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.
Yes, Bush, Bush and Reagan did support issues related to children but did they directly address children or work cooperatively through parents to disseminate their message?
Disgust towards homosexuality in particular is learned. Most children are neutral towards most abstract concepts. To a child homosexuality is a pretty abstract concept--they are not envisioning anal sex when they think homosexuality, contrary to how some posters described homosexuality in this very thread (ETA: I just realized that was your post.)
I'm gay myself and I find that imagery pretty repulsive. Yes, if that's the only idea your child has of homosexuality, they will be disgusted. That depiction of homosexuality gives it a violent slant. I'm pretty sure they would be equally disgusted by "a man pounding his penis into a woman's vagina" too. However if you describe homosexuality as "two men or women in love just like mommy and daddy love each other" I doubt they would have the same automatic reaction of disgust.
This is a relatively neutral, albeit slightly graphic, depiction of heterosexuality. I wouldn't be surprised if a child was slightly disgusted at the mention of "vaginal intercourse" but I am pretty sure that a child wouldn't be disgusted by "a man and woman in love."
"Disgust towards homosexuality in particular is learned."
Actually, no.
Schaller and colleagues (Faulkner, Schaller, Park, & Duncan, 2004; Park, Faulkner, & Schaller, 2003; Schaller & Duncan, 2007) have argued that over the course of human evolution, people developed a “behavioral immune system” that functioned to shield them from exposure to novel pathogens or parasites. Individuals belonging to unfamiliar groups, especially those who engaged in unusual practices regarding food, cleanliness, and sex, posed a higher risk of carrying novel (and therefore particularly dangerous) infectious agents. Perceiving such individuals would thus activate the behavioral immune system and cause avoidance behavior and the accompanying emotion of disgust.
My problem is also with her medium addressing children directly which bypasses parental authority and reinforces the idea of children being wards of the state.
Yes, Bush, Bush and Reagan did support issues related to children but did they directly address children or work cooperatively through parents to disseminate their message?
Just Say No was a widespread campaign on kids TV and it also held programs in schools. I also remember there being some controversy about the program encouraging kids to turn in their parents for drug use? My mind is fuzzy on that part.
Anyway, Michelle Obama is not the first to do things in schools and whatnot.
My personal pet peeve is for Michelle Obama to use Disney as her personal platform to address our nations children. This seems a common theme on the left for everything from using TV to insinuate themselves into children culture to the gay agenda sticking their perversion in school agendas.
Does the right do this too and I just didn't notice?
Am I over-reacting?
Yes, its an old war technique of subverting your enemy. You infect the children with an ideal that counters the parents and encourages disobedience. In doing so, you swoop in as the savior and protector for the "evil" parents who would subject the children to such poor position.
You want to win a war? Turn the children against the parents and create distension, conflict, and it keeps them from paying attention to the major offenses as well as grows support for your movement. Children are the key.
My problem is also with her medium addressing children directly which bypasses parental authority and reinforces the idea of children being wards of the state.
Yes, Bush, Bush and Reagan did support issues related to children but did they directly address children or work cooperatively through parents to disseminate their message?
Well yes. This is about as hands on and direct as you can get. Were you not alive in the 80's?
Quote:
She (Nancy Reagan) enlisted the help of the Girl Scouts of the United States of America, Kiwanis Club International, and the National Federation of Parents for a Drug-Free Youth to promote the cause;[8] the Kiwanis put up over 2000 billboards with Nancy Reagan's likeness and the slogan.[8] Over 5000 Just Say No clubs were founded in schools and youth organizations in the United State and abroad.[8] Many clubs and organizations remain in operation around the country, where they aim to educate children and teenagers about the effects of drugs.[1]
And just to be clear in case someone missed my earlier post, yes I am a liberal which means I really do not care what two consenting adults do in private. I would however be mad as all get-out if an elementary school were to push this stuff on a little kid of mine.
It does society no good, in fact it harms society, when certain people who harm no one are targeted as being unacceptable and to be disgusted by. I can't think of a positive to that...can anyone tell me one? JUST ONE?
Yes, its an old war technique of subverting your enemy. You infect the children with an ideal that counters the parents and encourages disobedience. In doing so, you swoop in as the savior and protector for the "evil" parents who would subject the children to such poor position.
Yes, I can just hear all those children saying to their parents "mom, can't we have a salad or maybe some fresh vegetables once in a while instead of all those greasy burgers and fries every day?"
yeah, i can just hear them...
Mom's response?
Grease is good for you, don't listen to anyone who tells you vegetables and fruits are better!
It does society no good, in fact it harms society, when certain people who harm no one are targeted as being unacceptable and to be disgusted by. I can't think of a positive to that...can anyone tell me one? JUST ONE?
Good question. And I'd like to add on to that - how does the idea that homosexuality is normal (or not something to be disgusted by, at the very least) actually hurt children in any way?
No you are 100% correct in your observation. Remember the book Hillary Clinton wrote It takes a Village to Raise a Child. Democrats in Congress or in government don't think parents are smart enough or responsible enough to raise their children on their own and they INSIST that government knows best.
Maybe Clinton is the reason there are so many entilement-minded parents. The whole notion of "It takes a village to raise a child" is completely moronic and creates even more stupid parents. Trust me, I've seen some real entitlement- brains out there.
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.
