Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 14, 2013 at 10:42 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767927November 14, 2013 at 10:34 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767925
spdrun
ParticipantAre TEC-9’s still a thing among gang-bangers?
November 14, 2013 at 10:30 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767923spdrun
ParticipantJust saying … not all straight people have kids or remain monogamous either.
November 14, 2013 at 9:52 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767918spdrun
ParticipantThe tittilated moralizers start freaking out even if none of the actual nipple is showing. I think it must be a product of old prejudices, that brown or red skin is bad — no other rational explanation. 🙂
November 14, 2013 at 9:45 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767916spdrun
ParticipantCDMA ENG — there’s a big difference between knowing about something healthy and pleasant and learning about horrible, painful injuries and unpleasant death early on.
What’s funny is that Americans seem to think that death and gore are OK for kids to see on TV or in games, yet show a 1/8″ crescent of a distaff areola mammae and there’s a furore.
November 14, 2013 at 9:13 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767911spdrun
ParticipantNo one is prohibiting parents from sending their kids to parochial or private school. But what we’re talking about is essentially kids learning biological facts. Homosexuality exists. Sex exists. Pregnancy can be prevented. Some have lingams, others yonis.
These aren’t value judgments. They’re part of scientific fact. Why is it OK for parents to use the excuse of superstition to keep their children from learning these facts? Should it also be OK for believers in a flat Earth to forbid the school from teaching their children about the structure of the solar-system?
Speaking of the Dutch…
November 14, 2013 at 8:55 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767908spdrun
ParticipantI’m saying, the earlier the better. I have no problem with a 4 or 5 year old knowing that some kids have a mommy and daddy, and others have two of a single gender. They’ll know it eventually, so may as well learn. Kids are open-minded by default, so it’s unlikely that any trauma will ensue.
And it’s healthier that the kids that are gay by nature go through puberty knowing that what they’re feeling is OK, not a shameful thing to be painfully hidden.
November 14, 2013 at 8:52 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767906spdrun
ParticipantAnd your point is other than just to be a negative troll…
I’m not being a troll. I’m stating the truth, which is that I have little patience for fundies of ANY religion who hurt those that they purport to love via their superstition and prudery.
One of the purposes of education should be to counter harmful superstitions.
Gay folk and lesbians exist. Deal with it.
Sex exists. Deal with it.
Birth control exists. Learn about it.Your kid won’t die or be scarred for life from learning any of those things, quite the contrary.
November 14, 2013 at 8:03 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767899spdrun
ParticipantPuberty starts anywhere from age 10 to 16 — waiting till age 15 (10th grade) is far too late. The point of sex ed is to educate the kids whose parents are too ignorant or ashamed to have that discussion themselves.
November 14, 2013 at 7:43 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767896spdrun
ParticipantPolygamists are not adopting, or they are? Has that gone somewhat mainstream?
Does the law support it?Of course they do — divorcees aren’t forbidden from adopting, and if someone remarries a few times, that makes them a (what) in all but name ….?
Plus quite a few people probably have unofficial arrangements that are polygamous in all but legal name. If those can be hidden from a background check, then I’m sure some of them do adopt.
November 14, 2013 at 6:31 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767893spdrun
ParticipantPersonally, I have zero problem with polygamy among consenting adults. Americans are very hypocritical about it, since they already practice serial (vs parallel) polygamy.
I may add that the Torah and Bible make mention of polygamy, so any child with an Abrahamic religious education is already exposed to the mention of such.
November 14, 2013 at 4:58 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767890spdrun
Participantspd, I love that De Blasio was elected mayor of NYC. I guess his wife used to be lesbian
I don’t know if “used to be lesbian” is as accurate as “was wired to be bisexual and unaware of it.” Don’t know if that’s accurate either, it’s probably more like a scale where 10 is 100% gay and 0 is 100% het, she may have thought she was 10 but really she was 7 or 8 and happened to meet a compatible life partner who was the opposite gender.
I guess “used to IDENTIFY as a lesbian” would be accurate. But yeah, hoping that DeBlasio will correct the worst mistakes of the Bloomberg admin while keeping the city relatively friendly to business.
November 14, 2013 at 1:50 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767883spdrun
ParticipantOoooookkkkk, and what does Obamacare have to do with health ed curriculum in schools, or is this just pure, unlubricated trolling?
November 14, 2013 at 12:31 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767880spdrun
ParticipantBut would anyone really object if it were taught elsewhere, or is it simply not explicitly a part of policy?
November 14, 2013 at 12:28 PM in reply to: OT: The “Radical” Gay Agenda in California Public Schools #767877spdrun
ParticipantRegardless, it is taught in some US places and political correctness doesn’t come into it.
-
AuthorPosts
