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, if you don't want someones personal opinion one should not start a thread with a poll that has only Yes or No as your options.
I have the right to disagree with someone's personal opinion, and I happen to think that anyone who disagrees with the premise of this thread is absolutely, 100% WRONG. The opposition has provided no substantial justification for being against it. None.
Quote:
If serious debate is the goal, a better defined question would be in order. I say that after 42 pages so something must be working.
At first I thought I agreed with the OP, but I do think people have the right to disagree. Isn't that the point of the whole thread? Also, why do they have to prove anything to anyone. It doesn't mean they are prejudiced if they decide school is not the place for this lesson. It is just their opinion. I personally think school could do without a lot of the things we try to teach. I have students that can't read in middle school. Shouldn't that come before electives and sports? See what I mean, I shouldn't have to prove it. It is just my opinion. Let everyone have their own opinion.
No, people do not have the luxury of disagreeing on this. There is nothing to disagree on.
You are asking what people think, but yet you refuse to give them the option of taking a stance that is different from yours.
They can take whatever stance they choose, but if it does not agree with my own, I won't accept their opinion and will acknowledge them as being prejudicial and wrong.
They can take whatever stance they choose, but if it does not agree with my own, I won't accept their opinion and will acknowledge them as being prejudicial and wrong.
You are being extremely prejudical yourself. You refuse to even contemplate that you could be wrong. Not wanting something taught in school does not mean someone is prejudiced against it. I am sure that you are firm in you beliefs, but you have to allow others the same luxury.
No, I don't believe it should be taught. Why would we want to further seperate "LGBT" any more than it already is? We don't teach "When the first hetro Pilgrams crossed the ocean" or "King James, the hetro, first took his throne". So IMO why would we want to do this now? If a historic figure is LGBT or "hetro" then so be it. No need to highlight something unless it's relavent to the historic issue.
Again IMO, focusing on any one individual trate or quality to much seperates it from the normal. Lets make it normal by excepting the trate instead of calling it out.
But if it has to be taught I think junoir high is an acceptable age.
At first I thought I agreed with the OP, but I do think people have the right to disagree. Isn't that the point of the whole thread? Also, why do they have to prove anything to anyone. It doesn't mean they are prejudiced if they decide school is not the place for this lesson. It is just their opinion. I personally think school could do without a lot of the things we try to teach. I have students that can't read in middle school. Shouldn't that come before electives and sports? See what I mean, I shouldn't have to prove it. It is just my opinion. Let everyone have their own opinion.
Do you have Civil Rights as part of your American History class?
Do you consider American History, including Civil Rights, an essential class?
No, I don't believe it should be taught. Why would we want to further seperate "LGBT" any more than it already is? We don't teach "When the first hetro Pilgrams crossed the ocean" or "King James, the hetro, first took his throne". So IMO why would we want to do this now? If a historic figure is LGBT or "hetro" then so be it. No need to highlight something unless it's relavent to the historic issue.
Again IMO, focusing on any one individual trate or quality to much seperates it from the normal. Lets make it normal by excepting the trate instead of calling it out.
But if it has to be taught I think junoir high is an acceptable age.
Again, the premise of the OP is not to single out anyone's sexuality.
The OP is suggesting adding the GLBT community's fight for Rights and Equality to the Civil Rights History courses already offered.
Again, the premise of the OP is not to single out anyone's sexuality.
The OP is suggesting adding the GLBT community's fight for Rights and Equality to the Civil Rights History courses already offered.
I must have missed something, I was simply replying to the original post.
Quote:
Should GLBT History Be Taught In Public Schools (K-12)?
If so, at what age/grade would it be "appropriate" to introduce said history into the curriculum?
For those of you who are voting no, could you give some reasons for your objection?
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.
Should GLBT History Be Taught In Public Schools (K-12)? 