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

[fyrenza]

If we believe in God,

AND Believe Him?

We know that we're ALL sinners,

and the "degree" makes No Diff in the Big Scheme of Thangs.

We give others what He gave us:

LOVE,

CONSIDERATION,

and FREE CHOICE,

even if the choice is against all He told us was True...

THAT's His LIGHT shining through us, into the world.

 

[mudwhistle]

If we believe in God,

AND Believe Him?

We know that we're ALL sinners,

and the "degree" makes No Diff in the Big Scheme of Thangs.

We give others what He gave us:

LOVE,

CONSIDERATION,

and FREE CHOICE,

even if the choice is against all He told us was True...

THAT's His LIGHT shining through us, into the world.

Free choice...but not free abortions.

 

[Madeline]

mudwhistle wrote:

They've got warning signs on books and movies now if it contains lessons on morals and Christianity.

mudwhistle, are you in some sort of drug induced haze? WTF??? No one has changed the rating system for movies and video games and there still is none for books or music. Are you seriously suggesting there's a "Warning" label on "The Giving Tree" because generosity is "taught" by the book?

Do you think the Bible now comes in a plain brown wrapper?

 

[rdean]

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.

Legally, you can do a lot of those things, including committing murder. It is personal morals that infuence your behavior. In your case, you are borrowing your mother's.

I never suggested teaching "traditional family morals", I just said they should not be held up for ridicule by teachers that believe in "alternate lifestyles".

If you have a sexually promiscuous teacher bragging about their lifestyle, it does not belong in the classroom if they are hetero, homo, or animal. I think that was the context of DeMint's statement. He is not the best-spoken senator out there. I think he does care about the country and want the best for its' citizens.

I don't believe he does. He has blocked the presidential commission created to investigate BP from getting subpoena power at least 3 times that I'm aware of. The presidential committee can't compel BP to produce witnesses, testimony or provide documents. The house passed it over 400 to one. The senate won't pass it because of Jim De mint.

Basically, not only have Republicans apologized to BP because America wants them to clean up their mess, but they have blocked any investigation so they can say, "It was an accident". De mint is an odious man who does NOT have the best interests of America at heart. He squats on the Middle Class. The group that has suffered the most from the BP spill.

 

[fyrenza]

How we live,

what we do,

who we are,

and how we think

ARE His Light.

Morals? Please. Those are nothing more than Points of View.

UNTIL you can SEE the other side? Really see it?

You aren't Representing Him.

And until you KNOW Him?

You can't even BEGIN to try to speak for Him.

WE are His truth ~ not because of what we say,

but because of how we just basically ARE.

WHAT we do ~ that's Him.

HOW we handle the shit, based on His word ~ that's Him.

The things we try to share ~ the love that knows no boundaries, that will reach over, with a helping hand ~ that's Him.

We don't need to Force truth on folks.

They see it, or they don't.

All we have are our words, and our prayers that the words we spew forth will reflect what He is to folks who don't know Him, as yet.

 

[logical4u]

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?

What are you considering "morals?"

The idea of what is "moral" and/or "right" have changed, time and again,

as we come to grips with LIFE, and with EXACTLY what all Free Choice could encompass.

THAT's why muslim folks are still living in a past that the rest of us got over and kicked to the curb as the REPRESSION that it is.

For MY "morality?" I'd MUCH rather a woman that accidentally got pregnant would have the child than an abortion,

BUT I DON'T GET TO MAKE THE CHOICE FOR HER.

I HATE abortion. It's an abomination, the KILLING of unborn innocents.

BUT

I would no more send a desperate woman to a back alley "doctor" with a wire coat hanger than I would kill my own self.

How can you presume to KNOW what is right for EVERYONE,

AND be willing to FORCE them to do YOUR bidding?

You can't. No one on this earth can.

What you CAN do is to try to understand how shit happens, to EVERYONE,

and even when they don't want that for themselves, they find themselves in a position of having their backs against a wall and choosing the lesser of the two "evils,"

the FIRST of which is just being THEM and being in that sitch.

What are you talking about? Did you even read "I don't really see an issue" in the above quote from me?

I stated my opinion. I have no power to change laws. If I could vote for DeMint, I would.
I have asked how promoting an immoral lifestyle raises test scores; it went unanswered. I asked why so many people seem to object to professional behavior in the classroom. Some people don't like that question either.
Well tell me, how can having an openly homosexual teacher raise test scores more than the same quality teacher that is NOT openly homosexual? How can having a teacher that flaunts their immoral lifestyle raise test scores more than the same quality teacher that does not flaunt their lifestyle?

 

[logical4u]

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.

Legally, you can do a lot of those things, including committing murder. It is personal morals that infuence your behavior. In your case, you are borrowing your mother's.

I never suggested teaching "traditional family morals", I just said they should not be held up for ridicule by teachers that believe in "alternate lifestyles".

If you have a sexually promiscuous teacher bragging about their lifestyle, it does not belong in the classroom if they are hetero, homo, or animal. I think that was the context of DeMint's statement. He is not the best-spoken senator out there. I think he does care about the country and want the best for its' citizens.

I can completely agree to this statement.

I can't agree to what Senator DeMint said. His comments were clear. Don't hire unwed mothers and homos as teachers. That's a DANGEROUS statement.

If you flaunt your sexuality no matter what it is in front of children you are a pervert.

If he would have said don't hire perverts, I'd be fine with it. He didn't. So I have a problem with his statement.

I can respect that.

 

[logical4u]

Like I said, Republicans want to force women who have been raped to have the child. How can you take that position and be embarrassed by seeing a "pregnant, unwed mother"?

A pregnant, unmarried rape victim is still a pregnant unwed mother.

Another rumor. I think the main focus is not using Treasury funds to pay for it. I don't think anyone should consider taking the right a woman has to murder her own child in the womb away. I figure if there is a God he'll deal with her when she passes. If you can explain why the child has to die because his mother was raped then maybe we'll have a meeting of the minds. I suggest if it bothers her so much she can always give the kid up for adoption.

A woman is brutally raped and you want to force her to have the child of her rapist? This is one position Republicans and ethical Americans will never agree on.

Should her rapist get "visitation" rights? After all, he IS the father.

Their have been some studies that suggest if a woman has the child as the result of a rape, she recovers quicker than if she has an abortion (that would make two crimes, instead of one, holding an unborn child responsible for the father's actions). That said, I believe the abortion should be discouraged, not prohibited.

As for the "sperm donor", he should be killed. His behavior showed he has no respect for human life or dignity. To prevent him from doing the same crime to others, his right to life should be taken.

 

[mudwhistle]

mudwhistle wrote:

They've got warning signs on books and movies now if it contains lessons on morals and Christianity.

mudwhistle, are you in some sort of drug induced haze? WTF??? No one has changed the rating system for movies and video games and there still is none for books or music. Are you seriously suggesting there's a "Warning" label on "The Giving Tree" because generosity is "taught" by the book?

Do you think the Bible now comes in a plain brown wrapper?

Give em time.

I heard they were trying to give a PG-13 rating to Christian themed films.

Some people feel like they were tricked into reading a book. They want warning labels telling them the book is Christian themed so they can stay away.

Talk about hatred.....

Is It Deceptive to Not Label a Christian Book “Christian”?

by Mike Duran · 21 comments

So I’m on record about being suspicious of Amazon reviews. But the disparity of reviews concerning James Rubart’s new book Rooms, takes the issue to another level. Apparently, Amazon offered a free download of the book without indicating it was a” Christian” book and many readers felt deceived. Which is why the reviews (as you can see below) are either 5 star or 1 star, with little middle ground. Why is this? And do the objectors have a point?

I have heard many good things from trustworthy reviewers about Rubart’s book. I haven’t read it, so I can’t comment on the story itself. Still, I find the disparity of opinions fascinating. Is this book that polarizing? Or do the 1-star reviewers have a genuine reason to be pissed off? Here’s a sampling of some of their points:

* New Kindle Reader — “Suckered again, I hate being manipulated into reading pseudo-Christian material. If I want to read this type of genre I will choose to do so. Amazon, don’t sucker me in with a freebie like this and not allow me at least to have an idea of it’s content.”
* Richard Tracey – “…I am getting aggravated with Amazon for not identifying Christian books at the outset. I respect Christians and Christianity but I am not a Christian. I don’t like ordering a book only to find that I am being preached too.”
* Lex — “Is there no end to so-called Christian witnessing? The write up for this book was intriguing. A thriller. A strange house. Not a single word about God or religion. By chapter three it became obvious, by chapter six, I was running to the toilet to throw-up! No. It is after all the christian way.”
* Em Librarian — “…please please please, Amazon, start labeling free kindle books as Christian Fiction! Stop trying to convert me!”
* Betty Cravens — “I am not into Christian literature and had I known this book fell into that genre I would not have downloaded it. Good thing it was a freebee or I would be mad.”
* A Customer — “Why must I waste hours of my time on a book that clearly has ulterior motives. If it’s Christian literature- JUST SAY SO!”
Is It Deceptive to Not Label a Christian Book “Christian”?

 

[uptownlivin90]

Another rumor. I think the main focus is not using Treasury funds to pay for it. I don't think anyone should consider taking the right a woman has to murder her own child in the womb away. I figure if there is a God he'll deal with her when she passes. If you can explain why the child has to die because his mother was raped then maybe we'll have a meeting of the minds. I suggest if it bothers her so much she can always give the kid up for adoption.

A woman is brutally raped and you want to force her to have the child of her rapist? This is one position Republicans and ethical Americans will never agree on.

Should her rapist get "visitation" rights? After all, he IS the father.

Their have been some studies that suggest if a woman has the child as the result of a rape, she recovers quicker than if she has an abortion (that would make two crimes, instead of one, holding an unborn child responsible for the father's actions). That said, I believe the abortion should be discouraged, not prohibited.

As for the "sperm donor", he should be killed. His behavior showed he has no respect for human life or dignity. To prevent him from doing the same crime to others, his right to life should be taken.

Never heard of that study. Regardless it's the woman's choice, entirely.

Slight disagreement with the emboldened statement, though. He should be killed unless the woman has the child... in that case he should be kept alive but forced to a life of hard labor paid minimum wage and his whole pay-check should go to the mother.

 

[fyrenza]

Free choice...but not free abortions.

Okay.

Send THOSE ladies, who are too poor to afford such, to ME, who values THEIR lives, and which, with more sadness than you could ever know, would "donate" to THEIR mental/physical well-being, AND to THEIR right to a Freedom of Choice.

I can't make decisions for others;

what I CAN do is reach out, in lovingkindness, to hold them.

If that's My Bad?

I'll stand up and hear about it, before I'm forgiven for my stupidity.

But I'll be able to say, the mistakes I made?

I made, in lovingkindness,

NOT is some sort of righteous anger.

 

[rdean]

Another rumor. I think the main focus is not using Treasury funds to pay for it. I don't think anyone should consider taking the right a woman has to murder her own child in the womb away. I figure if there is a God he'll deal with her when she passes. If you can explain why the child has to die because his mother was raped then maybe we'll have a meeting of the minds. I suggest if it bothers her so much she can always give the kid up for adoption.

A woman is brutally raped and you want to force her to have the child of her rapist? This is one position Republicans and ethical Americans will never agree on.

Should her rapist get "visitation" rights? After all, he IS the father.

Not of the SOB is locked up.

And most of the time when a kid is adopted they don't allow the kid to know their real parents and the parents aren't allowed to see the kids.

Most of the time?

We live in a different reality. One where I'm concerned with the welfare of a full grown woman. In your universe, you are only concerned with a clump of cells. Who cares what happens to the woman. Besides, you only have to get it born. After that? Who cares? The jobs done.

 

[Madeline]

No, they just have to pick another profession. They get the awesome responsability of raising a child by herself with a big red letter R on her forehead working in a factory somewhere there's no camera.

We hide our "immoral" women here in America.

If she was going to be a good teacher, she should pick another profession. Many teachers put in 14 hours a day for their job. It would leave very little time to be a mom.

Believe me in this economy if you spent money to go to school to be a teacher no matter what happens your going to be a teacher especially if you already have a job at this time.

Working in any profession with children is hard. Believe me I've watched it all my life.

But you gotta do what you gotta do. It shows nothing to me but strength and resolve.

Real America: struggling, but praise be to God, getting by.

There are several teachers on this board, and I'd bet they are all parents. I cannot wait for one of them to see where logical4u believes they should have forfeited the right to have children once they decided on a teaching career.

Holy fuck this might just be the stupidiest shit ever written on here...it should certainly be nominated for some sort of prize. You are a credit to your race, logical4u, assuming that race is artic flightless birds.

 

[Kalam]

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.

It's South Carolina man. The majority of folks here probably agree with him.

Considering the shit quality of most of our public school systems, you'd think we'd be less picky about the moral character of public school teachers. The quality of the actual teaching should be the main concern at this point.

Nothing like the "Corridor of Shame" should ever exist in a first-world society.

 

[Madeline]

mudwhistle wrote:

They've got warning signs on books and movies now if it contains lessons on morals and Christianity.

mudwhistle, are you in some sort of drug induced haze? WTF??? No one has changed the rating system for movies and video games and there still is none for books or music. Are you seriously suggesting there's a "Warning" label on "The Giving Tree" because generosity is "taught" by the book?

Do you think the Bible now comes in a plain brown wrapper?

Give em time.

I heard they were trying to give a PG-13 rating to Christian themed films.

Some people feel like they were tricked into reading a book. They want warning labels telling them the book is Christian themed so they can stay away.

Talk about hatred.....

Is It Deceptive to Not Label a Christian Book “Christian”?

by Mike Duran · 21 comments

So I’m on record about being suspicious of Amazon reviews. But the disparity of reviews concerning James Rubart’s new book Rooms, takes the issue to another level. Apparently, Amazon offered a free download of the book without indicating it was a” Christian” book and many readers felt deceived. Which is why the reviews (as you can see below) are either 5 star or 1 star, with little middle ground. Why is this? And do the objectors have a point?

I have heard many good things from trustworthy reviewers about Rubart’s book. I haven’t read it, so I can’t comment on the story itself. Still, I find the disparity of opinions fascinating. Is this book that polarizing? Or do the 1-star reviewers have a genuine reason to be pissed off? Here’s a sampling of some of their points:

* New Kindle Reader — “Suckered again, I hate being manipulated into reading pseudo-Christian material. If I want to read this type of genre I will choose to do so. Amazon, don’t sucker me in with a freebie like this and not allow me at least to have an idea of it’s content.”
* Richard Tracey – “…I am getting aggravated with Amazon for not identifying Christian books at the outset. I respect Christians and Christianity but I am not a Christian. I don’t like ordering a book only to find that I am being preached too.”
* Lex — “Is there no end to so-called Christian witnessing? The write up for this book was intriguing. A thriller. A strange house. Not a single word about God or religion. By chapter three it became obvious, by chapter six, I was running to the toilet to throw-up! No. It is after all the christian way.”
* Em Librarian — “…please please please, Amazon, start labeling free kindle books as Christian Fiction! Stop trying to convert me!”
* Betty Cravens — “I am not into Christian literature and had I known this book fell into that genre I would not have downloaded it. Good thing it was a freebee or I would be mad.”
* A Customer — “Why must I waste hours of my time on a book that clearly has ulterior motives. If it’s Christian literature- JUST SAY SO!”
Is It Deceptive to Not Label a Christian Book “Christian”?

O for God's sake....whiney atheists! WTF???

We are turning into a nation of people who can never be five minutes without our pacifiers. I'm ashamed of this crapola.

 

[fyrenza]

Meh

Those who KNOW God, come from THAT.

We don't HAVE to agree;

we, more times than not, tell ourselves that we CANNOT sit in judgment

over ANYTHING, other that our own selves.

We make our decisions, based on who we are, IN HIM.

Sometimes, it's not exactly what WE want, but we trust in Him,

and we KNOW that whatever happens?

HE WILL handle it, for the BEST.

It's easy to say, for us americans, but i've lived in countries where everyone has to wEnder wtf God IS, for them.

I don't know. I can't say. As shitty as it is, i just thank Him that i'm HERE, now.

Don't make me have to cry like this,

not today.

Not the day He gave me this life.

Please?

 

[fyrenza]

Yes, Yes.

THAT wasn't fair, at all.

I'll just get out for a bit, eh?

Yeah.

 

[fyrenza]

There are several teachers on this board, and I'd bet they are all parents. I cannot wait for one of them to see where logical4u believes they should have forfeited the right to have children once they decided on a teaching career.

Holy fuck this might just be the stupidiest shit ever written on here...it should certainly be nominated for some sort of prize. You are a credit to your race, logical4u, assuming that race is artic flightless birds.

it's just another POV, though.

And they think it's something REAL, telling folks the truth about it.

And because it IS the truth?

They want to MAKE folks see it.

Can't fault that, either.

That's love, as much as my POV, as stated, is.

 

[fyrenza]

But THIS:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FddRcJwlT4]YouTube - flightless bird, american mouth (Twilight Soundtrack) w lyrics[/ame]

You reminded me of this.

I don't understand all of it, and perhaps never will;

but it resonates within my spirit.

 

[Political Junky]

It's South Carolina man. The majority of folks here probably agree with him.

That would be the scariest thing about his statements.

DeMint doesn't give a shit. He's selling it to his constituents who eat that up.
Never mind that their governor was screwing a woman in Argentina.