Homosexuals immune to Mass. budget cuts

[neat62]

Lujack;

And when that’s not happening in church or at home, then what?

Some voluntary after school or on the weekend “class”. I mean, I pay taxes to, why should me or my kids have to sit through stuff I do not agree with. If they would stick to the three “R’s”, I would have no complaint.

But if it needs to be done, how do you reach kids?

If the parents do not do it(whatever it is), then that is the way it is. It is not the job of schools to take tax payer money, and indoctrinate kids. Schools should only be there to teach ALL kids the basics. Math that applies to all kids, be them black, white Mexican, gay, straight, or trans-whatever. The same for reading and science, and whatever else. No adults who come in with an agenda that does not apply to all kids in general.

A normal anti-bullying initiative just has to tell people not to bully, but an initiative focused on ending bullying towards gays has to explain why those phrases are not good things to say, and how they can be hurtful. More work has to be done than a skit that basically says not to pick on the nerds.

Then put an ad in the local newspaper offering such services at your home, or somewhere off of school grounds. Of course you can chagre a small fee for such services, as long as it is not tax payer money.

Do you feel they should all be in the closet?

If I had any doubt that it would not lead to gay marriage, then yes. But, I know it will. This is more than just about bullying, this is about acceptance. While they may claim that it is only about bullying, they know darn well that having an adult tell children that something is right or wrong, will have an impact that favors gay acceptance. To prove my point, what do you think would happen if an adult came into class, and told kids that it was OK to bully the gay ones? Why do you think they get at kids? Because kids are naieve and impressionable. Hitler knew it, the Hitler Youth, for example. Or for those who love to bring up Godwin’s Law, then how about this:

yikers.com/video_the_smallest_racists.html

This is the exact opposite as the gay agenda, but it proves my point about young, impressionable kids.

 

[Lujack]

Lujack;
Some voluntary after school or on the weekend “class”. I mean, I pay taxes to, why should me or my kids have to sit through stuff I do not agree with. If they would stick to the three “R’s”, I would have no complaint.

If its voluntary, none of the bullies will come, thus defeating the purpose of trying to tell people that it isn’t acceptable to call somebody a “f____” or a “d____”.

If the parents do not do it(whatever it is), then that is the way it is. It is not the job of schools to take tax payer money, and indoctrinate kids. Schools should only be there to teach ALL kids the basics. Math that applies to all kids, be them black, white Mexican, gay, straight, or trans-whatever. The same for reading and science, and whatever else. No adults who come in with an agenda that does not apply to all kids in general.

Heck, while you’re at it, why not drop guidance councilors, stop playing sports, stop having clubs, and stop offering lending libraries? A school should be a second home for kids, and it should be somewhere where they can feel safe. If parents aren’t making their kids feel safe (whether its because they happen to be gay or transsexual or not doing well at school or whatever), it is the job of the school to make them feel safe.

Then put an ad in the local newspaper offering such services at your home, or somewhere off of school grounds. Of course you can chagre a small fee for such services, as long as it is not tax payer money.

Same as my first concern. If its voluntary, no bullies will show, and you don’t do anything to prevent it.

If I had any doubt that it would not lead to gay marriage, then yes. But, I know it will. This is more than just about bullying, this is about acceptance. While they may claim that it is only about bullying, they know darn well that having an adult tell children that something is right or wrong, will have an impact that favors gay acceptance. To prove my point, what do you think would happen if an adult came into class, and told kids that it was OK to bully the gay ones? Why do you think they get at kids? Because kids are naieve and impressionable. Hitler knew it, the Hitler Youth, for example. Or for those who love to bring up Godwin’s Law, then how about this:

yikers.com/video_the_smallest_racists.html

This is the exact opposite as the gay agenda, but it proves my point about young, impressionable kids.

So, because we want to prevent gay marriage, we should allow gays to be bullied? Telling kids you can’t call somebody a “f____” just means you don’t pick on people, something the Catholic Church agrees with, and has taken great pains to make clear.

 

[neat62]

Lujack;

If its voluntary, none of the bullies will come, thus defeating the purpose of trying to tell people that it isn’t acceptable to call somebody a “f____” or a “d____”.

Exactly. Because this is social engineering and/or indoctrination. I do not pay taxes for that.

Heck, while you’re at it, why not drop guidance councilors, stop playing sports, stop having clubs, and stop offering lending libraries? A school should be a second home for kids, and it should be somewhere where they can feel safe. If parents aren’t making their kids feel safe (whether its because they happen to be gay or transsexual or not doing well at school or whatever), it is the job of the school to make them feel safe.

Sports and clubs(as long as they are for basic education purposes) are for teaching, well, basic education, not social engineering or indoctrination. And sure, a school should be safe, and it is the job of the adults there to make sure that it is, but that is not the same as indoctrinating or social engineering. Breaking up a fight is one thing, but telling kids to accept homosexuality is another. And yes, bullying should be stopped by the adults in school as it is an interruption, not because some think we can achieve Utopia.

Same as my first concern. If its voluntary, no bullies will show, and you don’t do anything to prevent it.

So, because we want to prevent gay marriage, we should allow gays to be bullied?

How would you prevent it from happening?

Telling kids you can’t call somebody a “f____” just means you don’t pick on people, something the Catholic Church agrees with, and has taken great pains to make clear.

Yeah, and they will, like it or not, help enable gay marriage to materialize. Not in the Church, but in society.

Why were gay’s in the closet for so many years? When did they come out? When did the push for gay marriage really begin in full force?

Look how many Catholics voted for socialism and abortion and gay marriage when they voted for Obama? (Nationally Obama captured 53% of the Catholic vote.) All against the Church.

“Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as “Born-again/Evangelical”.”

abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html

Catholics had the second highest rate of abortions even though the Church teaches against it.

I see this as the Catholic bleedingheart mentality. We are called to protect our neighbor from sin, not to enable it, which we seem to be doing, based on the data above.

The nicer the Catholics get, the more they enable sin to take root in our society, in my opinion.

I have a hard time beliveving that Jesus’ teachings were a plan to love everyone into sin.

 

[cristininha]

It is the duty of schools to stop any fights, take charge of the students, control them, and teach. Not to have “speakers” come in and teach the acceptance, through indoctrination, of gay’s. They call it bullying, but the aim is ultimately to have kids accept homosexuality. Otherwise, how did we manage to survive all this time without some “speaker” to tell our kids how to behave. That is not their job, it is the job of the parents.

The aim is to have kids accept and respect human diversity.

Have you managed to survive? Well done, lucky you, but speak for yourself. Many people haven’t:

nytimes.com/2008/02/23/us/23oxnard.html?em

gayteens.org/714/Article757.html

These two examples above are not isolated incidents. There are many of them the World over.

…

 

[neat62]

cristininha;

The aim is to have kids accept and respect human diversity.

Does that go for pedophiles and beastiality? Or the diverse nation of polygamy or bigamy?

Have you managed to survive? Well done, lucky you, but speak for yourself. Many people haven’t:

nytimes.com/2008/02/23/us/23oxnard.html?em

You know the whole story about that KID do you? Here it is:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.O._Green_School_shooting

That kid had many, many problems, and not all because that KID thought he was gay? He was a problem child, and was an “in your face” provocateur, who had many, many issues. He wasn’t entirley innocent.

gayteens.org/714/Article757.html

These two examples above are not isolated incidents. There are many of them the World over.

suntimes.com/news/24-7/1372340,w-shooting-south-side-011109.article

And this:

suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/1370751,4_1_JO10_DOGSHOT_S1.article

And this:

suntimes.com/news/24-7/1369583,w-fatal-fire-charge-kids-cheatem-010908.article

How about we have someone come in and preach to children about how their mother may kill them one day?

Murder is murder is murder no matter how you slice it.

 

[Lujack]

Lujack;
Exactly. Because this is social engineering and/or indoctrination. I do not pay taxes for that.

And if Parent X decides to teach their kid that all blacks are “lazy n_____s” and you should beat them up, its social engineering to tell them otherwise?

Face it, all schools, even the most conservative ones, participate in some level of social engineering. Not talking in class, not interrupting others, dress codes…all of these tell kids what is and is not acceptable behavior.

Then what is the difference between reactively preventing bullying and proactively preventing bullying? Tell me what the difference between Scenario A and Scenario B is:

Scenario A

Johnny is gay, and Jimmy knows it. As Johnny is walking down the hall one day, Jimmy throws him up against a locker and says “Gimme your lunch money, f_____. I know everything about people like you. You won’t fight back.” Jimmy thrashes Johnny until Mr. Smith comes along, who breaks up the fight and gives Jimmy a lecture on why its wrong to pick on people because they happen to be gay.

Two days later, Joey loudly makes a remark in Johnny’s presence about how “such and such is just so gay. I don’t know why anybody would do it.” Mr. Smith again takes Joey aside and gives him a lecture on why that is unnecessarily cruel to Johnny.

Scenario B

Mr. Smith gives his class a talk about not bullying people at the beginning of the year. He includes a segment about why calling people “f_____” or using gay as a slur is wrong.

The difference? In Scenario A, Johnny gets beat up and made fun of before anyone does anything about it. In Scenario B, Johnny at least knows that he has somebody to turn to if he’s getting mocked.

Yeah, and they will, like it or not, help enable gay marriage to materialize. Not in the Church, but in society.

Why were gay’s in the closet for so many years? When did they come out? When did the push for gay marriage really begin in full force?

They were in the closet because they knew they’d get tormented and possibly killed if they came out. That didn’t keep them from being gay, though. We even had a president who was probably gay, and Washington circles knew it, during his term, even (James Buchanan). They came out because people stopped treating homosexuality as a crime worthy of being ostracized for.

Look how many Catholics voted for socialism and abortion and gay marriage when they voted for Obama? (Nationally Obama captured 53% of the Catholic vote.) All against the Church.

Obama isn’t socialist and he doesn’t actually support gay marriage.

"Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%

, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as “Born-again/Evangelical”."

abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html

Catholics had the second highest rate of abortions even though the Church teaches against it.

What does this have to do with not allowing gay kids to be beat up in schools? The Church teaches against hatred towards gays. Do you remember that?

I see this as the Catholic bleedingheart mentality. We are called to protect our neighbor from sin, not to enable it, which we seem to be doing, based on the data above.

The nicer the Catholics get, the more they enable sin to take root in our society, in my opinion.

I have a hard time beliveving that Jesus’ teachings were a plan to love everyone into sin.

And I have a hard time that Jesus’s plans were to allow anyone to be persecuted. What about the adultress who was about to be stoned? Christ didn’t say that she was innocent, or try to clear her name, he simply asked he who was without sin to cast the first stone.

The woman was probably guilty, but Christ wasn’t going to allow her to be stoned to death. Was that enabling the woman in her sin?

 

[neat62]

Lujack;

And if Parent X decides to teach their kid that all blacks are “lazy n_____s” and you should beat them up, its social engineering to tell them otherwise?

Sure is. Who are they to go against the parents, or at least, some parents. The schools should not be concerned with that, only the Thre R’s.

Face it, all schools, even the most conservative ones, participate in some level of social engineering. Not talking in class, not interrupting others, dress codes…all of these tell kids what is and is not acceptable behavior.

Yeah, but all in general ways which apply to everyone, be them gay, straight, white, Mexican, etc. That applies to everyone.

The difference? In Scenario A, Johnny gets beat up and made fun of before anyone does anything about it. In Scenario B, Johnny at least knows that he has somebody to turn to if he’s getting mocked.

I like your approach and civility, thank you.

I knew kids who were bullied in school. At times, I was one of them. That is until high school, where the bully was taught a little respect by me. My own mother tells me her story about how she was picked on by another girl. That is, until that other girl was taught a little respect. Standing up for YOURSELF, can go a long way and have the right impact. Having adults come in and do it for someone else, may be a form of indoctrination.

They were in the closet because they knew they’d get tormented and possibly killed if they came out. That didn’t keep them from being gay, though.

No but we didn’t hear about gay marriage all the time either. As I say, you might as well welcome gay marriage into our society, because this is enabeling it to happen.(this open treatment)

They came out because people stopped treating homosexuality as a crime worthy of being ostracized for.

Uh-huh. And gay marriage is right around the corner because of that. Exactly my point.

Obama isn’t socialist and he doesn’t actually support gay marriage.

Both debatable.

What does this have to do with not allowing gay kids to be beat up in schools? The Church teaches against hatred towards gays. Do you remember that?

And they teach against abortion too, yet Catholics take the #2 spot in getting abortions. I am saying that Catholiscism is weakening because of the bleeding heart mentality. The only major differences between Catholics and Liberalism, is the Church’s (not the people) positions on gay marriage and abortion(which many Catholics support) And if many Catholics go against the Church’s teachings on them, and disregard the Church, then what happened to Catholiscism?

And I have a hard time that Jesus’s plans were to allow anyone to be persecuted. What about the adultress who was about to be stoned? Christ didn’t say that she was innocent, or try to clear her name, he simply asked he who was without sin to cast the first stone.

“Go now and sin no more” That is hardly being chased after by the gay’s.

The woman was probably guilty, but Christ wasn’t going to allow her to be stoned to death. Was that enabling the woman in her sin?

Yeah, it probably was, unless she repented and accepted Christ, which she did. Not many do that today though, and the gay’s certainly do not. Since we removed the stigma on gay’s, the gay marriage initiative rose up dramatically. How was that following God’s Law? It wasn’t. It enabled sin to rise many, many times fold. Specificlly since the 60’s.

 

[Lujack]

Lujack;
Sure is. Who are they to go against the parents, or at least, some parents. The schools should not be concerned with that, only the Thre R’s.

You take a much narrower view of schools than most people do. How can a school teach history if they can’t oppose racism? What does the history teacher say about Martin Luther King, and how does he/she approach Woodrow Wilson resegregating the federal government?

Besides, the school may not be able to say that the parents are wrong, but they certainly can refuse to permit that sort of behavior within their hallways, and explain, in no uncertain terms, why they do not.

Yeah, but all in general ways which apply to everyone, be them gay, straight, white, Mexican, etc. That applies to everyone.

It applies to everybody, yes. But so does a general prohibition against slurs, with a focus on those slurs that are most common in the school. A school can both make it clear that no slurs of any kind are acceptable, and deal with those specific slurs that prevent a common problem.

I like your approach and civility, thank you.

I knew kids who were bullied in school. At times, I was one of them. That is until high school, where the bully was taught a little respect by me. My own mother tells me her story about how she was picked on by another girl. That is, until that other girl was taught a little respect. Standing up for YOURSELF, can go a long way and have the right impact. Having adults come in and do it for someone else, may be a form of indoctrination.

Standing up for yourself can go a long way. At some point, it has to be done, but at other times, adult intervention is needed. While action can be indoctrinating, inaction can be equally so.

While Mr. Smith sends a message by taking action when he hears Joey call Johnny a “f____”, doesn’t he also send a message if witnesses that incident and walks by without doing anything?

No but we didn’t hear about gay marriage all the time either. As I say, you might as well welcome gay marriage into our society, because this is enabeling it to happen.(this open treatment)

It didn’t stop them from being gay, and it didn’t stop a man who known by almost everyone in Washington as gay from being president of the United States, something that could never happen today.

A society where vigilantism against a group is acceptable, such as the vigilantism and ostracism that was applied to gays in the past, makes it much easier for that vigilantism and ostracism to be directed towards any minority group, including Catholics

Both debatable.

Perhaps we should let this one drop, because that’s an entirely different can of worms that could wind up as multiple threads.

And they teach against abortion too, yet Catholics take the #2 spot in getting abortions. I am saying that Catholiscism is weakening because of the bleeding heart mentality. The only major differences between Catholics and Liberalism, is the Church’s (not the people) positions on gay marriage and abortion(which many Catholics support) And if many Catholics go against the Church’s teachings on them, and disregard the Church, then what happened to Catholiscism?

I don’t think its a bleeding heart mentality as much as its a protective mentality. The Church is a shepherd to all sheep, Catholic or not and sinner or not. While it is a duty of the shepherd to rebuke the wayward sheep (whether the reason it wandered off the path is for homosexuality or anything else), it is also the duty of that shepherd to fight the wolves away, no matter which sheep they attack.

“Go now and sin no more” That is hardly being chased after by the gay’s.

Yes, “go now and sin no more”, but even if she persisted in her sin, Christ would still have protected her from being stoned.

Yeah, it probably was, unless she repented and accepted Christ, which she did. Not many do that today though, and the gay’s certainly do not. Since we removed the stigma on gay’s, the gay marriage initiative rose up dramatically. How was that following God’s Law? It wasn’t. It enabled sin to rise many, many times fold. Specificlly since the 60’s.

Even if she chose not to, though, Christ was still not going to permit her death. Even if the sheep is wayward, the shepherd will still protect it.

 

[cristininha]

Does that go for pedophiles and beastiality? Or the diverse nation of polygamy or bigamy?

Human diversity encompasses many things, all human beings must be respected. Child and animal abuse are criminalized practices because they actually harm children and animals, who are not mature or prepared to consent.

You know the whole story about that KID do you? Here it is:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.O._Green_School_shooting

That kid had many, many problems, and not all because that KID thought he was gay? He was a problem child, and was an “in your face” provocateur, who had many, many issues. He wasn’t entirley innocent.

What do you mean by that child being an “in your face” provocateur and not entirely innocent? What did that child do???

Murder is murder is murder, but we can identify the motive behind some of them. That’s why students learn history, and learn about the discriminatory and/or murderous actions of some people against others.

 

[PaulAndrew83]

Have you ever been a public school student in the 2000’s? I lived through 4 years of that hell (in six different parts of the country nonetheless), and daily in all six schools I heard blatant homophobic remarks, with teachers looking on and saying nothing. This isn’t quite the majority revolution that you claim exists.

The point is, gay children of all ages are exploited in the supposedly “safe” environment of their schools at a much higher rate than straight teens. Therefore it is the duty of the school system to offer additional services to gay kids, just like they would do for any other risk group.

Yes I agree,

They should pay for trips to see catholic psycholgists known to heal the issue. They should also state all the extra health risks both from the physical side of things as well as the pshychological disorders that result from it including depression.

Paul

 

[JPUSC]

That’s not fair at all, to cut jobs and mental health facilities, but leave programs promoting homosexuality intact for the sake of political correctness. A general anti-bullying program would work better and would benefit everyone.

I also think schools should also remove ‘safe-sex’ and condom education. Pre-teens should not be exposed to sex toys or anything of the like as I’ve heard some of my public school friends have experienced. School is for academics, not for sexual matters which should be handled by the parents.

 

[Aramis]

Having dealt with students who are getting “married” at 12 into polygamous families… (No legal marriage, since it’s below age of consent, and constitutes pedophilia, slavery, and underage marriage.)

I’ve also dealt with kids who’ve had the anti-bullying curriculum. It neither stops the bullying, nor comforts the bullied, at least on the k-6 level where I’ve taught. It also shows the bullies just how far they can go before they cross the “legal limit,” and allows them to skirt the issue until they can get the victim to lash out, at which point they force the instructor to take action on the physical violence by the victim of the actual bully.

I had one student who use the anti-bullying curriculum as a resource for how to get others in trouble. By telling him what language is actually considered offensive, and his victims as well, he has a much wider repertoire of insults, racist, sexist, and linguistic derrogations.

 

[Holly3278]

Its nice not to need any evidence to back things up, right? Looking through that article, I see a lot of things about getting better information on demographics, reducing bullying, reducing homelessness, and keeping gay teenagers out of bars where they can run into serious trouble. I don’t see a lot of stuff worth objecting to.

Again, I think that if anybody is going to make the claim that X amount of money is going to “pro-homosexual organizations and programs”, they should be able to come up with a list of where the money is going. After all, budgets are public (in New Jersey, they are, at least). It shouldn’t take too much work for MassResistance or whatever they call themselves to find this information.

If they are really raising money for the things you said then I see nothing wrong with that. However, if they are using it for additional things such as actually promoting homosexuality, I find that to be utterly despicable.

 

[buffalo]

Have you ever been a public school student in the 2000’s? I lived through 4 years of that hell (in six different parts of the country nonetheless), and daily in all six schools I heard blatant homophobic remarks, with teachers looking on and saying nothing. This isn’t quite the majority revolution that you claim exists.

The point is, gay children of all ages are exploited in the supposedly “safe” environment of their schools at a much higher rate than straight teens. Therefore it is the duty of the school system to offer additional services to gay kids, just like they would do for any other risk group.

A chaste homosexual has no need to declare himself or bring attention to himself.

 

[Lujack]

A chaste homosexual has no need to declare himself or bring attention to himself.

No, but if he feels like saying “I don’t like girls”, that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be protected from bullies, and even if he is not a chaste homosexual, he still should be protected from bullies.

 

[buffalo]

No, but if he feels like saying “I don’t like girls”, that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be protected from bullies, and even if he is not a chaste homosexual, he still should be protected from bullies.

Bullying is an issue across the board and all forms of bullying should cease.

Kids should be careful enough not to act in a way that paints a bullseye on them.

And by the way - lot’s of boys state “I don’t like girls” at different ages.

 

[JPUSC]

I had one student who use the anti-bullying curriculum as a resource for how to get others in trouble. By telling him what language is actually considered offensive, and his victims as well, he has a much wider repertoire of insults, racist, sexist, and linguistic derrogations.

A group pointing out the hurt caused by racial slurs came to my school once.

Funny thing is, I’d never heard some of those terms before and I was joking to my friend that the program they put on just taught me some new vocabulary, haha. Of course, I didn’t actually use any of the words.

Yeah, not a very good idea.

 

[v3orb]

Yes I agree,

They should pay for trips to see catholic psycholgists known to heal the issue. They should also state all the extra health risks both from the physical side of things as well as the pshychological disorders that result from it including depression.

Paul

Only if it’s a catholic high school. This doesn’t apply to secular education at all.

 

[latinmasslover]

No, but if he feels like saying “I don’t like girls”, that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be protected from bullies, and even if he is not a chaste homosexual, he still should be protected from bullies.

Should I get protection from “bullies” if I chosse to go around saying “I hate blacks,” even though I don’t involve myself in hate crimes? (BTW, I don’t) What is the point in professing homosexual tendencies if you’re not pushing toward it’s acceptance? If a homosexual wants attention, I say let him have it, “good” with the bad. There should be a price for perverting society.

 

[Wolseley]

Personally, I think that discussion of any and all forms of sexual behavior should be handled by the public school precisely the way public schools are expected to officially handle prayer.

Scenario A

Johnny is gay, and Jimmy knows it. As Johnny is walking down the hall one day, Jimmy throws him up against a locker and says “Gimme your lunch money, f_____. I know everything about people like you. You won’t fight back.” Jimmy thrashes Johnny until Mr. Smith comes along, who breaks up the fight and gives Jimmy a lecture on why its wrong to pick on people because they happen to be gay.

Two days later, Joey loudly makes a remark in Johnny’s presence about how “such and such is just so gay. I don’t know why anybody would do it.” Mr. Smith again takes Joey aside and gives him a lecture on why that is unnecessarily cruel to Johnny.

Scenario B

Mr. Smith gives his class a talk about not bullying people at the beginning of the year. He includes a segment about why calling people “f_____” or using gay as a slur is wrong.

Scenario C

Mr. Smith tells Jimmy if he catches him laying a hand on any other student again, for any reason whatsoever, he will end up getting expelled. He warns Johnny that reprisal against Jimmy will garner him the same punishment. Mr. Smith also sets a policy in place that there will be no talking in the hallways between classes, by anybody, for any reason, and if Joey shoots his mouth off again, he ends up getting detention.

You don’t need “sensitivity training”. You don’t need special protection for any special group. What you need to do is maintain order and discipline, for all the students, at all times, with no specific reasons delineated other than “when you’re in this school, you will keep a civil tongue in your head and behave like a civilized human being, or you will not be in this school very long”.

More a case of “You have to be nice to everybody”, instead of “You have to be nice to Johnny because he’s a homosexual, and you have to be nice to Ted because he’s black, and you have to be nice to Cynthia because she’s handicapped, and you have to be nice to Jennifer because she’s an orphan”, and so on and so forth et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, ad infinitum et nauseam et absurdum.