Pro-Homosexual Booklet to Be Distributed to All 16,000 US School Districts

It's perfectly fine with me if you don't like me, trust me, or respect my viewpoints. What you don't get to do; is tell me I cannot have or express my views, the same as you do.

I never remotely suggested that you cannot have or express your views. I'm stating quite plainly that you don't have any special right to demand that your views be incorporated into public school curriculum. You seem to like invoking the KKK so much, they have a right to their views too. Doesn't mean I think their views need to be taught to children.

I do not believe the ends justify the means, BTW. Clearly, your own interpretation of my views is more important to you than what I actually believe or espouse.

Then you should consider what you project.

As long as our citizenry includes gay and lesbian youth and gay and lesbian children, I do have the right to express my opinion that including the topic of homosexuality in sex education classes is appropriate.

These tolerant views do need to be taught to children, so that all children grow up to be happy and healthy adults.
 
Last edited:
As long as our citizenry includes gay and lesbian youth and gay and lesbian children, I do have the right to express my opinion that including the topic of homosexuality in sex education classes is appropriate.

You have the right regardless of the whole citizenry thing. And if I understand you correctly I agree, let the majority decide what should be in the school curriculum.
 
Some pretend to not hate gays, so what? As an openly lesbian woman, I know who does and does not have tolerant attitudes toward lesbians and gay.

What?

I think it's really presumptuous when people talk about their "gaydar" going off like they were given some magical ability to know someone just from observing them. I think you're being equally presumptuous with your statement.

So why don't you go ahead and tell everyone your opinion of me. Am I tolerant of gays? If not, can you give a small explanation?
 
I dont think this should be allowed.
Im not against gays/lesbians...but if they want rights...they need to be treated just like other people...Theres no reason for them to write a book on this. its stupid and it will just bring a negative outlook on the gay community from parents that dont want there children reading this.

why would there be anything wrong with telling kids that homosexuality isn't an aberration?

unless of course you want to tell your kids it is....

in which case, no one really has to be tolerant of your hatred.

BTW, word to the wise... charlie bass is a raging homophobe who is obsessed with gay sexuality. A closet case if I've ever seen one. He looks for rabid right trash so he can pretend he has a choice about his sexuality.

BTW, since you think gays and lesbians should be treated just like other people, can I assume you're not opposed to gay marriage?

Why do you want to sexualize children? I don't teach my daughter about sexual behavior. Until she hits puberty it's strictly on a need to know basis for my kids. I'll answer specific questions, and when they are capable of getting pregnant (or getting somebody else pregnant), they get to have a 3 hour discussion about sexuality, it's implications, the responsibility that goes with it, how it works, when it's appropriate.

And what is expected of them if they get pregnant or get somebody pregnant.

As far as teaching kids that it's A-OK to be contemplating homosexuality that's bullshit and it's just more rampant sexualization of children by the left.
 
This applies to jillian especially, and all those liberals who accuse people of hatred for not supporting militant homosexual activism:

Does Opposing "Gay Rights" = "Hating Gays?"


"Surely in a civilized society people can disagree politically without disagreeing hatefully. If not, the logical contrary to gay militants' insistence that all opponents to their agenda "hate gays" must be true: that "gay rights" advocates all hate their political opponents (a conclusion which has perhaps more evidence to support it than gay extremists' name- callings).

Calling names or merely attributing evil motives to opponents cannot establish -- or discredit-- truth. The Greek roots of the word homophobia mean "fear of men." Responsible opposition to granting protected class status on grounds of "sexual orientation" has nothing to do with fear or hatred of male or female genders, nor fear of "gayness." Why should we in any way fear people whose preoccupation with the sole, nebulous attribute of "sexual orientation" is so obsessive that it drives them to make only irrational claims, on none but specious grounds? How can we hate people whose identity is so fragile, and so totally defined by sexuality, that they are obviously terrified at what they imagine to be the slightest threat to its unbridled expression? Attributing negative characteristics to others without proof is the essence of bigotry. We have offered no proof of either hatred or bigotry toward gays. We think it is clear on which side of this issue the real bigotry lies."
 
It's perfectly fine with me if you don't like me, trust me, or respect my viewpoints. What you don't get to do; is tell me I cannot have or express my views, the same as you do.

I never remotely suggested that you cannot have or express your views. I'm stating quite plainly that you don't have any special right to demand that your views be incorporated into public school curriculum. You seem to like invoking the KKK so much, they have a right to their views too. Doesn't mean I think their views need to be taught to children.

I do not believe the ends justify the means, BTW. Clearly, your own interpretation of my views is more important to you than what I actually believe or espouse.

Then you should consider what you project.

As long as our citizenry includes gay and lesbian youth and gay and lesbian children, I do have the right to express my opinion that including the topic of homosexuality in sex education classes is appropriate.

These tolerant views do need to be taught to children, so that all children grow up to be happy and healthy adults.

Bullshit. School is not for providing our children with anything except an education. To take the religion of homosexuality and force it upon children of families who don't support the lifestyle and don't want their children exposed to it is wrong and perverted.

You can teach kids anything you like at home. But school is not where I want my kids to be programed into sexual automatons at an early age. I don't want them to consider themselves as sexual creatures, I certainly don't want them to be taught that it's ok to act on sexual impulses or "explore" their sexuality. They are not equipped to handle these things, and, as I've said over and over, it's just more of the homosexual and progressive movement to sexualize children and pervert the family. You can't convince parents to leave church and to vote for homosexual marriage, so you will force their children..who are REQUIRED BY LAW TO ATTEND SCHOOL, to listen to your mantra about how wonderful homosexuality is, and how they should go ahead and try it if they like.

Maybe it's time to talk about the real meaning of separation of church and state again. This is the same thing. The government has no business superceding the beliefs of Americans by teaching children crap that is contrary to the beliefs of those parents, and which undermines their authority with their own children.

Oh, and creates a whole new order of beautiful young things for perverts to play with.
 
Some pretend to not hate gays, so what? As an openly lesbian woman, I know who does and does not have tolerant attitudes toward lesbians and gay.

What?

I think it's really presumptuous when people talk about their "gaydar" going off like they were given some magical ability to know someone just from observing them. I think you're being equally presumptuous with your statement.

So why don't you go ahead and tell everyone your opinion of me. Am I tolerant of gays? If not, can you give a small explanation?

I'd say you're tolerant but that you don't condone. Sky doesn't understand the difference.
 
I dont think this should be allowed.
Im not against gays/lesbians...but if they want rights...they need to be treated just like other people...Theres no reason for them to write a book on this. its stupid and it will just bring a negative outlook on the gay community from parents that dont want there children reading this.

why would there be anything wrong with telling kids that homosexuality isn't an aberration?

unless of course you want to tell your kids it is....

in which case, no one really has to be tolerant of your hatred.

BTW, word to the wise... charlie bass is a raging homophobe who is obsessed with gay sexuality. A closet case if I've ever seen one. He looks for rabid right trash so he can pretend he has a choice about his sexuality.

BTW, since you think gays and lesbians should be treated just like other people, can I assume you're not opposed to gay marriage?

Why do you want to sexualize children? I don't teach my daughter about sexual behavior. Until she hits puberty it's strictly on a need to know basis for my kids. I'll answer specific questions, and when they are capable of getting pregnant (or getting somebody else pregnant), they get to have a 3 hour discussion about sexuality, it's implications, the responsibility that goes with it, how it works, when it's appropriate.

And what is expected of them if they get pregnant or get somebody pregnant.

As far as teaching kids that it's A-OK to be contemplating homosexuality that's bullshit and it's just more rampant sexualization of children by the left.


Liberals and militant homosexual activists go hand and hand. This also exposes the hypocrisy of liberals, they want prayer in schools to be banned but want gay activists material to be taught in schools, thus the rights of Christians are trampled on but homosexual militant activism is being forced down childrens mouths, thats pure hypocrisy.
 
Regarding Sky in previous post....that is in no way surprising.
Neither does she understand the irony in hating the Pledge of Allegience and wanting the word God removed from it, despite the fact that it is an always has been a voluntary activity, but thinking it's okay to indoctrinate young children into unhealthy, unsafe, and psychologically disturbing sexual activity against the wishes of their parents.

See, Sky's claim is that she's "forced" to use the word God in the Pledge (which is of course a lie). But she apparently doesn't understand that forcing children to read pornography isn't an act of tolerance but of exploitation.
 
It's perfectly fine with me if you don't like me, trust me, or respect my viewpoints. What you don't get to do; is tell me I cannot have or express my views, the same as you do.

I never remotely suggested that you cannot have or express your views. I'm stating quite plainly that you don't have any special right to demand that your views be incorporated into public school curriculum. You seem to like invoking the KKK so much, they have a right to their views too. Doesn't mean I think their views need to be taught to children.

I do not believe the ends justify the means, BTW. Clearly, your own interpretation of my views is more important to you than what I actually believe or espouse.

Then you should consider what you project.

As long as our citizenry includes gay and lesbian youth and gay and lesbian children, I do have the right to express my opinion that including the topic of homosexuality in sex education classes is appropriate.

These tolerant views do need to be taught to children, so that all children grow up to be happy and healthy adults.
Gay and lesbian children!!!

That is sick!! :eek:

Here is what I don't get???

Most homos don't have children.

Yet they want to tell us parents all about what we need to teach our kids. :cuckoo:

Listen faggots!!

Butt out!!! We don't need your help in any way, shape, or form!!! :evil:
 
Not only that...children AREN'T SEXUAL CREATURES. We shouldn't be telling them they're gay or lesbian anything or, or that they should be considering it because they SHOULDN'T BE FUCKING CONSIDERING SEX. We should be teaching them to be less impulsive, not more impulsive, when it comes to sex, and to wait until they are adult before making life-changing decisions regarding sex.

It's called child sexual abuse when a dirty old man takes a boy aside and flashes him, or tells him the joys of being whacked off.

But apparently if it's done in the school, it's just fine and dandy! Why is the left so enamored of this? Are you honestly all closet child molesters?
 
Last edited:
More extreme gay activism

Telling kids homosexuality 'innate' challenged

Telling kids homosexuality 'innate' challenged Court asked to overturn curriculum deemed inaccurate, unsafe


Public school district board's decision to teach homosexuality is innate and anal sex is just an alternative will be challenged in court after officials in Maryland refused to address concerns raised by parents. Officials with the Thomas More Law Center told WND the issues are too important to ignore. The curriculum, developed in-house by the Montgomery County Board of Education, not only is inaccurate, but it could expose children to life-threatening diseases by failing to provide sufficient warnings about alternative sexual behaviors, according to Edward L. White III, trial counsel with the Law Center who is handling the case. "This curriculum is full of factual inaccuracies and runs counter to sound educational policy," he said. "It should not be taught in the public school." White said parents also should be alarmed by the teaching of "sexual variations." "The students are introduced to anal sex, which has a much higher risk rate of [various] infections," he said. "It's endangering the lives of students."
 
Do you think it is impossible to think homosexuality is wrong (aberrant) and not hate gays?

Of course not. That would be the view of the endangered species known as the non-hypocritical Christian. Unlike others who call themselves Christian, these elusive creatures actually follow what Jesus taught and hate the sin instead of the sinner. They would still be wrong, just less hypocritical than the “Christians” who pull gays behind their trucks. Making an argument based upon somebody being a hater is indeed an ad hominem fallacy many impassioned rights advocates fall into. But their use of a fallacy doesn’t make hating homosexuality any less stupid.

I have a great deal of trouble in seeing the other side because my moral system is very simple. Anything that hurts another person without their consent is immoral; anything that hurts nobody against their consent is fine. This leaves some ambiguity as you have to define both “harm” and “consent."

Being against homosexuality as immoral seems almost as bad to me as hating people and treating them differently due to ethnicity.

Thank you for allowing me that privilege Sky Dancer :eusa_angel:

I teach all my children that homosexuality is perverted and nasty, and that homosexuals are mentally ill degenerates.
That's what I teach my children about Islam. :cool:
I support any parent teaching their children whatever belief system they follow.

Judging by the existence of child protective services and the raid on the FLDS ranch, my guess is most people would not agree...

Note the date of the fishman's post: 2/21/2008. It's a year old. I haven't seen anything on this in the schools, has anyone else?

It's old news AND it's about Canadian schools.

Canada? Isn't that like that land of Oz? Well then it couldn't possibly have any relevant to the real world. :razz:

Thanks to people like you.

You claim it's all about tolerance when what you are really after is approval. When people seek approval and validation from others it usually means they're not completely comfortable in their own skin.

Just sayin...

What I want to see happen is healthy self-esteem develop in gay and lesbian youth.
They have low self-esteem because of being in a degenerate lifestyle.

Now you want to reinforce their perversion by tell them it's normal and healthy. :evil:

Hence why we shouldn't mix real world policies with Christianity. Here's a few beautiful biblical phrases from Leviticus. Favorite book of intolerant assholes:

Leviticus 11:6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud , but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
11:7 And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.
19:20 And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that is a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free.
20:9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.
20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
20:14 And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you.
20:27 A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.

Well at least the slaves get off easy when they get raped under God’s justice, but almost everybody else in American society would be executed for one ridiculous rule or another. At least we could get rid of those Harry Potter wizard people. But then I also couldn’t have bacon!:sad:

The Old Testament is repulsive and no thought or action, let alone policy, should be based upon it. The irrational hatred of homosexuality by those who follow monotheistic religions originated with this BS. Does anybody have any other “legitimate” reason for viewing homosexuality as morally wrong?
 
I'm against having my children INDOCTRINATED into homosexuality.

I don't hate gays. One of my best friends in school was gay, and I lived with a homosexual couple for a year or so and loved them dearly.
 
I'm against having my children INDOCTRINATED into homosexuality.

I don't hate gays. One of my best friends in school was gay, and I lived with a homosexual couple for a year or so and loved them dearly.

I'm not sure if a document stating that homosexuality is "normal" is indoctrinating people to be homosexual (if that's even possible). It's more a matter of encouraging people to accept themselves and others where homosexuality occurs.
 
Last edited:
Do you think it is impossible to think homosexuality is wrong (aberrant) and not hate gays?

Of course not. That would be the view of the endangered species known as the non-hypocritical Christian. Unlike others who call themselves Christian, these elusive creatures actually follow what Jesus taught and hate the sin instead of the sinner. They would still be wrong, just less hypocritical than the “Christians” who pull gays behind their trucks. Making an argument based upon somebody being a hater is indeed an ad hominem fallacy many impassioned rights advocates fall into. But their use of a fallacy doesn’t make hating homosexuality any less stupid.

I have a great deal of trouble in seeing the other side because my moral system is very simple. Anything that hurts another person without their consent is immoral; anything that hurts nobody against their consent is fine. This leaves some ambiguity as you have to define both “harm” and “consent."

Being against homosexuality as immoral seems almost as bad to me as hating people and treating them differently due to ethnicity.

I just see it as not right. It's not what we are made for. The parts work the way they do for a reason. I do believe in God and I think that creation is the most beautiful thing and I think God meant it to be the way it is. To do otherwise just seems wrong to me. Just because something feels good doesn't mean we should do it.

If you have your money sitting on a table and it would feel good to me if I had it should I take it? No, that would be wrong. I love ice cream, I could eat it until I threw up. It would feel good to pig out on it, should I do it? No, our bodies aren't meant to take that kind of abuse, it would be wrong to do it. I can give lots of examples of what I mean. You don't have to agree, but do you understand?
 

Forum List

Back
Top