Judge Says Schools can Teach Sexual Orientation

[KathleenElsie]

For all those saying “just teach them some manners”, I have a question. Do you think that will work? And another question, what do you think sensativity training entails? From what I understand, it simply means teaching children that some children have just a mom or just a dad. Some children live with their grandparents. Some children have two moms and two dads. It does not make a value judgement, it simply demonstrates how society is made up of all different values.

I am not afraid of my son being friends with so-and-so who has 2 moms. What would I be afraid of? That he would “turn gay”? That he would adopt their values? We have this situation that the children have come across in society. We draw the line at overnights.

If I am raising my children correctly, they will be strong enough to live up to the values I have instilled within them without my having to shield them from everyone else’s values. If I have to keep them in a bubble bubble? scouts, sports, etc no bubble here we just don’t think it is in the best interest to confuse a young child on family dynamics but to teach them good manners along with our moral standards to make sure they stay “moral” and “right”, then I’ve done a lousy job raising them. Their foundation should be strong. If it’s not, the only one to blame should be me.

The only one responsible for our childs foundation is us. We chose to keep the secular schools out of it.

 

[boppaid]

The above referenced article is not the best but it does refer the reader to the many aspects of this type of training. This training is New Age.

Thank you for that link. However, I meant sensativity training from an Educational standpoint. Maybe that’s the disconnect here. The sensativity training I’ve been involved in looked nothing like that link. Possibly because it’s not from an edu source.

 

[boppaid]

The only one responsible for our childs foundation is us. We chose to keep the secular schools out of it.

See, that’s great! I really think it is. I think homeschooling or private school is a GREAT option for parents who want their children to be in controlled environments, and around people of similar values and morals.
And ITA with you that parents should be the primary educators of their childrne.

 

[Dee_Dee_King]

i agree that it isn’t there fault, but i don’t see a way around this. if we tell them the truth, they will be offended.

i just don’t want to see sensitivity as an excuse for not admonishing the sinner or proclaiming the truth.

Many are on drugs, drop outs out of the sixth grade, working 10 hours a day 7 days a week to put food in their child’s belly, etc. These children DESERVE a free education

these children need a solid catholic education. i don’t support public schools. i think we should at a local level have charity drives to fund education for these types. theoretically, lower property taxes would allow people to spend more on education for the poor. catholic schools never turn students away based on income.

we haven’t decided whether to home or catholic school. i feel that public education is just too far gone and that it would be too much work to deprogram my children.

 

[fix]

Because heightened sensitivity on these issues leads to less bullying.

What are the “current problems” you are referring to? Children being picked on because they have gay parents? What do you suppose is the answer, if not teaching the children to be sensative to those who are different.

Because if you just try to “treat” the teasing, it will resume again as soon as the teacher’s back is turned. If you heighten a child’s sensativity, they are less likely to tease.

My point is there has always been teasing and such. Kids get picked on because they wear glasses or their pants seem too short, or because one’s name is funny, or ears are too big, or whatever. Why do we need a special class to tell students to stop teasing? The notion “re-education” is some panecea is absurd.

What is so different today that we now need sensitivity training ?

 

[boppaid]

i don’t support public schools. i think we should at a local level have charity drives to fund education for these types. theoretically, lower property taxes would allow people to spend more on education for the poor. catholic schools never turn students away based on income.

we haven’t decided whether to home or catholic school. i feel that public education is just too far gone and that it would be too much work to deprogram my children.

I see your points. I think, though, that if we left education up to charity, there still would not be enough funds to properly educate children whos parents cannot or will not do it themselves. Our society is simply too selfish to do that. If it doesn’t directly benefit them, then many will not fund education willingly. It’s very sad we cannot rely on charitable donations.

 

[boppaid]

My point is there has always been teasing and such. Kids get picked on because they wear glasses or their pants seem too short, or because one’s name is funny, or ears are too big, or whatever. Why do we need a special class to tell students to stop teasing? The notion “re-education” is some panecea is absurd.

What is so different today that we now need sensitivity training ?

Well, for one thing, families are more diverse now. There were far fewer interracial marriages, homosexual marriages, and single parent families in days past. Good or bad, that’s just the way it is. Additonally, even though teasing has always existed, does that make it right? If sensativity training may help, I think it should be done. Further, I’m not talking about a kid going up to another and calling him “4 eyes”. I’m talking about mean-spirited bigotry. And mean bullying can lead to tragedy. Look at Matthew Shepphard. I would lke to think that if his school had sensativity training from the earliest years on up, he might not have been filled with such hate. Of course, that is an extreme example. But bullying should never be tolerated. Never.

 

[fix]

Well, for one thing, families are more diverse now. There were far fewer interracial marriages, homosexual marriages, and single parent families in days past. Good or bad, that’s just the way it is. Additonally, even though teasing has always existed, does that make it right? If sensativity training may help, I think it should be done. Further, I’m not talking about a kid going up to another and calling him “4 eyes”. I’m talking about mean-spirited bigotry. And mean bullying can lead to tragedy. Look at Matthew Shepphard. I would lke to think that if his school had sensativity training from the earliest years on up, he might not have been filled with such hate. Of course, that is an extreme example. But bullying should never be tolerated. Never.

It is all mean spirited. The only change today is that more deviant behavior is codified into civil law. I am against bullying and teasing. I am also against claiming things are worse today because of more “diversity”. The etiology is the same. That is kids acting out towards what they perceive as different. There have always been school fights and all sorts of bad things. The real difference today is the means of correction. We think a class will change things. I think that is partly true and unfortunately what it will change is moral values. It may change how young people form their conscience meaning they will be told to accept wrong as right. That is the problem with secular re-education programs.

 

[boppaid]

It is all mean spirited. The only change today is that more deviant behavior is codified into civil law. I am against bullying and teasing. I am also against claiming things are worse today because of more “diversity”. The etiology is the same. That is kids acting out towards what they perceive as different. There have always been school fights and all sorts of bad things. The real difference today is the means of correction. We think a class will change things. I think that is partly true and unfortunately what it will change is moral values. It may change how young people form their conscience meaning they will be told to accept wrong as right. That is the problem with secular re-education programs.

I agree with you that it is all mean spirited. However, I strongly disagree with your statement: “We think a class will change things. I think that is partly true and unfortunately what it will change is moral values. It may change how young people form their conscience meaning they will be told to accept wrong as right. That is the problem with secular re-education programs.”

If you raise your children with a strong foundation of your values, a sensativity consciousness program will not change them. And just because an educator says that “There are many different types of families” doesn’t mean that your child will interpret it as “gay couples aren’t sinning”. They also are aware (I’m assuming) that not everyone is Christian. Does that mean that just because they are aware this country has many different religions that they will no longer believe in Christianity? Of course not. In that same way, it does not mean that they will think homosexuality is not a sin just because Johnny’s parents are gay.

 

[KathleenElsie]

I agree with you that it is all mean spirited. However, I strongly disagree with your statement: “We think a class will change things. I think that is partly true and unfortunately what it will change is moral values. It may change how young people form their conscience meaning they will be told to accept wrong as right. That is the problem with secular re-education programs.”

If you raise your children with a strong foundation of your values, a sensitivity consciousness program will not change them. And just because an educator says that “There are many different types of families” doesn’t mean that your child will interpret it as “gay couples aren’t sinning”. They also are aware (I’m assuming) that not everyone is Christian. Does that mean that just because they are aware this country has many different religions that they will no longer believe in Christianity? Of course not. In that same way, it does not mean that they will think homosexuality is not a sin just because Johnny’s parents are gay.

Then as I have state many time previous. Good manners and the strength to remember right and wrong is the only way to stop the “class bully”, I am not unsympathetic. I was the child of a single parent, town drunk etc. I had a hard time. Not because other did or did not accept my family situation but because children were not taught manners and kindness. I would never have wanted to have others see my situation as good or normal, just to know they were being unkind.

 

[boppaid]

I can see where you’re coming from. The only problem I see in my field is that some children simply do not care about having proper manners. It’s very sad, really. But if seeing different types of families no longer has a “taboo” attached to it, they do start treating children in unconventional families better. It’s all about their attitude. And taking away a social taboo is not the same as saying it isn’t a sin. It’s just saying that these people do not share our religious beliefs, but they are still good people. That’s all.

 

[fix]

I agree with you that it is all mean spirited. However, I strongly disagree with your statement: “We think a class will change things. I think that is partly true and unfortunately what it will change is moral values. It may change how young people form their conscience meaning they will be told to accept wrong as right. That is the problem with secular re-education programs.”

If you raise your children with a strong foundation of your values, a sensativity consciousness program will not change them.

That is the common argument used to foist things like this on the public. I think it is disingenuous at best. A strong foundation does not make a person invincible. It requires, particularly among people in the formative years, reinforcement and exclusion as much as possible of propaganda from authority figures.

And just because an educator says that “There are many different types of families” doesn’t mean that your child will interpret it as “gay couples aren’t sinning”.

If it is simply about stating that one sentence then why a formal class? That can be related in a few seconds.

They also are aware (I’m assuming) that not everyone is Christian. Does that mean that just because they are aware this country has many different religions that they will no longer believe in Christianity? Of course not. In that same way, it does not mean that they will think homosexuality is not a sin just because Johnny’s parents are gay.

Homosexuality is not equivaent to a religion. Although, it is seen as much by many people these days.

 

[fix]

I can see where you’re coming from. The only problem I see in my field is that some children simply do not care about having proper manners. It’s very sad, really. But if seeing different types of families no longer has a “taboo” attached to it, they do start treating children in unconventional families better. It’s all about their attitude. And taking away a social taboo is not the same as saying it isn’t a sin. It’s just saying that these people do not share our religious beliefs, but they are still good people. That’s all.

That nuancing is very important though and that is why we ought not leave it to the government.

 

[boppaid]

That is the common argument used to foist things like this on the public. I think it is disingenuous at best.

I assure you, I am not being disingenuous.

A strong foundation does not make a person invincible. It requires, particularly among people in the formative years, reinforcement and exclusion as much as possible of propaganda from authority figures.

This is not meant to be snarky, but if people believe exclusion as much as possible of propaganda,then surely they should not put them in a public school with people of all different belief systems, morals, and religious values. I, personally, like my children to be surrounded by diverse groups of people. I am not afraid of what that will do to them. I am confident that they will still grow up with the values I have instilled in them.

Homosexuality is not equivaent to a religion. Although, it is seen as much by many people these days.

No, but it is an accepted lifestyle in our society.

 

[Protestant101]

We should NEVER offend the children of homosexuals. These are KIDS we are discussing here, not homosexual adults. There is a HUGE difference. Can you see the difference?

Of course, there is a difference between the children and the adults; but this is comparing apples with oranges. It can be classed as child abuse in some cases where our sole aim is to avoid offending them. Sometimes, kids need to be corrected regardless of how offended they get.

Now, if you were talking about bullying of the children of homosexuals; then it would be a more clear cut path. But there should be the same rules for hetero, as well as homo - sexuals; including the education policies. Right now it is almost like treason to pray publicly in a school; but you can teach almost any other lifestyle now, under the guise of tolerance.

 

[boppaid]

Of course, there is a difference between the children and the adults; but this is comparing apples with oranges. It can be classed as child abuse in some cases where our sole aim is to avoid offending them. Sometimes, kids need to be corrected regardless of how offended they get.

Now, if you were talking about bullying of the children of homosexuals; then it would be a more clear cut path. But there should be the same rules for hetero, as well as homo - sexuals; including the education policies. Right now it is almost like treason to pray publicly in a school; but you can teach almost any other lifestyle now, under the guise of tolerance.

I don’t think schools teach homosexuality. They just teach tolerance as many children (legally) have parents who are homosexual. If you are against homosexuality, continue to lobby and write your officials against the “legality” of it. That is your issue. Not these children.

Telling these kids their parents are going to Hell is abusive imo as well. I’ve heard people tell kids this!! :eek

 

[Protestant101]

I don’t think schools teach homosexuality. They just teach tolerance as many children (legally) have parents who are homosexual. If you are against homosexuality, continue to lobby and write your officials against the “legality” of it. That is your issue. Not these children.

Telling these kids their parents are going to Hell is abusive imo as well. I’ve heard people tell kids this!! :eek

The tolerance thing is really a guise for other agendas; but I do agree that we should not be telling these kids such things.

It is also interesting to note that some Christians will say such dramatic things about homosexual/lesbian parents; but they would never say the same about adulterers, which is equally condemned by God’s Word.

 

[boppaid]

It is also interesting to note that some Christians will say such dramatic things about homosexual/lesbian parents; but they would never say the same about adulterers, which is equally condemned by God’s Word.

Yes! I truly agree with you here!