Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I guess our Obama appointed, Safe Schools Czar, homosexual, Kevin Jennings must be getting his wish come true, as outlined in the book for which he wrote a foreward, entitled, "Que*ring Elementary Education." The book talks about the need to create a Gender Neutral society, beginning with elementary education. The goal would be to do away with all distinctions between boys and girls; e.g., Teachers should stop asking students to line up in separate boy and girl lines. Boys should not be encouraged to think of themselves growing up to be Fathers and of course should not be encouraged to play with typically "boy toys." The book talks about the need to go beyond teaching children to understand and sympathize with homosexuals; but discusses a need to obliterate the lines of distinction between the sexes and sexual orientations. The author talks about the methods of using Art, Music, Literature, etc. to indirectly indoctrinate students with these ideas when the law forbids directly teaching them. I think we have seen this type of indoctrination and "manufactured consent" in the works for many years in much of the media. Doesn't make it right; but it does explain how all of this is coming into place.
I, personally don't care what Gays, etc. do in their private lives. I have sympathy for those few who are actually born gay. Must be tough. I could accept a Civil Union. Not being in the Military or personally knowing anyone who is, I don't have a strong opinion on that. But, when it comes to changing the very fabric of our lives with a goal of gender neutralizing everything, I have a big problem. Let the PassPort office offer a supplemental form for homosexuals, if deemed necessary, but forcing the huge majority of society to do away with what is and has been normal, cherished standards for a small segment of the population, whose cause is still very much debated is not right.
Please don't start with the hate/homophobic labels. I am not a hater. I have neighbors/friends, etc. who are gay and lovely people. I happen to have a different opinion on these social/political issues. I don't hate anyone.
LMAO!!!! I think it is hysterical. It is like "Thing One" and " Thing Two". LMAO sorry. Serious topic but it just sounds so dumb. I understand what they are trying to do but they should just use something like Parent(s) for both sections.
OMG!!!! Thing One and Thing Two, like the Cat in the Hat!!!! That is too funny. (I can just picture them with numbered shirts).
I guess our Obama appointed, Safe Schools Czar, homosexual, Kevin Jennings must be getting his wish come true, as outlined in the book for which he wrote a foreward, entitled, "Que*ring Elementary Education." The book talks about the need to create a Gender Neutral society, beginning with elementary education. The goal would be to do away with all distinctions between boys and girls; e.g., Teachers should stop asking students to line up in separate boy and girl lines. Boys should not be encouraged to think of themselves growing up to be Fathers and of course should not be encouraged to play with typically "boy toys." The book talks about the need to go beyond teaching children to understand and sympathize with homosexuals; but discusses a need to obliterate the lines of distinction between the sexes and sexual orientations. The author talks about the methods of using Art, Music, Literature, etc. to indirectly indoctrinate students with these ideas when the law forbids directly teaching them. I think we have seen this type of indoctrination and "manufactured consent" in the works for many years in much of the media. Doesn't make it right; but it does explain how all of this is coming into place.
I, personally don't care what Gays, etc. do in their private lives. I have sympathy for those few who are actually born gay. Must be tough. I could accept a Civil Union. Not being in the Military or personally knowing anyone who is, I don't have a strong opinion on that. But, when it comes to changing the very fabric of our lives with a goal of gender neutralizing everything, I have a big problem. Let the PassPort office offer a supplemental form for homosexuals, if deemed necessary, but forcing the huge majority of society to do away with what is and has been normal, cherished standards for a small segment of the population, whose cause is still very much debated is not right.
Please don't start with the hate/homophobic labels. I am not a hater. I have neighbors/friends, etc. who are gay and lovely people. I happen to have a different opinion on these social/political issues. I don't hate anyone.
The problem with rejecting the concept of normal is then where does this process end?
Today it's sexuality and gender designation, but why would we expect it to stop there if it the same people who now promote gender nullification cannot give a logical explanation why any remaining standards of normal should not be discarded in the future?
Gay rights supporters who compare the "right" of same-sex marriage to other civil rights cannot explain why this "right" doesn't include three-way marriages between any combination of heterosexuals, homosexuals, trans-genders and the essential bi-sexual except to say bi-sexuals must pick one. OK, why? Who appointed himself the marriage police so as to apply an arbitrary limit of two participants? If three people want to marry each other, what argument that prevents them from doing so is consistent with permitting same-sex marriages?
It's all either right for a reason, or it's all wrong for the same reason.
people can't truly be this dense. do you have a problem where to sign when you buy property with your spouse? what about all the papers you have to sign that just has a line for each of you without a description?
do you wonder where to sing if it doesn't say man/husband/dad/brother/cousin?
this is like the crap thinking in the 50's that women should be in the passenger seat because a man feels funny having a woman drive.
would it bother you that the "your woman" signed on the first line and you were left with the second line....
traditional family is alive and well ...news flash so are families of all other types. we changed the rotary phone to touch to cell it's a reflection what is really happening in the real word.
the form is effective for the society of today. live in the past, protest by not traveling to far off wonderful places because you refuse to sign as parent
Just one question.
Will men now be parent 1 or parent 2 in divorce court?
Somehow I just don't see this gender neutral designation being supported by the left when the issue is child custody and support payments. In those matters, liberals have shown they are still happy to live in the 50s.
The problem with rejecting the concept of normal is then where does this process end?
Today it's sexuality and gender designation, but why would we expect it to stop there if it the same people who now promote gender nullification cannot give a logical explanation why any remaining standards of normal should not be discarded in the future?
Gay rights supporters who compare the "right" of same-sex marriage to other civil rights [b]cannot explain why this "right" doesn't include three-way marriages between any combination of heterosexuals, homosexuals, trans-genders and the essential bi-sexual[b] except to say bi-sexuals must pick one. OK, why? Who appointed himself the marriage police so as to apply an arbitrary limit of two participants? If three people want to marry each other, what argument that prevents them from doing so is consistent with permitting same-sex marriages?
It's all either right for a reason, or it's all wrong for the same reason.
I think those groups should have the right to get married too. Allowing same-sex marriage is a step in the right direction, but I think any consenting adults that want to get married should be allowed to. We should just let people marry whatever other people they want without labeling them. Leave it up to them to label themselves.
And when I believe a marriage shouldn't happen, I have reasoning. I don't think children should be allowed to get married to adults because children and adults because children cannot consent emotionally to a marriage with an adult yet, and 99% of the time, the adult holds some sort of social power over the child, making them unequals in a marriage, which I also believe is unhealthy for marriage.
Will men now be parent 1 or parent 2 in divorce court?
Somehow I just don't see this gender neutral designation being supported by the left when the issue is child custody and support payments. In those matters, liberals have shown they are still happy to live in the 50s.
Try not to group all liberals together. I know a lot of liberals do the same with conservatives, but it would help us all if we stopped grouping each other together and making sweeping generalizations.
I would be all for a Parent 1 / Parent 2 in that situation too. Though I also happen to believe that if parents split up, all of them remain responsible for caring for children in all ways possible. If someone is unfit for parenting, they still remain responsible for the child financially.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
far off wonderful places because you refuse to sign as parent
