"A free thinker is Satan's slave"

[koshergrl]

Look, another progressive who doesn't know what constitutes "teaching" and "learning".

That explains so much.

logical4u specifically said teaching. Thanks for playing.

Whoosh.

I know what he said.

My point is that you don't know what constitutes teaching.

I'm pretty sure I said that.

 

[sublime]

People who pass judgement on others and condemn them to hell are guilty of sin. They are not good Christians, they do not follow God's commandments and they should learn to hate the sin but love the sinner.

I always love b!tch slapping a so called religious person who is on their high horse of condemnation.

Sin is sin.....

Thank you for that irrlevant tidbit.

I like macaroni.

You are one of the worst kinds of sinners.

 

[koshergrl]

Liking macaroni is a sin?

 

[BDBoop]

No, - well. He might be wrong. You may very well be mentally ill, in which case, no sin is involved.

 

[koshergrl]

I don't recall condemning anyone to hell.

Could you link that? I think you're affording me a little more power than I have, but if you think I did, well, just show me where and I'll play along.

 

[Montrovant]

Look, another progressive who doesn't know what constitutes "teaching" and "learning".

That explains so much.

logical4u specifically said teaching. Thanks for playing.

Whoosh.

I know what he said.

My point is that you don't know what constitutes teaching.

I'm pretty sure I said that.

Sorry, since there was clearly no teaching children to have sex, I assumed you were saying that they were learning it anyway. That at least would have made some sense. Apparently, instead, you think that somewhere in those links there was actually examples of children being taught they should have sex.

 

[koshergrl]

No, not clearly. And you shouldn't assume. I said what I said, it's written right there. You are free to change my words, but lying about what I was saying doesn't mean I really said anything like that.

 

[BDBoop]

No, not clearly. And you shouldn't assume. I said what I said, it's written right there. You are free to change my words, but lying about what I was saying doesn't mean I really said anything like that.

Sucks when they turn your game around on you, dunnit.

 

[logical4u]

Where is it that underage children are taught sex is good and they should do it? I'd appreciate evidence rather than you making a baseless claim. I'd also like evidence that these places accept bestiality.

....."Middle school students will be assigned "risk cards" that rate the safety of different activities, the paper says, from French kissing to oral sex.

The workbooks for older students direct them to a website run by Columbia University, which explores topics such as sexual positions, porn stars, and bestiality. The lessons explain risky sexual behavior and suggest students go to stores to jot condom brands and prices.
..." Mandatory Sex Ed Details May Be Too Racy for Parents: Report | NBC New York

".....
Michael Sudlow, a parent of a 16-year-old student there, called the play semi-pornographic and too torrid to describe in print for a family newspaper.

"Except for one passing reference to abstinence, they centered on 'safe sex' and included dildos, male and female condoms and how to use them, explanations about oral sex and a Saran Wrap condom alternative," Sudlow said. "We were really shocked at the audacity of the school to show that kind of stuff."

Sudlow said his son saw one girl try to leave the assembly but was detained until she called her mother. The son was too embarrassed to even tell his mother about the program, said Sudlow, who works in the admissions office at Brigham Young University-Hawai'i.
...." Sex education play upsets Kahuku parents, students | The Honolulu Advertiser | Hawaii's Newspaper

...."When she picked up her 12-year-old son at Hardy Middle School last Tuesday afternoon, "Susan" knew something was wrong. Her son looked "disturbed," his father said later. Susan asked her son what had happened at school. A test had been given in a health/physical education class filled with 7th-grade boys and girls.

One classmate called it a "sex test."

"What is your gender?" was the first question. The choice of answers:

a) Male
b) Female
c) Transgender (M to F)
d) Transgender (F to M)

The 12-year-old was slightly bewildered. He noticed other children seemed confused.

The questions became more graphic:

"How sure are you that you....

...Can name all four body fluids that can transmit HIV.
...Know the difference between oral, vaginal, and anal sex.
...Can correctly put a condom on yourself or your partner.
...Will avoid getting yourself or your partner pregnant if you have sex.
...Can convince a reluctant partner to use barrier protection (i.e. condoms, dental dams) during sex."

The 12-year-old, even more confused, asked an instructor about some of the terms. "What is this? I don't know what this is," he told the facilitator. Children ventured guesses as the instructor -- brought in on a DCPS contract -- started to define "anal sex" and "oral sex."

Susan (not her real name) called her husband at the office. She was practically in tears. He was outraged.

Other parents heard about the "sex test" from their kids. "The school is making us take a sex survey," one child told his mother. ...."
Parents upset by "sex test" at Hardy Middle School | The Georgetown Dish

"...A group of parents in a California school district say they are being bullied by school administrators into accepting a new curriculum that addresses bullying, respect and acceptance -- and that includes compulsory lessons about the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community that will be taught to children as young as 5 years old. ...............The proposed curriculum will include a 45-minute LGBT lesson, once a year from kindergarten through fifth grade. The kindergartners will focus on the harms of teasing, while the fifth graders will study sexual orientation stereotypes. ..................."

Gay Curriculum Proposal Riles Elementary School Parents | Fox News

"........SB 1437, which requires editing textbooks and other materials to give only positive references to homosexuality, bisexuality, transsexuality and transvestitism, was approved on a nearly party-line vote of 47-31 (46 Democrats and one Republican for; 30 Republicans and one Democrat against) after a Republican-sponsored amendment to require parental permission failed 26-48. The bill was sponsored by lesbian activist state Sen. Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica), a former actress who is the driving force behind the legislative homosexual agenda. Earlier this month, in the face of a promised veto by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), Kuehl removed a portion of the bill that would have forced all California public schools to teach the "history and achievements" of homosexuals in America. ........."
Concerned Women for America - California Law Makers Approve K-12 Pro-Homosexual School Bills

You can do your own research if that isn't enough examples.

Not surprisingly, none of your links showed that kids are being taught to have sex. Also not surprisingly, none of your links had a single thing to do with bestiality that I saw.

If you are telling a child how to make pancakes, don't you think the child is going to try to make pancakes?

 

[logical4u]

logical4u specifically said teaching. Thanks for playing.

Whoosh.

I know what he said.

My point is that you don't know what constitutes teaching.

I'm pretty sure I said that.

Sorry, since there was clearly no teaching children to have sex, I assumed you were saying that they were learning it anyway. That at least would have made some sense. Apparently, instead, you think that somewhere in those links there was actually examples of children being taught they should have sex.

If you are "explaining" what sexual positions are used, the different types of sex, and the differents partnering in sex, what do you call that???? And please be specific.
If someone brought a handgun into a class room and proceeded to "explain" how to load, clean and shoot it, would you say the students were being taught how to handle a gun? What is the difference? Corruption never "starts" large.

 

[koshergrl]

No, not clearly. And you shouldn't assume. I said what I said, it's written right there. You are free to change my words, but lying about what I was saying doesn't mean I really said anything like that.

Sucks when they turn your game around on you, dunnit.

When that happens, I'll let you know.

 

[BDBoop]

No, not clearly. And you shouldn't assume. I said what I said, it's written right there. You are free to change my words, but lying about what I was saying doesn't mean I really said anything like that.

Sucks when they turn your game around on you, dunnit.

When that happens, I'll let you know.

No you won't. You're in denial.

 

[koshergrl]

Not at all.

 

[Montrovant]

Sorry, I've been out of town for a few days for a funeral, wasn't around to reply.

I'm just going to make a quick post here.

Teaching someone how to do something is not the same as teaching them they should do it. That seemed to be your argument logical....kids are being taught to have sex, not being taught how. So, my counter is that they are not being taught to do it. That doesn't mean I approve of any of the things being taught, but it does draw a line between saying something like, "It's better for you not to have sex, but if you do, here's how to be safe" and saying, "Go have sex! Here's how!".

kg, the same point applies to you. I'm not commenting on what the kids may be learning but what the teaching is specifically. You used both terms in your original comment to me. I won't deny that kids will, after being taught about sex, decide to go have sex. I'm denying any evidence that schools are teaching them they should go out and do it.

 

[koshergrl]

Kids are being taught to have sex...not being taught how?

WTF?

The schools dont' teach them they SHOULD go out and do it. The schools teach them that they're EXPECTED to go out and do it.

 

[kawserahmed]

The free thinking man that discovered fire and learnt to cook food, the free thinking hunter that used his magnificent brain the create tools, the free thinker that decided to settle down and farm crops and keep live stock, thus creating civilisation, ALL SATAN'S SLAVES,

Who has said you that a free thinker ,.... .? If you are right then there is no one in the earth who is not free thinker.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Sorry, I've been out of town for a few days for a funeral, wasn't around to reply.

I'm just going to make a quick post here.

Teaching someone how to do something is not the same as teaching them they should do it. That seemed to be your argument logical....kids are being taught to have sex, not being taught how. So, my counter is that they are not being taught to do it. That doesn't mean I approve of any of the things being taught, but it does draw a line between saying something like, "It's better for you not to have sex, but if you do, here's how to be safe" and saying, "Go have sex! Here's how!".

kg, the same point applies to you. I'm not commenting on what the kids may be learning but what the teaching is specifically. You used both terms in your original comment to me. I won't deny that kids will, after being taught about sex, decide to go have sex. I'm denying any evidence that schools are teaching them they should go out and do it.

Good perspective, like when someone tells their college age kid "if you're going to drink, don't drive", I wouldn't take that as an endorsement to drink.

Besides when you tell a kid explicitly not to do something, that often encourages them to do it. I'll bet that's half the excitement for kids who grow up in fundamentalist households.

 

[buckeye45_73]

I do have a problem with the you shouldnt do, but if you do....because you are setting the expectation that if they do it there is no consequence. If there isnt a consequence, why not do it? you have to take time to explain stuff to your kids. For example, when I have kids, I'll teach them sex ed, I dont want the schools doing it. it's my job as a parent, not theirs. Same with drinking, drugs, ect.

you can teach them about sex and still say if you do this, then x might or might not happen, but if you do it, dont expect sympathy from me.

 

[koshergrl]

Sorry, I've been out of town for a few days for a funeral, wasn't around to reply.

I'm just going to make a quick post here.

Teaching someone how to do something is not the same as teaching them they should do it. That seemed to be your argument logical....kids are being taught to have sex, not being taught how. So, my counter is that they are not being taught to do it. That doesn't mean I approve of any of the things being taught, but it does draw a line between saying something like, "It's better for you not to have sex, but if you do, here's how to be safe" and saying, "Go have sex! Here's how!".

kg, the same point applies to you. I'm not commenting on what the kids may be learning but what the teaching is specifically. You used both terms in your original comment to me. I won't deny that kids will, after being taught about sex, decide to go have sex. I'm denying any evidence that schools are teaching them they should go out and do it.

Good perspective, like when someone tells their college age kid "if you're going to drink, don't drive", I wouldn't take that as an endorsement to drink.

Besides when you tell a kid explicitly not to do something, that often encourages them to do it. I'll bet that's half the excitement for kids who grow up in fundamentalist households.

YOU wouldn't...but most teens do. They think "so long as I have a driver, I can drink!"

I know because that's what all my friends did when they were growing up...when the push was first being made to focus on the driving aspect of drinking, instead of the drinking aspect. The kids whose parents said "IF you're going to drink, don't drive" were the ones who had big blow out parties at their house, whose parents bought the booze. It was going home from their parties that other kids died, in car wrecks, or from alcohol poisoning.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Sorry, I've been out of town for a few days for a funeral, wasn't around to reply.

I'm just going to make a quick post here.

Teaching someone how to do something is not the same as teaching them they should do it. That seemed to be your argument logical....kids are being taught to have sex, not being taught how. So, my counter is that they are not being taught to do it. That doesn't mean I approve of any of the things being taught, but it does draw a line between saying something like, "It's better for you not to have sex, but if you do, here's how to be safe" and saying, "Go have sex! Here's how!".

kg, the same point applies to you. I'm not commenting on what the kids may be learning but what the teaching is specifically. You used both terms in your original comment to me. I won't deny that kids will, after being taught about sex, decide to go have sex. I'm denying any evidence that schools are teaching them they should go out and do it.

Good perspective, like when someone tells their college age kid "if you're going to drink, don't drive", I wouldn't take that as an endorsement to drink.

Besides when you tell a kid explicitly not to do something, that often encourages them to do it. I'll bet that's half the excitement for kids who grow up in fundamentalist households.

YOU wouldn't...but most teens do. They think "so long as I have a driver, I can drink!"

I know because that's what all my friends did when they were growing up...when the push was first being made to focus on the driving aspect of drinking, instead of the drinking aspect. The kids whose parents said "IF you're going to drink, don't drive" were the ones who had big blow out parties at their house, whose parents bought the booze. It was going home from their parties that other kids died, in car wrecks, or from alcohol poisoning.

There are loser parents who host those things yes I agree. But I'm only 26, high school wasn't that far back for me. Half the people who attended those parties were the kids of naive parents (like mine) who were so out of touch that a kid being out all night was never going to drink. Half the kids who weren't allowed to drink or do anything cuz they had the hardcore moralist type parents were the ones who partied the hardest as a release.

If an 18 year goes out and drinks 8 beers and gets drunk and falls asleep, no big deal. If an 18 year old goes out, drinks and drives, that's a big deal. IMO at least.