Supreme Court backs parents seeking to opt their kids out of LGBTQ books in elementary schools

[coyote505]

Mmm, so the solution is to pretend that gay people don’t exist?

No. Just that they are not as prominent as they would like the rest of us to believe.

 

[multivita-man]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

I was being sarcastic.

 

[trixare4kids]

13eastxpharoh said:

I'm simply stating nobody should decide what's best for the children other than the ones who we can generally trust the most to make such decisions for their child, the parents. I believe if parents don't want their kids reading lgbtq books that is their decision.

Absolutely.

You think that bigoted parents always make the right decisions?

I don't think any parent qualifies for sainthood because they teach their children religious belief but I also don't think this means they are all bigoted either if that was your dumb point.

 

[13eastxpharoh]

You think that bigoted parents always make the right decisions?

How about you read and make sure you're interpreting my post correctly before you reply to me.

 

[Phys251]

How about you read and make sure you're interpreting my post correctly before you reply to me.

Calm down. I wasn't talking about every single parent, just the bigoted ones. Do you defend them?

 

[trixare4kids]

End of story.

Let's hope so, but the day is still young for Lursa.

 

[CaughtInThe]

 

[trixare4kids]

Calm down. I wasn't talking about every single parent, just the bigoted ones. Do you defend them?

Why do you keep asking loaded questions?

 

[j brown's body]

Bill of rights trumps your fee-fees.

So you feel it makes religous ideas more equal than secular ones.

 

[Manc Skipper]

That's a position that's not only full of naivety, but also dangerously enabling and permissive.

Why would you advocate for blindly trusting an underdeveloped human whose frontal lobe (the part of the brain that is responsible for self-control, planning, organization, anticipating consequences, and engaging good judgment) is decades away from full maturation?

To be an effective parent, one must integrate a healthy amount of skepticism and distrust. That doesn't mean you're angry, abusive, disparaging, or mean.

The one thing you can trust is that most kids will do dumb, careless, dangerous, and impulsive things.



They are dependents whom at different ages are not yet as intelligent as the smartest breeds of dogs, dolphins, chimpanzees, or elephants yet.

Nobody has suggested they are "property." That's just hysterical nonsense.

Brains develop into the mid twenties yet you send children to war. LGBTQ people exist in society, the kids will meet them, be taught by them, maybe even be related to them, but they can't read an age appropriate book about them because their parent think they are icky?

 

[13eastxpharoh]

Calm down.

If that's how you react to stuff online you might want to think about not going on.

I wasn't talking about every single parent, just the bigoted ones. Do you defend them?

Do you know what generally means? it means most of, minus a few exceptions such as the obvious, which yes includes bigoted ones in this case. You wouldn't have to ask me this if you read my post.

 

[Napoleon]

So you fee it makes religous ideas more equal than secular ones.

I know it prevents you from using the government to impose your values on children as demonstrated by the decision today. That it does you a sad is immaterial.

 

[j brown's body]

13eastxpharoh said:


Absolutely.



I don't think any parent qualifies for sainthood because they teach their children religious belief but I also don't think this means they are all bigoted either if that was your dumb point.

Have you thought at all about the effect this ruling has on the kids?

 

[Phys251]

If that's how you react to stuff online you might want to think about not going on.

Do you know what generally means? it means most of, minus a few exceptions such as the obvious, which yes includes bigoted ones in this case. You wouldn't have to ask me this if you read my post.

You didn't address my point. Maybe it is too much for you to handle?

 

[j brown's body]

I know it prevents you from using the government to impose your values on children as demonstrated by the decision today.

Used to censor what the real world looks like is a pretty weak argument.

 

[Hello My Son]

In this case, Im referring to their reading a story about a penguin that has two daddies. I think we're pretty safe here.

If you don't want to be thought as seeing kids as parent's property, then perhaps you might include kids in this discussion that effects them.

Where did I suggest that parents shouldn't have discussions with their kids? Perhaps you should make honest posts instead of posting complete fabrications and strawmen.

You all relentlessly claim this case as a victory for parents, but ignore the impact it has on depriving their kids of a view of the world they are growing into.

I noticed that you completely avoided my post in which I initiated an honest conversation with you earlier in the thread and elaboratively detailed my actual positions rather than the strawman stuff you're posting here.

Are you avoiding that post now because what I said gets in the way of your agenda of misrepresenting me and pigeon-holing me into being the composite character you're pre-determined to argue against?

 

[j brown's body]

I know it prevents you from using the government to impose your values on children as demonstrated by the decision today. That it does you a sad is immaterial.

What value are you so frightened of?

 

[BirdinHand]

End of story.

Yep.

Parents can opt their kids out of classes if they disagree with the books

Works for me.

Now schools can have inclusive books - and all the snowflake’s kiddos can miss reading lessons and sit in the principals office or nurses office if Mommy and Daddy don’t like the content.


And later, when Little Johnny struggles with reading, the school can pull out all those opt out forms and go

You opted them out of reading for every lesson including X books. That book and characters from that book were referenced the entire week - so you opted them out of reading all week. You opted them out again with Y book. And D book.

Parental rights.

Oh well.

 

[Manc Skipper]

I know it prevents you from using the government to impose your values on children as demonstrated by the decision today. That it does you a sad is immaterial.

While you seek to have the government impose your values in turn. We see you.

 

[Atreus21]

Freedom of religion does not mean forcing your religious beliefs down everyone's throat.

Well.

I'd say that depends on the religion. The 2SLGBTQIA+MS-13 religion sure doesn't mind doing it.

 

[j brown's body]

Where did I suggest that parents shouldn't have discussions with their kids? Perhaps you should make honest posts instead of posting complete fabrications and strawmen.



I noticed that you completely avoided my post in which I initiated an honest conversation with you earlier in the thread and elaboratively detailed my actual positions rather than the strawman stuff you're posting here.

Are you avoiding that post now because what I said gets in the way of your agenda of misrepresenting me and pigeon-holing me into being the composite character you're pre-determined to argue against?

The trust I was referring to is in hearing a story about two penguin dads, not in borrowing the car.

I was noting that you guys don't discuss the kids in this thread. You all ignore them for the parents.

I think I did respond when I wrote:

"Let's look at two of the books in this case, which, btw, no one is required to read. They're simply on the shelf.

...Are they advocating for same sex marriage and transgender rights or simply describing things people are free to do?

It appears to me that what they are really saying is that their religion teaches them that these people have no right to exist in our world."

 

[Napoleon]

While you seek to have the government impose your values in turn. We see you.

Maybe through cataracts.

 

[vesper]

Are they removing the trans kids from the classes? The kids with gay parents? The kids already know and are exposed to it. They dont naturally attach all the negative and intolerant crap that adults do, to it. They learn that from adults

Shouldnt they learn to be kind and include others? To prevent bullying? Prevent exclusion? To create a better learning environment?

From what you post, some obviously arent going to learn that at home.

No one is removing trans kids from any classes. No one is removing gay parents.
Stop the hyperbole.
This ruling is to protect the rights of parents to be able to opt out of activities such as trans story hours, mandatory book readings promoting same sex agendas or any sexual agendas without retaliation. Parents now have control of what their children are being taught. It's common sense.

 

[Atreus21]

Seems like a no brainer. The school isn't being asked to change its curriculum. It's being asked to reinstate the opt-out policy they revoked.

That doesn't seem so bigoted or extreme to me.

 

[13eastxpharoh]

You didn't address my point.

Where did you make a point? You asked me a question I gave you an answer. You are leaving me concerned dude. Are you trolling?

Maybe it is too much for you to handle?

its clear having a simple conversation online is clearly too much for you to handle. You can't even remember what you said in separate posts minutes apart.