|
Post by Insane_Zang on May 22, 2011 14:31:53 GMT -5
No, you didn't. It's not supportive in the wrong way to say that it's ok. Let me give you a scenario: Person A: I like turtles. Person B: YOU LIKE F*****G TURTLES? HOW COULD YOU [pants]HOLE?? I'M GOING TO COME TO YOUR F*****G HOUSE AND KILL YOUR FAMILY. YOUR WHOLE FAMILY. Better way of dealing with it: Person A: I like turtles Person B: Oh, that's cool I guess. I don't really like turtles much, I like giraffes (DFTBA) more. See, but there's nothing wrong with liking turtles.
|
|
|
Post by Nancy R. on May 22, 2011 15:08:48 GMT -5
Oh and there's something wrong with liking the vagina instead of the wang when you're a girl?
|
|
|
Post by Insane_Zang on May 22, 2011 15:26:29 GMT -5
owait, we didn't go over this here. I had a discussion with Dandy and Carter about this last night too. Basically, yeah
|
|
|
Post by Lyserg Zeroz on May 22, 2011 15:46:55 GMT -5
. . . Why? (if you are gonna use religion, instead of just saying "In the bible it says: bla", or "God says: Bla" explain why they would say what they say and how you see this is justified).
|
|
|
Post by SwimFellow on May 22, 2011 16:26:58 GMT -5
Zang, the discussion of Turtles vs. Giraffes is about as important as your stupid discussion.
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on May 22, 2011 16:52:52 GMT -5
I really could not care less about it.
But I see why they would pass it, even tho I dont think this is the best solution to the problems that arise.
|
|
Flappy
Star
Grrr! But not really....
Posts: 577
|
Post by Flappy on May 22, 2011 17:28:56 GMT -5
The bill is probably the worst thing that has happened as of yet, in regards to this issue. It is a step way in the wrong direction. the LGBT community should be able to express themselves from as early an age as they would like. (Most people realize their sexuality by the age of 5, if I remember correctly.) Not allowing them to openly discuss it until the age of 15 could cause severe mental and sexual tension on the person, which could very easily result in the individual isolating themselves from society, suicide, and other mental health problems.
From a non-psychological point of view, not allowing discussion of homosexuality is logically a bad choice. Sexuality, especially in this day and age, NEEDS to be discussed. ESPECIALLY in a school setting. (Not that it really is being discussed, which is why I think it should be discussed in social-studies classrooms from an early age, but that's off topic.) The ability to discuss such a topic opens the door for kids and teens to be able to learn more about themselves and get on with their lives a lot easier. If a student has to worry about his sexuality and not being able to talk about it, or the problems that may be associated with it (bullying, harassment, etc.), that child, is even more at risk of humiliation, outcasting, social awkwardness, etc. etc. (Sorry went back to a psychological standpoint.)
In short, if the law gets passed, it means a world of hurt for members and supporters of the LGBT community. And I for one would protest it if I was given the chance.
In response to previous comments: "If the teacher was homophobic, making anti-gay remarks...etc." -This is a situation that begs the law not to be passed! if a student is being harassed by a teacher (and yes, this would be harassment). If the law was passed, the student would not be allowed to tell administration what was going on. Meaning he would be forced to suffer the harassment.
|
|
|
Post by Chelsea on May 22, 2011 17:48:30 GMT -5
In response to previous comments: "If the teacher was homophobic, making anti-gay remarks...etc." -This is a situation that begs the law not to be passed! if a student is being harassed by a teacher (and yes, this would be harassment). If the law was passed, the student would not be allowed to tell administration what was going on. Meaning he would be forced to suffer the harassment. If it were flat out hate speech, then this is already against the law. I meant in cases where the teacher in general just says s/he thinks homosexuality is wrong. Everyone is focusing on the immediate relationship between a gay student and the teacher, but this reaches further than that. This still has an effect in classrooms where all of the students are heterosexual.
|
|
|
Post by SwimFellow on May 22, 2011 20:05:50 GMT -5
Chelsea has a point..
But I still think that classrooms with only heterosexual students can't just be not aware of homosexuals.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on May 22, 2011 21:16:19 GMT -5
Insane_Zang - don't answer Lyserg's question. @lyserg - Zang has explained his answer before and here is not the place for it - ask him privately if you must know. If you remove the right of school faculty to discuss sexuality, then in all fairness you should remove their right to talk about (____Insert any topic here_____). What makes one subject more allowable than another? In history you learn of war and violence and sometimes important murderers of history. In chemistry class (if you pay attention) you learn the fundamentals of bomb-making. In health (assuming your school has sex education) you learn about safe sex and birth control. What makes sexuality less deserving of discussion? Zang you can't argue that it's morally wrong in this case since each of my examples is morally wrong. So if you do support this bill (anyone here) I ask you to find a reason.
|
|
|
Post by Draemora on May 23, 2011 0:57:30 GMT -5
I agree with Chelsea. This has deep implications for the developing students, for they will be unexposed to a basic part of life. Sometimes parents cannot explain something, or the kids want a second opinion, and a teacher's guidance is usually better than another teen's opinion or that of the Internet. Not only that, limiting the discussion topics in a classroom can affect the reasoning and cognitive abilities of students. Spoon feeding topics from a cookie-cutter program that limits its students will yield pseudo-zombies at worst, and naivety in the long run.
I wish we could live in a world where sexuality was not taboo and people could love whoever they want, however they want. (As long as it doesn't hurt anyone)
|
|
0netnet0
Meteor
The things I do for love...
Posts: 50
|
Post by 0netnet0 on May 23, 2011 11:41:46 GMT -5
If it were flat out hate speech, then this is already against the law. I meant in cases where the teacher in general just says s/he thinks homosexuality is wrong. Isn't it illegal for a teacher to express that type of stuff in his classroom? Anyway, jumping into the conversation, not letting kids know about homosexuality, is like not letting kids learn about the menstrual cycle. Everyone is taught about the menstrual cycle at some point, even boys, even though it makes them uncomfortable. Even though this won't happen to them they are taught about it because it will be relevant to them later on. For girls, it's learning about what's happening to their bodies - they have a right to know and understand. Same thing with homosexuality. Everyone (should be) is taught about it. Even straight people, even if it's uncomfortable for them. This "homosexuality" thing won't happen to them - but it will be relevant to them. And for the gay people? They have a right to know why they aren't like everyone else. Plus, talking about something is legitimizing it. It's giving the person a message: "This isn't something to be ashamed of. This is a subject that can be talked about publicly." By not talking about it, the person questioning him/herself has no answers. By not being able to ask questions, most people would go to the worst case scenario, creating mental problems, self-image problems... A scenario in my head: A gay couple has adopted a child when s/he was too young to remember. Said child goes to school. Said child has a lesson about families where everyone draws their parents, siblings, pets and presents it to the class. Is he allowed to talk about his family? If not, what will it do to the child? Are the parents allowed to sue? What happens here?
|
|
|
Post by Ferrrrrre on May 23, 2011 13:10:09 GMT -5
A scenario in my head: A gay couple has adopted a child when s/he was too young to remember. Said child goes to school. Said child has a lesson about families where everyone draws their parents, siblings, pets and presents it to the class. Is he allowed to talk about his family? If not, what will it do to the child? Are the parents allowed to sue? What happens here? This ^ What will happen then? Let say these kids need to show and tell about their family drawing. Even if the said kid can tell about his family, there will be children who have never heard about a child who has two moms/dads. They WILL ask question. Then what? I'm definitely against this bill and as advice for those who aren't: This bill is like a bill that forbids the sale of cigarettes in an attempt to have more people quit smoking.. This won't solve the 'problem', it will only make it worse.. A lot worse! Same with this bill; not educating children about a part of life is just not acceptable.. AS many said before and what I see as the MAIN problem about this: talking/discussing about anything LGBQT, doesn't make people LGBQT.. it might simply help people understand what they've always been..
|
|
|
Post by SwimFellow on May 23, 2011 20:18:38 GMT -5
May I add Zang, that liking TURTLES doesn't always make you a zombie.
If you are gay, that doesn't mean you're a bad person. Or a sinner.
|
|
|
Post by Insane_Zang on May 23, 2011 20:47:44 GMT -5
Oh SHIRT, that was an epic analogy. It's wrong, but epic
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on May 24, 2011 0:14:04 GMT -5
Zang - I thought you believed that gay people were just sinners - not necessarily bad?
|
|
|
Post by Insane_Zang on May 24, 2011 9:13:26 GMT -5
Well, ok they're not bad people. It [is][/i] however bad to sin and therefore bad to be gay. Now yes, we all sin. We should try to rid the sins from our lives. Being gay just brings another sin out
|
|
|
Post by sarawhatwho on May 24, 2011 9:40:36 GMT -5
I don't think homosexuality should be taught in detail simply because of the huge debate over if it's a choice or not. We don't know what 'causes' it...or do we? o.O do we? Hormones? I don't know. But I don't see a problem with it being brought up when talking about sexual reproduction or something. It's a really controversial subject and everyone is going to deal with it sooner or later.
As for the religious aspect....homosexuality is a sin. You can't say it's not a sin because it says it in the Bible. However, you can argue that it isn't a choice. I do find the two very conflicting. If being straight were a sin, I'd be pretty screwed. I can't help the way I feel about a certain person, I just feel that way. I do not choose to like guys. I just do.
|
|
|
Post by Draemora on May 24, 2011 12:02:46 GMT -5
What about non denominational schools then Zang? Should it be banned there too? Catholic/Christian beliefs should only affect those who believe in the teachings.
|
|
|
Post by SwimFellow on May 24, 2011 18:23:18 GMT -5
But here's the thing Zang..
It might be slightly controversial (well, only for people who don't understand WHAT I'm saying( for me to say, but I've got to say it, there are (probably, I don't know of any, but I'm sure there are) LOADS of [pants]holes who happen to be gay.
It's not as if there are no bad gay people, but they aren't all bad. In fact, all I know are incredibly nice.
|
|