Toronto schools teaching children there are 6 genders

[thereisnospoon]

Yes, I think it's okay to teach about human sexuality in a human sexuality class. Color me crazy.

To young children? Explain why? Elaborate on why you believe this is a good thing?
Please explain why you believe it is better for the public school teacher who may not be a parent, to teach this kind of material to a young impressionable child without the consent or with any input from the parents?

Yes, all these things can be explained, even to young children. There is age appropriate material at all levels.

There is ZERO proof that it is without parental notification other than the OP. No links supporting it, nothing.

I will tell you that over 90% of parents in Canada believe that sex education should be taught in schools. Sexual health education in the schools:

A more recent survey from Saskatchewan (Advisory Committee on Family Planning, 2008) found that 92% of parents strongly agreed or agreed that sexual health education should be provided in the schools and 91% indicated that sexual health education that is appropriate for a child’s age and developmental level should start before Grade 9.​

And yes, I do believe that an educator is qualified to teach sex education to children...much more so that many parents I know.

Well you do get extra credit for staying on the liberal reservation.
I think you would think differently if it were your kid.
One thing. I NEVER asked you what other Canadians thought about this. I asked YOU.
What tells me you are just staying with the cause is the fact that you thought it necessary to bring in the opinions of others( those surveys which cannot be vetted and the samples not large enough) to bolster your own.
In any event, such nonsense would not be allowed in our schools. Not here in this state. And not where I originally come from either.
This garbage will stay in Canada where it belongs.
This kind of thing has no place in the public schools for kids that young.
We have enough trouble here trying to keep 12 year old girls from getting pregnant.
Sometimes knowledge can be a BAD thing.
Now you will label me closed minded and neanderthal. See that? I am a nice guy. Saved you the keystrokes.
I am done here. Unsubscribed from thread.

 

[Seawytch]

To young children? Explain why? Elaborate on why you believe this is a good thing?
Please explain why you believe it is better for the public school teacher who may not be a parent, to teach this kind of material to a young impressionable child without the consent or with any input from the parents?

Yes, all these things can be explained, even to young children. There is age appropriate material at all levels.

There is ZERO proof that it is without parental notification other than the OP. No links supporting it, nothing.

I will tell you that over 90% of parents in Canada believe that sex education should be taught in schools. Sexual health education in the schools:

A more recent survey from Saskatchewan (Advisory Committee on Family Planning, 2008) found that 92% of parents strongly agreed or agreed that sexual health education should be provided in the schools and 91% indicated that sexual health education that is appropriate for a child’s age and developmental level should start before Grade 9.​

And yes, I do believe that an educator is qualified to teach sex education to children...much more so that many parents I know.

Well you do get extra credit for staying on the liberal reservation.
I think you would think differently if it were your kid.
One thing. I NEVER asked you what other Canadians thought about this. I asked YOU.
What tells me you are just staying with the cause is the fact that you thought it necessary to bring in the opinions of others( those surveys which cannot be vetted and the samples not large enough) to bolster your own.
In any event, such nonsense would not be allowed in our schools. Not here in this state. And not where I originally come from either.
This garbage will stay in Canada where it belongs.
This kind of thing has no place in the public schools for kids that young.
We have enough trouble here trying to keep 12 year old girls from getting pregnant.
Sometimes knowledge can be a BAD thing.
Now you will label me closed minded and neanderthal. See that? I am a nice guy. Saved you the keystrokes.
I am done here. Unsubscribed from thread.

I have school age children, heading off to 5th and 7th grade this morning.

The United States leads in teen pregnancies. It isn't because of sex education.

 

[logical4u]

What does that have to do with the link I posted? Did you even read it? It will help women conceive. This is bad how?

Science says there is much more than that. Have you never heard the term intersex?

I was refering to the large population of children conceived without and artificial assistance.
Scientific studies have been done that indicate that children are the most well adjusted, healthiest, and with the least emotional problems if they are raised by mature biological parents (that would be one man and one woman). I know, that is now considered "hate speech" because it does not fit your agenda. If you want to use "science" to "what if" the typical, it would seem that science would have been considered when it came to making and raising children. You chose to ignore "scientific studies" when it came to your personal choices, yet you want to beat other people over the head with "science" when it fits your agenda/beliefs.

You do wear that drama queen label proudly don't you? I noticed you didn't actually cite the study or link to it. That's telling...

Study: Same-Sex Parents Raise Well-Adjusted Kids

Children need parents that love them unconditionally, period. The sexual orientation of those parents is immaterial.

Oh, here we go again.... where did I say that "same-sex" parents could not raise well adjusted children. I just said that their were "scientific studies" that say the "best" way for children to be raised.....

Do you have evidence that the "sexual orientation" of parents is immaterial?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yes, all these things can be explained, even to young children. There is age appropriate material at all levels.

There is ZERO proof that it is without parental notification other than the OP. No links supporting it, nothing.

I will tell you that over 90% of parents in Canada believe that sex education should be taught in schools. Sexual health education in the schools:

A more recent survey from Saskatchewan (Advisory Committee on Family Planning, 2008) found that 92% of parents strongly agreed or agreed that sexual health education should be provided in the schools and 91% indicated that sexual health education that is appropriate for a child’s age and developmental level should start before Grade 9.​

And yes, I do believe that an educator is qualified to teach sex education to children...much more so that many parents I know.

Well you do get extra credit for staying on the liberal reservation.
I think you would think differently if it were your kid.
One thing. I NEVER asked you what other Canadians thought about this. I asked YOU.
What tells me you are just staying with the cause is the fact that you thought it necessary to bring in the opinions of others( those surveys which cannot be vetted and the samples not large enough) to bolster your own.
In any event, such nonsense would not be allowed in our schools. Not here in this state. And not where I originally come from either.
This garbage will stay in Canada where it belongs.
This kind of thing has no place in the public schools for kids that young.
We have enough trouble here trying to keep 12 year old girls from getting pregnant.
Sometimes knowledge can be a BAD thing.
Now you will label me closed minded and neanderthal. See that? I am a nice guy. Saved you the keystrokes.
I am done here. Unsubscribed from thread.

I have school age children, heading off to 5th and 7th grade this morning.

The United States leads in teen pregnancies. It isn't because of sex education.

Yeah..It's the parents inability to threaten their kids with punishment with extreme prejudice if they defy the rules of the house.
Too many times I have heard/read "sure your boyfriend/girlfriend can spend the night"...Or, yes your girlfriend/boyfriend may go on vacation with us"....
Or...Mom/dad, there will be adults there. I promise!"...
Look, kids will lie and deceive so that they can get their parents to let them do stuff.
Too many parents try to be their kids' friend instead of the parent.
Too many parents are afraid to say "NO" because they "did those things too"...
Too many parents are much too soft with their kids.
There are things that kids should not know because their brains are not equipped to handle certain information. In other words it's "need to know". Look up the meaning of that phrase.

 

[Seawytch]

I was refering to the large population of children conceived without and artificial assistance.
Scientific studies have been done that indicate that children are the most well adjusted, healthiest, and with the least emotional problems if they are raised by mature biological parents (that would be one man and one woman). I know, that is now considered "hate speech" because it does not fit your agenda. If you want to use "science" to "what if" the typical, it would seem that science would have been considered when it came to making and raising children. You chose to ignore "scientific studies" when it came to your personal choices, yet you want to beat other people over the head with "science" when it fits your agenda/beliefs.

You do wear that drama queen label proudly don't you? I noticed you didn't actually cite the study or link to it. That's telling...

Study: Same-Sex Parents Raise Well-Adjusted Kids

Children need parents that love them unconditionally, period. The sexual orientation of those parents is immaterial.

Oh, here we go again.... where did I say that "same-sex" parents could not raise well adjusted children. I just said that their were "scientific studies" that say the "best" way for children to be raised.....

Do you have evidence that the "sexual orientation" of parents is immaterial?

I already provided some. Here's more from the APA.

Overall, results of research suggest that the development, adjustment, and well-being of children with lesbian and gay parents do not differ markedly from that of children with heterosexual parents.

http://www.apa.org/about/policy/parenting.aspx

How about the American Academy of Pediatrics?

The American Academy of Pediatrics recognizes that a considerable body of professional literature provides evidence that children with parents who are homosexual can have the same advantages and the same expectations for health, adjustment, and development as can children whose parents are heterosexual.1–9 When 2 adults participate in parenting a child, they and the child deserve the serenity that comes with legal recognition.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/109/2/339.full

Two engaged parents are what is best for children.

What does it matter? We have kids. We're doing it in ever increasing numbers. We are using science (just like the Romney family), we use turkey basters and some make 'em the old-fashioned way. So? Do you want to somehow keep us from having children?

 

[logical4u]

You do wear that drama queen label proudly don't you? I noticed you didn't actually cite the study or link to it. That's telling...

Study: Same-Sex Parents Raise Well-Adjusted Kids

Children need parents that love them unconditionally, period. The sexual orientation of those parents is immaterial.

Oh, here we go again.... where did I say that "same-sex" parents could not raise well adjusted children. I just said that their were "scientific studies" that say the "best" way for children to be raised.....

Do you have evidence that the "sexual orientation" of parents is immaterial?

I already provided some. Here's more from the APA.

Overall, results of research suggest that the development, adjustment, and well-being of children with lesbian and gay parents do not differ markedly from that of children with heterosexual parents.

APA Policy Statement: Sexual Orientation, Parents, & Children

How about the American Academy of Pediatrics?

The American Academy of Pediatrics recognizes that a considerable body of professional literature provides evidence that children with parents who are homosexual can have the same advantages and the same expectations for health, adjustment, and development as can children whose parents are heterosexual.1–9 When 2 adults participate in parenting a child, they and the child deserve the serenity that comes with legal recognition.

Coparent or Second-Parent Adoption by Same-Sex Parents

Two engaged parents are what is best for children.

What does it matter? We have kids. We're doing it in ever increasing numbers. We are using science (just like the Romney family), we use turkey basters and some make 'em the old-fashioned way. So? Do you want to somehow keep us from having children?

No you did not provide evidence that "the "sexual orientation" of parents is immaterial". You provided evidence that same-sex parents "can" raise children. The effects of children being raised by same-sex parents are only beginning to be thouroughly studied (I suspect PC police will prevent any negative effects from being reported, officially).

Yes, it matters, you want to bring in science whenever it supports your agenda, but will ignore it, if it doesn't. It demonstrates that your children's well being comes, after your personal sex life.

I don't think you should have children. I think it nulls your arguement that you are "born" that way. After all, given the freedom to choose a partner, you physically cannot reproduce with your sexual preference. The unchosen sex must be reduced to a fill-up for a turkey baster (how do you explain that to a child? I wanted a child so much that I had a man mastrubate into a cup and insert it into myself because I wanted his sperm, not him?), or a temporary mother fit for growing a child inside her, but not raising that said child. How do you tell your children they were sooo important to you that you would not consider having them in the traditional, biological parent way? (and yes, I get that some couples cannot have children, but you, are talking about rejecting that for your personal wants)

And yes, I know that I have no say, but you asked for my opinion. I also don't think people that do drugs, are unmarried, are alcoholics, or are nymphomaniacs should have children. I think that they are making bad choices in their lives, and that their children will suffer from those choices, sooner or later. After all, if we are going to claim that we care about children, shouldn't we do the best possible job that we can with them, and not treat them as an afterthought in our lives?

 

[Seawytch]

Oh, here we go again.... where did I say that "same-sex" parents could not raise well adjusted children. I just said that their were "scientific studies" that say the "best" way for children to be raised.....

Do you have evidence that the "sexual orientation" of parents is immaterial?

I already provided some. Here's more from the APA.

Overall, results of research suggest that the development, adjustment, and well-being of children with lesbian and gay parents do not differ markedly from that of children with heterosexual parents.

APA Policy Statement: Sexual Orientation, Parents, & Children

How about the American Academy of Pediatrics?

The American Academy of Pediatrics recognizes that a considerable body of professional literature provides evidence that children with parents who are homosexual can have the same advantages and the same expectations for health, adjustment, and development as can children whose parents are heterosexual.1–9 When 2 adults participate in parenting a child, they and the child deserve the serenity that comes with legal recognition.

Coparent or Second-Parent Adoption by Same-Sex Parents

Two engaged parents are what is best for children.

What does it matter? We have kids. We're doing it in ever increasing numbers. We are using science (just like the Romney family), we use turkey basters and some make 'em the old-fashioned way. So? Do you want to somehow keep us from having children?

No you did not provide evidence that "the "sexual orientation" of parents is immaterial". You provided evidence that same-sex parents "can" raise children. The effects of children being raised by same-sex parents are only beginning to be thouroughly studied (I suspect PC police will prevent any negative effects from being reported, officially).

Yes, it matters, you want to bring in science whenever it supports your agenda, but will ignore it, if it doesn't. It demonstrates that your children's well being comes, after your personal sex life.

I showed evidence that our children are at no disadvantage to the children of heterosexuals. Logical thought would conclude that the sexual orientation of parents is immaterial and what matters most is that children have two, engaged, parents.

I don't think you should have children.

And I don't think ignorant people like you should have children. Hate is taught, sexual orientation isn't.

I think it nulls your arguement that you are "born" that way. After all, given the freedom to choose a partner, you physically cannot reproduce with your sexual preference.

So what if we can't "naturally" reproduce? Lots of people can't and use artificial insemination, invitro fertilization and surrogacy to create their families (Like Mitt Romney's). Being gay does not take away your desire to raise children anymore than being infertile does.

That The unchosen sex must be reduced to a fill-up for a turkey baster (how do you explain that to a child? I wanted a child so much that I had a man mastrubate into a cup and insert it into myself because I wanted his sperm, not him?), or a temporary mother fit for growing a child inside her, but not raising that said child.

, butHow do you tell your children they were sooo important to you that you would not consider having them in the traditional, biological parent way? (and yes, I get that some couples cannot have children, but you, are talking about rejecting that for your personal wants)

Not quite the motivations nor the explanations used to describe it to our children, but you're getting the gist. Did you know one of Mitt's strapping lads used a surrogate AND invitro (which involves choking it into a cup)? Do you think he explained it YOUR way to his kids? I bet he didn't. As someone who has used artificial insemination and was a surrogate, I can say...with all authority on the subject...that you are an ignorant fool (but it came through environmental factors).

And yes, I know that I have no say, but you asked for my opinion. I also don't think people that do drugs, are unmarried, are alcoholics, or are nymphomaniacs should have children. I think that they are making bad choices in their lives, and that their children will suffer from those choices, sooner or later. After all, if we are going to claim that we care about children, shouldn't we do the best possible job that we can with them, and not treat them as an afterthought in our lives?

Yes, isn't it lovely that neither of us can dictate the other's reproductive choices...but the GOP keeps trying.

 

[blimpo]

I agree, it is the parents job. I just wish more parents would actually teach their kids.

Unfortunately, some parents are teaching their kids about sex.

Stuff like:

-you don't have to be married
-you don't have to be married to live together
-you don't have to be married to have a kid or kids
-love affairs come before anything else (including kids)
-mom loves the stranger living in our house (but he's creepy)

it goes on....

 

[Papageorgio]

I agree, it is the parents job. I just wish more parents would actually teach their kids.

Unfortunately, some parents are teaching their kids about sex.

Stuff like:

-you don't have to be married
-you don't have to be married to live together
-you don't have to be married to have a kid or kids
-love affairs come before anything else (including kids)
-mom loves the stranger living in our house (but he's creepy)

it goes on....

Hey blimpo, are you from the Indystar?

 

[AmyNation]

I agree, it is the parents job. I just wish more parents would actually teach their kids.

Unfortunately, some parents are teaching their kids about sex.

Stuff like:

-you don't have to be married
-you don't have to be married to live together
-you don't have to be married to have a kid or kids
-love affairs come before anything else (including kids)
-mom loves the stranger living in our house (but he's creepy)

it goes on....

I actually think the government has had more to do with the downfall of the "nuclear family" then anything else.