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.
You might want to adjust that compass - it is pointing you in the wrong direction.
I hope that you don't use it for airborne navigation.
How odd, because I feel it's pointing me in the direction of love, compassion and empathy. Yours on the other hand... Well, perhaps you should get it recalibrated .
What possible relevance does the sexual preference of a historical figure have to their contribution to California history?
There is ZERO reason to mention homosexuality to elementary school age children - except for purposes of indoctrination.
I don't see how the tragically ending life of Harvey Milk should be hidden from California elementary school children any more than how Martin Luther King died. It about history, not indocrination.
It is founded on a sense of right and wrong - what has guided people forever.
Xerxes I thought it was right to enslave 7 million citizens of the countries he conquered.
Hitler thought it was right to mass murder 5 million Jews. (yes, I know we just went into Godwin territory, but it fits).
Right: All people should be treated equally and be able to excercies their RIGHTS as allowed under the US Constitution. The US Supreme Court already has weighed in, and stated that Marriage is a right to EVERYONE in the United States, including homosexuals.
Quote:
Do you think it is OK to murder
Is considered a major crime, and we deal with the offenders through our laws and courts. there is no reason to murder anyone.
Quote:
, to steal
Is considered a crime, but severity is determined on worth of the item stolen or in which the item was stolen, and the underlying reason. A child stealing a loaf of bread because he or she is starving, would be given nearly a slap on the wrist, but a man stealing a $20,000 car would be punished with restitution and jail time.
Quote:
, to habitually be dishonest?
It is not a crime to be dishonest in America (unless its part of fraud, which means the taken of money on a false pretense). Free speech and all. Habitual liars do see that their lies are right.
The point is that people that are this against gay marriage and gay adoption are the same people that fire gay people solely for being gay. Hatred begets more hatred.
It is founded on a sense of right and wrong - what has guided people forever.
Do you think it is OK to murder, to steal, to habitually be dishonest? Isn't the fact that we consider those to be wrong a moral judgment? What is the source of that moral judgment? Isn't it an idea of right and wrong?
But murder and stealing is doing something against your will. How are two gay men getting married doing something against your will that is really harming you, like murder or thievry would?
If homosexuals were in truth treated equally in this society then your statement would be true. Unfortunately this isn't the case at this point in our history. Pointing out accomplishments by noted historical figures that also happened to be homosexuals just might give a sliver of hope to a homosexual student that his or her life can have meaning and achievement for society as a whole despite being told that they are somehow less than human by people of your ilk.
If a person makes a historical contribution - that is great. Their sexual preference should have nothing to do with it. The students should be taught about what the person did - not whom he/she sleeps with.
Show me one place where I said that anyone is "less then human"? You won't find that - in fact I have specifically stated the opposite in this thread - saying that labels cause people's individual humanity to be trivalized.
And no proof either. Valid and legitimate non sexual preference reasons were cited. Nowhere in the article does it ever say the reason was because he was homosexual. Excerpts from the linked article -
“Johnson said he and other committee members thought it was inappropriate to confirm a former state elected office holder to the election board, where he could encounter conflicts of interest with former opponents.”
“Asked if Roth’s sexual orientation was a factor in the decision to block his hearing, Johnson replied “No, absolutely not.”
“Somebody’s private life is none of my business, and I don’t see any relevance whatsoever between that and him being on the election board,” Johnson said of Roth. “I had no senator come to me and say they didn’t want him there because of that, or it was even an issue to them.”
Even Roth himself admits that his homosexuality had nothing to do with it.
“Roth stopped short of alleging he didn’t receive a nomination hearing because he’s gay.”
"The river tells no lies. Though standing on the shore the dishonest man still hears them."
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.
.