johndylan1
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2013
- Messages
- 1,932
- Reaction score
- 375
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Well, that's homophobic futility for ya. Acceptance keeps going up with each generation, so clearly an awful lot of parents are failing to instill their 'values' and paranoia.
Sexualizing children?
I guess if there was time in public schools...there could be one class devoted to the Muslim religion, one class on Judaism, on class on Christianity, one class on Hinduism, and the list goes on....and by the end of the school day kids will know all about religions, but won't be able to count their finger and toes out loud.
So you haven't said why its different in principal. Only a straw man of impracticality. Substitute the religions you mentioned various sexual preferences and you'll see the weakness of that argument. It actually makes the point that the schools have become places of advocacy. There is not time to teach everything so they have chosen those things deemed most valuable. This shows that the public school system has determined that religion is not valuable, homosexuality is.
I always find it amusing when people project like they do.
People who react with phobic hysteria to homosexuality calling OTHER people emotional? What a hoot.
Maybe we should ask our Gay posters if they chose homosexuality as an alternative life style!!
So you haven't said why its different in principal. Only a straw man of impracticality. Substitute the religions you mentioned various sexual preferences and you'll see the weakness of that argument. It actually makes the point that the schools have become places of advocacy. There is not time to teach everything so they have chosen those things deemed most valuable. This shows that the public school system has determined that religion is not valuable, homosexuality is.
Because that has no bearing on the discussion at this point.
Yes it does..the thread is called ''Is homosexuality a choice''
Would be interesting to hear from Gays...
I'm not really interested in your bitch fight with various posters!!
John...if you can't grasp the difference between religion and human science, which includes sexual orientation...hey...deal with it however you need to.
But I don't see schools adding values to any sexual orientations or praising one orientation over the other, but rather being included as part of curriculum, which define sexual orientation.
And if your child isn't taught your religion in the way you want it taught...or if a teacher somehow inject his or her own religious values, which aren't agreeable with you...something tells me you'd be raising hell.
I have many posts in this thread in which this has been fully discussed and other posters and I have exchanged on that issue. As a result of our discussions about that I noticed and pointed out inconsistent arguments coming from many and realized that the arguments were not anything more than advocacy at any cost. I am defending my position honestly. So before you start calling people out from a position of ignorance, I would suggest that you go back and read the entire thread.
My post wasn't meant to confront you or any other poster..I stated I would like more of an opinion from gay people..
Did you test your consistency or did you only take the time to mock? Wait I'll answer that for you, you didn't test, you chose to ignore honest debate and decided to mock. This makes my point you are a dishonest advocate not principled.
Yea the do. Schools are government agencies, they require sex ed with homosexual studies. By law you must send your kids to school. If you cannot afford private ed, you are in that class.
Another example you might think about would be requiring kids to take Christian religion class in public school. I am not advocating, I'm comparing the Idea of how institutional power has approved one set of moral judgments and removed another.
I tend to ignore sophistry in general, so yes, I do ignore certain things.
The entire phobic reaction to homosexuality is based upon emotion rather than reason because it is inevitably the result of the cognitive dissonance created by the contrast between arbitrary teachings and one's own impulses, or else a generalized revulsion to practices one cannot imagine themselves engaging in. In either case, the homophobia is an emotional response rather than rational since there is nothing inherently hurtful or damaging to another person when two adults engage in it willingly.
The circular illogic of "It's icky-poo because people say it's icky-poo; therefore since people say it's icky-poo it must be icky-poo" doesn't cut it. Just because ignorant people wag their sanctimonious little fingers about "morality" while persecuting people who cause no intrinsic harm, that does not make the actions of those they persecute immoral. It just means that the ignorant, bigoted individuals have no basis for calling it immoral other than their arbitrary prejudice.
Come up with a valid reason for WHY homosexuality is immoral other than arbitrary prejudice based upon emotion. You can't. You simply can't.
I'd be fine with them teaching that Christianity exists, and I'd also be fine with them abstaining from giving any opinion as to the morality of being Christian. If you can do the same for homosexuality, then you have an equality to talk about.
I would like for them to do just that. do not teach that non reproductive sexual practices are morally equivalent to reproductive practices.
Way off base. Family values can run either way, remember this discussion is in context with bidirectional thinking about issues and consistent principals vs advocacy. Many of you have taken the opportunity to show your true position which is one of advocacy. I would find it perfectly acceptable for families to teach their children acceptance and inclusion of sexual preferences. I also find it acceptable for families to teach their children about sexual immorality. I do not however support governmental indoctrination with respect to sexual morality. I find it acceptable for families to teach their children about Jesus Christ. I find it also acceptable for families to teach their children atheism. I do not, however, find it acceptable for governmental agencies to indoctrinate children about religious values. It's a matter of personal liberty in raising one own children with the moral education that is appropriate for each family.
Bidirectional thinking: Within your own post Replace the references to "gay" or "homosexua"l etc. with the word "Christian" and any reference to "Sex ed" ,etc. with "religion class", and tell me if you would feel the same way about another protected right. This will determine if this is an emotional appeal based on advocacy or if it is a well thought out and consistent principal for kids of all types. Please give it an honest review. I would propound that families not government agencies should maintain control over certain aspects of their own child's education.
Soooo, let me understand. So if your male and "attracted" to males, but you have sex only with females who your not attracted to, you are hetero?I chose "maybe" but now I'm re-thinking this.
You don't choose who you're attracted to. So in that case I would say no it's not a choice.
But you choose who you have sex with, which makes the act of homo or hetero sexuality a choice.
....
I chose "maybe" but now I'm re-thinking this.
You don't choose who you're attracted to. So in that case I would say no it's not a choice.
But you choose who you have sex with, which makes the act of homo or hetero sexuality a choice.
I also think you can "turn" straight or gay because things might trigger those feelings. Just like anything that happens to you in life can shape who you are. Either way, gays don't bother me. Why would they? More women for me.arty
My post wasn't meant to confront you or any other poster..I stated I would like more of an opinion from gay people..
I chose "maybe" but now I'm re-thinking this.
You don't choose who you're attracted to. So in that case I would say no it's not a choice.
But you choose who you have sex with, which makes the act of homo or hetero sexuality a choice.
I also think you can "turn" straight or gay because things might trigger those feelings. Just like anything that happens to you in life can shape who you are. Either way, gays don't bother me. Why would they? More women for me.arty
Well, the statement was simple in reference to a statement made by another. It was clear as well, and I cannot make it any simpler.
If you cannot figure out the few simple sentences written, and the comment by Cap'n Courtesy extrapolating on that response, too bad.
I can't help you.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?