Story Comments
Posted by: Tangent001 11 months, 2 weeks ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
100%
Tangent00111 months, 2 weeks ago
-
25%
Redneck11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I have watched the gay agenda over the years. There has been a steady progession. It has not stopped. With each step a different demand has been offered. Now we are to the point they are demanding we teach that homosexual activity is just as valid as heterosexual acts and we should teach children to "explore" homosexuality.
Reply
They did not demand that twenty years ago. They were just "coming out of the closet." They are now demanding we redefine marriage to suit them and their definition. Do not tell me there is no agenda or that they merely want to "just live their lives." There are many in the homosexual community that have expressed condemnation of the "agenda." If they recognize there is one for some then how can you deny there is one?-
91%
Tangent00111 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Now we are to the point they are demanding we teach that homosexual activity is just as valid as heterosexual acts and we should teach children to "explore" homosexuality."
Reply
That's a BS straw man argument. You're trying to paint a picture where third-graders will be taught how to give a good blow job! That simply is not the case. Your rabid hyperbole aside, where is the harm in teaching children diversity? Heck, where is the harm in homosexuality in the first place?
As to the 'progression' of demands, the same thing happened with the women and minority civil rights movements. And the same bogus, bigoted arguments were leveled: "What? They want to vote? Next they'll want to live in our neighborhoods! Next they'll want to marry our daughters!"-
38%
KISA452a11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Your rabid hyperbole aside, where is the harm in teaching children diversity?"
Reply
I've pointed this out before, but this assumes that "you" are right and homosexuality is OK. Others do not agree with that and so having school, a government sponsored required activity, deliberately teach against the parent is a direct harm.
Teaching that diversity exists is fine. "Look folks, there are gays, there are straights, there are blacks, whites, yellows, reds, there are male female" period! When the government starts teaching morals (ie, homosexuality is "OK") why don't people get livid that they are "forcing their morals on impressionable children"? Other than, those people, in this case, agree with the moral...-
100%
Tangent00111 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Personally, I don't find homosexuality to be at all immoral, so I have no problem with my children knowing that there are gays out there. Teaching awareness and tolerance is not teaching acceptance. If you have a huge problem with that particular section of the curriculum, you would have every right as a parent to have your child sit that part out without penalty (as they allow now for elementary 'growth and development' portions that cover human sexuality).
Reply
"I've pointed this out before, but this assumes that "you" are right and homosexuality is OK." Yes, I do make that assumption, since I can find no harm. But than, I'm a Rationalist. The point is: I'm not trying to deny anyone's inherent rights. If one is going to specifically deny a particular class of people access to a legal institution, you'd better have a damned good reason for doing so!-
0%
KISA452a11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I provided evidence of a harm as you requested.
Reply
Additionally, diversity is rarely about tolerance in the "don't hit the gay guy" sort of way. It is now "homosexuality" is "OK". "You should support your gay brothers and sisters". Or it would be as I presented above you "There are gays and straights" without any moralizing. And why should "my child" have to sit out when there is an activity that offends "me" at the school? Or should we have Christian celebrations again? Jews et al can just "opt out"... Prayers are OK, just let the atheists opt out. I thought seperate but equal was inherrently unequal.-
100%
Tangent00111 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I provided evidence of a harm as you requested. " You provided evidence for not bringing up homosexuality in a school setting. I'm still waiting for a reply as to how gay marriage itself in harmful.
Reply
The only harm you brought up as far as teaching diversity was that I was assuming I was correct, unless I misread you. Reporting on a phenomenon is not teaching that something is 'OK'. You can teach a child about Hinduism, but that is not ADVOCATING for Hinduism. You go swiftly from presenting homosexuality as a social/cultural phenomenon right to presenting homosexuality as 'moral'. Ever hear of 'teaching the controversy'? Besides, how does presenting a different point of view harm a child? Does the classroom setting supersede the ability of the parent to help a child interpret?-
Neutral
KISA452a11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"where is the harm in teaching children diversity?" That is the issue I was addressing. The difference is that my experience is that "diversity" and "tolerance" is usually taught as biggotry and condemnation. You don't see it that way so we have different oppinions and expectations.
Reply
"Besides, how does presenting a different point of view harm a child? Does the classroom setting supersede the ability of the parent to help a child interpret?" If it is Christian theology being taught, do you feel the same? Or muslim theology, or Jewish, or Communist, take your pick. I think we have made clear here several times in the past that most do not feel that way.
Yes, every example I have ever been has been trying to convince that someone's personal morals on "diversity" are correct. That whatever the diveristy of the day seems to be, that is "ok". I disagree.
-
-
-
100%
mesodude11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I provided evidence of a harm as you requested."
Reply
--Actually you didn't. You wrote:
"I've pointed this out before, but this assumes that "you" are right and homosexuality is OK. Others do not agree with that and so having school, a government sponsored required activity, deliberately teach against the parent is a direct harm."
--Your "direct harm" premise is based on the assumption that all parents will disagree with the information their children are being taught regarding gay people. You don't speak for all parents. -
100%
david_nwpa11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No you have not demonstrated how being gay is immoral or wrong. It is not the same as being straight, but that is perfectly fine. Who put you in a position to make moral decisions anyway? As for teaching children, they are pretty resilient and are becoming more accepting of gays and lesbians by the day. Your arguments just simply do not hold water, KISA, and they come off as purely bigoted.
Reply
-
-
-
100%
Dionys11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"When the government starts teaching morals (ie, homosexuality is "OK") why don't people get livid that they are "forcing their morals on impressionable children"?"
Reply
When the government then does as you're asking and teaches that homosexuality isn't okay, then why won't you get livid that the government is forcing someone's morals on impressionable children. Or does it only upset you when the morals being enforced don't match up with yours? -
100%
hamy11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You said yourself that teaching the existence of something is OK. Well if you teach children that being different is OK, why isn't it? It sounds like you are teaching a double standard to your kids. And again, saying that it exists isn't promoting it. You seem to think that by teaching kids that their friends who have gay parents aren't any different than they are is somehow endorsing homosexuality.
Reply
Teach your kids to hate people all you want. The rest of us will continue to rebuild our society. -
100%
mesodude11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"When the government starts teaching morals (ie, homosexuality is "OK") why don't people get livid that they are "forcing their morals on impressionable children"?
Reply
--I'm not sure I follow you...If you don't want the government "teaching morals" then it shouldn't be encouraging people to marry at all. The same goes for religion. If we're going to promote religion in government, promote ALL religions. Or don't promote any at all.-
100%
Dionys11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
".If you don't want the government "teaching morals" then it shouldn't be encouraging people to marry at all."
Reply
I don't think the government does encourage people to marry, what with the marriage penalty for taxes. Though all of the legal benefits regarding right of survivorship and medical issues are positive.
You're right about promoting all religions or none, though. That's what the anti-establishment clause says. We agree completely on that issue.-
Neutral
mesodude11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I don't think the government does encourage people to marry, what with the marriage penalty for taxes."
Reply
--Dionysis I often hear people complain about the marriage penalty but married people also benefit from our tax laws in significant ways. Just ask Cindy and John McCain or Bill and Hillary. Ask Madonna's ex-husband or Paul McCartney's ex-wife.
If you're married, you inherit a share of your spouses estate in a way that comes with far fewer strings than it does when unmarried couples are involved. Marriage exempts a surviving spouse from the so called "death tax" and the spouse is automatically first in line if one needs to make financial or medical decisions on the other's behalf. Marrieds get special Social Security, medicare and disability benefits as well as vet and military benefits and benefits for education healthcare and certain types of loans. I'm just getting started...
Also, one could argue that to the extent government supports certain types of commerce (the wedding industry, for instance), it promotes marriage.
-
-
-
-
-
100%
hamy11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As I have said many times, you are free to hate me all you want. I don't care what you think about what I do or who I am. I know who I am and what I do. I don't require or want your approval or tolerance. But, in the eyes of the LAWS of this country where I reside and pay taxes, I deserve and demand the same rights afforded to straight Americans. And if you are looking for an agenda, that's it. EQUALITY. The reason we didn't fight for it a long time ago was that the laws weren't on our side. Homosexuality was illegal in many states up until just a few years ago. With the overturning of those laws came a new sense of pride. A sense that we didn't have to be beaten in our neighborhoods, burned in the streets, dragged behind cars or shot in the face anymore just because of who we love.
Reply
That is the agenda. Equality. Nothing else. No recruiting. That's ridiculous. If homosexuality could be taught, then heterosexuality could as well. And my parents will tell you that you can't teach a gay person to be straight.
Now. ONE MORE TIME. Show me proof of physical harm to someone's relationship because of the existence of a homosexual relationship. -
100%
mesodude11 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I have watched the gay agenda over the years. There has been a steady progession."
Reply
--I'm not familiar with a "gay agenda" but that's usually the way a movement works. No different from women and racial minorities.
"Now we are to the point they are demanding we teach that homosexual activity is just as valid as heterosexual acts and we should teach children to "explore" homosexuality."
--You're distorting, mischaracterizing, exaggerating and lying here. All children are being taught is that same sex couples exist. No one is teaching children about anyone's sexual activity.
"They are now demanding we redefine marriage to suit them and their definition."
--LOL. You're outrageously misinformed or lying. Gay people don't want to re-define anything. As the laws read, they could already marry so they didn't have to do anything. It's you who wants to re-define marriage. This "one man and one woman" crap is something you bigots just recently pulled outta your azzes. Marriage was never meant to exclude gay couples in the first place. That's why the bigot brigade i s running around in a gay panic trying to ram through petitions for Constitutional Amendments. *You're* the ones who are jumping through hoops to nullify rights gay people already have. Get serious. ;-(
-
-
loading ...
People Who Liked This Comment (13)
Ciera-Marie
david_nwpa
jordan11
tchef
ForrestPhelps
hamy
juvel
Dionys
mesodude
kobzikov
lvrofwolves
bluetexasvalley
KitPeople Who Didn't Like This Comment (0)
No one voted this comment negatively.
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.