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

[fyrenza]

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.

If you're FUCKABLE?

You are fucked.

'nuf said.

 

[Kalam]

Fyrenza, I stepped out to smoke a blunt and now your posts make perfect sense to me.

 

[mudwhistle]

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.

The same people will say it's okay for our kids to be reading books like "My two Dads".

I figure it this way.....if the kid doesn't know it exists how are they gonna learn to hate it in the classroom?

In my home town there are next to no blacks. We had to travel to other cities to bump into them. By my senior year in high school we had two in my school. One boy and one girl. They never dated. Everybody knew them and said hello to them in the hallways. They were both somebody that just about everyone was friends with. Because of an early childhood where I was not living around blacks I didn't develop any prejudices towards them. I had no reason to. I believe the same goes for Gays. Kids don't know it's wrong unless somebody teaches them it is. And that somebody is usually their parents.

When I visited Florida racism was all over the place. I tried to take my nephew to a R rated movie and because I was white and he was black they wouldn't believe I was his uncle. If he stood outside the movie theater waiting for a ride they'd call the cops. In Florida kids of different races are constantly bumping heads.

Kids learn from their parents more then anything. If their parent is prejudice they tend to be so themselves. But often times they're the opposite. My cousin's father was a member of the John Birch Society....but she married a Black guy. That went over like a fart in a spacesuit.

My point is I never developed prejudice in my early years. I just didn't know about all of these things. Living among Gays, Blacks, Hispanics, whatever, just someone who's different in your early years tends to cause conflict, and the younger you are when it starts tends to imprint it deeper in you psyche. It makes no sense to teach hatred to kids...because it happens anyway. It's not just because of the kids developing these attitudes but they see their parents and use them as examples.

I figure waiting to expose them to it later in life helps them handle it better and make better decisions about it. I wish we could all just get along and live together...but there's little chance of that. I'm not for segregation but I'm also not rushing to expose kids to the world so quickly. Let them have childhoods without all of the muck of the real world. Why stress them out so young?

 

[Madeline]

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.....

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.

The same people will say it's okay for our kids to be reading books like "My two Dads".

I figure it this way.....if the kid doesn't know it exists how are they gonna learn to hate it in the classroom?

In my home town there are next to no blacks. We had to travel to other cities to bump into them. By my senior year in high school we had two in my school. One boy and one girl. They never dated. Everybody knew them and said hello to them in the hallways. They were both somebody that just about everyone was friends with. Because of an early childhood where I was not living around blacks I didn't develop any prejudices towards them. I had no reason to. I believe the same goes for Gays. Kids don't know it's wrong unless somebody teaches them it is. And that somebody is usually their parents.

When I visited Florida racism was all over the place. I tried to take my nephew to a R rated movie and because I was white and he was black they wouldn't believe I was his uncle. If he stood outside the movie theater waiting for a ride they'd call the cops. In Florida kids of different races are constantly bumping heads.

Kids learn from their parents more then anything. If their parent is prejudice they tend to be so themselves. But often times they're the opposite. My cousin's father was a member of the John Birch Society....but she married a Black guy. That went over like a fart in a spacesuit.

My point is I never developed prejudice in my early years. I just didn't know about all of these things. Living among Gays, Blacks, Hispanics, whatever, just someone who's different in your early years tends to cause conflict, and the younger you are when it starts tends to imprint it deeper in you psyche. It makes no sense to teach hatred to kids...because it happens anyway. It's not just because of the kids developing these attitudes but they see their parents and use them as examples.

I figure waiting to expose them to it later in life helps them handle it better and make better decisions about it. I wish we could all just get along and live together...but there's little chance of that. I'm not for segregation but I'm also not rushing to expose kids to the world so quickly. Let them have childhoods without all of the muck of the real world. Why stress them out so young?

mudwhistle, trust me, you had gays and lesbians and bisexuals and all the rest of the messy sexual orientations among the people in your small Walt Whitman sampler of a town...they just knew to stay in the closet. Because they feared not being accepted.

No one should have to live in fear in the US because of who and how they love, as long as their conduct is not illegal.

 

[mudwhistle]

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.

The same people will say it's okay for our kids to be reading books like "My two Dads".

I figure it this way.....if the kid doesn't know it exists how are they gonna learn to hate it in the classroom?

In my home town there are next to no blacks. We had to travel to other cities to bump into them. By my senior year in high school we had two in my school. One boy and one girl. They never dated. Everybody knew them and said hello to them in the hallways. They were both somebody that just about everyone was friends with. Because of an early childhood where I was not living around blacks I didn't develop any prejudices towards them. I had no reason to. I believe the same goes for Gays. Kids don't know it's wrong unless somebody teaches them it is. And that somebody is usually their parents.

When I visited Florida racism was all over the place. I tried to take my nephew to a R rated movie and because I was white and he was black they wouldn't believe I was his uncle. If he stood outside the movie theater waiting for a ride they'd call the cops. In Florida kids of different races are constantly bumping heads.

Kids learn from their parents more then anything. If their parent is prejudice they tend to be so themselves. But often times they're the opposite. My cousin's father was a member of the John Birch Society....but she married a Black guy. That went over like a fart in a spacesuit.

My point is I never developed prejudice in my early years. I just didn't know about all of these things. Living among Gays, Blacks, Hispanics, whatever, just someone who's different in your early years tends to cause conflict, and the younger you are when it starts tends to imprint it deeper in you psyche. It makes no sense to teach hatred to kids...because it happens anyway. It's not just because of the kids developing these attitudes but they see their parents and use them as examples.

I figure waiting to expose them to it later in life helps them handle it better and make better decisions about it. I wish we could all just get along and live together...but there's little chance of that. I'm not for segregation but I'm also not rushing to expose kids to the world so quickly. Let them have childhoods without all of the muck of the real world. Why stress them out so young?

mudwhistle, trust me, you had gays and lesbians and bisexuals and all the rest of the messy sexual orientations among the people in your small Walt Whitman sampler of a town...they just knew to stay in the closet. Because they feared not being accepted.

No one should have to live in fear in the US because of who and how they love, as long as their conduct is not illegal.

So how do you explain my lack of prejudice against Gays? I didn't find out about that stuff till I was in my late teens. I didn't hear about it much at all till I joined the military.

I don't want to keep Gays out of the classroom but I'm also not gonna make sure there is equal representation by Gays and heteros ether.

 

[Madeline]

mudwhistle wrote:

So how do you explain my lack of prejudice against Gays? I didn't find out about that stuff till I was in my late teens. I didn't hear about it much at all till I joined the military.

I don't want to keep Gays out of the classroom but I'm also not gonna make sure there is equal representation by Gays and heteros ether.

I explain it this way. You were older when you finally got "the news" and you have a good heart. Hate just doesn't suit you; it is not your normal condition. But across time and across Planet Earth, about 10% of all adults are not heterosexual, mudwhistle. You really think there were no GLBT people in Mayberry RFD?

BTW, no one is suggesting we require half of all new teaching positions be filled by GLBT people...where do you get these notions, dahlin'?

 

[bodecea]

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.

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.

You think we don't?

 

[bodecea]

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.

Post #20

 

[random3434]

Some of you folks crack me up.

I teach with a handful of teachers that are gay, they are wonderful teachers and the students don't know they are gay, just like they don't know what the single teachers do in their private life.
It's not like the teachers are going to come into class Monday morning and share with their students,

"Hey, I got so buzzed Saturday night! I made out with another girl and then smoked a little one hit, then I had sex with my boyfriend. Now, get out you math book and turn to page 37."




Calm down people.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

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.

Post #20

You just eliminated most of the left-wingers on this board.

 

[mudwhistle]

mudwhistle wrote:

So how do you explain my lack of prejudice against Gays? I didn't find out about that stuff till I was in my late teens. I didn't hear about it much at all till I joined the military.

I don't want to keep Gays out of the classroom but I'm also not gonna make sure there is equal representation by Gays and heteros ether.

I explain it this way. You were older when you finally got "the news" and you have a good heart. Hate just doesn't suit you; it is not your normal condition. But across time and across Planet Earth, about 10% of all adults are not heterosexual, mudwhistle. You really think there were no GLBT people in Mayberry RFD?

BTW, no one is suggesting we require half of all new teaching positions be filled by GLBT people...where do you get these notions, dahlin'?

The notion comes from this diversity requirement I keep seeing.

I know now that it existed but I also know that when I went to a public restroom when I was a kid I didn't have to worry about gazers. It just never happened. I go into the service and spent an evening in downtown San Diego and my first visit to a public restroom gave me an education on it.

 

[California Girl]

Some of you folks crack me up.

I teach with a handful of teachers that are gay, they are wonderful teachers and the students don't know they are gay, just like they don't know what the single teachers do in their private life.
It's not like the teachers are going to come into class Monday morning and share with their students,

"Hey, I got so buzzed Saturday night! I made out with another girl and then smoked a little one hit, then I had sex with my boyfriend. Now, get out you math book and turn to page 37."




Calm down people.

I kind of figure that some gays are great teachers, some are average and some shouldn't be teaching - not because they are gay but because they are crap teachers. Teaching, like any other profession, has its good, its adequate and its bad.

I don't care if a teacher is gay or whatever.... IF they are a decent teacher. In order to improve standards, we need to sort out a whole range of issues - one of which is to get rid of the crap teachers.... the others would be to do with crap parents and, deal with the kids.

 

[Madeline]

mudwhistle wrote:

So how do you explain my lack of prejudice against Gays? I didn't find out about that stuff till I was in my late teens. I didn't hear about it much at all till I joined the military.

I don't want to keep Gays out of the classroom but I'm also not gonna make sure there is equal representation by Gays and heteros ether.

I explain it this way. You were older when you finally got "the news" and you have a good heart. Hate just doesn't suit you; it is not your normal condition. But across time and across Planet Earth, about 10% of all adults are not heterosexual, mudwhistle. You really think there were no GLBT people in Mayberry RFD?

BTW, no one is suggesting we require half of all new teaching positions be filled by GLBT people...where do you get these notions, dahlin'?

The notion comes from this diversity requirement I keep seeing.

I know now that it existed but I also know that when I went to a public restroom when I was a kid I didn't have to worry about gazers. It just never happened. I go into the service and spent an evening in downtown San Diego and my first visit to a public restroom gave me an education on it.

Mebbe that was because you peed with little kids when you were a little kid, and you peed with other adults when you became an adult?

Just guessing here....

 

[FireGod]

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.

Really? Like some evangelical teachers can't resist trying to teach about God in my son's class room? True Story

 

[mudwhistle]

Some of you folks crack me up.

I teach with a handful of teachers that are gay, they are wonderful teachers and the students don't know they are gay, just like they don't know what the single teachers do in their private life.
It's not like the teachers are going to come into class Monday morning and share with their students,

"Hey, I got so buzzed Saturday night! I made out with another girl and then smoked a little one hit, then I had sex with my boyfriend. Now, get out you math book and turn to page 37."




Calm down people.

You just proved my point. Telling kids about your sex-life is going over the line. It doesn't matter what it is. Kids don't need to be taught about that sort of thing regardless how much the Gay-rights community wants it.

Another thing to take into consideration. The unwed mothers issue. How do you explain to kids when you start showing? They're gonna ask. Kids are curious.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Some of you folks crack me up.

I teach with a handful of teachers that are gay, they are wonderful teachers and the students don't know they are gay, just like they don't know what the single teachers do in their private life.
It's not like the teachers are going to come into class Monday morning and share with their students,

"Hey, I got so buzzed Saturday night! I made out with another girl and then smoked a little one hit, then I had sex with my boyfriend. Now, get out you math book and turn to page 37."




Calm down people.

I would have probably paid more attention in High School if they DID start out the lessons that way...

 

[Madeline]

Some of you folks crack me up.

I teach with a handful of teachers that are gay, they are wonderful teachers and the students don't know they are gay, just like they don't know what the single teachers do in their private life.
It's not like the teachers are going to come into class Monday morning and share with their students,

"Hey, I got so buzzed Saturday night! I made out with another girl and then smoked a little one hit, then I had sex with my boyfriend. Now, get out you math book and turn to page 37."




Calm down people.

You just proved my point. Telling kids about your sex-life is going over the line. It doesn't matter what it is. Kids don't need to be taught about that sort of thing regardless how much the Gay-rights community wants it.

Another thing to take into consideration. The unwed mothers issue. How do you explain to kids when you start showing? They're gonna ask. Kids are curious.

Mebbe we could start storing unwed moms in Mammoth Cave, along with their kiddies?

Is the calendar at your house reading 1951, mudwhistle? Did you think "Pleasantville" was a documentary?

 

[FireGod]

mudwhistle wrote:

So how do you explain my lack of prejudice against Gays? I didn't find out about that stuff till I was in my late teens. I didn't hear about it much at all till I joined the military.

I don't want to keep Gays out of the classroom but I'm also not gonna make sure there is equal representation by Gays and heteros ether.

I explain it this way. You were older when you finally got "the news" and you have a good heart. Hate just doesn't suit you; it is not your normal condition. But across time and across Planet Earth, about 10% of all adults are not heterosexual, mudwhistle. You really think there were no GLBT people in Mayberry RFD?

BTW, no one is suggesting we require half of all new teaching positions be filled by GLBT people...where do you get these notions, dahlin'?

The notion comes from this diversity requirement I keep seeing.

I know now that it existed but I also know that when I went to a public restroom when I was a kid I didn't have to worry about gazers. It just never happened. I go into the service and spent an evening in downtown San Diego and my first visit to a public restroom gave me an education on it.

I am thinking that the root of the problem is that fear is rampant among us. We tend to fear that which we do not know. You seem to be the exception to that rule. The allowing of different types of people to teach would eliminate the fear or at least reduce it in that the exposure it self would provide a bit of inoculation to that which is feared. Pregnancy is not to be feared nor is homosexuality, THEY ARE FACTS OF LIFE plain and simple. if the child has a problem with it then the parents have the duty of teaching the kidlets about those things. The protection of the children often has negative longer lasting consequences than an earlier exposure. Different people with different values do exist, unless we are willing to eliminate everyone how does not think like you or dress like you or looks like you or have the same values as you, wouldn't the prudent path be to educate? Wouldn't the prudent path be to discuss and foster critical thinking in the spawn? A common mistake in parenting is the use of the phrase "because I said so".

 

[NYcarbineer]

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.

'Some studies'?

Did these imaginary studies include women who were forced by law to carry a rape pregnancy to term?

 

[Ravi]

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.

Is he okay with unmarried men that sleep with their girlfriends? How about unmarried fathers?