Homosexual "Mix It Up Day" in Elementary On Up Schools - October 30th

  • Thread starter Thread starter gam197
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Seeker1961 said:
Now, now…let’s not ruin a good opportunity for “righteous outrage” by spreading facts! 😛

Like it or not, when children get out into the world of college and work, they are going to be exposed to people that are different from them in many ways and the sooner they learn to find the ways to get along-the better.

We have created a society that is so polarized that we can’t solve our common problems. It’s not enough anymore to disagree, we have to become mortal enemies. We’ve separated ourselves into armed camps that can think of the “other” only as intent on the destruction of everything we hold dear.

Maybe there is hope that today’s children can learn to find common ground with others and realize that you don’t have to agree on everything in order to work together.
Click to expand...
I agree Seeker.

Therr are also Catholics in the world they will work with and run into. we need to start informing them on Catholics and Catholicism, the sooner the better 🙂
 
God please Bless me with a great-paying job so I won’t have to put my kids through public school :gopray2:
 
DaddyGirl said:
I don’t think this group is helming a “gay indoctrination program” trying to “push the homosexual lifestyle”.
They are a nonprofit civil rights organization that fights hate and bigotry, founded by civil rights lawyers in 1971. They teach tolerance.

Here’s more info:
tolerance.org/mix-it-up/what-is-mix
Click to expand...
No, they prosecute the liberal agenda. Tolerance would preclude them from naming the AFA an “anit-gay hate group”.
 
DaddyGirl said:
I don’t think this group is helming a “gay indoctrination program” trying to “push the homosexual lifestyle”.
They are a nonprofit civil rights organization that fights hate and bigotry, founded by civil rights lawyers in 1971. They teach tolerance.
Click to expand...
I actually read a couple things about the SPLC yesterday that are very interesting. The first is that apparently they make a lot of money and have accumulated $250 million dollars which they have invested. They neither practice law or give to the poor. (source)

The second is that Mark Potok of the SPLC thinks executing children who defend the wrong principles is good. I imagine someday this might apply to those against homosexual activity since for Mr. Potok that is a wrong principle. His principles were revealed in an article about a teenage Confederate spy who was executed by the Union. He said: “It’s a very sad story, but at the end of the day, Dodd was spying for the Confederacy, which was fighting a war to defend the institution of slavery”. This sentence might not strike a lot of people as being disturbing but it should. The teenager was most likely simply helping to defend his home from an invading army. He probably had no great ideological concerns as most who fought in that war did not. But in Mr. Potoks mind if he was defending an evil institution that is grounds for killing him. He could have simply said he was an enemy in a war fighting for the other side, but he did not. He justified the execution on the grounds of what principles the teenager is associated with defending in Mr. Potok’s own mind. I’d stay clear of Mr. Potok as he would have his tolerance carried out by the sword. (source)
 
LaSainte said:
Whoa, paranoid much? The “Mix it Up at Lunch” day seems like it is geared only toward sitting with someone different at lunch. I’m not really seeing the “homosexshul” agenda here. Maybe it’s got something to do with “Al Kayda” or the “illegals” takin’ all our jobs!

Seriously, this is really irresponsible “reporting”.
Click to expand...
The group that is pushing for this nonsense is irresponsible. It is part of the left agenda to indoctrinate children with moral relativism and push the “gay” agenda. True tolerance is bearing an evil. Sitting with folks from different backgrounds is not tolerance it is simply decent behavior, but that is not what is being pushed here.
 
So because you don’t like the organization, any message they have must be bad?

This is what is wrong with our polarized country. If an otherwise good message comes from the “wrong” messenger it must be denounced-not because of the message, but because of the messenger.

Teaching children to get along with people who are not like themselves is a good thing, no matter who is advocating it.
 
DaddyGirl said:
They teach tolerance.
Click to expand...
“Tolerance” ain’t what it used to be. Traditionally, ‘tolerance’ means to put up with something you DON’T like for the sake of something more important. (For the sake of freedom of speech, for example, you tolerate the babbling of the aggressively uninformed.) But now ‘tolerance’ means 'you must approve of something, or else."

Curiously, it is socially acceptable to hate rich people, fundamentalists, and pro-lifers. It is now acceptable in some quarters to define pro-lifers as misogynists because no one who respects women could find fault with abortion.
 
My parochial elementary/middle school did “Mix It Up Day” and I was CERTAINLY unaware of any homosexual agenda. We just pulled people’s names out of a hat and sat with them at lunch, then had a class discussion about how nice it was to get to know classmates we usually didn’t talk to… a discussion that included prayer… At the time, I just thought it was a little silly (my class only had 26, so we all basically sat together anyway). There wasn’t even a mention of homosexuality… just of being aware not to exclude anyone.
 
markeverett49 said:
“Tolerance” ain’t what it used to be. Traditionally, ‘tolerance’ means to put up with something you DON’T like for the sake of something more important. (For the sake of freedom of speech, for example, you tolerate the babbling of the aggressively uninformed.) But now ‘tolerance’ means 'you must approve of something, or else."

Curiously, it is socially acceptable to hate rich people, fundamentalists, and pro-lifers. It is now acceptable in some quarters to define pro-lifers as misogynists because no one who respects women could find fault with abortion.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t say that the rich hate the poor, we are just outside their frame of reference. Fundamentalists hate CATHOLICS and main-line Protestants, I think anyone who is not fundamental themselves.
 
andrewstx said:
I wouldn’t say that the rich hate the poor, we are just outside their frame of reference. .
Click to expand...
“The rich” and “the poor” refer to shifting populations. Economists used to have a saying, “from shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations.” Many people who are rich NOW had parents who were (or are) not, and may well have grandchildren who aren’t either. Many people in the middle class now had poor parents. Many young people born into middle class families are sliding into poverty. Rich and poor is less ‘us’ and ‘them’ than ‘now’ and ‘then.’
 
fix said:
I do not think so. They are very liberal group with a specific agenda. from their website:

Toolkit for ‘Therapy of Lies’
Click to expand...
Ironic since it is the AFA that is lying this time. There is nothing in this project that even suggests homosexuality. That part is made up out of thin air, or in other words, a lie. I have no respect for an organization that thinks it must lie, even to do good.
 
DaddyGirl said:
This dialogue excerpt you posted from somewhere (is it a magazine article?)is to help break sex stereotypes of men and women, yes?
Click to expand...
No, it is to ensure that kids are indoctrinated into the propaganda.

The link is from the Sountern Poverty Law center. The “day” in question is a project that condones many things. I only posted two of the links. There is more.
I applaud that, for sure.
It would be silly for people to think or to be taught that boys can’t wear a specific color just because of their gender. From Bloomies to Barneys, the top designers in menswear showcase beautiful pink shirts for men in their windows. Colors were not “attached” to specific genders until the early 1900s, when clothing manufacturers realized they could make more money that way. As a female, if i was told I couldn’t wear blue because it’s a “boy” color, 75 percent of my wardrobe would be gone! (how would I live without blue jeans?)
Telling kids a boy should not wear pink is waaaaay over-micro-managing-over-scrupulosity!
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting!
Click to expand...
It is not about coloration. Read the link please.
 
pnewton said:
Ironic since it is the AFA that is lying this time. There is nothing in this project that even suggests homosexuality. That part is made up out of thin air, or in other words, a lie. I have no respect for an organization that thinks it must lie, even to do good.
Click to expand...
I am sorry you are misinformed about the project. I posted two links, there are more, that spell out exactly what the indoctrination is about. The AFA is not lying.
 
Why does it not surprise that so many catholic schools are involved:rolleyes:(2651 schools total so far)

There are many teachers at these schools that blog on the" mix-up day" web page and I can’t understand why these teachers are getting the impression this is also about gay rights if it is not???

Shouldn’t Southern Poverty Law inform the teacher that they are confused about this day.???

Type in a state and you get teachers remarking on it -this is from Missouri-
Coming Out as a Safe Zone for LGBT Students?
Blog post
Keywords: Sexual orientation
In an ideal world, our students would be safe to openly be who they are at all times. Since the world we live in is far from ideal, we must support our students’ rights to privacy and trust them to make the decision to reveal their sexuality when they feel the time is right.
Click to expand...
One reason there are so many incidences of anti-gay bullying is a simple lack of understanding. Introducing kids to LGBT topics at an early age, in a comfortable and open environment, rather than allowing them to discover the subject at a later age where they may also pick up prejudicial and inaccurate information can help prevent such violence. This approach can also help LGBT children–or those with LGBT family members—feel safer and more accepted within the classroom.
Click to expand...
The key to fostering tolerance and understanding is integrating age-appropriate materials that flow with the curriculum. When completing a unit on family, for example, include family groups ]that feature same-sex parents. In the primary grades, picture books, such as Mommy, Mama, and Me, The Family Book as well as And Tango Makes Three, help illustrate different families. When making felt boards, create a display for a two-father or two-mother household as well.
Click to expand...
tolerance.org/blog/books-help-open-talks-about-lgbtissues
Click to expand...
 
fix said:
I am sorry you are misinformed about the project. I posted two links, there are more, that spell out exactly what the indoctrination is about. The AFA is not lying.
Click to expand...
Not only the AFA. Your links which “spell out exactly what the indoctrination is about” do not such thing.

Your first link:

tolerance.org/therapy-of-lies

… does not even mention this Mix it up event. It addresses reparitive therapy.

The second link:

tolerance.org/blog/princess-boys-and-preempting-stereotypes

…likewise addresses only somthing called “princess boy” and never mentions the event being discussed.

So, before you come out saying I am uninformed about this project, you might want to actually find information on** this** project, not cut and paste other stuff. Now you may believe that the SPLC is incapable of any good because of their rather liberal political leaning. However, I do not buy that. I have seen the Catholic Church far too often be targeted by bigots to become one myself. Yes, I am as far from the SPLC as day is from night, but this even never involved homosexuality. There are too many people out there seeing gays under every rock and at every event.
 
Guys hello! The AFA are anti-Catholic Evangelicals. My crowd (although I’m anti-Catholic)! Why are you citing Evangelicals who are anti-Catholic?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top