Who is the better Parent?

[Avatar4321]

The purpose of "parents" is to guide their children and hopefully, make better people than they were.

The purpose of "house rules" is to make sure the children don't walk all over their parents.

Without rules, those same children might walk into the house with muddy shoes and not clean up afterwards. They might have drug induced drinking orgies. They might steal.

Besides, rules can teach responsibility and make children secure that there are "rules" and "consequences".

On the other hand, at some point, "rules" can be just another way of saying "slavery" if every trait of individuality is stifled.

And that is one of the defining differences between conservative and liberal. Conservatives are way more into being part "of the group" and liberals are way more into being an "individual".

So "house rules" can be slavery. Unconstitutional Federal laws and regulations that promote your political agenda can't.

Yeah, we are the ones more into being part of the group. That's why we want everyone to be free.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

There has been plenty of discussion on the "Mississippi school does the right thing" thread about this girl wanting to take her girlfriend to the prom, but there is another question that no one has discussed that is just as important.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...-prom-due-to-lesbian-couple-attending-30.html

In the March 12, Chicago Redeye on page 12, top of the page, this situation goes into more detail with names and places.

The girls name is "Constance McMillen" and she is 18 years old.

She said she didn't want to go back to Itawamba Country Agricultural High School in Fulton the morning after the decision, but her FATHER told her she needed to face her classmates, teachers and school officials.
"My daddy told me that I needed to show them that I'm still proud of who I am. The fact that this will help people later on, that's what's helping me to go on."

She said the day after the school board ruling, she returned to campus to "unfriendly looks" and "Somebody said, 'Thanks for ruining my senior year.'"

Well that's one solid school system. Good for them. The Lesbian made her choice and she's already suffering the first of a lifetime of consequences for it.

So what?

-----------------------------------------------

Compare that to the circumstances of former Republican Senate Nominee Alan Keyes.

-----------------------------------------------

Maya Keyes (Alan Keyes' Daughter) Sets the Record Gay in Interview Exclusive

Alan Keyes' daughter: <br>I'm a 'liberal queer'

Maya (Keyes teenage daughter) announced that she was getting kicked out of her house by her parents on her weblog a couple weeks ago.
She had resigned to being homeless and putting off her dream of attending college when her parents determined they would withhold all forms of support due to behaviors they described as “hedonism” and “supporting the enemy.”

Quote from Alan Keyes:

"The essence of ... family life remains procreation," he explained. "If we embrace homosexuality as a proper basis for marriage, we are saying that it's possible to have a marriage state that in principle excludes procreation and is based simply on the premise of selfish hedonism."

---------------------------------------------------

Obviously Keyes believes it's a "choice". So many questions:

Did Keyes himself ever have to "choose"?

"Breeding" is the "only" reason for marriage? (Not all straights have children - are they also hedonists?)

ROFLMNAO Sweet post hoc straw Dog... So because some normal people don't have children in marriage; that somehow means that the purpose of marriage is not the "JOINING OF TWO PEOPLE; One male and one female for procreation and raising a family?

By that reasoning because some people join the military for an education; the military is therefore serves the purpose of education...

BRILLIANT!

Who is the better father? The one who teaches his daughter a "lesson", no matter how painful, no matter what the cost, even if the cost tears up the family?"

or

The father who accepts his daughter and supports her to the point of not letting her back down from who she is?

Oh that's a toughy... the parent who accepts the child for who they are... sexual devient... or the one who recognizes that sexual deviency is unacceptable and turns his back on that child so as to teach her that the path SHE HAS CHOSEN comes with stark and HARSH consequences...

Gotta go wit Keyes on this one...

Which is more "Christian"?

the one which recognizes sound, sustainable miral principles and bears the responsibility inherent in those principles... Like Christ when he willingly submitted to unspeakable cruelty to pay for the sins of that Sexual Devient.

Which is more "Family Values"?

The one which recognizes the values best suited to a sound, sustainable family.

Can "Christian values" and "Family values" be at odds?

Nope...

So many questions.

Ain't that the trruth...

 

[code1211]

I don't really know your definition of "house rules". For some, it's "no pot smoking, no drinking, clean your room, etc".

For some parents, it's, "You will wear only what we buy for you, you will go only where we approve, when we approve, you will not go out at night, the only opinion you will have is one we give you, we will decide which college you will go to and what courses you will take - since we are paying for it", and you will live at home so we can keep an eye on you."

Why would the definition of house rules matter?

The purpose of "parents" is to guide their children and hopefully, make better people than they were.

The purpose of "house rules" is to make sure the children don't walk all over their parents.

Without rules, those same children might walk into the house with muddy shoes and not clean up afterwards. They might have drug induced drinking orgies. They might steal.

Besides, rules can teach responsibility and make children secure that there are "rules" and "consequences".

On the other hand, at some point, "rules" can be just another way of saying "slavery" if every trait of individuality is stifled.

And that is one of the defining differences between conservative and liberal. Conservatives are way more into being part "of the group" and liberals are way more into being an "individual".

She said that her son broke the rules and was asked to leave as a result. I was in the same situation when I left home. It was definitely an If-then proposition for me and it sounds the same for Avatar.

The priviledge of living in the house was withheld, but not the love or the support from the sounds of the story. A definite rights/responsibility thing.

Whether the distasteful rule is a curfew or a profanity viiolation, it is a rule. If you want the priviledge to live here, you will need to exercise the responsibility to follow these rules.

So, again, why would the definition of house rules matter? Seems like a pretty simple contract with bilateral cancelation rights.

 

[Oscar Wao]

Maybe we shouldn't fault Keyes; perhaps he wasn't present at his gen ed psychology class the day they taught about sexual orientation, or maybe he was goofing off and falling asleep in the back of the class when the teacher taught about orientation being inborn.

Eh well. That's her Dad. My Dad accepts me and loves me, even with my "differences."

 

[rdean]

The purpose of "parents" is to guide their children and hopefully, make better people than they were.

The purpose of "house rules" is to make sure the children don't walk all over their parents.

Without rules, those same children might walk into the house with muddy shoes and not clean up afterwards. They might have drug induced drinking orgies. They might steal.

Besides, rules can teach responsibility and make children secure that there are "rules" and "consequences".

On the other hand, at some point, "rules" can be just another way of saying "slavery" if every trait of individuality is stifled.

And that is one of the defining differences between conservative and liberal. Conservatives are way more into being part "of the group" and liberals are way more into being an "individual".

So "house rules" can be slavery. Unconstitutional Federal laws and regulations that promote your political agenda can't.

Yeah, we are the ones more into being part of the group. That's why we want everyone to be free.

Not everyone. Free includes rights. We both understand the Republican "agenda".

 

[Luissa]

There has been plenty of discussion on the "Mississippi school does the right thing" thread about this girl wanting to take her girlfriend to the prom, but there is another question that no one has discussed that is just as important.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...-prom-due-to-lesbian-couple-attending-30.html

In the March 12, Chicago Redeye on page 12, top of the page, this situation goes into more detail with names and places.

The girls name is "Constance McMillen" and she is 18 years old.

She said she didn't want to go back to Itawamba Country Agricultural High School in Fulton the morning after the decision, but her FATHER told her she needed to face her classmates, teachers and school officials.
"My daddy told me that I needed to show them that I'm still proud of who I am. The fact that this will help people later on, that's what's helping me to go on."

She said the day after the school board ruling, she returned to campus to "unfriendly looks" and "Somebody said, 'Thanks for ruining my senior year.'"

-----------------------------------------------

Compare that to the circumstances of former Republican Senate Nominee Alan Keyes.

-----------------------------------------------

Maya Keyes (Alan Keyes' Daughter) Sets the Record Gay in Interview Exclusive

Alan Keyes' daughter: <br>I'm a 'liberal queer'
If Maya chooses to become what her parents are against why should she want them to support her choice and contribute to something they're against. If kids make a choice to go against their parent beliefs they shouldn't whine about getting cut off the money tree.
Maya (Keyes teenage daughter) announced that she was getting kicked out of her house by her parents on her weblog a couple weeks ago.
She had resigned to being homeless and putting off her dream of attending college when her parents determined they would withhold all forms of support due to behaviors they described as “hedonism” and “supporting the enemy.”

Quote from Alan Keyes:

"The essence of ... family life remains procreation," he explained. "If we embrace homosexuality as a proper basis for marriage, we are saying that it's possible to have a marriage state that in principle excludes procreation and is based simply on the premise of selfish hedonism."

---------------------------------------------------

Obviously Keyes believes it's a "choice". So many questions:

Did Keyes himself ever have to "choose"?

"Breeding" is the "only" reason for marriage? (Not all straights have children - are they also hedonists?)

Who is the better father? The one who teaches his daughter a "lesson", no matter how painful, no matter what the cost, even if the cost tears up the family?"

or

The father who accepts his daughter and supports her to the point of not letting her back down from who she is?

Which is more "Christian"?

Which is more "Family Values"?

Can "Christian values" and "Family values" be at odds?

So many questions.

If Maya chooses to become something her parents are against she shouldn't whine about getting cut off from the money tree.

But what kind of parents don't let their kids make their own decisions? Wanting to control everything about your child, is being a bad parent. My dad is a die hard liberal, and he has never disowned or judged my brother for being a republican. The two just debate a lot, and respect each other completely.

 

[rdean]

There has been plenty of discussion on the "Mississippi school does the right thing" thread about this girl wanting to take her girlfriend to the prom, but there is another question that no one has discussed that is just as important.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...-prom-due-to-lesbian-couple-attending-30.html

In the March 12, Chicago Redeye on page 12, top of the page, this situation goes into more detail with names and places.

The girls name is "Constance McMillen" and she is 18 years old.

She said she didn't want to go back to Itawamba Country Agricultural High School in Fulton the morning after the decision, but her FATHER told her she needed to face her classmates, teachers and school officials.
"My daddy told me that I needed to show them that I'm still proud of who I am. The fact that this will help people later on, that's what's helping me to go on."

She said the day after the school board ruling, she returned to campus to "unfriendly looks" and "Somebody said, 'Thanks for ruining my senior year.'"

Well that's one solid school system. Good for them. The Lesbian made her choice and she's already suffering the first of a lifetime of consequences for it.

So what?

-----------------------------------------------

Compare that to the circumstances of former Republican Senate Nominee Alan Keyes.

-----------------------------------------------

Maya Keyes (Alan Keyes' Daughter) Sets the Record Gay in Interview Exclusive

Alan Keyes' daughter: <br>I'm a 'liberal queer'

Maya (Keyes teenage daughter) announced that she was getting kicked out of her house by her parents on her weblog a couple weeks ago.
She had resigned to being homeless and putting off her dream of attending college when her parents determined they would withhold all forms of support due to behaviors they described as “hedonism” and “supporting the enemy.”

Quote from Alan Keyes:

"The essence of ... family life remains procreation," he explained. "If we embrace homosexuality as a proper basis for marriage, we are saying that it's possible to have a marriage state that in principle excludes procreation and is based simply on the premise of selfish hedonism."

---------------------------------------------------

Obviously Keyes believes it's a "choice". So many questions:

Did Keyes himself ever have to "choose"?

"Breeding" is the "only" reason for marriage? (Not all straights have children - are they also hedonists?)

ROFLMNAO Sweet post hoc straw Dog... So because some normal people don't have children in marriage; that somehow means that the purpose of marriage is not the "JOINING OF TWO PEOPLE; One male and one female for procreation and raising a family?

By that reasoning because some people join the military for an education; the military is therefore serves the purpose of education...

BRILLIANT!



Oh that's a toughy... the parent who accepts the child for who they are... sexual devient... or the one who recognizes that sexual deviency is unacceptable and turns his back on that child so as to teach her that the path SHE HAS CHOSEN comes with stark and HARSH consequences...

Gotta go wit Keyes on this one...

the one which recognizes sound, sustainable miral principles and bears the responsibility inherent in those principles... Like Christ when he willingly submitted to unspeakable cruelty to pay for the sins of that Sexual Devient.



The one which recognizes the values best suited to a sound, sustainable family.

Can "Christian values" and "Family values" be at odds?

Nope...

So many questions.

Ain't that the trruth...

I joined the military to get an education. It was "a" reason, but not the only reason. Now I'm an engineer. I tell young people to join. The sense of satisfaction at serving your country and the opportunity to better their lives.

You sound like you have problems. And quit possibly some mild "mental illness". You might want to talk to a "professional". Just saying.

Many straight people marry for love and decide they don't want children. Happens all the time.

I suspect if you raise children, I should pity them while they are young and fear them when they are adults. So should you.

 

[rdean]

There has been plenty of discussion on the "Mississippi school does the right thing" thread about this girl wanting to take her girlfriend to the prom, but there is another question that no one has discussed that is just as important.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...-prom-due-to-lesbian-couple-attending-30.html

In the March 12, Chicago Redeye on page 12, top of the page, this situation goes into more detail with names and places.

The girls name is "Constance McMillen" and she is 18 years old.

She said she didn't want to go back to Itawamba Country Agricultural High School in Fulton the morning after the decision, but her FATHER told her she needed to face her classmates, teachers and school officials.
"My daddy told me that I needed to show them that I'm still proud of who I am. The fact that this will help people later on, that's what's helping me to go on."

She said the day after the school board ruling, she returned to campus to "unfriendly looks" and "Somebody said, 'Thanks for ruining my senior year.'"

-----------------------------------------------

Compare that to the circumstances of former Republican Senate Nominee Alan Keyes.

-----------------------------------------------

Maya Keyes (Alan Keyes' Daughter) Sets the Record Gay in Interview Exclusive

Alan Keyes' daughter: <br>I'm a 'liberal queer'
If Maya chooses to become what her parents are against why should she want them to support her choice and contribute to something they're against. If kids make a choice to go against their parent beliefs they shouldn't whine about getting cut off the money tree.
Maya (Keyes teenage daughter) announced that she was getting kicked out of her house by her parents on her weblog a couple weeks ago.
She had resigned to being homeless and putting off her dream of attending college when her parents determined they would withhold all forms of support due to behaviors they described as “hedonism” and “supporting the enemy.”

Quote from Alan Keyes:

"The essence of ... family life remains procreation," he explained. "If we embrace homosexuality as a proper basis for marriage, we are saying that it's possible to have a marriage state that in principle excludes procreation and is based simply on the premise of selfish hedonism."

---------------------------------------------------

Obviously Keyes believes it's a "choice". So many questions:

Did Keyes himself ever have to "choose"?

"Breeding" is the "only" reason for marriage? (Not all straights have children - are they also hedonists?)

Who is the better father? The one who teaches his daughter a "lesson", no matter how painful, no matter what the cost, even if the cost tears up the family?"

or

The father who accepts his daughter and supports her to the point of not letting her back down from who she is?

Which is more "Christian"?

Which is more "Family Values"?

Can "Christian values" and "Family values" be at odds?

So many questions.

If Maya chooses to become something her parents are against she shouldn't whine about getting cut off from the money tree.

But what kind of parents don't let their kids make their own decisions? Wanting to control everything about your child, is being a bad parent. My dad is a die hard liberal, and he has never disowned or judged my brother for being a republican. The two just debate a lot, and respect each other completely.

Bad parents. It's the duty of parents to "guide" their children. Rules are necessary, but they change as the child grows into an adult. I believe conservatives have a difficult time as parents because the core of conservative is "static" "unchanging". Children are supposed to grow and learn. Young children can't make every decision, but they have to be allowed some freedom or when they are finally one their own, they become "victims".

 

[rdean]

Why would the definition of house rules matter?

The purpose of "parents" is to guide their children and hopefully, make better people than they were.

The purpose of "house rules" is to make sure the children don't walk all over their parents.

Without rules, those same children might walk into the house with muddy shoes and not clean up afterwards. They might have drug induced drinking orgies. They might steal.

Besides, rules can teach responsibility and make children secure that there are "rules" and "consequences".

On the other hand, at some point, "rules" can be just another way of saying "slavery" if every trait of individuality is stifled.

And that is one of the defining differences between conservative and liberal. Conservatives are way more into being part "of the group" and liberals are way more into being an "individual".

She said that her son broke the rules and was asked to leave as a result. I was in the same situation when I left home. It was definitely an If-then proposition for me and it sounds the same for Avatar.

The priviledge of living in the house was withheld, but not the love or the support from the sounds of the story. A definite rights/responsibility thing.

Whether the distasteful rule is a curfew or a profanity viiolation, it is a rule. If you want the priviledge to live here, you will need to exercise the responsibility to follow these rules.

So, again, why would the definition of house rules matter? Seems like a pretty simple contract with bilateral cancelation rights.

I knew a guy when I was in the service whose parents told him what to wear, they told him if they wanted an opinion from him they would give him one. They told him they would pay for his college, but they would choose the courses and he had to live at home so they could "keep an eye" on him. He was told as long as he lived there, he had to work every day after work and on weekends and every holiday without pay because be was being fed and given clothes. His parents used to slap his face if you spoke out of turn. Slaps which gave him numerous black eyes, bloody noses and damaged one ear.

At 16, his father slapped him and he slapped his father back. He was kicked out of the house. He managed to get a job as a bag boy and an apartment. He was doing well until a month before his turned 18. His father showed up with police, had him arrested as a run away and while he was in detention, sold every one of his belongings. He lost his job and his apartment and that was why he joined the military.

His parents also told all of his relatives that he was a drug addict and the thief as "punishment" for disobeying.

He actually went home one Christmas on leave and asked his parents why they did all these things to him. They told him, first, because they could, and second, to teach him a lesson.

I asked him what the lesson was? He said it didn't matter. They never wanted a son. They wanted a slave. While this guy was in the service, he got married and his wife had a baby. He was a nice guy, smart and responsible. She seemed to be a very nice girl. I bet he made a good father.

There are rules and there is slavery.

 

[Foxfyre]

1. I applaud parents who accept their children for who and what they are, but which also provide constructive guidance, guidelines, and enforce rules short of those which constitute child abuse.

2. Enforcing rules that the child doesn't like is very rarely child abuse.

3. Not setting and enforcing any rules at all IS almost always a form of child abuse.

4. Booting out a person who has achieved majority for whatever reason is the right of the parent whether or not we approve of the reason, and the reason is really none of our business. I think most responsible parents would approve of inviting a young adult to leave if said young adult was not interested in keeping the rules of the house. And I think most would approve of the young adult leaving of his/her own volition if said rules were deemed unreasonable.

5. The anecdotal illustrations used in the OP were too different to offer much of a comparison. I think the father of the minor sent back to school probably made a good choice, but without knowing all the circumstances, that is difficult to judge. So far as we know, the father may have been a staunch Republican and conservative, so political ideology is irrelevent in that case. I don't know enough about the Alan Keyes situation to comment though I would not invite a child to leave JUST because he or she was gay or lesbian.

 

[Wicked Jester]

If Maya chooses to become something her parents are against she shouldn't whine about getting cut off from the money tree.

But what kind of parents don't let their kids make their own decisions? Wanting to control everything about your child, is being a bad parent. My dad is a die hard liberal, and he has never disowned or judged my brother for being a republican. The two just debate a lot, and respect each other completely.

Bad parents. It's the duty of parents to "guide" their children. Rules are necessary, but they change as the child grows into an adult. I believe conservatives have a difficult time as parents because the core of conservative is "static" "unchanging". Children are supposed to grow and learn. Young children can't make every decision, but they have to be allowed some freedom or when they are finally one their own, they become "victims".

Seriously, you're a fucking idiot!

 

[code1211]

The purpose of "parents" is to guide their children and hopefully, make better people than they were.

The purpose of "house rules" is to make sure the children don't walk all over their parents.

Without rules, those same children might walk into the house with muddy shoes and not clean up afterwards. They might have drug induced drinking orgies. They might steal.

Besides, rules can teach responsibility and make children secure that there are "rules" and "consequences".

On the other hand, at some point, "rules" can be just another way of saying "slavery" if every trait of individuality is stifled.

And that is one of the defining differences between conservative and liberal. Conservatives are way more into being part "of the group" and liberals are way more into being an "individual".

She said that her son broke the rules and was asked to leave as a result. I was in the same situation when I left home. It was definitely an If-then proposition for me and it sounds the same for Avatar.

The priviledge of living in the house was withheld, but not the love or the support from the sounds of the story. A definite rights/responsibility thing.

Whether the distasteful rule is a curfew or a profanity viiolation, it is a rule. If you want the priviledge to live here, you will need to exercise the responsibility to follow these rules.

So, again, why would the definition of house rules matter? Seems like a pretty simple contract with bilateral cancelation rights.

I knew a guy when I was in the service whose parents told him what to wear, they told him if they wanted an opinion from him they would give him one. They told him they would pay for his college, but they would choose the courses and he had to live at home so they could "keep an eye" on him. He was told as long as he lived there, he had to work every day after work and on weekends and every holiday without pay because be was being fed and given clothes. His parents used to slap his face if you spoke out of turn. Slaps which gave him numerous black eyes, bloody noses and damaged one ear.

At 16, his father slapped him and he slapped his father back. He was kicked out of the house. He managed to get a job as a bag boy and an apartment. He was doing well until a month before his turned 18. His father showed up with police, had him arrested as a run away and while he was in detention, sold every one of his belongings. He lost his job and his apartment and that was why he joined the military.

His parents also told all of his relatives that he was a drug addict and the thief as "punishment" for disobeying.

He actually went home one Christmas on leave and asked his parents why they did all these things to him. They told him, first, because they could, and second, to teach him a lesson.

I asked him what the lesson was? He said it didn't matter. They never wanted a son. They wanted a slave. While this guy was in the service, he got married and his wife had a baby. He was a nice guy, smart and responsible. She seemed to be a very nice girl. I bet he made a good father.

There are rules and there is slavery.

Obviously, what you have described is abusive. If that is love, it's outside of the normal definitions.

 

[froggy]

But what kind of parents don't let their kids make their own decisions? Wanting to control everything about your child, is being a bad parent. My dad is a die hard liberal, and he has never disowned or judged my brother for being a republican. The two just debate a lot, and respect each other completely.

Bad parents. It's the duty of parents to "guide" their children. Rules are necessary, but they change as the child grows into an adult. I believe conservatives have a difficult time as parents because the core of conservative is "static" "unchanging". Children are supposed to grow and learn. Young children can't make every decision, but they have to be allowed some freedom or when they are finally one their own, they become "victims".

Seriously, you're a fucking idiot!

If children make decisions against their parents beliefs, and the parents support them, then the respect of the child is no longer there. To change your belief that you've instilled in the child through out the years would hurt your relationship with your child.

 

[del]

1. I applaud parents who accept their children for who and what they are, but which also provide constructive guidance, guidelines, and enforce rules short of those which constitute child abuse.

2. Enforcing rules that the child doesn't like is very rarely child abuse.

3. Not setting and enforcing any rules at all IS almost always a form of child abuse.

4. Booting out a person who has achieved majority for whatever reason is the right of the parent whether or not we approve of the reason, and the reason is really none of our business. I think most responsible parents would approve of inviting a young adult to leave if said young adult was not interested in keeping the rules of the house. And I think most would approve of the young adult leaving of his/her own volition if said rules were deemed unreasonable.

5. The anecdotal illustrations used in the OP were too different to offer much of a comparison. I think the father of the minor sent back to school probably made a good choice, but without knowing all the circumstances, that is difficult to judge. So far as we know, the father may have been a staunch Republican and conservative, so political ideology is irrelevent in that case. I don't know enough about the Alan Keyes situation to comment though I would not invite a child to leave JUST because he or she was gay or lesbian.

i wish more parents wanted to be parents and not friends to their kids.

 

[Foxfyre]

1. I applaud parents who accept their children for who and what they are, but which also provide constructive guidance, guidelines, and enforce rules short of those which constitute child abuse.

2. Enforcing rules that the child doesn't like is very rarely child abuse.

3. Not setting and enforcing any rules at all IS almost always a form of child abuse.

4. Booting out a person who has achieved majority for whatever reason is the right of the parent whether or not we approve of the reason, and the reason is really none of our business. I think most responsible parents would approve of inviting a young adult to leave if said young adult was not interested in keeping the rules of the house. And I think most would approve of the young adult leaving of his/her own volition if said rules were deemed unreasonable.

5. The anecdotal illustrations used in the OP were too different to offer much of a comparison. I think the father of the minor sent back to school probably made a good choice, but without knowing all the circumstances, that is difficult to judge. So far as we know, the father may have been a staunch Republican and conservative, so political ideology is irrelevent in that case. I don't know enough about the Alan Keyes situation to comment though I would not invite a child to leave JUST because he or she was gay or lesbian.

i wish more parents wanted to be parents and not friends to their kids.

Thanks Del. Sometimes you can be friends too, but not always. And if it comes down to whether it is better to be an unpopular good parent or popular friend, that's a no brainer too.

 

[AllieBaba]

If my high school daughter told me she was a lesbian, I would tell her #1, she's not old enough to make life-altering decisions. #2, she's not old enough to have sex.

Regarding prom, it's not supposed to be a political event. Prom is a place where kids get to dress up and pretend they're grown up. If my daughter wanted to go with a girl, I'd say sure. I went to homecoming with two guys, what does it hurt? Just no PDA...whether you're macking on a person of the same sex or the opposite. It's trashy either way.

 

[Samson]

The OP started off decently enough, then, predictably, Rdean's hatred of all things Republican kicked in.

Have a nice life

Frank...you are the first one to mention "Republicans".

yeah, nobody knew alan keyes was a republican until he mentioned it. i'm sure there are NO other examples of parents tossing their gay children to the curb, too.



keep swinging

I honestly had no idea.

But then, I'm not sure WTF the point of this thread is either.

Parents who "throw their kids to the curb," because of their (kid's) sexual orientation are parents who have had it WAY too easy being parents. Could any parent that's had a child with Down's Syndrom, or Muscular Dystrophy, or a hunderd other serious physical disabilities, imagine throwing a completely healthy, but homosexual son or daughter out of the house?

 

[Oscar Wao]

If my high school daughter told me she was a lesbian, I would tell her #1, she's not old enough to make life-altering decisions.

So 18 and up and in college (or out in the real world) is a magic age group now?

#2, she's not old enough to have sex.

I've known and fully acknowledged that I was gay since I was 17 and I haven't engaged in gay sex.

Regarding prom, it's not supposed to be a political event. Prom is a place where kids get to dress up and pretend they're grown up. If my daughter wanted to go with a girl, I'd say sure. I went to homecoming with two guys, what does it hurt? Just no PDA...whether you're macking on a person of the same sex or the opposite. It's trashy either way.

I agree. But it's foolish to assume toat just because two chicks or dudes going together means that they're going to flaunt their gay in terms of physical affections.

 

[AllieBaba]

It's even more foolish not to address the possibility.

 

[Samson]

I've known and fully acknowledged that I was gay since I was 17 and I haven't engaged in gay sex.
.