California's SB48 may be repealed (homosexual, paint, children)

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by Fontucky

Then they do what all the other religious whackjobs in this country are doing: home school.

Yawn. My point exactly.

We cannot allow one side of the argument to write and implement policies that define what is and what is not acceptable, when it comes to public schools and moral issues.

I dont believe in prayer in school because that is INDOCTRINATION, and I am just as adamantly and vehemently opposed to FORCING students to be taught curriculum that is FRAMED in such a way that directly opposes their religious and moral views, because that is also INDOCTRINATION.

Originally Posted by .highnlite

Society judges and government responds to many social issues. That there are those who disagree is not surprising. Most issues have at least two sides.

What a field day you all would be having if the law also called for BOTH SIDES to be part of the discussion.

hahahahahahahahaha

Which is why Im opposed to either side being given precious SCHOOL TIME---there are much bigger fish to fry folks.

Leave the soap boxes and pulpits for home and church.

The reason for government intervention is that private intervention, whether family or church or other has not worked.

Oh really?

I dont believe that we are going through some epidemic of intolerance at the moment. DO YOU?

And I am most certainly not contradictory. Teach them math and science where color, race, sexual orientation, religion and gender are all irrelevant.

[Fontucky]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

and I am just as adamantly and vehemently opposed to FORCING students to be taught curriculum that is FRAMED in such a way that directly opposes their religious... views, because that is also INDOCTRINATION.

So you're in favor of ****canning the sciences that don't jibe with their religious views? No more evolution, geology, paleontology, anthropology, plate tectonics or anything that directly opposes the creationists and their "6000-year-old Earth and man walked with dinosaurs" beliefs? Slippery slope.

I thought you wanted our students to be competitive?

[.highnlite]

I dont believe that we are going through some epidemic of intolerance at the moment. DO YOU?

Why yes I do, all you need to do is to read the comments made about our President and his family on the ahem, conservative boards.

So you're in favor of ****canning the sciences that don't jibe with their religious views? No more evolution, geology, paleontology, anthropology, plate tectonics or anything that directly opposes the creationists and their "6000-year-old Earth and man walked with dinosaurs" beliefs? Slippery slope.

Fontucky, you nailed it.

[Fontucky]

I wouldn't have made a peep if she'd kept it to moral issues. But as soon as that "r" word entered the picture...

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by Fontucky

So you're in favor of ****canning the sciences that don't jibe with their religious views? No more evolution, geology, paleontology, anthropology, plate tectonics or anything that directly opposes the creationists and their "6000-year-old Earth and man walked with dinosaurs" beliefs? Slippery slope.

I thought you wanted our students to be competitive?

I have ZERO clue from whence you gleaned this^ from anything that I wrote.

Science is not up for debate and there are no campaigns in the state of California to force creation or related beliefs on students the way that SB48 MOST DEFINITELY FORCES the agenda of one group on all, whether they like it or not.

I still can't believe how easily it is for some to take away rights from parents in favor of what Sacramento thinks. That's ludicrous.

Originally Posted by .highnlite

Why yes I do, all you need to do is to read the comments made about our President and his family on the ahem, conservative boards.

And your solution is to inject the State of California in between parents and their children because of what neocons have written on message boards about Barack Obama? Because they arent allowed to have opinions that are diametrically opposed to your opinion?


That is beyond arrogant.

Its very difficult to reach a consensus with people who constantly move the goal posts.

[.highnlite]

I dont believe that we are going through some epidemic of intolerance at the moment. DO YOU?

This is what you said, I gave you one example of the epidemic of intolerance at the moment.
Here is another

A CNN source with very close to the U.S. Secret Service confirmed to me today that threats on the life of the president of the United States have now risen by as much as 400 percent since his inauguration, 400 percent death threats against Barack Obama — quote — “in this environment” go far beyond anything the Secret Service has seen with any other president.

Another example would be the wide spread prejudice against muslims.
Another example would be the Zimmerman case, where there are strong beliefs at play because of the two races involved.

Another example has been and will be the prejudice against Mitt Romney and the religious group he belongs to. It is considered a non Christian cult by a fair percentage of the population

Now you may say, "well, those are just the haters, not everyone hates, yes, you are right" but, those are precisely the people that need to be reached, to be educated.

Hate and violence against gays exists in this country, and is a significant problem. Addressing that problem is in societies interest.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by .highnlite

This is what you said, I gave you one example of the epidemic of intolerance at the moment.
Here is another
Another example would be the wide spread prejudice against muslims.
Another example would be the Zimmerman case, where there are strong beliefs at play because of the two races involved.

Another example has been and will be the prejudice against Mitt Romney and the religious group he belongs to. It is considered a non Christian cult by a fair percentage of the population

Now you may say, "well, those are just the haters, not everyone hates, yes, you are right" but, those are precisely the people that need to be reached, to be educated.

Hate and violence against gays exists in this country, and is a significant problem. Addressing that problem is in societies interest.

And so you believe that it is acceptable for the government to step in btwn parents and their children when it comes to teaching what is and what is not morally acceptable. I do NOT see it that way.

Whether a leftwing nut or rightwing nut, people are allowed to have dissenting views and sometimes their views are going to rub off on their children, and guess what?Its okay if people have differing views.

Being offensive to some is no reason to take away freedom of speech and freedom of expression so long as the kid isnt breaking school district rules like harrassment or bullying.

Furthermore, there are already actual laws on the books protecting all of the groups you have mentioned---the only thing the teacher should be saying with respect to these groups and intolerance is that discrimination in housing, hiring etc is against the law.

[.highnlite]

I think that you are stuck on this gay issue to the point where your normal rational posts are not reflected here

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

And so you believe that it is acceptable for the government to step in btwn parents and their children when it comes to teaching what is and what is not morally acceptable. I do NOT see it that way.

It has nothing to do with morality, it has to do with humanity. The government commonly has actions which some people feel are not morally acceptable.
When I was a kid, in our church, dancing was not morally acceptable, yet the schools (government) held frequent dances, which was morally wrong to our church

The government kills people, war, execution, that is considered morally wrong, yet, if you are in the service and you are ordered to kill, you kill, despite your feelings.

Whether a leftwing nut or rightwing nut, people are allowed to have dissenting views and sometimes their views are going to rub off on their children, and guess what?Its okay if people have differing views.

It is not always OK if people have differing views, and the government often steps in to address that issue. For instance, back to Romney, his religion at a point in the past supported plural marriage. The Federal Government made abolishing plural marriage a condition of Utah's entry into statehood. Despite what the members of that religion believed.

Being offensive to some is no reason to take away freedom of speech and freedom of expression so long as the kid isnt breaking school district rules like harrassment or bullying.

This sentence is not very clear as to meaning, but, children generally reflect the values of their parents. Sometimes the government will reach parents through the children. Take the use of seat belts, because of the "indoctrination" of children by schools of the advisability of using seatbelts, millions of parents like myself, could not get away with driving without the seatbelts on, our kids would reflect that government indoctrination and order us to "buckle up". I am often surprised at the lack of racism by children. When I was a kid, the Mexican kids kept to themselves, an anglo boy or girl would not date a Mexican, today that divide is largely gone, again because of tolerance programs in the schools.

Furthermore, there are already actual laws on the books protecting all of the groups you have mentioned---the only thing the teacher should be saying with respect to these groups and intolerance is that discrimination in housing, hiring etc is against the law.

Mississippi had laws on the books in the first half of the 20th century forbidding murder. Yet, approximately 4,000 young black men were lynched in the years 1900 to 1940 in the state of Mississippi alone.
Those young men should have been protected by existing laws, but they weren't.
Discrimination is far more than housing and hiring. Consider this, when my mother was a child in the deep south, in her North Carolina town black men and women had to step off the curb and look at the ground that was discrimination. That was not a law on the books, but it was custom.
All, blacks had to be out of town between sunset and sunrise, that was discrimination and law.

Now, a couple more points, I do not know any gay or lesbian men or women, I don't really have a horse in this race, but, I react strongly to bias, prejudice and oppression.

Your point of view supports bias, prejudice and discrimination.

People are homosexual through no decision making process, any more than being tall or short is a decision. To carry bias, prejudice and discrimination.

I was not only aware of segregation in the South through our visits to our relatives, but, on a much closer more personal note, I grew up with a group of children, whose parents, American citizens, were ordered by law to assemble at our local high school, not a half mile from where I grew up. They were then placed on buses and taken to Concentration Camps.

This appalling bias, prejudice and discrimination was supported by law, and a high percentage of Americans, who were not of Japanese descent.

That was wrong. You see 18Montclair, one never knows if they will be next.

Keep this in mind, think about it, for you discrimination begins in one place, and ends in another, but for someone else, it may begin with you, and what you hold dear;

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

... SB48 MOST DEFINITELY FORCES the agenda of one group on all, whether they like it or not.

I don't get that the intent of SB48 is to force a special interest group's individual agenda, at all. The agenda is very broadly one on which our nation was founded. It isn't to promote gay culture. It is to recognize that gays are one of the remaining minorities that have not been respected with the freedoms of America's promise -- and it's damn past time for that kind of destructive discrimination to stop.

I do get that you, Montclair, aren't coming at this from the same place that the OP is. Pilgrim expresses his disgust with homosexuality at every opportunity. You are not being overtly discriminatory. But your position, argues to allow hate to be perpetuated in a society antithetically founded.

[Fontucky]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

I have ZERO clue from whence you gleaned this from anything that I wrote.

See the following. If you meant something else by it, you'll have to explain.

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

I dont believe in prayer in school because that is INDOCTRINATION, and I am just as adamantly and vehemently opposed to FORCING students to be taught curriculum that is FRAMED in such a way that directly opposes their religious and moral views, because that is also INDOCTRINATION.

I don't see any other interpretation. Enlighten me.