PDA

View Full Version : Same-sex talk in diversity video divides town


*JR*
Sep 19th, 2007, 04:25 PM
N.J. school system bans a controversial documentary about tolerance

By Mike Celizic
TODAYShow.com contributor
Updated: 5:59 p.m. ET Sept 17, 2007

The State of New Jersey mandates that all school children be taught a diversity curriculum by the fourth grade, and the Evesham Township Board of Education says that’s what it intends to do. It just doesn’t want part of that education to be conveyed by a film about diversity in families that includes households with same-sex parents.

The film, “That’s a Family!”, looks at diversity through the eyes of children who talk about their own families. One child talks about having mixed-race parents. Another talks about living with a divorced parent. Others talk about single parents, traditional parents, adoptive parents.

And then there’s the child who says, “This is my mom. Her name is Betty. And this is my other mom. Her name is Kim.”

As one parent told NBC’s Ron Allen, “I'm losing my tolerance for the amount of tolerance I'm supposed to tolerate.”

The film was shown last December to a third-grade class in Evesham’s J. Harold Van Zant School. When parents heard from their children about the film, some objected. The school board stopped the film from being shown and appointed a committee made up of all segments of the community to determine whether the film was acceptable to show to the district’s children. The board also commissioned a poll of district attitudes on the issue.

The poll showed that Evesham, an affluent suburb of Philadelphia, was split almost exactly down the middle — half in favor, half opposed. The committee was more positive, recommending that the film be shown in district schools, but to fourth graders instead of third graders.

At an Aug. 30 meeting the board heard the recommendation of the committee and then voted to ban the video altogether. The state-mandated diversity program would be addressed through discussion, it decided, not a film.

To those who opposed the board, it seemed clear that the objection wasn’t to showing single-parent or mixed-race households, but to showing children who had gay parents.

“It’s not about parental control, it’s about fear of gay people,” Steven Goldstein, the president of a New Jersey gay rights group, Garden State Equality, told “The New York Times.” “We think the school board’s decision hinges on its fear of one community — the lesbian and gay community — and violates the state’s law against discrimination.”

“What kind of message is the school board and community sending to children whose family structure is perceived as ‘different’ in some way?” Debra Chasnoff, the Academy Award-winning director who made the film wrote in an op-ed piece in “The Philadelphia Inquirer” after the board initially ordered that teachers stop showing the film. “‘You don't belong here?’ ‘Your family is not normal?’ Or — in the words of one parent who spoke out recently — ‘your family is ‘disgusting’?”

Those who fought to have it removed from the curriculum in Evesham say they’re all in favor of teaching diversity, but many parents say it should be up to them to decide when to tell their children about same-sex parents and what to tell them about such households.

“I think it's the parents’ decision to decide to teach their children morality,” local parent Mike Quinn told NBC.

“I think they need to be more open-minded because there are families like this in our schools,” countered another parent, Tricia Colmon.

Kathy Yeager, a teacher, said that parents are seeing issues that don’t even occur to the kids watching the film. “I think third grade is too young for them to understand the ramifications of what the parents are upset about,” she told Allen.

“That’s a Family!” was produced in 2000 by Chasnoff, who won an Academy Award in 1991 for a documentary about the nuclear-weapons industry. Highly praised by various groups and screened in the Clinton White House, the film, distributed by Women’s Educational Media, is used in hundreds of school districts around the country.

In some, where the content is an issue, parents are allowed to prescreen it and decide for themselves whether they want their children to see it. The compromise proposed by Evesham’s committee also recommended that local parents be allowed to make the same decision.

But it still wasn’t enough to get over the opposition to a boy named Daniel in the film, who tells viewers, “There are my two dads, Rusty and Jason.”

égalité
Sep 19th, 2007, 04:48 PM
Why do straight people feel so threatened by homosexuals? Even recognizing that they exist causes uproars like this. Straight people care way too much about gay people. It's really weird. You'd almost think they're insecure about something.

venus_rulez
Sep 19th, 2007, 05:35 PM
Why do straight people feel so threatened by homosexuals? Even recognizing that they exist causes uproars like this. Straight people care way too much about gay people. It's really weird. You'd almost think they're insecure about something.


I think insecurity and ignorance are a lot of what it is. The sad thing is, it has been the history of the United States since the beginning. In 50 years, everyone will love gays and gays will be allowed to marry and no one will want to talk about this time period right now when gays were treated as second class citizens and anytime anyone brings it up, people will say that was in the past and why can't people get over it. Much like they do now with minorities and racism.

Qrystyna
Sep 19th, 2007, 05:45 PM
As one parent told NBC’s Ron Allen, “I'm losing my tolerance for the amount of tolerance I'm supposed to tolerate.”


That has to be one of the most ignorant comments I've ever heard.

samsung101
Sep 19th, 2007, 06:38 PM
That parent is right.
This is a 4th grade class.
All the kids need to be told is don't pick on other people for
being different from you - period.

Good for them for standing up for a change. Instead of rolling
over due to the news and media and activist group rants and
raves about anyone daring to question the mandated tolerance
education kids must have.

Tolerance means put up with - tolerate. Not embrace or like or love.

How about tolerating some parents who dare to question what the
liberal school system is forcing them to show and give their kids?



It's a local school, and that's where the decisions should be made -
locally. These parents are saying, stop it. Stop forcing our kids
to deal with adult issues as kids, or having one type of lifestyle
shoved in their face over another. How about teaching them to read,
write, work with computers, and stop falling so far behind the
kids in Japan in terms of education.

If the schools spent more time dealing with a hard line education
system and mandatory testing, perhaps, we would have kids with more
opportunity in their future, instead of such high drop out rates.

samsung101
Sep 19th, 2007, 06:47 PM
Desperate Houswives.
Brothers and Sisters.
Will and Grace.
Cable tv shows.
Ellen.
Rosie.
Elton John.
All successful gay stars, or shows written by gay writers, etc.
Mainstream.
Prime Time.
Millionaires, billionaires.

What intolerance are you talking of on the whole in America?
The majority of Americans support civil unions.
The majority of Americans support the idea you can will what
you want to who you want, family, straight, gay, friends, your dog, whatever.
The majority of Americans support the idea of tolerance.
Most American support simple individual freedom.

Hollywood, Academy Awards, Emmys, Grammys, you will find
a lot of gay men and women who are successful, wealthy, and
open about it. They have more influence on our viewing,
reading, and entertainment than about any other group in America.



That doesn't mean all Americans want traditional marriage laws
in their state alterd or removed to ensure gay marriage is legal.
They largely don't. Left and right, black and white. They don't.

Nor does it mean parents want more sexual diversity taught to their
kids in elementary school. Having seen Britanny and Paris these
days, all over our tv sets, who can blame them for being leery of
any growth in sex education in lower level grades by the far left
union driven school system. How about being tolerant of a few people
who disagree with you.

Really, I wouldn't worry too much about American parents and tolerance.
The fastest growing population in the world, especially Europe, is Islamic.

They won't have any tolerance for the gay community. But, we concentrate
on hating Americans who dare to question any of the gay agenda and policy ideas
instead.

Pureracket
Sep 19th, 2007, 07:34 PM
That parent is right.
This is a 4th grade class.
All the kids need to be told is don't pick on other people for
being different from you - period.

Good for them for standing up for a change. Instead of rolling
over due to the news and media and activist group rants and
raves about anyone daring to question the mandated tolerance
education kids must have.

Tolerance means put up with - tolerate. Not embrace or like or love.

How about tolerating some parents who dare to question what the
liberal school system is forcing them to show and give their kids?



It's a local school, and that's where the decisions should be made -
locally. These parents are saying, stop it. Stop forcing our kids
to deal with adult issues as kids, or having one type of lifestyle
shoved in their face over another. How about teaching them to read,
write, work with computers, and stop falling so far behind the
kids in Japan in terms of education.

If the schools spent more time dealing with a hard line education
system and mandatory testing, perhaps, we would have kids with more
opportunity in their future, instead of such high drop out rates.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v620/lpbk2713/RushAsMJF.gif

miffedmax
Sep 19th, 2007, 08:20 PM
Yep, having had two kids in one, I can tell you what bastions of liberalism those "affluent" suburban school systems are, with mock elections usually going about 80%/20% for Republican candidates and kids who dared to voice support for Democrats being threatened with physical violence. ( I realize my experience is limited to my locality, but it certainly seems reflective of general trends).

My suspicion is that a sizable number of those parents who are saying they want to discuss it when it's appropriate basically don't want to discuss it at all.

The gist of it all is that this film and this effort are about getting kids to accept other kids, regardless of their family background. Parents and children can disapprove of gay parents, divorced parents, mixed race parents etc. if they want. But the kids of these families have no control over who their parents are. And kids have a tendency to pick on kids who are perceived as "different." This tendency can be mitigated somewhat by programs like this one. So I don't see the problem, except that it bothers the "famiy values" crowd that their children might ever question those values, even if for a few minutes while they watch a film.

¤CharlDa¤
Sep 19th, 2007, 08:25 PM
God samsung, could someone be more close-minded and actually don't realize?

fufuqifuqishahah
Sep 19th, 2007, 08:55 PM
Desperate Houswives.
Brothers and Sisters.
Will and Grace.
Cable tv shows.
Ellen.
Rosie.
Elton John.
All successful gay stars, or shows written by gay writers, etc.
Mainstream.
Prime Time.
Millionaires, billionaires.

What intolerance are you talking of on the whole in America?
The majority of Americans support civil unions.
The majority of Americans support the idea you can will what
you want to who you want, family, straight, gay, friends, your dog, whatever.
The majority of Americans support the idea of tolerance.
Most American support simple individual freedom.

Hollywood, Academy Awards, Emmys, Grammys, you will find
a lot of gay men and women who are successful, wealthy, and
open about it. They have more influence on our viewing,
reading, and entertainment than about any other group in America.



Well samsung, these comments of yours hurt your argument. I feel this is exactly why there shouldn't be a problem showing the video to these 3rd/4th graders. There are so many gay parents in real life and the media anyways, that children are bound to ask about them anyways.

It's not like the video is pushing the gay agenda. It's just simply teaching kids that there are other kids like themselves out there who have maybe 2 fathers/mothers.

samsung101
Sep 19th, 2007, 09:44 PM
It is an issue the parents should get to debate and discuss locally.
It's not a national issue. The feds should stay out.

They're not asking to eliminate tolerance lessons. As mandated by the
big brother State.

They're saying the forced and mandatory lesson that incldues this video
is going too far for their taste.

Fair enough complaint.

You are allowed to complain as a parent of a child in a public school
aren't you? They're doing that.

They're only saying, hey, for 4th graders, this is too much in their view.
Why do their little kids have to get into this at all?

It wouldn't be the first time a GLSEN or GLADD or gay activist group/teacher union
lesson plan for a public school has been questioned. It won't be the last.

griffin
Sep 19th, 2007, 09:47 PM
4th graders are too young to hear that other kids have parents?

:weirdo:

Honestly, get your mind out of the gutter.

samsung101
Sep 19th, 2007, 09:50 PM
You're presuming the kids don't get same sex information in any other
form in the school system. They probably do already. They should probably
get this information after 6th grade. Not when they're making finger puppets
and still into Transformers and Dora lunch boxes.



These parents have every right to say they do not approve of this lesson plan tool.


It's amazing to me we can't say Christmas in school anymore, can't discuss why 9/11 happened
in relation to Islamic fascists, or have an 'Easter' break...but, we can force feed 8 or 9
year olds same sex marriage and relationships...over the objection of some parents who may
not want that done at this point in their kids lives.

Being 'forced' to accept the school policy is really the main issue. The parents have a right
to ask for an alternative or a change in the lesson plan.

samsung101
Sep 19th, 2007, 09:56 PM
Sorry, you can't deal with the idea that parents have a voice in the school system.

They should be heard, and not trounced for differing with the politically correct
mandated and force fed agenda of one group. They may very well be shot down in the
school board, or at the state capital. Still, have the right to say 4th grade is too
young in their silly parental minds for this.

All they did was have the kids, care for them, and love them...so, why should anything
they say matter.

In the end, they'll probably lose their case. Fine. But, they should be
allowed to say, excuse me, I don't care for this for my 9 year old.

Gutter? As usual, disagree with a liberal, and you get smeared. That follows the
script.


That's the place anyone gets to go who disagrees with the teacher union, Democrats who
control the New Jersey state govt. and school system, and the powerful gay activist
groups in politics. Tolerance is a one way street I guess.

Could be why more people are opting for private schools, charter schools that exclude this
area entirely and instead concentrate on basic education, and home schooling.

HippityHop
Sep 19th, 2007, 09:59 PM
Yep, having had two kids in one, I can tell you what bastions of liberalism those "affluent" suburban school systems are, with mock elections usually going about 80%/20% for Republican candidates and kids who dared to voice support for Democrats being threatened with physical violence. ( I realize my experience is limited to my locality, but it certainly seems reflective of general trends).

My suspicion is that a sizable number of those parents who are saying they want to discuss it when it's appropriate basically don't want to discuss it at all.

The gist of it all is that this film and this effort are about getting kids to accept other kids, regardless of their family background. Parents and children can disapprove of gay parents, divorced parents, mixed race parents etc. if they want. But the kids of these families have no control over who their parents are. And kids have a tendency to pick on kids who are perceived as "different." This tendency can be mitigated somewhat by programs like this one. So I don't see the problem, except that it bothers the "famiy values" crowd that their children might ever question those values, even if for a few minutes while they watch a film.


I can make the same argument about some urban areas except they go 80/20 for Democrats.

griffin
Sep 19th, 2007, 10:02 PM
Your brain IS in the gutter samsung - the film references same-sex parents, and you immediately start obsessing about sex, and are kids learning about sex too early...which, by the way, is the standard "script" for right-wing fruitcakes and people who can't get their minds out of other people's business.

Telling kids about families headed by same-sex couples has no more to do with sexuality than telling them about families headed by people with different religious backgrounds, or inter-racial couples, or single parents.

Stop obsessing about sex. It's not healthy.

~{X}~
Sep 19th, 2007, 10:11 PM
Your brain IS in the gutter samsung - the film references same-sex parents, and you immediately start obsessing about sex, and are kids learning about sex too early...which, by the way, is the standard "script" for right-wing fruitcakes and people who can't get their minds out of other people's business.

Telling kids about families headed by same-sex couples has no more to do with sexuality than telling them about families headed by people with different religious backgrounds, or inter-racial couples, or single parents.

Stop obsessing about sex. It's not healthy.

Its cause her George W. Bush Vibrating dildo broke and she hasn't been able to get off recently. :lol:

AmeDevotee
Sep 19th, 2007, 10:21 PM
Gutter? As usual, disagree with a liberal, and you get smeared. That follows the
script.


The fact that you think the word "liberal" is some kind of insult says it all. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

miffedmax
Sep 19th, 2007, 10:55 PM
I can make the same argument about some urban areas except they go 80/20 for Democrats.

I agree, but I was (for some reason) responding to samsung's remark that this particular school district was in the grip of an evil liberal conspiracy.

If it's like most affluent suburban school districts I know about, that's unlikely.

Bruno71
Sep 19th, 2007, 11:56 PM
You wanna know what tolerance is? The administrators of this board tolerating Samsung's incessant and egregious anti-liberal flames. They have more tolerance than I do.

*JR*
Sep 20th, 2007, 01:30 AM
You wanna know what tolerance is? The administrators of this board tolerating Samsung's incessant and egregious anti-liberal flames. They have more tolerance than I do.
Though I'm generaIly on the left, I'd be rather ashamed to post here if there was was an ideological litmus test. Seems to me there are plenty of "anti-conservative flame threads".
:shrug:

Let me make a different point (on the left side) that applies more to older kids. I'm not very happy about parents being able to pull their kids out of sex education classes because said parents are offended.

Jews and (@ least Catholics, not sure about Protestants) have the "rites of passage" into adulthood @ age 13. (And ppl can even join this board then). :o Parents shouldn't contradict their own religions by shielding these "new grownups" from other viewpoints then.

Bruno71
Sep 20th, 2007, 01:35 AM
Though I'm generaIly on the left, I'd be rather ashamed to post here if there was was an ideological litmus test. Seems to me there are plenty of "anti-conservative flame threads".
:shrug:

Let me make a different point (on the left side) that applies more to older kids. I'm not very happy about parents being able to pull their kids out of sex education classes because said parents are offended.

Jews and (@ least Catholics, not sure about Protestants) have the "rites of passage" into adulthood @ age 13. (And ppl can even join this board then). :o Parents shouldn't contradict their own religions by shielding these "new grownups" from other viewpoints then.

Everyone has a different standard of what a flame thread is. I'm not saying there aren't anti-conservative flame threads either. I wanted to point out that samsung does this incessantly. And the fact that he doesn't respond to people who respond to his threads/posts underscores that they are meant solely for the purpose of getting liberals on the board riled up, not as an actual means of two-way discourse.

I also want to add that I admire the admins for tolerating this, as long as he's not breaking any rules of WTAWorld...I just wouldn't have that kind of tolerance.

Qrystyna
Sep 20th, 2007, 01:41 AM
I don't think samsung is real... I think it's just somebody taking the piss out of neo-cons. :lol:

¤CharlDa¤
Sep 20th, 2007, 02:04 AM
Thank god samsung doesn't host the view, or else old-gay singers would just boycott it even more...

Or maybe samsung is Liz H.....Interesting thought.

¤CharlDa¤
Sep 20th, 2007, 02:06 AM
I think what samsung isn't understanding is that yes SOME parents complained about the movie. But as they voted, they said it was an exact tie. Why, in this case, would the people who actually complain win? How about the parents who want to show it to their kids?

How about a compromise. When the teachers shows it in class, she tells the parents in advance and the kids just don't show up. This way we can keep on living in a close-minded conservative world, where two guys holding hands is seen as disgusting.

tterb
Sep 20th, 2007, 02:11 AM
That parent is right.
This is a 4th grade class.
All the kids need to be told is don't pick on other people for
being different from you - period.

Good for them for standing up for a change. Instead of rolling
over due to the news and media and activist group rants and
raves about anyone daring to question the mandated tolerance
education kids must have.

Tolerance means put up with - tolerate. Not embrace or like or love.

How about tolerating some parents who dare to question what the
liberal school system is forcing them to show and give their kids?



It's a local school, and that's where the decisions should be made -
locally. These parents are saying, stop it. Stop forcing our kids
to deal with adult issues as kids, or having one type of lifestyle
shoved in their face over another. How about teaching them to read,
write, work with computers, and stop falling so far behind the
kids in Japan in terms of education.

If the schools spent more time dealing with a hard line education
system and mandatory testing, perhaps, we would have kids with more
opportunity in their future, instead of such high drop out rates.
Has anyone ever told you that you've got a gift for setting up straw man arguments?

For starters, absolutely NO ONE here, or in the article, said (or even suggested) that these parents don't have the right to debate what should be taught to their kids. Where do you pull these paranoid ideas? Many obviously will disagree with those parents' opinions, but nobody is telling them they can't speak their minds about it.

Additionally, nobody is forcing these parents to keep their kids in public schools if the curriculum bothers them that much. You can go on ad naseum about "lifestyles" and "adult issues," but that doesn't change the fact that this video simply shows that gay families exist (and, I would guess, that such a family's "lifestyle" consists of: two people loving each other, raising their children, earning a living, etc. ... how ever WILL the children deal with this knowledge? :eek: ).

If parents want to explain the morality of those families, they have every right to. The real issue is that these parents (a) wanted to avoid the subject altogether, because THEY are uncomfortable with it, or (b) realize that is much more difficult to call the members of a normal, loving family sinful. Abstract depictions of gays are much simpler to work with.

What is so ridiculous to me, is the fact that most parents let their kids know the major principles of morality as early as possible - "don't take that, it's not yours" and "how would you feel if he pushed you?" Furthermore, these basic principles are consistently reinforced in school - but I don't imagine many parents complain about the teacher "imposing her morality on my child" when the teacher stops him from taking a smaller kid's lunch.

So why is this religious "moral" principle, which seems so important to many, any different? Why are parents so uncomfortable with possibly having to explain it to their children? Do they believe that if they never mention it, or if their child never comes across any gay people, the issue will magically disappear? Why not just use this as a tool - is it that hard for a religious person to explain to your child, "Some families have two Moms or two Dads. God doesn't approve of those relationships, but they're people, too, so we must respect them and not judge."

I swear, it's the parents that actually need these videos. What would they do - not let their children sleep over at a friend's house if that child had gay parents? Avoid going out in public for fear of their children seeing any gay families? Why fear exposure to a fact of life? Do the parents feel any pressure to explain the ins and outs of heterosexuality to their children when they see straight couples out and about? This honestly isn't as difficult as people try to make it.

tterb
Sep 20th, 2007, 02:18 AM
^ Wow, that was long. Forgot to add one more thing that samsung glossed over:

In some, where the content is an issue, parents are allowed to prescreen it and decide for themselves whether they want their children to see it. The compromise proposed by Evesham’s committee also recommended that local parents be allowed to make the same decision.

But it still wasn’t enough to get over the opposition to a boy named Daniel in the film, who tells viewers, “There are my two dads, Rusty and Jason.”

Looks like the board is even allowing parents to exempt their kids from this diversity video. So what is the problem? It's borderline fascist to attempt to ban a video from being seen in school simply because you disapprove, unless you legitamitely feel the video is harming the children (and in this case, that argument is ridiculous). What right do these parents have in deciding what other kids may or may not see?

Dementieva_Dude
Sep 20th, 2007, 02:20 AM
It is an issue the parents should get to debate and discuss locally.
It's not a national issue. The feds should stay out.


Samsung, would you feel the same way if parents decided not to let the Civil Rights Movement be taught in schools?

You're presuming the kids don't get same sex information in any other
form in the school system. They probably do already. They should probably
get this information after 6th grade. Not when they're making finger puppets
and still into Transformers and Dora lunch boxes.


Umm...the class was about TOLERANCE, not specifically SAME SEX relationships. I didn't realise there was a limit on how much tolerance kids should be "exposed" to :rolleyes:.

Samsung's post reveals exactly what the problem is with a lot of people...tolerance isn't something you can teach through a series of half-hour lessons twice a week...it is something you have to be exposed to for a long time. The sooner you start teaching and exposing kids to the idea of tolerance the better the chance that the concept will catch on. This applies to ALL forms of tolerance...

LudwigDvorak
Sep 20th, 2007, 02:29 AM
Maybe it's my pro-liberal agenda speaking here, but I think 3rd grade is too late. When I was eight I was one of the kids who hated the "different" kids even though I was a "different" kid too. True, no one made fun of other's sexualities; that was reserved for middle school. Third and fourth grade is about the time most kids start learning about sex, different kinds of people in the world. Third and fourth grade, however, is way too late to be teaching kids tolerance through a video or two. As I recall seeing videos like that as a child I often thought they were stupid or irrelevant.

Tolerance and appreciation of diversity need to be set in from an early age. I was never taught about "tolerance" as a kid in my family, and if I hadn't ended up gay I probably would still be the racist, anti-gay, anti-tolerant Republican zombie that I used to be.

Videos and mind-frames like that need to be emphasized as early as possible. Unfortunately, tons of parents are bullshit at doing that, parenting. I feel sorry for the children samsung and others who think like him will have in the future.

Whitehead's Boy
Sep 20th, 2007, 12:16 PM
Some people just don't want to face reality, and don't want their kids to face it.

I mean, you don't even have to agree with the video. The video is merely to show what kind of families exist.
Too much for fourth graders? Please.

égalité
Sep 20th, 2007, 05:46 PM
Desperate Houswives.
Brothers and Sisters.
Will and Grace.
Cable tv shows.
Ellen.
Rosie.
Elton John.
All successful gay stars, or shows written by gay writers, etc.
Mainstream.
Prime Time.
Millionaires, billionaires.

What intolerance are you talking of on the whole in America?
The majority of Americans support civil unions.

NONE OF THESE PEOPLE CAN GET MARRIED. MOST STATES DON'T HAVE CIVIL UNIONS. IS THAT ENOUGH INEQUITY FOR YOU?


There is no gay agenda. If straight people weren't so obsessed with the every move of homosexuals, there'd be no mirage of the "gay agenda." The government treats us like we're some kind of subspecies that they're analyzing, telling us we can do this and we can't do that, and when we protest it, we suddenly have an "agenda."

As a side note, when straight people hold hands in public, they're flaunting their relationship status. When homosexuals hold hands in public, they're flaunting their sexual orientation. Just putting that out there.

Kart
Sep 20th, 2007, 06:46 PM
But it still wasn’t enough to get over the opposition to a boy named Daniel in the film, who tells viewers, “There are my two dads, Rusty and Jason.”

I'm sorry but I'd object to this as well.

Rusty is something I'd name a ginger cat, not my gay dad.

The directors couldn't come up with something better :confused:.

samsung, I didn't bother to read most of what you wrote but I'm sure I disagree.

miffedmax
Sep 20th, 2007, 08:43 PM
NONE OF THESE PEOPLE CAN GET MARRIED. MOST STATES DON'T HAVE CIVIL UNIONS. IS THAT ENOUGH INEQUITY FOR YOU?


There is no gay agenda. If straight people weren't so obsessed with the every move of homosexuals, there'd be no mirage of the "gay agenda."

There is so! This spring when I was visiting Las Vegas with my brother he had a sheet of paper clearly labeled "agenda."

hingisGOAT
Sep 21st, 2007, 08:14 AM
Stop forcing our kids
to deal with adult issues as kids, or having one type of lifestyle
shoved in their face over another.

Oh, right. So when EVERY movie these kids watch and EVERY book they read features absolutely, positively NOTHING but heterosexual relationships....

...that's not having one type of lifestyle shoved in your face?

:weirdo:

égalité
Sep 21st, 2007, 08:23 PM
These parents are saying, stop it. Stop forcing our kids to deal with adult issues as kids, or having one type of lifestyle shoved in their face over another.

Oh, where to begin...

Telling kids that other kids have parents isn't "adult issues."

"Lifestyle" implies choice. You may want to reconsider your choice of words.

And on having one "lifestyle" shoved in their faces over another, count how many gay couples and straight couples you see holding hands tomorrow. Count how many gay couples and straight couples you see on TV tomorrow. I'll eagerly await your numbers.

This video just shows that not everyone's family is the same, and there is nothing wrong with teaching that. It has nothing to do with sex. The only people who have problems with programs like this are those who are obsessed with making it about sex. It's funny... the more people hate us, the more they're obsessed with our sex lives. It's kind of pathetic.

Volcana
Sep 21st, 2007, 11:25 PM
This is the sort of thing that happens because not enough parents are involved in the decisions of the school board. Maybe 4th grade is too young, maybe it's not. But yout typical American school boared election draws less than 10% of the voters. Your average school board meeting has only a couple people watching. And that's where these decisions get made.

The school board was likely trying to be responsible. It's an Academy Award winning film, which usually means a pretty conservative treatment of a topic. And if the concept of 'familes' is what you're aiming at, fourth grade is certainly an appropriate age.

Of course, I haven't seen the film, but the passages cited don't mention sexuality at all. Of course, the whole concept of 'parents' runs up near 'sex' but it's not the same thing. OTOH, the real problem homophobia. Having the government taking the position that homosexuals are fit parents may seem a no-brainer, but for a lot of Americans that's a radical, even aggressively perverse, position. Having the school support something you as a parent oppose is a serious problem. Literally miiilions of white parents pulled their children out of southern public schools rather than have them go to school with Black children. The state of Virginia closed it's public schools altogether for five years. Those are the lengths people driven by bigotry will go to.

Someone with that sort of mindset will NEVER want a ten year old being told that a kid having two Dads is just as normal as a kid having a Dad and Mom.

Apoleb
Sep 21st, 2007, 11:36 PM
Guys, essays and essays over what Samsung is writing? :rolls: Come on, you should all know better. Whatever it wrote should be taken with a grain of salt. She just hides her beliefs about homosexuality and her fear of its spread in society (like so many paranoid social conservatives) with those nonsensical arguments.

mykarma
Sep 22nd, 2007, 12:03 AM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v620/lpbk2713/RushAsMJF.gif
:lol::lol::lol:

mykarma
Sep 22nd, 2007, 12:14 AM
I'm sorry but I'd object to this as well.

Rusty is something I'd name a ginger cat, not my gay dad.

The directors couldn't come up with something better :confused:.

samsung, I didn't bother to read most of what you wrote but I'm sure I disagree.
:worship::worship::worship:

Bruno71
Sep 22nd, 2007, 04:50 AM
And on having one "lifestyle" shoved in their faces over another, count how many gay couples and straight couples you see holding hands tomorrow. Count how many gay couples and straight couples you see on TV tomorrow. I'll eagerly await your numbers.

You'll be waiting a looooooooooong time for that response.

Super_Marion
Sep 22nd, 2007, 05:49 PM
Just a general point about sex education in America.

The fact America has the highest level of youth pregnancy and STI's in the western world is an indicator of widespread sexual illiteracy among it's youth.

Netherland's has arguably the best sex education and access to sexual health in the western world. They also have the lowest rate of youth pregnancy and STI's in the western world.

I hear a lot of talk about parent's rights. But what about the rights and choices of kids? The right to learn and make their own mind up about diversity and sexuality.

It's sad that in the land of civil liberty, children are treated as property. Sponges for FastFood and Cable TV.

If they are not provided with facts and resources. Then they'll just pick up it from the playground and tv... Which can lead to risky behavior. Dirty secrets, lies, fear, prejudice.

Xander
Sep 24th, 2007, 11:36 AM
My partner Dean and I have a 3 year-old daughter, Kiera, and when we pick her up from daycare, her friends have no problems acknowledging Kiera's 2 Daddies. :) (It helps that Portland is progressive on many levels)

Why do straight people feel so threatened by homosexuals?

For the same reason that some whites feel threatened by blacks, some men are threatened by aggressive and/or ambitious women... :(