HAH.
Satire is fun - but she does have a point. elementary school isn't the place to be teaching sexuality.
Nope. ME.
You CONTINUE to help me prove my point. So, if it is presented entirely in an informational way, what values the receiver perceives is on him or her.
Nope. One presents information, how the listener evaluates that information is on the listener. This is why it is important to impart the information clearly.
No, that's not precisely what I said. There is no weight presented. Only information. What the student does with that is completely on HIM/HER.
And if that context is to provide information, the value judgments perceived are on the listener.
No, that is not equivelency. It is a list. YOU are assigning morality, NOT the presenter.
Context and judgment are not the same concepts.
The implication comes from their own morality and values, not those of the presentation of a list. You are demonstrating this point by how you are posting. You are presenting your own morality from the list that has been presented.
No, you didn't and you are being dishonest by posting that you did. Your second example was filled with value judgments. Here is your comment and I will, place in bold all of the value judgments:
These are value judgments. Stating "major form" indicates preference. Saying "some claim that homosexuality, bi sexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, and all other manners of sexuality should be treated as no better or worse than hetero sexuality, but the fact remains that these are very, very, very small minority groups" presents that this view is carried by a minority, and by using the word "claim" you impress that it is an unsubstantiated minority. Further, your comment is biased because it is fundamentally INACCURATE. By all accounts, your example was a complete failure.
Your presentation was by no means equivalent, and certainly biased, and by no means dry.
Of course you can.
No, it isn't.
Giving information is providing THAT information. Now, it is possible to do what you are claiming, but not necessary.
Certainly. Context. Not judgment.
See? Your presentation was flawed. If your presentation had been clear, no interpretation on my part would have been necessary
Here, your presentation is clear. Perhaps I would have been offended. Why? Perhaps I haven't liked some of your positions, so I have built in animosity towards you
I don't). See? The presentation is not the issue in this case. You were clear, contextual, and without judgment. The problem was with the listener.
You are STILL illustrating my point. If your presentation is clear and informational, the judgments that I perceive are on me.
So, you agree that it is not, always, but could be, correct?
I vacillate with the school choice issue. Personally, I'd rather see an more effective and efficient use of funds in our public schools, but I could see school choice as a viable option.
How about tolerance? Is it okay to teach tolerance in elementary school?
:shrug: no school should promote enable or allow bullying; and group cohesion is indeed something that will and should be picked up as a result of group projects, team sports, and the like.
Point is moot. Kindergartners through 8th grade shouldn't be taught sex.
That didn't answer the question.
Want to try again.
Is it okay to teach Tolerance in Schools?
If so, how do you teach tolerance towards Homosexuals without using the word Gay?
Some people danced around it early on, but check out post #70 and read forward from there...
Both and all. Actions, words... You have to read between the lines and look at a poster's history in these types of threads.
Homophobia can be anyone supporting this Tenn law. It's a fear that causes people to act in a certain way.
Some Libertarians will try to support this law or support anti-gay marriage laws based on 'Logic', but if it's thin logic, I'd say look deeper... where are these thoughts and feelings coming from?
Homophobia, like any bigotry, doesn't have to be overt, in your face gay bashing.
I see alot of heterophobia and anti straightness in here, I sense hateful heterophobia and a tyrannical attempt to intimidate people into a lifestyle they dont agree with and the indoctrination of it to underage schoolchildren who should be learning the 4 rs instead
We do not need tax-payer funded indoctrination.
How about tolerance? Is it okay to teach tolerance in elementary school?
No, elementary schools should not teach tolerance. They should have strict rules that are strictly enforced.
No, elementary schools should not teach tolerance. They should have strict rules that are strictly enforced.
Elementary aged children do not need to be taught why the rules are there, they just need to know what the rules are and what the consequences are for breaking them.
I see no reason nor intimidation, pressure to change my sexual orientation to homosexual. Nor do I see it for anyone else what ever their sexual orientation is.
Who was it earlier that asked me for proof of Homophobia in this thread... Pls see above.
Wait, what?
Point is moot. Kindergartners through 8th grade shouldn't be taught sex. I'm in favor of the bill, and I think all non-academic matter should stay out of school.
I think Godwin's law applies here and you lose the debate hazlnut. Hyperbolic accusations of homophobia, in an attempt to silence and/or marginalize those with whom you disagree, is akin to calling them a nazi or a commie or a homo etc.
You lose.
we have schools for educating our kids, not socializing them. that is the job of the family and the community. in particular if we are going to make it difficult for parents and children to escape a particular school system then we have no business trying to impose solutions via the curriculum and presentation of material on controversial subjects such as the one under discussion. that is a way to guarantee backlash, including the law that kickstarted this discussion.
I think Godwin's law applies here and you lose the debate hazlnut. Hyperbolic accusations of homophobia, in an attempt to silence and/or marginalize those with whom you disagree, is akin to calling them a nazi or a commie or a homo etc.
You lose.
I cannot discern whether you're being sarcastic or not.
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?