Don't Say Gay BillFollow

Man-Seeking-Man "partied" if history has taught us anything about these rabidly homophobic GOP legislators.

His fantasies, your reality.

I was in reference to myself. You were stating that I have a problem with teaching religion based on a Christian agenda and there wasn't.



I don't disagree.



See my post above.



As a science person, I view science as being based on facts. When there is this big question mark looming around an explanation and you say "Oh, well we don't know yet, but I'm sure I'm right", it's no longer substantiated by facts, but assumptions, theories, etc. So, while some definitions may still support that as being science, other definitions can be used to counter the lack of solidarity of facts. This is definitely more evident when you have people that support various alterations of the same topic.



Of course I do, because now you're being biased. The whole purpose of having them there in the first place is to create an "equal" sense of an environment where the school is not promoting one thing over the other. It's really not that hard to grasp.



No, it wasn't even close. You're making the assumption that the people don't have any problems internally with homosexuality, but only because Jesus Christ says so, then all of the sudden "it's bad". Christians (just as with any religion) do what they want. Many sin just as much as "sinners" do, so what makes you think they are incapable of supporting homosexuality if they support everything else deemed "un-Godly" by the Church? People just use religion as an argument because that way they don't have to explain their feelings. They can just say, "God says it wrong". In reality, they have their own problems with it.

Obviously people made posts while I was typing. Any way, my previous post before the one you quoted.

My crazy conservative cousin wrote this while trying to convince me that the revolutions in the Middle East and the Wisconsin teacher unions were all connected through a shadowy international, government-sponsored Marxist movement.

She didn't seem to be happy when I said "Well, you must be the world's most blissful person!"

Edited, Apr 25th 2011 1:29pm by LockeColeMA

By bums you mean the Soldiers you send to other countries to defend your rights because you're too much of a ***** to do anything about anything other than whine? Thank you for your money, the last deployment finished off my daughter's college fund.

The point was directed to DSD, while in response to you.



That's why I asked the question, because I wasn't sure on your reference.



No it wasn't because I don't recall you specifically asking me to provide you with examples.

But, I'll answer your question anyway.

First, I responded earlier to Nali (I don't know which thread now that they have blended) that Christians have their own personal reasons against homosexuality. The one's that say "It's a sin" are simply using religion as a scapegoat for their reasons. That is unless, they are not purposely "sinning" in any other area.

But to answer your question in the least amount of words, "The ***** goes in the ******".


This is just going to open a can of worms of other topics that you'll just be biased against. You'll respond with "love is not defined by sex" and then I'll respond with "Either or, As an adult, I can't date a 16 year old and say 'we're in love with each other, we aren't having sex, so it's ok'". Then you'll respond with "That's against the law and that I'm talking about two consenting adults". I respond with the fact that you don't see the hypocrisy in your statement. You'll respond that you're giving up and that it's a waste of time to argue with me. Pages later, we'll rinse and repeat.



To orient you to your sex, hence "Sex Ed". In Biology, you're going over the body parts from more of a natural science point of view. In a sex Ed class, you're talking about your body from a more social science point of view. You can discuss the stages of puberty and how the body works. That doesn't mean you have to talk about the difference between and a BJ and a HJ.



Exactly my point. You're just making up stuff.



I'm not denying that stuff happens. My point is at that age, I don't want a teacher giving my child their opinions on sex. I admit that society changes throughout time and we become more and more sexual, but you can't assume that everyone or the majority of the children are having sexual relations before the 8th grade.

So what if they had a full-blown sex class (everything you would want to know)in the 8th grade? What help does that do if your children are having sex in the 7th grade? This is why parents have to be involved. Unless you start teaching students Sex Ed from Pre-k, waiting till your local schools systematically teach your children about sex may be too late.





I've already said that the bill was silly, but I would have to read the whole bill in order to have a fair judgement.

So, if you want to focus purely on the bill, then I think the bill is incomplete and should include all sexuality.

Varus, this is off topic, and I'm sincerely curious, but why do you think that everyone aside from you is a bum on welfare? I mean, most of us here work, and if we're working, then we're probably not jobless bums leeching off of the welfare system. I've just always wondered what thought process goes into those statements.


Now, on topic, I don't think that anything past basic sex ed(birth control options, anatomy, etc.) should be discussed in the classroom before 9th grade, and at 9th grade, what is discussed needs to be more about acceptance and anti-bullying than anything else. However, if a student who is unsure of their sexuality, or is sure of their sexuality but is still in the proverbial closet, wants to talk to a teacher for advice after class, then that's fine.