- This topic has 380 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 8 months ago by
FlyerInHi.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 26, 2013 at 7:22 PM #768526November 27, 2013 at 12:15 AM #768531
paulflorez
ParticipantAs a married, gay man, if I decide I want to see what is on the gay agenda, I typically peek at raunchy conservative sites like free republic, since they seem to obsessively have all the deets on all the destruction I’m suppose to have wrought that day.
I wonder what people like paramount would do with married gay teachers. I remember seeing spouses visit their teacher husband/wife (opposite-sex couple) before as a child, including sharing a kiss during a hello or a goodbye. I don’t think I ever heard outrage about that.
Then there are the plethora of childrens books that highlight opposite-sex couples and their families: The Berenstain Bears, The Ugly Duckling, Hop on Pop, etc. Do these books expose children to “sex” somehow, or is it only books about families headed by same-sex couples that expose children to “sex”?
I agree with most everyone else here that a book that simply talks about a same-sex couple adopting a child together is not sexual. There’s little difference between such a book and books that highlight multi-racial families. I’m also tired of the knee-jerk censorship of educational materials that simply include families headed by same-sex couples. Gay parents have kids in the education system too.
November 27, 2013 at 1:35 AM #768533temeculaguy
Participantpaul, please do not take this as a flippant comment after your first hand account and insight. But when I was on college one of my friends was raised by his gay dad and his partner. It was the 1980’s and not something that was common or commonly spoken of, and certainly not something that was supported by the majority. Anyways, that friend is a big part of my view on the subject today. Not only was he straight (he felt you were born that way, I tend to agree) but the guy was an ass magnet of the highest order. He knew how to dress, was very cultured and well traveled, but most of he knew how to talk to women. In summary, he had more game than anyone I had ever met, to this day and I took a number of cues from him. We had a speech class together that was loaded with hotties. I think I ended up sleeping with one of them, he slept with the rest, sometimes more than one at a time. So do I think gay couples are something to be feared when raising children and will make them gay, nope. In some cases they can be better parents than most straight couples. But this is purely anecdotal, feel free to allow your religion or fear to dismiss differing opinions.
November 27, 2013 at 2:05 AM #768529CA renter
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]Not convinced that men attacking women should be classified as hate crime. Maybe because I’m a man and subconsciously I’m protecting my sex.
I’m not against broadening the legal definition of hate crimes. Women can go for it.
That has no bearing on the hates crimes we have defined so far.[/quote]
Again, you are still conflating two very different things:
1. the background of the perpetrator
2. the background of the victim
It is primarily the background of the victim that establishes whether or not a crime is a “hate crime.” You keep talking about the background of the perpetrator; that is not at issue here.
————–
As for your above comment, most rapes are committed against women. The perpetrators are clearly targeting a group of victims who have been oppressed at least as much as any other group throughout human history. Why is rape not classified as a hate crime?
November 27, 2013 at 9:21 AM #768537CDMA ENG
ParticipantAgain…
The real crux of the whole arguement is there should be NO AGENDAS in schools at all.
Gay or Straight.
God or Athethist.
Democrat or Republican.Schools need to focus on thier primary charter. Teaching the 3Rs.
What is taught outside of the school is the sole responisiblity of the parents (Homo or Hetro).
The parent should have full control over what and when any subject is address.
Eitherway this whole thread was probably a waste of space as Paramount never did produce the literature in question.
So essentially this whole thing has been a law school case study.
CE
November 27, 2013 at 9:26 AM #768538spdrun
ParticipantNo civics? No economics? No history? All of those are ALWAYS colored by opinion, politics, and maybe even religion.
November 27, 2013 at 9:26 AM #768539ParticipantNo civics? No economics? No history? All of those are ALWAYS colored by opinion, politics, and maybe even religion.
November 27, 2013 at 9:27 AM #768540Participant[quote=spdrun]No civics? No economics? No history? All of those are ALWAYS colored by opinion, politics, and maybe even religion.[/quote]
What fucking school did you go to that they taught civics to a 7 year old?
Always the troll.
CE
November 27, 2013 at 9:30 AM #768541Participant[quote=CDMA ENG]Again…
The real crux of the whole arguement is there should be NO AGENDAS in schools at all.
Gay or Straight.
God or Athethist.
Democrat or Republican.Schools need to focus on thier primary charter. Teaching the 3Rs.
What is taught outside of the school is the sole responisiblity of the parents (Homo or Hetro).
The parent should have full control over what and when any subject is address.
Eitherway this whole thread was probably a waste of space as Paramount never did produce the literature in question.
So essentially this whole thing has been a law school case study.
CE[/quote]
I’ll go one further from the orginal arguement. Why introduce the idea of adoption? Let alone same sex relations.
Both of those ideas should be left to the home.
CE
November 27, 2013 at 9:38 AM #768544FlyerInHi
Guest[quote=CA renter]
It is primarily the background of the victim that establishes whether or not a crime is a “hate crime.” [/quote]
Ok. So the perpetrator gets extra punishment for a hate crime. And that is unjust to whom?
November 27, 2013 at 9:42 AM #768546scaredyclassic
ParticipantCivics is the study of the great theoretical and practical aspects of citizenship, its rights and duties; the duties of citizens to each other as members of a political body and to the government.[1] It includes the study of civil law and civil code, and the study of government with attention to the role of citizens ― as opposed to external factors ― in the operation and oversight of government.
shoot. sounds like it covers gay marriage…
but i agree. i hate teachers who fail to teach math and english, then send kids home with hours of homework to cover up their own failure to get anything done in school.
November 27, 2013 at 10:04 AM #768549ParticipantWhat fucking school did you go to that they taught civics to a 7 year old?
I don’t remember the exact grade, but we definitely had civics and touched on current events in elementary school, so 5th-6th grade or before. This was in public school in NJ, guess my home state starts ’em young.
And again, if we need to go in circles, I knew about marriage by the 2nd grade, and teachers mentioned people (even themselves in one case) getting married. As long as no actual mechanisms of sex are mentioned, what’s the big deal about a 2nd grader knowing that two people of the same gender got married?
Lastly, what if we created a hypothetical religion where same-sex marriage is OK and opposite-sex marriage is abhorrent? Would their followers have a right to go up in arms if a het marriage were mentioned in school?
November 27, 2013 at 10:59 AM #768550Participantultimately, schools are social conformity tools to produce cogs in a machine. that is what “education” is. to pretend otherwise, to claim there is some neutral education that is “real”, is just, well, false.
schools transmit societal values by their very structure …wait in this line…shut up,,,curved grades……listen to teacher..observe and obey social pecking order…barely any movement or exercise…tedium…wait for the bathroom and suppress impulses…etc etc…
they teach us to survive in the society we have…it could be entirely different of course…but it isnt…that’s our values…
if we taught nothing but mathematics all day long, it would still not be “valueneutral”. im not sure exactly what value that would be expressing, but im pretty sure it would be some technocratic nightmore and it’s not neutral.
i don’t think you could possibly come up with an english passage or readingassignment that does not have some sort of valueladen message in it, either right there on the surface, or with a bit of reading between the lines…
in fact, i DEFY you to provide me with a bit of english reading material that cannot be interpreted as having some sick, twisted agenda. i doubt it can be done! there is no valuefree language..schools that are in the business of teaching english are in the business of teaching values.
as pink freud says:
We don’t need no education
We don’t need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teacher leave them kids alone
Hey! Teacher! Leave them kids alone!
All in all it’s just another brick in the wall
All in all you’re just another brick in the wall(With kids)
We don’t need no education
We don’t need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teacher leave us kids alone
Hey! Teacher! Leave us kids alone!
All in all it’s just another brick in the wall
All in all you’re just another brick in the wallNovember 27, 2013 at 11:03 AM #768552Participant[quote=temeculaguy]paul, please do not take this as a flippant comment after your first hand account and insight. But when I was on college one of my friends was raised by his gay dad and his partner. It was the 1980’s and not something that was common or commonly spoken of, and certainly not something that was supported by the majority. Anyways, that friend is a big part of my view on the subject today. Not only was he straight (he felt you were born that way, I tend to agree) but the guy was an ass magnet of the highest order. He knew how to dress, was very cultured and well traveled, but most of he knew how to talk to women. In summary, he had more game than anyone I had ever met, to this day and I took a number of cues from him. We had a speech class together that was loaded with hotties. I think I ended up sleeping with one of them, he slept with the rest, sometimes more than one at a time. So do I think gay couples are something to be feared when raising children and will make them gay, nope. In some cases they can be better parents than most straight couples. But this is purely anecdotal, feel free to allow your religion or fear to dismiss differing opinions.[/quote]
perhaps THIS is the greatest fear; that gay men will raise a new breed of superheteromen, who with their special homoenhanced ways, including but not limited to actual grooming, style, sophitcation, savoirfaire, etc., will get to screw all the women, and leave just the dregs for the offspring of heteros….in this way, gay men will conquer the world….
curses, how can my kid stand a chance?! stop gay adoption!
November 27, 2013 at 11:25 AM #768555livinincali
Participant[quote=6packscaredy]
if we taught nothing but mathematics all day long, it would still not be “valueneutral”. im not sure exactly what value that would be expressing, but im pretty sure it would be some technocratic nightmore and it’s not neutral.
[/quote]The fundamentals of reading are “valueneutral”.
“The cat is sleeping.”
Has no moral value behind it. It’s just a simple statement. If the cat is sleeping it’s a fact, if the cat is not sleeping then it is a lie, but it doesn’t impose some sort of cultural view. Does the selection of cat versus dog create some sort of underlying “value”.
1 + 1 = 2 no matter what, unless you’re economist searching for a free lunch.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.