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.
She didn't say anyone was setting up classrooms she said people were condoning it, big differance and she's right.
Look, this is their mindset:
Quote:
A consequence of the antisexual attitudes in the child abuse system is that men are driven back to seeing themselves as tough, hard, cold, unemotional, and aggressive. After 20 years of trying to persuade men that they can be soft and gentle, that they can have feelings and cry, and that they can be tender and intimate, now when they believe it and affectionately touch children, they may go to prison.
All over this country men have told us they are afraid of children. They see an attractive, cute child in the supermarket and they don't go down that aisle. They don't make reinforcing comments to children in elevators. They worry about kissing and hugging their children or changing their diapers and wiping their bottoms. They cannot go into hot tubs or showers with their children for fear of being misunderstood. Teachers who were taught that children need to be touched and hugged risk being accused of sexual abuse, losing their jobs and careers, and even going to prison.
When anger is advanced as a positive healing force (Bass & Davis, 1988) and aggression becomes more palatable than tenderness and affection and men go to prison for kissing boys, something is amiss.
This is why it is important for us in the United States to maintain sovereign control over our educational system and not get signed into UNESCO, the U.N.'s educational arm. There is a concerted, sinister effort to sexualize our children. Europeans may think this is fine. Most Americans don't. We are starting to see this infiltrate into the States. Those who deny it are either blind or trying to cover it up. Stay informed. Its not good.
"A guide contained in the sex boxes instructs kindergarten teachers to "show that contacting body parts can be pleasurable." It also recommends having children massage each other or to rub themselves with warm sand bags, all accompanied by soft music."
Your views, whatever you call yourself, ARE extreme. True, there are Millions of you .... there are also estimated to be 150 Million Muslim Extremists in the world (15% of the 1 Billion, as per the Muslim community themselves ... a very conservative estimate in my opinion, as there is no such thing as a non-extreme believer in an extreme religion). So, numbers play no factor in determining levels of extremism.
Bull .... public education is not there to provide children with tactile stimulation ... you keep your freaking demented paws off the kids!! That tactile stimulation comes from the caring embrace of their parents ... NOT YOU AND YOUR SAND BAGS!!
I'm insinuating nothing ... let's be clear. I'm making a direct charge, not an insinuation. I don't care what you "say" or what you "write" ... it's not my reading comprehension at issue here ... it's your lack of credibility based on the actions you support that I choose to call a spade a spade.
Oh really ... in that case, since you make such a blanket claim of support for every liberal agenda .. every form of sex education, and sexual freedom proposed by your fellow liberals, that must include promoting homosexuality to 2nd graders ... as well as support to NAMBLA ... that organization of self professed pedophiles who's primary mission is to lower the age of consent so that they can legally engage in the molestation of little boys. Didn't I already remark on how you liberals have far more in common with the so called conservative Catholic priests, than you care to admit?
And just who, pray tell, is behind this constant stream of perversion and moral depravity emanating from entertainment industry? Who is polluting the impressionable minds of our children with this garbage? LIBERALS .. that's who! How convenient .... you cite this assault on morality from entertainment side of the liberal progressive movement, then use that as justification for explaining it's harmlessness and natural diversity in the forum of public education? Depraved and devious, all at the same time.
Oh .... you're sooooo innocent ... soooo caring about the kids!!! Baloney. You liberals are corrupt to your very dark core ... that black hole located where everyone else's soul generally resides.
Let me show you liberal innocence in all it's unholy glory ... OK?
How about a little innocent pair of panties for little girl fans of Disney's Little Mermaid? "Dive in" ? How charming!! (insert vomiting smiley face here) (of course, anyone reading anything into this innocent decoration on little girls panties is just seeing something that isn't really there? Is that it? ) Who do you think you're going to fool here? This isn't a bathing suit which might be associated with a theme like "Dive in" ... this is children's underwear, and the inclusion of the graphic .. is .... rather graphic, don't you think?
And from the same source .... just a little innocent "subliminal" education from the caring liberals:
Purely coincidental .... it's not designed to look like the male member ... just a totally innocent coincidence.
Children who are not sexualized beginning at 1st grade don't even have such thoughts about sex ... let alone would they daydream about homosexuality (without your tutoring) ... and certainly not even consider their own sexual orientation. What a totally demented claim to make. But it is very revealing as to YOUR mindset.
No ... children's values are SUPPOSED to be taught at home ... but apparently, the liberal crowd doesn't agree with those values, which is why you want to reshape them in the public school system to your twisted views of "normal".
It is not normal behavior for children to have sex ... it's illegal behavior to be discouraged in every manner possible ... from shielding those too young to even understand it .. to admonishing those who are to not engage in the activity. It may be a natural inclination for those coming "of age", as it is human nature to do ... but not an inclination to be rushed or encouraged prematurely, by overt and covert promotion in the schools.
And without that outside influence and encouragement ... that prodding ... that indoctrination ... little boys and girls will be focused on what little boys and girls have always focused on at young ages ... playing and having fun ... boys and their favorite past times, girls, theirs. NOT Gender identification and confusion ... not sex and orientation issues. Let them be damned kids for Christ sake!!
Proper? And we should take your definition of what "proper" is? You haven't a clue about what is proper, or age appropriate. That's obvious.
I can see there are no shades of grey with you. nambla? please what a reactionary and extreme thing to bring into a conversation about sex ed
times have changed we live in the society that is, not the one we wish we lived in. kinda hard to close the barn door once it was opened what...50 years or more ago? you may rather we go back to the repressed sexuality of years ago and have your children not understand human sexuality, but you are the one in the minority there, not us liberals.
again you read what your fear wants you see. no one said children should have sex before they are of age, however it is a fact they do. you can turn your back on that and not care but that isn't reality. again age appropriate sex ed does not mean encouraging kids to have sex or play with themselves. but you don't want to accept that for some reason. you would rather see something that isn't because it suits your mind set.
as a parent is you don't like clothing for your child don't buy it. simple as that. the subliminal picture you posted I would like to see the entire picture before commenting on it.
And you don't have to look past the first page to see someone condoning it.
you like a few others are reading into the op's links something that isn't there. the assumption you have is wrong. there are no class rooms where fondling and masturbating are being taught.
you like a few others are reading into the op's links something that isn't there. the assumption you have is wrong. there are no class rooms where fondling and masturbating are being taught.
They're in a school enviorment and these are considered a "guide" that "instructs"...
Idk what planet you're from, but that's called educating on every square inch of Planet Earth.
No that will stop the RWNJ's from continuing to extoll the values of abstinence education... despite the fact that it has zero efficacy.
Hey, it worked for Bristol! Oh wait...
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.
) Who do you think you're going to fool here? This isn't a bathing suit which might be associated with a theme like "Dive in" ... this is children's underwear, and the inclusion of the graphic .. is .... rather graphic, don't you think?
