Jim DeMint: Gays And Unmarried, Pregnant Women Should Not Teach Public School

[del]

Maybe that is because you are "comfortably numb". Teachers are role models. If they want to display behaviors that are against the taxpayers' (parents') beliefs or morals, they should not be supported by tax dollars. If they want to run their own schools and display those behaviors, go for it! Use free enterprise to push your beliefs, not my tax dollars.

That's one way of looking at it, but there ARE gay folks out there, In Real Life,

as there are unmarried pregnant women,

and I'd rather our school system didn't TEACH bigotry...

I don't think it has anything to do with bigotry.

It's more to do with letting them live a childhood before real life hits them in the face. There's value to a decent childhood.

and how is having an unmarried pregnant woman or a gay person as a teacher indecent?

 

[mudwhistle]

Whose morals?

Maybe we shouldn't let smokers, or drinkers, or gamblers teach...

I don't think they're doing it in front of the kids.

But if you want to let everyone else provide bad examples to our kids then so should the above be allowed to do so.

How many gay teachers do you know that have sex infront of children?

How many gay teachers are talking about their lifestyles in front of our kids?

Well truth is some may introduce it in study materials. They may not be able to resist the urge to bring the subject up.

 

[shintao]

So Bush, the murderer, torturer & rapist of children should never be permitted around our children. And soldiers who have murdered, or criminals, etc. I guess Obama whacked a few, so he shouldn't be allowed around schools either, where the air is pristine and children never see evil or abnormal behaviors.

Can we add smokers & people who drink alcohol? How about the blind and disabled? I am not sure I want a guy missing a leg and arm teaching my children.

 

[mudwhistle]

That's one way of looking at it, but there ARE gay folks out there, In Real Life,

as there are unmarried pregnant women,

and I'd rather our school system didn't TEACH bigotry...

I don't think it has anything to do with bigotry.

It's more to do with letting them live a childhood before real life hits them in the face. There's value to a decent childhood.

and how is having an unmarried pregnant woman or a gay person as a teacher indecent?

You figure it out.

I wasn't talking about it that way but since you brought it up.

I was mainly saying that those subjects have no place in the classroom.

 

[Madeline]

Lady...you're confusing teaching kids to hate with not exposing them to lax morals. I can't see why you'd want to bring the subject up with them in the first place.

Whose morals?

Maybe we shouldn't let smokers, or drinkers, or gamblers teach...

I don't think they're doing it in front of the kids.

But if you want to let everyone else provide bad examples to our kids then so should the above be allowed to do so.

I swear you write these sort of posts just to afflict me, mudwhistle. I WANT gay teachers, just as I want black teachers and Muslim teachers and anyone else qualified to teach to do so. I want PUBLIC school students to know -- in PUBLIC we expect you to treat one another with respect and to treat the teachers with deference.

You wanna teach the Future Haters Of America to despise gays? Do so in Wednesday Night Bible Class or Saturday Morning Militia Training...not on the grounds of the schools I help pay for.

BTW, someone please tell me this fucking asswipe excuse for a senator is a Democrat?

 

[syrenn]

Sen. Jim DeMint: Gays And Unmarried, Pregnant Women Should Not Teach Public School

In addition to reiterating anti-choice talking points on abortion and backing "traditional marriage," according to the Spartanburg Herald-Journal, the senator went further and "said if someone is openly homosexual, they shouldn't be teaching in the classroom and he holds the same position on an unmarried woman who's sleeping with her boyfriend -- she shouldn't be in the classroom."

Controversy over DeMint's position on this issue first arose in 2004 during a Senate debate, when he was asked whether he agreed with the state party's platform that said openly gay teachers should be barred from teaching public school. DeMint said he agreed with that position because government shouldn't be endorsing certain behaviors.

"(When I said those things,) no one came to my defense," DeMint said on Friday in Spartanburg. "But everyone would come to me and whisper that I shouldn't back down. They don't want government purging their rights and their freedom to religion."

There are so many things wrong with his statements that I don't even know where to begin criticizing them.

I would rather my children be taught WELL by unmarried pregnant lesbian who cares about their education, then by some straight married lazy union freak slacking on their laurels who doesn't give a shit about children and their education..


I am amazed at this. How stupid can this person be?

 

[del]

I don't think it has anything to do with bigotry.

It's more to do with letting them live a childhood before real life hits them in the face. There's value to a decent childhood.

and how is having an unmarried pregnant woman or a gay person as a teacher indecent?

You figure it out.

I wasn't talking about it that way but since you brought it up.

I was mainly saying that those subjects have no place in the classroom.

i can't without stipulating the possibility of some really ridiculous scenarios as likely to occur,such as a gay teacher being unable to control themselves and slipping the dreaded gay agenda into the curiculum.

help me out

 

[uptownlivin90]

I don't think they're doing it in front of the kids.

But if you want to let everyone else provide bad examples to our kids then so should the above be allowed to do so.

How many gay teachers do you know that have sex infront of children?

How many gay teachers are talking about their lifestyles in front of our kids?

Well truth is some may introduce it in study materials. They may not be able to resist the urge to bring the subject up.

I'd hope the same amount of heterosexual teachers who are talking about their sexual lifestyles in front of kids: none.

 

[fyrenza]

I believe Jim DeMint's statement was about people that touted their immorality. I agree with him, you, apparently, don't.
If there was no public schools and you had the choice of two private schools: one where the teachers acted professionally, and dressed in muted fashion where the focus was on the intellect and learning, and the other where the teachers dress and behavior drew the focus onto themselves and personality, not so much on the intellet, which would you choose for your children?
I work for my employer. I am expected to dress for the job, and act in a professional manner. That is all I am saying that I expect teachers to do. You seem to think teachers should be encouraged to behave as "individuals" with all their personal beliefs, foremost in the classroom. I disagree. I pay them to teach, not work on their egos.

WHO decides if I'm "touting" immorality?

Is me admiting that I smoke dope immoral? I have "good" excuses (health probs), but it's still against the law, here in Texas.

It is NOT against the law, in other states, states which choose to believe that GOD Himself gave us every plant for OUR USAGE.

I wouldn't DREAM of showing up to work, stoned to the bone ~ I have sense enough to realize that it could hurt me, along with anyone I was working with.

My folks HATED that I was a stoner, but it wasn't a view of the reality of the situation. We TALKED about it, and I got to see where they were coming from, as well as letting them know where I was at.

GOD gave me Free Choice, and I'll lay my life down to insure that OTHERS get THEIR Free Choice,

whether I agree with it, or not.

It isn't up to ME; it isn't up to YOU, either, to make those decisions, even for the children you seem to feel you OWN.

 

[logical4u]

Screw morals.

If a woman decides to have a child and raise her child despite the absense of a father GOD BLESS HER.

A woman with a job and steady income taking care of her child is more then commendable. If she is doing so, nobody has the right to call what she did or does "immoral".

Pushing unwed teachers into abortion clinics so they don't loose there jobs doesn't sound like the "christian right", and believe me that's exactly what's going to happen. Then again the "christian right" only has "morals" when it fits their own sick little agenda.

Keep your morals out of public schools.

As for gays, the sexual preference of a teacher shouldn't be an issue because the sexual preference of the teacher shouldn't be brought up in the classroom with children. Therefore it's a non-issue and just another way for the ignorant senator from South Carolina to stir up the crazies and send them into another frenzy.

Let's clarify:
no morals:
stealing is okay
bullying is okay
bearing false witness, okay
murder, okay
coming and going as you please, okay
selling drugs in school, okay
sex at school, okay
guns at school, no we can't have that
blackmail, okay
kidnapping, okay

Teachers acting and dressing in a professional manner, ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Stealing- Against the Law.
Bullying- Against the Law (harrassment).
Bearing False Witness- Against the Law.
Murder- Against the Law.
Sex in public places- Against the Law.
Selling drugs- Against the Law.
Guns on government property- Against the Law.
blackmail- Against the Law.
Kidnapping- Against the Law.

Guess what?

Having a baby out of wedlock- Not against the Law.
Sodomy- Not against the Law.

Can you guess why?

Those ARE moral behaviors, you, sir, are the ones that suggested there should be no morals at school.
If the woman is not having the baby (out-of-wedlock) in the classroom or relating how she does not believe in the "traditional family" (not trying to imply she is not being inclusive of other family types, just against traditional), I don't really see an issue. If a teacher is homosexual, and does not flaunt it in the classroom, I don't see an issue.

Once again, please explain how acting in a professional manner is a bad thing?

 

[RadiomanATL]

and how is having an unmarried pregnant woman or a gay person as a teacher indecent?

You figure it out.

I wasn't talking about it that way but since you brought it up.

I was mainly saying that those subjects have no place in the classroom.

i can't without stipulating the possibility of some really ridiculous scenarios as likely to occur,such as a gay teacher being unable to control themselves and slipping the dreaded gay agenda into the curiculum.

help me out

Teh ghey can be weaponized into an aerosol format.

True story

 

[uptownlivin90]

I don't think it has anything to do with bigotry.

It's more to do with letting them live a childhood before real life hits them in the face. There's value to a decent childhood.

and how is having an unmarried pregnant woman or a gay person as a teacher indecent?

You figure it out.

I wasn't talking about it that way but since you brought it up.

I was mainly saying that those subjects have no place in the classroom.

I wholeheartedly agree. We're not talking about that though, DeMint said gays shouldn't be allowed to teach.

Why should we assume gays are going to talk about being gay infront of students in an inappropriate matter than straight people?

If they're qualified they should be allowed to teach, no matter what they do within their rights behind closed doors. If they bring what's done in the dark, into the light in front of kids, they should be fired.

 

[mudwhistle]

Sen. Jim DeMint: Gays And Unmarried, Pregnant Women Should Not Teach Public School

In addition to reiterating anti-choice talking points on abortion and backing "traditional marriage," according to the Spartanburg Herald-Journal, the senator went further and "said if someone is openly homosexual, they shouldn't be teaching in the classroom and he holds the same position on an unmarried woman who's sleeping with her boyfriend -- she shouldn't be in the classroom."

Controversy over DeMint's position on this issue first arose in 2004 during a Senate debate, when he was asked whether he agreed with the state party's platform that said openly gay teachers should be barred from teaching public school. DeMint said he agreed with that position because government shouldn't be endorsing certain behaviors.

"(When I said those things,) no one came to my defense," DeMint said on Friday in Spartanburg. "But everyone would come to me and whisper that I shouldn't back down. They don't want government purging their rights and their freedom to religion."

There are so many things wrong with his statements that I don't even know where to begin criticizing them.

I would rather my children be taught WELL by unmarried pregnant lesbian who cares about their education, then by some straight married lazy union freak slacking on their laurels who doesn't give a shit about children and their education..


I am amazed at this. How stupid can this person be?

I guess unmarried pregnant lesbians and gays are never lazy union freaks who don't give a shit about children and their education?

 

[shintao]

I don't think they're doing it in front of the kids.

But if you want to let everyone else provide bad examples to our kids then so should the above be allowed to do so.

How many gay teachers do you know that have sex infront of children?

How many gay teachers are talking about their lifestyles in front of our kids?

Well truth is some may introduce it in study materials. They may not be able to resist the urge to bring the subject up.

Yes, I don't know how many married hetro teachers gave lessons to their students. I mean we can't trust heterosexuals with our children, and don't lay stats & BS on me. The same goes for Catholic priests. Maybe if your lil Johnny can't stand a homosexual teacher, he is the one who should leave his ass home and go to a school where no homos are.

 

[mudwhistle]

and how is having an unmarried pregnant woman or a gay person as a teacher indecent?

You figure it out.

I wasn't talking about it that way but since you brought it up.

I was mainly saying that those subjects have no place in the classroom.

I wholeheartedly agree. We're not talking about that though, DeMint said gays shouldn't be allowed to teach.

Why should we assume gays are going to talk about being gay infront of students in an inappropriate matter than straight people?

If they're qualified they should be allowed to teach, no matter what they do within their rights behind closed doors. If they bring what's done in the dark, into the light in front of kids, they should be fired.

Well...sodomy is still against the law in some states. So is smoking dope...or smoking poles.

 

[mudwhistle]

Whose morals?

Maybe we shouldn't let smokers, or drinkers, or gamblers teach...

I don't think they're doing it in front of the kids.

But if you want to let everyone else provide bad examples to our kids then so should the above be allowed to do so.

I swear you write these sort of posts just to afflict me, mudwhistle. I WANT gay teachers, just as I want black teachers and Muslim teachers and anyone else qualified to teach to do so. I want PUBLIC school students to know -- in PUBLIC we expect you to treat one another with respect and to treat the teachers with deference.

You wanna teach the Future Haters Of America to despise gays? Do so in Wednesday Night Bible Class or Saturday Morning Militia Training...not on the grounds of the schools I help pay for.

BTW, someone please tell me this fucking asswipe excuse for a senator is a Democrat?

Like I said before just because they aren't teaching in classrooms doesn't mean the subjects being taught are "Hating Gays 101".

 

[logical4u]

So getting raped and having the child is immoral?

Where did anyone say anything against a rape victim? Where did anyone suggest abortions? Is being professional so alien to you, that you want to go off in another direction?

DeMint said women having babies out of wedlock.

If you get raped and get pregnant you will have a baby out of wedlock.

Kids can figure out that "Ms. so-and-so" is having a baby, but her name is "Ms" so she's not married.

Now what? Does the teacher have to explain to the children in each of her classes that she didn't sin against God but that she was forced into sex?

DeMint was talking about people that "flaunt" their lifestyle. An example would be if an unmarried teacher was explaining to the entire class that their partner did not want a "traditional family" because people that grow up in "traditional families" are sooo boring (or whatever negative adjective you want there). He was not talking about a female teacher that was pregnant coming to school and saying, "yes I am going to have a baby, now let's do some school work". There is a difference. The first is teaching "bigotted views", the second is acting professionally.

 

[uptownlivin90]

Let's clarify:
no morals:
stealing is okay
bullying is okay
bearing false witness, okay
murder, okay
coming and going as you please, okay
selling drugs in school, okay
sex at school, okay
guns at school, no we can't have that
blackmail, okay
kidnapping, okay

Teachers acting and dressing in a professional manner, ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Stealing- Against the Law.
Bullying- Against the Law (harrassment).
Bearing False Witness- Against the Law.
Murder- Against the Law.
Sex in public places- Against the Law.
Selling drugs- Against the Law.
Guns on government property- Against the Law.
blackmail- Against the Law.
Kidnapping- Against the Law.

Guess what?

Having a baby out of wedlock- Not against the Law.
Sodomy- Not against the Law.

Can you guess why?

Those ARE moral behaviors, you, sir, are the ones that suggested there should be no morals at school.
If the woman is not having the baby (out-of-wedlock) in the classroom or relating how she does not believe in the "traditional family" (not trying to imply she is not being inclusive of other family types, just against traditional), I don't really see an issue. If a teacher is homosexual, and does not flaunt it in the classroom, I don't see an issue.

Once again, please explain how acting in a professional manner is a bad thing?

No they are not. They are legal behaviors. I'm an extreme libertarian when it comes to social issues especially. What you are talking about isn't morality it's lifestyles. The children should be taught a respect for the law and should be taught the law itself. However the teachers have no right to teach children how to live their lives within the boundry of the law.

We should not be teaching children "traditional family values" in the school system, that's the parents jobs.

I was raised on personal family values. My mother taught me how to read using a Bible at age 3 and 4.

I still believe homosexuality is a sin.

I have sex outside of wedlock (even though I know I shouldn't) but I won't live with a woman outside of marriage out of respect for my mother (strange how southern folks are raised).

However, do I think public schools should be used to indoctrinate those values into students? No. Simply because we live in a society where constitutionally noone has the right to force their lifestyle on anyone else outside of following the law. I believe in the philosophy "to each his own". Which is why I stand for gun rights and against socialized health care.

I never said acting in a professional manner is a bad thing. No i don't think ANYBODY'S personal life should be discussed with little children. However, that's not what DeMint said, he said women with children out of wedlock and gays SHOULD NOT BE HIRED professional or not.

 

[Madeline]

I don't think they're doing it in front of the kids.

But if you want to let everyone else provide bad examples to our kids then so should the above be allowed to do so.

I swear you write these sort of posts just to afflict me, mudwhistle. I WANT gay teachers, just as I want black teachers and Muslim teachers and anyone else qualified to teach to do so. I want PUBLIC school students to know -- in PUBLIC we expect you to treat one another with respect and to treat the teachers with deference.

You wanna teach the Future Haters Of America to despise gays? Do so in Wednesday Night Bible Class or Saturday Morning Militia Training...not on the grounds of the schools I help pay for.

BTW, someone please tell me this fucking asswipe excuse for a senator is a Democrat?

Like I said before just because they aren't teaching in classrooms doesn't mean the subjects being taught are "Hating Gays 101".

Get real, mudwhistle. Even if it were legal to discriminate against qualified teachers because of sex or race or sexual orientation or marital status or religion or whatever else bugs you, having zero teachers around who resemble the students will have a negative effect on diversity and mutual respect.

The only people who should not teach are people who are unqualified to do so or who lack the background etc. to demonstrate they can be trusted alone with the students.

 

[rdean]

This has to be one of the stupidest posts I've read on here in awhile. Congrats on setting that bar so high, or would it be so low? Either way, congrats.

Based on your logic, we should have drunks, drug addicts, prostitutes teaching in public schools? Why do you say my post is stupid?
If you want "brain-washed" worker bees, then you give them role-models, not people that are "rebeling against the system". If you want the children to grow up not believing in the rule of law, and taking advantage of the system at every turn, then you give the students "alternative models".
If I am a parent, I do not want my tax dollars to support a person that does not respect my values by trying to push "their agenda" onto school students. It is like the guys that were using drugs and drinking that worked for Chrysler; it was unacceptable for them to do that while they were going to be working that afternoon. If you want to display your homosexual tendencies, or immoral living conditions, or your recreational drug use, don't teach school. If you want to represent a moral person that will be influencing young children, then teach school.

Yes...we shouldn't be able to discriminate against child-abusers, pedophiles, necrophiliacs, mass-murders, communists, nudists, sheep-fuckers, people that drool uncontrollably, retards, folks with Tourettes, cross-dressers.....etc, ether.

Or a woman who has been raped and Republicans want to force her to have the child and take care of it.

Those women are OK. They can be at school and unmarried and pregnant.