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 have a hard time supporting you as a fellow teacher though antredd considering some of your posts.. I hope that I'm wrong and have just pre-judged you though.., I just think your opinion on the issue is formed out of speculation of how a scenario should or would happen and without any real experience with gay parents and their children.
I think if the law allows them to be married, it is proper to respect the law and refer to those gay parents as married if indeed they are.
But if both parents are active with your classroom, surely you can see where two different women or men are being introduced as madison's mom or dad?
and surely you can understand the questions and issues with it that will arise. Religious families will certainly like to make a mountain out of a mole hill on this particular situation. Simple statements like this are very easy as far as I'm concerned and don't lead into anything. "Madison has two mommies, some people have different families than what you have at home and thats ok, everyone is welcome here.. and they've come to help out with class.."
I would venture to say most kids wouldn't bat an eye and resume coloring or working on their projects..
Young kids are genuinely very accepting and able to take things at face value, because they haven't been filled with ideologies and patterns of thought.. to make them see something is wrong.. The school telling them that there's nothing wrong with madison's two mommies is perfectly fine, I don't see how that is imposing on anything. It's no different than a single mom influencing the class, and a christian parent not wanting their child to be around that single parent because they want to ensure their child is taught the value of marriage...
It really starts getting insane... I think it's a pretty easy issue to address.. but you've got to be able to let your walls down to be able to see what's really going on and what the actual issue is..
16 years.. I commend you... lets hope for atleast another 16 more years for you.. no matter if we disagree or people don't agree with you.. you still deserve a big thankyou for doing a hard job.. that doesn't get nearly the amount of respect it deserves...just try to keep objective about it all in spite of your own opinion..so that you aren't in the middle of anything political and nasty.. that's how careers and reputations are ruined.. and it's just not worth it.. That's my only advice..
and again i apologize if I pre-judged you... and I do think you deserve more respect for what you do...
If I am understanding you correctly, you can't support me as a fellow teacher because I don't agree with you on gay issues? Hummmmmmmmmmmm? This is not an issue of me agreeing with you on a gay issue. It's about us supporting each other because we are in the same profession---point blank. I have no beef with anyone who is gay, bi sexual, straight or lesbian, when it comes to the teaching of our kids. What I do have a problem with, is being demonized as some racist bigot when I don't agree with you on any gay issue. We both had to the right to agree to disagree, and leave that issue alone because I'm not going to get you to agree with me, and you are not going to get me to agree with you on that particular issue.
Until the reading books address families of all kinds, and since parents do have a say in what text books public schools use, I am sure if its a school district that is overwhelmingly heterosexual and religious, they will opt out of any text books that depict families that don't fit the traditional family role. Not that it makes it right, but they would have that choice to opt out, especially if that meant electing a school board who would listen to them. Now if iwere a district that has a large percentage of gay parents or single gay parents who want those text books depicting families of all kinds, then I am sure they would not opt out and include those stories for their kids to read about in their local schools as well.
I agree, and I don't agree with changing or introducing new text books as the foundating of cirriculum.. most of what I've seen is supplimental to address issues related to the subject. In our district we have quite a few parents that have children from a previous straight relationship, and are now in a gay relationship. While I don't think it has it's place to even tackle that issue.. we just deal with what is face value.. Andrew has two mom's..
Kids like andrew have been teased in some incidents, which is not acceptable.
Also, Andrew has friends who know his family and he shares his home life with other students and even in class... the issue really is unavoidable... and in certain instances supplimental teaching of tolerance is in order, not to teach that it's right or wrong, but to properly illustrate how they are just like any other family rather than how they are different..
I realize there are some spooky literature out there that is fueled by political agenda's.. I certainly do not advocate it AT ALL.. it has no place in the schools.. but both sides of the political issue have some pretty spooky proposals on how it should be handled. Which is why my advice to you is.. don't get involved with any of that mess.. even if you side more with one or the other personally.. It can and does come to bite you in the rear end eventually... trust your gut, and keep an open mind when talking with ALL the parents of your kids.. what has always been the norm for 16 years could very well change sooner than you think..
If I am understanding you correctly, you can't support me as a fellow teacher because I don't agree with you on gay issues? Hummmmmmmmmmmm? This is not an issue of me agreeing with you on a gay issue. It's about us supporting each other because we are in the same profession---point blank. I have no beef with anyone who is gay, bi sexual, straight or lesbian, when it comes to the teaching of our kids. What I do have a problem with, is being demonized as some racist bigot when I don't agree with you on any gay issue. We both had to the right to agree to disagree, and leave that issue alone because I'm not going to get you to agree with me, and you are not going to get me to agree with you on that particular issue.
I think my second post to yours was clear on my support for what you do..believe me.. I feel you more than I disagree with you... i'm just simply providing an opinion, advice, as someone who is gay and understands the issue personally, but also as a fellow teacher that has experienced the issue first hand in the classroom context.. That's all.. forgive me if I didn't clear it up earlier...
No one here's talking about animals and humans having sex. You're the sick one if those are the things that came to your mind.
Yeah, that's quite a leap from gay anal intercourse to bestiality. I say it's all Greek to me. Nature has proven that heterosexual sex is the only natural sex since it is the only one that produces children. And the hair-splitting will begin in 5, 4 , 3,.....
The teachers aren't going to ignore the experts who study human behavior for a living, and who would strongly disagree with you.
When you get your Ph.D. in human sexuality, let us know. Until then, I'll trust those who have their degrees already.
Ever listen to Dr. Ruth?
That's why you're wrong.
Believe it or not, most people are able to make up their own minds about gay sex without advice from a self-affirming liberal bigot who makes up the answers as he or she goes along.
Liberals are always OK with our kids being indoctrinated in the public schools as long as it reflects their values.
There are plenty examples of homosexuality in nature. The assumption that it goes against natural law is only an attempt to countermand (albeit unsuccessfully) the empirical evidence of over a thousand different species that engage in homosexual sex for a variety of reasons.
Homosexuality in nature is abundant and is a part of the diversity of sexuality period. However, some of us continue to ignore the cumulative knowledge gained in all fields of academia, due to his/her own ignorance/personal agenda.
Animals do lots of stupid and disgusting things that are "natural". Being intelligent enough to recognize that something is disgusting is also "natural".
Yeah, that's quite a leap from gay anal intercourse to bestiality. I say it's all Greek to me. Nature has proven that heterosexual sex is the only natural sex since it is the only one that produces children. And the hair-splitting will begin in 5, 4 , 3,.....
No hair-splitting here. Your statements are outlandish and irrational, most everybody knows it.
Believe it or not, most people are able to make up their own minds about gay sex without advice from a self-affirming liberal bigot who makes up the answers as he or she goes along.
Liberals are always OK with our kids being indoctrinated in the public schools as long as it reflects their values.
Yep, and most people understand that homosexuality is normal and natural. I know you'll deny it until the day you die, but that's your problem, not mine.
Nice name-calling, by the way. Too bad you can't come up with a more clever way to express yourself.
Yep, and most people understand that homosexuality is normal and natural. I know you'll deny it until the day you die, but that's your problem, not mine.
Nice name-calling, by the way. Too bad you can't come up with a more clever way to express yourself.
Most people do? If "most" people think that, then why were the past two votes in California concerning it a majority in opposition of gay marriage? If most people believed it to be normal and natural, then would it not be logical to assume that an issue as such would mirror your statement? Also, would it not also reflect this claim as majority belief in the nation? If so, why is it that a minority of states actually instituted it? I think a recent thread has around 5 states that now support it? It would be irresponsible to claim that with the evidence of support received.
Now you can say there are other factors and reasons to why people are against gay marriage, but if it were "normal" and "natural" as you claim people to think it is, what logical objection could they have to it outside of that? It seems that it is more likely that people tend to think it abnormal and unnatural, yet understand there are boundaries to which a persons individual choices should be restricted. That is, people can believe it to be abnormal and unnatural while still defending peoples rights to choose their own lifestyles. I would not confuse the issue of support for a persons right to choose as acceptance of the choice the person makes.
Yeah, that's quite a leap from gay anal intercourse to bestiality. I say it's all Greek to me. Nature has proven that heterosexual sex is the only natural sex since it is the only one that produces children. And the hair-splitting will begin in 5, 4 , 3,.....
I guess sterile people are having unnatural sex.
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.
