intolerance. Having differing opinions is not bigotry. Being intolerant of those differing opinions is.

I can read.

If one is not bigoted or intolerant, then what is it? Fear?

What makes people so afraid that they don't want to expose their children to the realities of gender variance in others at school? Are they afraid that exposure to someone else's homosexuality will turn their children gay?

What utter bulls@#t! You can't make children gay just by teaching them about how others live their lives. As for exposure to gay pedophiles, statistically there are FAR more heterosexual pedophiles in the world than homosexual ones!

It doesn’t belong in school…plain & simple.

Children in school are a captive audience, therefore it’s inappropriate.

Spidey wrote:I wouldn’t keep them home on a DOS I would send them to school with some educational literature such as “avoiding black pedophiles”.

see what i did there?

Yes, as always you missed the mark.

The reason I chose \"Gay\" Pedophiles is because they were the topic of the day.

however it is common for people who hate all forms of deviance to associate gays with pedophilia. I see people express this opinion a lot, and wouldn't be surprised if that is what you are implying right here.

it's the whole \"would you be afraid to let your kid sleep over at their friends house if he has 2 dads?\" question.

You see, what you fail to recognize is that using school to push a social agenda is unfair, and I’m only using the event to get a little “turnaround is fair play”.

I could just as easily used Spreading AIDS instead of Pedophilia.

You think people should just roll over and capitulate when someone shoves something down their throat?

Edit:

JFTR I don’t hate all kinds of deviance…quite the contrary. What I dislike is someone assuming that I have to accept it, and force feeding it to me, or my kids.

what is being shoved down your throat?
is someone shoving a cawk down your throat? (★■◆●ing swear filter)

acceptance of others is a passive act, you don't need to do anything. As comparison to actively shooting people you dislike, that are doing nothing to you.

tunnelcat wrote:If one is not bigoted or intolerant, then what is it? Fear?

What makes people so afraid that they don't want to expose their children to the realities of gender variance in others at school? Are they afraid that exposure to someone else's homosexuality will turn their children gay?

What utter bulls@#t! You can't make children gay just by teaching them about how others live their lives. As for exposure to gay pedophiles, statistically there are FAR more heterosexual pedophiles in the world than homosexual ones!

Are you purposely misrepresenting, or are you just that naive? Homosexuality is wrong. It is an unnatural deviation. That is the position of these people. It's all about the context of the information. At some point I would teach my children about the realities of gender deviations in others, but I would teach them that it is wrong--it's not acceptable behavior. And that's because it isn't, not because I hate homos. These schools on the other hand would be afraid to make that statement at best, and condone such behavior as normal at worst. So what you're saying is the utter bull****, because teaching children that it's acceptable obviously increases the likelihood that they will try it. I don't care what some people say, a child can have an improper urge, and if properly warned against it, can make the right choice and go on to live a normal, happy life. Children are naturally curious, they'd try going in the road once if they weren't warned against it.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:At some point I would teach my children about the realities of gender deviations in others, but I would teach them that it is wrong--it's not acceptable behavior.

how will you tell your own intersexed child that her body is unacceptable?
I want to know how you'll word it.

This is why kids of religious zealots are so messed up. Could you imagine growing up always being told you are a sinner and will burn in hell if you so much as question your place in you parents world?

he mentioned the realities of gender deviations.

i liked how he mentioned reality.

right before saying it's wrong.

reality is wrong.

lulz




I guess the intersexed kid is going to try really hard to WILL his body into the correct heteronormative orientation. To please Daddy.

Intersexed kids actually ask stuff like this: \"will i get a penis when i grow up?\"


\"Sure Johnny, but only if God loves you\"

It’s just an expression Roid.

I will teach my children about homosexuality, not some political group…period

Sorry, roid, I went and reread and realized you were right and changed my post while yopu were posting...my bad

Spidey wrote:It’s just an expression Roid.

My reply was just a reply Spidey

Spidey wrote:political group

NOW what are you on about?

WillyP wrote:This is why kids of religious zealots are so messed up. Could you imagine growing up always being told you are a sinner and will burn in hell if you so much as question your place in you parents world?

that is just scary. poor kid.

The Political Group is.....

Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network

Man you’re annoying.

My point is that it doesn’t belong in school…want to take a crack at that?

Duper wrote:Who is forcing their value system on our kids now in schools? God forbid it should be churches.. might as well be gays.

Spidey wrote:using school to push a social agenda is unfair ...
My point is that it doesn't belong in school... want to take a crack at that?

I'm with Spidey, just so long as you replace "school" with "Public School".

The key point IS that no one likes having the government shove a viewpoint down their throat. A little application of the Golden Rule would go a long way here. When Christians ask for teacher led prayer in public schools, they are putting non-believers through the same uncomfortable situation that a public schools supporting the homosexual day of silence is putting them through.

My work here is done.

Done…I actually meant to say “Public School”

Spidey wrote:The Political Group is.....

Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network

Man you’re annoying.

My point is that it doesn’t belong in school…want to take a crack at that?

are you aware of this form of protest?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sit-in
i remind you the students involved are willing volunteers

so.. what 'values' are they trying to 'force' on people? Anyone have an answer for that?

roid wrote:i remind you the students involved are willing volunteers

And if they had chosen a form of protest that didn't violate school rules (such as wearing pink or somesuch) then they would be entirely within their rights. Even as is, as long as they are willing to suffer the punishments that happen for not responding to a teacher, they are within their rights.

There is only a problem if the protest is sponsored, encouraged, or supported by the government owned and run school. Then it ceases to be a private protest and becomes a statement of government policy.

Please note that this is the IDENTICAL problem with prayer in public schools. If students want to get together and pray on their own, no problem. Teacher led prayer, or the public school facilitating the prayer in any way becomes exactly the same problem that we have with the public school supporting the gay day of silence.

Fenro wrote:so.. what 'values' are they trying to 'force' on people? Anyone have an answer for that?

The value being pushed here is twofold. One I happen to agree with, the other I dont.
1: That the hatred and violence that has been perpetrated against homosexuals is WRONG. I agree with this 100%
2: That homosexual behavior is ok. I disagree with this.

But it doesn't really MATTER whether I agree with the stance or not. I believe that prayer is a very VERY good thing, but I am STRONGLY opposed to teacher led prayer in public schools. The government should not be supporting my religious ideas, or my social agenda, or anyone elses either.

Public schools make this a nightmare because education is inevitably values laced.

Sergeant Thorne wrote: Are you purposely misrepresenting, or are you just that naive? Homosexuality is wrong. It is an unnatural deviation. That is the position of these people. It's all about the context of the information. At some point I would teach my children about the realities of gender deviations in others, but I would teach them that it is wrong--it's not acceptable behavior. And that's because it isn't, not because I hate homos. These schools on the other hand would be afraid to make that statement at best, and condone such behavior as normal at worst. So what you're saying is the utter bull****, because teaching children that it's acceptable obviously increases the likelihood that they will try it. I don't care what some people say, a child can have an improper urge, and if properly warned against it, can make the right choice and go on to live a normal, happy life. Children are naturally curious, they'd try going in the road once if they weren't warned against it.

Sorry, but I'm not naive. Homosexuality HAS been found in animals. It's even being studied in male sheep at Oregon State University.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/U.S._study_ ... _sexuality

There was even a recent British science documentary on the subject with other species of animals showing the trait. If you think that homosexuality is not normal, then you are at best, closed-minded to not even consider the possibility of gender variance in humans.

I also strongly disagree that children will dabble in homosexuality if shown it in schools. Most children KNOW their sexuality by age six and lock in on it. You can tell that by how children play with toys and their peers. But if some child presents as different from the gender norm, they have to hide it from their peers for fear of intense bullying. Sometimes it can lead to murder, so intense is the hatred. Adults are the ones the perpetuate the problem with their own fears and bigotry.

tunnelcat wrote:Sorry, but I'm not naive.

Yes you are. I wasn't talking about the issue of homosexuality at that point, I was talking about your representation of the people pulling their children out of those schools on the day of silence. It's not the first time I've heard that kind of naivety, either. It's a failure to understand the situation. A failure to understand the objections. Even if you disagree with it, it's naive or dishonest to say it doesn't make sense. It makes perfect sense.

tunnelcat wrote:Most children KNOW their sexuality by age six and lock in on it. You can tell that by how children play with toys and their peers. But if some child presents as different from the gender norm, they have to hide it from their peers for fear of intense bullying.

Now that's regurgitated nonsense. The idea that a person's sexuality is separate from their gender is a rule that's being derived from an exception. Are we to believe that all girls who have tom-boy attributes are not female in their sexuality? My sister was a tom-boy when she was growing up, always doing things with us boys. Now she's married with children of her own. All this "you can tell by" stuff doesn't hold water. Boy and girls ought to be encouraged in their gender role, not merely left to "discover" it for themselves.

Personally, I can't help but wonder if there's an element of cowardice in cases of homosexuality. It's much easier to relate to people of the same sex.

Anymore in this culture the women are too tough and the men are too weak. It's little wonder there's more and more confusion about sexuality.

Lol...i just read, and re-read those last five sentences, and i'm not sure if you're taking the piss or not. I'm gobsmacked!

Concerning marriage, and whether or not it's an invention of the church, or the domain of the church:

It's obviously not. I challenge you to find a period of history in any area that was without marriage, whether Christian or non. It's a recognition of a union between a man and a woman.

Where there is religion, it presides over the form of marriage. In the USA, marriage cannot be solely the domain of the church, because not everyone has a church.

For Christians, Jesus said, "Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate." (Mark 10:9)

Most of you don't believe in God, but I believe that this is the reason marriage is so common throughout history:

Genesis 2 wrote:18 And the LORD God said, "It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.

Genesis 1:27 wrote: 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

Kilarin teh Awesomeness wrote:And if they had chosen a form of protest that didn't violate school rules (such as wearing pink or somesuch) then they would be entirely within their rights. Even as is, as long as they are willing to suffer the punishments that happen for not responding to a teacher, they are within their rights.

Their is only a problem if the protest is sponsored, encouraged, or supported by the government owned and run school. Then it ceases to be a private protest and becomes a statement of government policy.

Please note that this is the IDENTICAL problem with prayer in public schools. If students want to get together and pray on their own, no problem. Teacher led prayer, or the public school facilitating the prayer in any way becomes exactly the same problem that we have with the public school supporting the gay day of silence.

QUOTED FOR F***ING TRUTH! ESPECIALLY THE LAST PART!

I believe that prayer is a very VERY good thing, but I am STRONGLY opposed to teacher led prayer in public schools.

This part is the only part I would like to comment on, as if it is an after school club led by a teacher, then it should be alright. Of course not in class

(I just like the little green happy face, it is the best thing ever to happen in this board)

roid wrote:

Spidey wrote:The Political Group is.....

Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network

Man you’re annoying.

My point is that it doesn’t belong in school…want to take a crack at that?

are you aware of this form of protest?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sit-in
i remind you the students involved are willing volunteers

Sit-in...is that anything like a Laugh-in?...Give me a break, I’m 51 and live in a Major City in the USA…what do you think?

The participants may well “be” volunteers…that doesn’t make it ok, the rest of the students are not volunteers they’re just subject to it. Still doesn’t belong in Public School.

Let me put it another way…

I reserve the right to be the sole teacher to my children of the following subjects:

1. Religion
2. Politics
3. Morals
4. Ethics
5. Values
6. Sexuality

Got a problem with that!

Sergeant Thorne wrote: Now that's regurgitated nonsense. The idea that a person's sexuality is separate from their gender is a rule that's being derived from an exception. Are we to believe that all girls who have tom-boy attributes are not female in their sexuality? My sister was a tom-boy when she was growing up, always doing things with us boys. Now she's married with children of her own. All this "you can tell by" stuff doesn't hold water. Boy and girls ought to be encouraged in their gender role, not merely left to "discover" it for themselves.

So you think that all girls should be "encouraged" to behave and play as girls and all boys should be "encouraged" to behave and play as boys. At what point or age do you force proper gender conformation? It tends to be a very young age for boys in our society, not so much for girls. Effeminate boys tend to get to worst treatment and coercion to conform to so called 'standard gender typical roles' from both their peers and parents.

And what gender roles do you "encourage" for each gender? That the girls will always be subservient to males, dress up, play house, do 'girl' things, while boys are "encouraged" to be dominant, play rough, build things, etc.? Who decides what types of toys to play with or what to wear when the child is behaving differently from their gender?

As a parent, for example, would you force your son to conform to your and society's definition of normal for boys, even if he decided that girl things were more to his liking? Would you be upset if he fought you on it?

I'm of the OPINION that gender roles should NOT be enforced on children. They should be allowed to find their own way in life and to make up their own minds on how they want to live life.

tunnelcat wrote: I'm of the OPINION that gender roles should NOT be enforced on children. They should be allowed to find their own way in life and to make up their own minds on how they want to live life.

Why are gender roles any different from morality or ethics? I’m going to teach my son what is to be a man, mostly by setting the example to follow, along with a certain amount of guidance. A good roll model is important to a child, along with guidance, without that how will they learn…peer pressure?

When his peers are teaching him that to be a man you must get as many bitches pregnant as possible, I would hope that I have enough influence to contradict that.

But in the end when he becomes an adult the ultimate decision of what constitutes being a man is up to him, I can only hope that I did the right thing.

Thank you Kil, you were the only one to answer my question.

That pretty much confirms what I thought beforehand; That groups are against this because they simply don't like homosexual behaviour. Not because it's a problem for society in general but because it simply rubs them the wrong way.

the only real response I have to that is for them to just get over themselves. It's 2008 already. not 1950.

Ferno wrote:Not because it's a problem for society in general but because it simply rubs them the wrong way.

Hey, whatever you want to think I guess, Ferno. Don't let yourself be troubled with the facts or what's been said. It's simpler that way.

As for the subject of female role, I may start a topic just so I can get this straight. Maybe I can get some mod assistance with that?

tunnelcat wrote:I'm of the OPINION that gender roles should NOT be enforced on children.

Well, it needs to be handled with wisdom and discernment: just because a boy isn't thumping his chest all of the time doesn't mean something is amiss. But a boy is a boy.

tunnelcat wrote:They should be allowed to find their own way in life and to make up their own minds on how they want to live life.

See, that's foolish when you're talking about young children. Children come into this world lacking experience and knowledge. They need guidance. A lot of the kids in my neighborhood didn't get it, growing up, and to me it was obvious.

As far as the rest of your post, come back when you can be a little more reasonable than, "coerced", "force", "subservient", and "dominant". It would take me longer than I care to take to wade through all of that. How would you like it if I addressed you as if I thought all of your views and intentions were the worst possible? I know I'm in strong disagreement with most of the people on this board, but give me a little credit, huh?

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Hey, whatever you want to think I guess, Ferno. Don't let yourself be troubled with the facts or what's been said. It's simpler that way.

Might help if you posted some.

you didn't even try and answer the one question I had.

and the opinions i've seen are mainly centered around 'I hate fags!' and calling the day of silence 'stupid'.

Ferno wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Hey, whatever you want to think I guess, Ferno. Don't let yourself be troubled with the facts or what's been said. It's simpler that way.

Might help if you posted some.

you didn't even try and answer the one question I had.

and the opinions i've seen are mainly centered around 'I hate fags!' and calling the day of silence 'stupid'.

Man, you need to relax on the hostility. This is a very good thread. It has lots of pro's and con's to a very sensitive issue. They are exploring various aspects from different view points. What did you expect would happen? HO HUM and no one responds or is everyone supposed to succumb to your point of view only.


bye the way - in all 3 pages you where the only one to use the word stupid aside from me. You used it in a negative fashion and I responded it was not stupid. The word is never again used by anyone