Political Crossfire Forums

[Jay2014]

Ben_Huh wrote: Quote: i have no problem with the parents being involved. and no, murder is not something we need to tolerate, and neither is bigotry.

So I have to tolerate someone's view that homosexuality is alright, but you don't have to tolerate that I'm against it? Just because someone might have been taught that homosexuality is wrong doesn't mean they hate homosexuals.

BTW: I support gay marriage, but I laugh sometimes at the gay community when they try and tie their struggles to that of Black Americans. There not even close.

i tolerate opposition to gay marrige, i will not tolerate bigotry. they do not walk hand in hand. there is a difference between opposing gay marrige and using biggoted language, for example. and no, you dont have to tolerate my opinions. you can tell me to "f" off and walk away.

[Geneviève]

Quote: Why can't a father determine what his child can and can't be indoctrinated with when he/she is supposed to be learning the A,B,C's and 1,2,3's at school?

Because frankly, educators are better qualified to decide what curriculum to teach than most parents are, having years of specialized training in the field of child development.
For another thing, there is no consensus among parents on how or what they want their children to be taught, and a teacher with thirty-plus students cannot possibly teach a separate, individualized lesson plan dictated by parents to each student.
If the parents do not want their children to learn what public schools have to teach, then they are better off looking into private education and/or home-schooling.

"David Parker became enraged last April when he discovered his six-year old son had brought home the book "Who's in a Family.' (story)

The book by Robert Skutch, and illustrated by Laura Nienhaus is aimed at children between three and seven. It catalogues a variety of multicultural contemporary family units, including those with single parents, lesbian and gay parents, mixed-race couples, grandparents and divorced parents.

But, it was the inclusion of same-sex parents that angered Parker. He confronted officials at the Joseph Estabrook School.

Parker, who is a member of the Article 8 Alliance, an organization fighting same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, demanded that the book be removed from the school library and that his son be pulled from discussions about homosexuality whether they are in planned lessons or arise spontaneously."

Just hypothetically, what if it was the illustration of the mixed-race parents that this gentleman objected to, rather than the picture of the homosexual parents?
All else being the same, would you still support his actions?

Personally, I find it ironic that the same people who oppose gay adoption on the grounds that the child will feel different/ be teased/ not fit in/ not be accepted by his peers also oppose any effort by educators to try to alleviate intolerance and help children from different types of families become more accepted and less discriminated against by their peers.

God forbid you ever die, leaving your spouse to raise your children as a single parent.
If the neocons have their way, children from single-parent households will soon be as socially alienated and discriminated against as the children of homosexual parents are now.

[Innoova]

Jay2014 wrote: Innoova wrote: Jay2014 wrote: Innoova wrote: Jay2014 wrote: Little Wimp wrote: Quote: The dispute started last spring when a book was sent home with Parker's 5-year-old son as optional reading material to be shared with his parents. One page of the book depicted a gay family. After meeting with school officials, Parker refused to leave unless they agreed to notify him in the future if similar material is again offered to his son. He was arrested and banned from school property.


http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45594

http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/08/080405dadBook.htm

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/4801212/detail.html

This is the kind of thing that makes people like me despise the gay movement. Why are they going after children who are 5 years old?
Why can't a father determine what his child can and can't be indoctrinated with when he/she is supposed to be learning the A,B,C's and 1,2,3's at school?

Welcome to the Soviet Union.

its a book with some gay people in it, i hardly see it as indoctrination.i dont see them as "going after" them any more than a book with a black family would be black people "going after" them. i think tolerance needs to be taught young. that being said, i oppose public education, and this is one of the reasons. as much as i may find it personally offensive, i think a parent has the right to raise his or her child however they see fit.


Are you saying that it is Not the Parents right to know in advance whether or not controversial topics are going to be taught to their Children at 5?

Do you also support Teaching 5 year olds about Jeffrey Dhamer? I mean, Murder is something they'll need to Tolerate, Right?

i have no problem with the parents being involved. and no, murder is not something we need to tolerate, and neither is bigotry.


Do you stop Murder?

Did you stop Jeffrey Dhamer?

Do they have to tolerate it?

stopping and not tolerating are two different things. i am not "stopping" racism. i do not tolerate it though. i live in rural missouri, it is something i encounter daily. when i hear it, i inform them or their stupidity, and walk away. i am not stopping it, but i do not have to tolerate it.
if we tolerated murder, that would mean not arresting dahmer in the first place.

i think you are confusing having to deal with something with having to accept it.


Ok, Let me go at this from a different Angle.


Can you change the past?

Or do you have to tolerate that it happened?

And live with it?

[Jay2014]

Geneviève wrote: Quote: Why can't a father determine what his child can and can't be indoctrinated with when he/she is supposed to be learning the A,B,C's and 1,2,3's at school?

Because frankly, educators are better qualified to decide what curriculum to teach than most parents are, having years of specialized training in the field of child development.
For another thing, there is no consensus among parents on how or what they want their children to be taught, and a teacher with thirty-plus students cannot possibly teach a separate, individualized lesson plan dictated by parents to each student.
If the parents do not want their children to learn what public schools have to teach, then they are better off looking into private education and/or home-schooling.

"David Parker became enraged last April when he discovered his six-year old son had brought home the book "Who's in a Family.' (story)

The book by Robert Skutch, and illustrated by Laura Nienhaus is aimed at children between three and seven. It catalogues a variety of multicultural contemporary family units, including those with single parents, lesbian and gay parents, mixed-race couples, grandparents and divorced parents.

But, it was the inclusion of same-sex parents that angered Parker. He confronted officials at the Joseph Estabrook School.

Parker, who is a member of the Article 8 Alliance, an organization fighting same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, demanded that the book be removed from the school library and that his son be pulled from discussions about homosexuality whether they are in planned lessons or arise spontaneously."

Just hypothetically, what if it was the illustration of the mixed-race parents that this gentleman objected to, rather than the picture of the homosexual parents?
All else being the same, would you still support his actions?

Personally, I find it ironic that the same people who oppose gay adoption on the grounds that the child will feel different/ be teased/ not fit in/ not be accepted by his peers also oppose any effort by educators to try to alleviate intolerance and help children from different types of families become more accepted and less discriminated against by their peers.

God forbid you ever die, leaving your spouse to raise your children as a single parent.
If the neocons have their way, children from single-parent households will soon be as socially alienated and discriminated against as the children of homosexual parents are now.

you'd be suprised how many would. the only difference would be they would keep quiet, because we as a society decided we wouldnt accept those attitudes. we just havent gotten there with this kind of thing. gay bashing is still socially acceptable.

[Ben_Huh]

Quote: Because frankly, educators are better qualified to decide what curriculum to teach than most parents are, having years of specialized training in the field of child development.

I still wouldn't want teachers ,who for the most part are complete strangers outside the classroom, teaching my kids what they think is best for them in lifestyle choices. I'll teach my kid that, you stick to the basic curriculum.

[Melchior]

Little Wimp wrote: Coral wrote: Why is anything related to sexuality on a 5-year old kids list of readings? Heck, if mine came home with a heterosexual book at 5-years old I'd bring it back to school and stuff it up the teacher.

I agree! :lol:

These books have nothing to do with sex and don't have any sexual content. It would be unprofessional of you to assume that and this assumption has a prejudice ring.

These books teach kids how to be tolerant toward kids with gay parents and such families. What the hell is wrong with that?

[Jay2014]

Innoova wrote: Jay2014 wrote: Innoova wrote: Jay2014 wrote: Innoova wrote: Jay2014 wrote: Little Wimp wrote: Quote: The dispute started last spring when a book was sent home with Parker's 5-year-old son as optional reading material to be shared with his parents. One page of the book depicted a gay family. After meeting with school officials, Parker refused to leave unless they agreed to notify him in the future if similar material is again offered to his son. He was arrested and banned from school property.


http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45594

http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/08/080405dadBook.htm

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/4801212/detail.html

This is the kind of thing that makes people like me despise the gay movement. Why are they going after children who are 5 years old?
Why can't a father determine what his child can and can't be indoctrinated with when he/she is supposed to be learning the A,B,C's and 1,2,3's at school?

Welcome to the Soviet Union.

its a book with some gay people in it, i hardly see it as indoctrination.i dont see them as "going after" them any more than a book with a black family would be black people "going after" them. i think tolerance needs to be taught young. that being said, i oppose public education, and this is one of the reasons. as much as i may find it personally offensive, i think a parent has the right to raise his or her child however they see fit.


Are you saying that it is Not the Parents right to know in advance whether or not controversial topics are going to be taught to their Children at 5?

Do you also support Teaching 5 year olds about Jeffrey Dhamer? I mean, Murder is something they'll need to Tolerate, Right?

i have no problem with the parents being involved. and no, murder is not something we need to tolerate, and neither is bigotry.


Do you stop Murder?

Did you stop Jeffrey Dhamer?

Do they have to tolerate it?

stopping and not tolerating are two different things. i am not "stopping" racism. i do not tolerate it though. i live in rural missouri, it is something i encounter daily. when i hear it, i inform them or their stupidity, and walk away. i am not stopping it, but i do not have to tolerate it.
if we tolerated murder, that would mean not arresting dahmer in the first place.

i think you are confusing having to deal with something with having to accept it.


Ok, Let me go at this from a different Angle.


Can you change the past?

Or do you have to tolerate that it happened?

And live with it?

i have to live with it, yes. do i have to espouse tolerance onto it? no. i can condemn the holocaust, i have no tolerance for that part of history. i have to live with the fact that they happened. i have to live with the fact that tonight, somewhere in the US, someone eill be unjustly killed. i do not have to have tolerance for that fact.

[Geneviève]

I mean, how sickeningly offensive. :roll:
Those illustrations are practically pornographic.
I mean, that lioness is licking her lion cub, and the two of them aren't even wearing any clothes.
I'm sure this book will warp children for life; someone better call the Christian Coalition.

:lol:

[Innoova]

Geneviève wrote: Quote: Why can't a father determine what his child can and can't be indoctrinated with when he/she is supposed to be learning the A,B,C's and 1,2,3's at school?

Because frankly, educators are better qualified to decide what curriculum to teach than most parents are, having years of specialized training in the field of child development.
For another thing, there is no consensus among parents on how or what they want their children to be taught, and a teacher with thirty-plus students cannot possibly teach a separate, individualized lesson plan dictated by parents to each student.
If the parents do not want their children to learn what public schools have to teach, then they are better off looking into private education and/or home-schooling.

"David Parker became enraged last April when he discovered his six-year old son had brought home the book "Who's in a Family.' (story)

The book by Robert Skutch, and illustrated by Laura Nienhaus is aimed at children between three and seven. It catalogues a variety of multicultural contemporary family units, including those with single parents, lesbian and gay parents, mixed-race couples, grandparents and divorced parents.

But, it was the inclusion of same-sex parents that angered Parker. He confronted officials at the Joseph Estabrook School.

Parker, who is a member of the Article 8 Alliance, an organization fighting same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, demanded that the book be removed from the school library and that his son be pulled from discussions about homosexuality whether they are in planned lessons or arise spontaneously."

Just hypothetically, what if it was the illustration of the mixed-race parents that this gentleman objected to, rather than the picture of the homosexual parents?
All else being the same, would you still support his actions?

Personally, I find it ironic that the same people who oppose gay adoption on the grounds that the child will feel different/ be teased/ not fit in/ not be accepted by his peers also oppose any effort by educators to try to alleviate intolerance and help children from different types of families become more accepted and less discriminated against by their peers.

God forbid you ever die, leaving your spouse to raise your children as a single parent.
If the neocons have their way, children from single-parent households will soon be as socially alienated and discriminated against as the children of homosexual parents are now.



So, You're saying the Parents should have no say in how their children are raised?


Want em Factory perfect eh?

[Innoova]

Jay2014 wrote: Innoova wrote: Jay2014 wrote: Innoova wrote: Jay2014 wrote: Innoova wrote: Jay2014 wrote: Little Wimp wrote: Quote: The dispute started last spring when a book was sent home with Parker's 5-year-old son as optional reading material to be shared with his parents. One page of the book depicted a gay family. After meeting with school officials, Parker refused to leave unless they agreed to notify him in the future if similar material is again offered to his son. He was arrested and banned from school property.


http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45594

http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/08/080405dadBook.htm

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/4801212/detail.html

This is the kind of thing that makes people like me despise the gay movement. Why are they going after children who are 5 years old?
Why can't a father determine what his child can and can't be indoctrinated with when he/she is supposed to be learning the A,B,C's and 1,2,3's at school?

Welcome to the Soviet Union.

its a book with some gay people in it, i hardly see it as indoctrination.i dont see them as "going after" them any more than a book with a black family would be black people "going after" them. i think tolerance needs to be taught young. that being said, i oppose public education, and this is one of the reasons. as much as i may find it personally offensive, i think a parent has the right to raise his or her child however they see fit.


Are you saying that it is Not the Parents right to know in advance whether or not controversial topics are going to be taught to their Children at 5?

Do you also support Teaching 5 year olds about Jeffrey Dhamer? I mean, Murder is something they'll need to Tolerate, Right?

i have no problem with the parents being involved. and no, murder is not something we need to tolerate, and neither is bigotry.


Do you stop Murder?

Did you stop Jeffrey Dhamer?

Do they have to tolerate it?

stopping and not tolerating are two different things. i am not "stopping" racism. i do not tolerate it though. i live in rural missouri, it is something i encounter daily. when i hear it, i inform them or their stupidity, and walk away. i am not stopping it, but i do not have to tolerate it.
if we tolerated murder, that would mean not arresting dahmer in the first place.

i think you are confusing having to deal with something with having to accept it.


Ok, Let me go at this from a different Angle.


Can you change the past?

Or do you have to tolerate that it happened?

And live with it?

i have to live with it, yes. do i have to espouse tolerance onto it? no. i can condemn the holocaust, i have no tolerance for that part of history. i have to live with the fact that they happened. i have to live with the fact that tonight, somewhere in the US, someone eill be unjustly killed. i do not have to have tolerance for that fact.


Ok, Allow me to rephrase, Perhaps Tolerate was the wrong word.


You have to accept it happened.


Would you agree that a Child should be taught about Murder at 5?

[Ben_Huh]

Quote: These books teach kids how to be tolerant toward kids with gay parents and such families. What the hell is wrong with that?

Parents teach their kids what they believe is right or wrong. It's not a law to be anti-homosexual, nor is it to teach your kids the same. The only thing that is wrong is that the school is trying to play parent when they should be playing teacher, as it's not the school's place to teach morals. Besides, most kids do tend to end up becoming tolerate of others just by growing up in our diverse society.

[Melchior]

And what's with equating this book to a book that supposedly teaches tolerance toward murderers? Not even close, the equation is pathetic.

If your religion believes something is immoral, tough s**t! If it doesn't involve coercion, is clearly not a choice, and there is a large community of people who just want to live their lives and have the same rights like everyone else, you will have to learn to live with them. And a book that teaches kids to be tolerant of them is not a bad thing.

You people make me sick!

[Melchior]

Ben_Huh wrote: as it's not the school's place to teach morals

This is kindergarden we are talking about. I'll take it that from this statement you don't support "faith" studies in our schools?

[Ben_Huh]

Quote: This is kindergarden we are talking about. I'll take it that from this statement you don't support "faith" studies in our schools?

If it's a class that students "must take," then no I wouldn't support it. If it's elective, than yes. Students shouldn't be forced by schools to be tolerate of others. Let them be bigots, especially if their hate doesn't turn to violence.

[Melchior]

Ben_Huh wrote: Quote: This is kindergarten we are talking about. I'll take it that from this statement you don't support "faith" studies in our schools?

If it's a class that student's "must take," then no I wouldn't support it. If it's elective, than yes. Students shouldn't be forced by schools to be tolerate of others. Let them be bigots, especially if their hate doesn't turn to violence.

Understandable, I have already stated that if it were up to me I would get rid of public schools all together anyway.

Now, if you support tolerance being taught by schools but not tolerance toward gay couples, I'm pissed off.

Any issue that deals with prejudice of sexual orientation gets me so mad I'll sometimes play devils advocate to get my point across. I'm sure you can understand...

[Innoova]

Melchior wrote: And what's with equating this book to a book that supposedly teaches tolerance toward murderers? Not even close, the equation is pathetic.

If your religion believes something is immoral, tough s**t! If it doesn't involve coercion, is clearly not a choice, and there is a large community of people who just want to live their lives and have the same rights like everyone else, you will have to learn to live with them. And a book that teaches kids to be tolerant of them is not a bad thing.

You people make me sick!


Because it is introducing things to Children that are not necessarily safe at their Age.


Melchoir, you obviously find it HORRIBLY wrong to teach children about murder at 5. I feel the same way about ANY controversial issue, Including Homosexuality.

[Ben_Huh]

Quote: Now, if you support tolerance being taught by schools but not tolerance toward gay couples, I'm pissed off.

Any issue that deals with prejudice of sexual orientation gets me so mad I'll sometimes play devils advocate to get my point across. I'm sure you can understand...

I don't think tolerance is something you should learn at school, period. Like I said before, most kids become tolerate of others anyway just by growing up in today's society.

I understand....no harm done.

Quote: Because it is introducing things to Children that are not necessarily safe at their Age

That's my main problem to. I think the parents alone should teach their kids about such subjects, not public schools.

[Melchior]

Innoova wrote: Because it is introducing things to Children that are not necessarily safe at their Age.

How is it not safe? Kids already know about gay couples because of their friends, I think it would be safe to educate them about Heather and her two mommies, wouldn't you?

[Innoova]

Melchior wrote: Innoova wrote: Because it is introducing things to Children that are not necessarily safe at their Age.

How is it not safe? Kids already know about gay couples because of their friends, I think it would be safe to educate them about Heather and her two mommies, wouldn't you?


And Children Also know that "Johnny's" Daddy Never came home from New York City...

Maybe he ran away to the Circus.


Is that safe to educate them about as well?

[Ben_Huh]

Quote: How is it not safe? Kids already know about gay couples because of their friends, I think it would be safe to educate them about Heather and her two mommies, wouldn't you?

I don't know that many 5 year olds who have a solid opinion on homosexuality, or whoeven know what it is. If the parents are teaching Bobby about Heather's Mommies, it's cool, but not when it's the school.