Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

Dont say gay bill

Page 2 of 3 [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Who_Am_I
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,632
Location: Australia

22 May 2011, 7:37 pm

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
"Under the proposal, any instruction or materials at a public elementary or middle school would be limited to age-appropriate lessons about the science of human reproduction."

I agree with the bill and hopefully other states will follow suit.
Thats not the kind of thing that needs to be taught in school, especially in that age group.


C'mon, this bill is the product of homophobic hysteria. The people behind it have the notion that hearing about gays will make young children themselves gay. I believe it was in Oklahoma where the school board had decided they couldn't allow girls to go to the restroom together, because of the "rampant lesbianism."

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The knee jerk reactions of one school board in one state shouldn't be grounds to condemn other states for wanting to keeping their classrooms clean. .....


Forgive my ignorance, but how is homosexuality "unclean"?


_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

22 May 2011, 8:29 pm

Who_Am_I wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
"Under the proposal, any instruction or materials at a public elementary or middle school would be limited to age-appropriate lessons about the science of human reproduction."

I agree with the bill and hopefully other states will follow suit.
Thats not the kind of thing that needs to be taught in school, especially in that age group.


C'mon, this bill is the product of homophobic hysteria. The people behind it have the notion that hearing about gays will make young children themselves gay. I believe it was in Oklahoma where the school board had decided they couldn't allow girls to go to the restroom together, because of the "rampant lesbianism."

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The knee jerk reactions of one school board in one state shouldn't be grounds to condemn other states for wanting to keeping their classrooms clean. .....


Forgive my ignorance, but how is homosexuality "unclean"?


"keeping their classrooms clean" as in free of unnecessary BS.

If you want to interpret my meaning of clean otherwise go right ahead.



Who_Am_I
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,632
Location: Australia

22 May 2011, 8:33 pm

Raptor wrote:
Who_Am_I wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
"Under the proposal, any instruction or materials at a public elementary or middle school would be limited to age-appropriate lessons about the science of human reproduction."

I agree with the bill and hopefully other states will follow suit.
Thats not the kind of thing that needs to be taught in school, especially in that age group.


C'mon, this bill is the product of homophobic hysteria. The people behind it have the notion that hearing about gays will make young children themselves gay. I believe it was in Oklahoma where the school board had decided they couldn't allow girls to go to the restroom together, because of the "rampant lesbianism."

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The knee jerk reactions of one school board in one state shouldn't be grounds to condemn other states for wanting to keeping their classrooms clean. .....


Forgive my ignorance, but how is homosexuality "unclean"?


"keeping their classrooms clean" as in free of unnecessary BS.

If you want to interpret my meaning of clean otherwise go right ahead.


Talking about gay people is "unnecessary BS"?
I fail to see why homosexuality is something that children should be shielded from; it's no more wrong than heterosexuality, and I don't see anyone trying to pass a "don't say 'straight'" Bill.


_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,239
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 May 2011, 9:02 pm

Raptor wrote:
gailryder17 wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
"Under the proposal, any instruction or materials at a public elementary or middle school would be limited to age-appropriate lessons about the science of human reproduction."

I agree with the bill and hopefully other states will follow suit.
Thats not the kind of thing that needs to be taught in school, especially in that age group.


C'mon, this bill is the product of homophobic hysteria. The people behind it have the notion that hearing about gays will make young children themselves gay. I believe it was in Oklahoma where the school board had decided they couldn't allow girls to go to the restroom together, because of the "rampant lesbianism."

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The knee jerk reactions of one school board in one state shouldn't be grounds to condemn other states for wanting to keeping their classrooms clean. .....


I think "Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer" is reacting to the concept of shielding kids from homosexuality. Kids are already becoming more aware of sexuality stand alone. Besides, when we're young kids, we didn't know about sex (other than the word happened to be some sort of taboo at that age) but we knew attraction and romance existed. They don't have to teach about sex to kindergarteners but they can promote tolerance.


How 'bout let them decide for themselves what they want to tolerate when they're old enough to make a decision like that?


Then in that case, why do we teach tolerance of anyone in class? Do we simply say, just let kids learn to be tolerant or intolerant on their own of other races, or of nationalities? Or other genders? Or other religions? Or of people with disabilities? If we teach children tolerance of these other groups, why not sexual minorities?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



jojobean
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,341
Location: In Georgia sipping a virgin pina' colada while the rest of the world is drunk

22 May 2011, 9:20 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
gailryder17 wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
"Under the proposal, any instruction or materials at a public elementary or middle school would be limited to age-appropriate lessons about the science of human reproduction."

I agree with the bill and hopefully other states will follow suit.
Thats not the kind of thing that needs to be taught in school, especially in that age group.


C'mon, this bill is the product of homophobic hysteria. The people behind it have the notion that hearing about gays will make young children themselves gay. I believe it was in Oklahoma where the school board had decided they couldn't allow girls to go to the restroom together, because of the "rampant lesbianism."

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The knee jerk reactions of one school board in one state shouldn't be grounds to condemn other states for wanting to keeping their classrooms clean. .....


I think "Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer" is reacting to the concept of shielding kids from homosexuality. Kids are already becoming more aware of sexuality stand alone. Besides, when we're young kids, we didn't know about sex (other than the word happened to be some sort of taboo at that age) but we knew attraction and romance existed. They don't have to teach about sex to kindergarteners but they can promote tolerance.


How 'bout let them decide for themselves what they want to tolerate when they're old enough to make a decision like that?


Then in that case, why do we teach tolerance of anyone in class? Do we simply say, just let kids learn to be tolerant or intolerant on their own of other races, or of nationalities? Or other genders? Or other religions? Or of people with disabilities? If we teach children tolerance of these other groups, why not sexual minorities?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Tennesee is not well known for its tollerance of others differences...I doubt they teach tollerance in school. I know they dont teach tollerance in Georgia schools.
But other than that, I agree tolerance SHOULD be taught, not legislated against. The same ones who carry on about too much government meddling in ppl buisness are the same ones who create crap like this. He probably created it just to gain the vote of the tennesee majority that are homophobic.


_________________
All art is a kind of confession, more or less oblique. All artists, if they are to survive, are forced, at last, to tell the whole story; to vomit the anguish up.
-James Baldwin


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,239
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 May 2011, 9:24 pm

jojobean wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
gailryder17 wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
"Under the proposal, any instruction or materials at a public elementary or middle school would be limited to age-appropriate lessons about the science of human reproduction."

I agree with the bill and hopefully other states will follow suit.
Thats not the kind of thing that needs to be taught in school, especially in that age group.


C'mon, this bill is the product of homophobic hysteria. The people behind it have the notion that hearing about gays will make young children themselves gay. I believe it was in Oklahoma where the school board had decided they couldn't allow girls to go to the restroom together, because of the "rampant lesbianism."

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The knee jerk reactions of one school board in one state shouldn't be grounds to condemn other states for wanting to keeping their classrooms clean. .....


I think "Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer" is reacting to the concept of shielding kids from homosexuality. Kids are already becoming more aware of sexuality stand alone. Besides, when we're young kids, we didn't know about sex (other than the word happened to be some sort of taboo at that age) but we knew attraction and romance existed. They don't have to teach about sex to kindergarteners but they can promote tolerance.


How 'bout let them decide for themselves what they want to tolerate when they're old enough to make a decision like that?


Then in that case, why do we teach tolerance of anyone in class? Do we simply say, just let kids learn to be tolerant or intolerant on their own of other races, or of nationalities? Or other genders? Or other religions? Or of people with disabilities? If we teach children tolerance of these other groups, why not sexual minorities?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Tennesee is not well known for its tollerance of others differences...I doubt they teach tollerance in school. I know they dont teach tollerance in Georgia schools.
But other than that, I agree tolerance SHOULD be taught, not legislated against. The same ones who carry on about too much government meddling in ppl buisness are the same ones who create crap like this. He probably created it just to gain the vote of the tennesee majority that are homophobic.


I'm sure that's true.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

22 May 2011, 10:01 pm

jojobean wrote:
Tennesee is not well known for its tollerance of others differences...I doubt they teach tollerance in school. I know they dont teach tollerance in Georgia schools.
But other than that, I agree tolerance SHOULD be taught, not legislated against. The same ones who carry on about too much government meddling in ppl buisness are the same ones who create crap like this. He probably created it just to gain the vote of the tennesee majority that are homophobic.

What's wrong with letting their parents decide when to talk to them about homosexuality?


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


gailryder17
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2011
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,038
Location: Los Angeles

22 May 2011, 10:13 pm

John_Browning wrote:
jojobean wrote:
Tennesee is not well known for its tollerance of others differences...I doubt they teach tollerance in school. I know they dont teach tollerance in Georgia schools.
But other than that, I agree tolerance SHOULD be taught, not legislated against. The same ones who carry on about too much government meddling in ppl buisness are the same ones who create crap like this. He probably created it just to gain the vote of the tennesee majority that are homophobic.

What's wrong with letting their parents decide when to talk to them about homosexuality?


Schools likely don't just let solely parents teach kindergarteners "No hitting". They let parents have a role, yet they intervene when they see Little Johnny hit someone. The lesson of "no hitting" leads to "these actions shape your character" and morph into "see what happens when people are violent and intolerant to another rather than existing in harmony. Look at 911". Schools don't always leave the tolerance talk completely up to parents, they teach people not to bully. We're telling kids people come from different backgrounds, races, religions, ect. To further prevent bullying and whatnot, they shouldn't shield kids from yet another minority. John_Browning's question is like "What's wrong with letting their parents decide when to teach about any OTHER minority?" Ignorance is NOT bliss. See what I'm saying?



jojobean
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,341
Location: In Georgia sipping a virgin pina' colada while the rest of the world is drunk

22 May 2011, 10:23 pm

John_Browning wrote:
jojobean wrote:
Tennesee is not well known for its tollerance of others differences...I doubt they teach tollerance in school. I know they dont teach tollerance in Georgia schools.
But other than that, I agree tolerance SHOULD be taught, not legislated against. The same ones who carry on about too much government meddling in ppl buisness are the same ones who create crap like this. He probably created it just to gain the vote of the tennesee majority that are homophobic.

What's wrong with letting their parents decide when to talk to them about homosexuality?


well most states require that parrents sign an OK form for their kids to take any sex ed classes, but to exclude homosexually in such a discusion only fuels the myth that homosexuals are deviants of society, which is not true. My cousin is a lesbian and is the fire chief in her town in Rhode Island, and her dept won awards that led her with the honor of putting a wreath on the tomb of the unknown soilder. She is a remarkable, compassionate person and not a deviant by any means. She is getting married to her partner of 20 years next year.
When I think of such intollerance, I think of the struggles of my cousin.


_________________
All art is a kind of confession, more or less oblique. All artists, if they are to survive, are forced, at last, to tell the whole story; to vomit the anguish up.
-James Baldwin


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

22 May 2011, 10:42 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
gailryder17 wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
"Under the proposal, any instruction or materials at a public elementary or middle school would be limited to age-appropriate lessons about the science of human reproduction."

I agree with the bill and hopefully other states will follow suit.
Thats not the kind of thing that needs to be taught in school, especially in that age group.


C'mon, this bill is the product of homophobic hysteria. The people behind it have the notion that hearing about gays will make young children themselves gay. I believe it was in Oklahoma where the school board had decided they couldn't allow girls to go to the restroom together, because of the "rampant lesbianism."

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The knee jerk reactions of one school board in one state shouldn't be grounds to condemn other states for wanting to keeping their classrooms clean. .....


I think "Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer" is reacting to the concept of shielding kids from homosexuality. Kids are already becoming more aware of sexuality stand alone. Besides, when we're young kids, we didn't know about sex (other than the word happened to be some sort of taboo at that age) but we knew attraction and romance existed. They don't have to teach about sex to kindergarteners but they can promote tolerance.


How 'bout let them decide for themselves what they want to tolerate when they're old enough to make a decision like that?


Then in that case, why do we teach tolerance of anyone in class? Do we simply say, just let kids learn to be tolerant or intolerant on their own of other races, or of nationalities? Or other genders? Or other religions? Or of people with disabilities? If we teach children tolerance of these other groups, why not sexual minorities?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


They tried to force feed it to me but as you can imagine I spit it back up.
That tends to happen a lot when you try to force feed things like that to anyone with a streak of independence to them.
I'll accept things at my own pace if I determine them to be acceptable to me. In reality I probably accept more than you give me credit for.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,239
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

23 May 2011, 1:18 am

If you are accepting of others, good for you. 8) But may I ask, what specific groups did you decide not to accept when younger?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

23 May 2011, 1:49 am

jojobean wrote:
John_Browning wrote:
What's wrong with letting their parents decide when to talk to them about homosexuality?


well most states require that parrents sign an OK form for their kids to take any sex ed classes, but to exclude homosexually in such a discusion only fuels the myth that homosexuals are deviants of society, which is not true.
Many parents don't go into great detail about sex ed until the start of high school. And whether homosexuality can be called deviant in a mental health (as opposed to religious) discussion is debatable since the gay activists used rioting, threats, and forged letters to get it removed from the DSM-II rather than through a scientific discussion.


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,239
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

23 May 2011, 2:03 am

John_Browning wrote:
jojobean wrote:
John_Browning wrote:
What's wrong with letting their parents decide when to talk to them about homosexuality?


well most states require that parrents sign an OK form for their kids to take any sex ed classes, but to exclude homosexually in such a discusion only fuels the myth that homosexuals are deviants of society, which is not true.
Many parents don't go into great detail about sex ed until the start of high school. And whether homosexuality can be called deviant in a mental health (as opposed to religious) discussion is debatable since the gay activists used rioting, threats, and forged letters to get it removed from the DSM-II rather than through a scientific discussion.


Actually, ridding homosexuality's standing as a mental illness was only in part achieved by gay activists. Most mental health professionals had in fact wanted it removed as a designated mental illness for some time, but it had clung on for so long because of a number of psychiatric professionals who were pushing spurious cures for the gay.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

23 May 2011, 2:14 am

gailryder17 wrote:
Schools likely don't just let solely parents teach kindergarteners "No hitting". They let parents have a role, yet they intervene when they see Little Johnny hit someone. The lesson of "no hitting" leads to "these actions shape your character" and morph into "see what happens when people are violent and intolerant to another rather than existing in harmony. Look at 911". Schools don't always leave the tolerance talk completely up to parents, they teach people not to bully. We're telling kids people come from different backgrounds, races, religions, ect. To further prevent bullying and whatnot, they shouldn't shield kids from yet another minority. John_Browning's question is like "What's wrong with letting their parents decide when to teach about any OTHER minority?" Ignorance is NOT bliss. See what I'm saying?

1) The teachers enforce no hitting. The parents teach it. It's one thing for teachers to say no bullying gays (which I'm not sure this new law would allow) and another to indoctrinate kids about a high risk lifestyle at a young age, that would have some effect (whether deliberate or not) to recruit loners and kids who are not developing their sense of sexuality at a normal pace to believe they are gay. Let them get a sense of how sexuality works in the [biologically] natural way, and if they still develop a taste for tube-steak when they get older, then so be it!

2) WTF does 9/11 have to do with anything here?!?!? That's a total red herring! I would DEFINITELY keep my kids away from certain ethnic, religious, and political groups if I thought it was going to have a detrimental influence on them. If I had a kid that was inclined to want to hang out around black kids and then my kid started wanting comedically large clothes with their pants half way to their knees, wanted rap music that glorifies gang activities, and I found out that many of his friends want to be drug dealers when they grow up, you bet I would isolate my kid from that and move if I have to. The same would apply if they started hanging out with a bunch of left wing wannabe do nothing revolutionaries or right wing militants who are known to have a history of not thinking their actions all the way through.


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,239
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

23 May 2011, 2:24 am

John_Browning wrote:
gailryder17 wrote:
Schools likely don't just let solely parents teach kindergarteners "No hitting". They let parents have a role, yet they intervene when they see Little Johnny hit someone. The lesson of "no hitting" leads to "these actions shape your character" and morph into "see what happens when people are violent and intolerant to another rather than existing in harmony. Look at 911". Schools don't always leave the tolerance talk completely up to parents, they teach people not to bully. We're telling kids people come from different backgrounds, races, religions, ect. To further prevent bullying and whatnot, they shouldn't shield kids from yet another minority. John_Browning's question is like "What's wrong with letting their parents decide when to teach about any OTHER minority?" Ignorance is NOT bliss. See what I'm saying?

1) The teachers enforce no hitting. The parents teach it. It's one thing for teachers to say no bullying gays (which I'm not sure this new law would allow) and another to indoctrinate kids about a high risk lifestyle at a young age, that would have some effect (whether deliberate or not) to recruit loners and kids who are not developing their sense of sexuality at a normal pace to believe they are gay. Let them get a sense of how sexuality works in the [biologically] natural way, and if they still develop a taste for tube-steak when they get older, then so be it!

2) WTF does 9/11 have to do with anything here?!?!? That's a total red herring! I would DEFINITELY keep my kids away from certain ethnic, religious, and political groups if I thought it was going to have a detrimental influence on them. If I had a kid that was inclined to want to hang out around black kids and then my kid started wanting comedically large clothes with their pants half way to their knees, wanted rap music that glorifies gang activities, and I found out that many of his friends want to be drug dealers when they grow up, you bet I would isolate my kid from that and move if I have to. The same would apply if they started hanging out with a bunch of left wing wannabe do nothing revolutionaries or right wing militants who are known to have a history of not thinking their actions all the way through.


Well, at least you're fair enough to add right wing militants to your "no friends" list. By the way, not every black kid is going to be a "gansta" type, while plenty of white kids, calling themselves "whiggers," get involved with the negative side of rap music without any blacks pulling them into it. That's the problem with stereotypes - they don't always conform with reality (despite what Bill Maher says).

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

23 May 2011, 3:35 am

Some militia groups have a strong sense of civic duty, are well organized (hey, I think I read that somewhere) and are out to simply create obstacles to the government infringing upon their way of life, and these groups are quit harmless when left alone. What I'm worried about is keeping kids away from white supremacist recruiters (who can be very charismatic father figures when they want to be) or the followers of some local patriarch of the hillbillies with some alcohol inspired plan to arbitrarily pick a fight with the government. The latter two tend to be run by unstable people with a cult-like following of equally volatile people. If there ever was an armed revolt, I would be more concerned about the participation of the latter two groups than heartened by it. If I had my way of dealing with them, I don't know what I'd do. Most of them have legitimate needs for owning guns for non-political issues. The problem is trying to get them enough of a political science education to understand when using force might be called for, and what is at stake if they resort to force, then the problem is how to make them fit some standard of "well regulated". Oh, and I wouldn't do anything that would be seen as an unnecessary provocation


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud