California is officially insane!

[Conservative]

Is that indoctrination enough for you?

He asked about indoctrination by the right in public schools, and this is what you offer as proof of said indoctrination? Odd... I looked at your link and I did not see where this is mandatory viewing in even 1 public school. Where is the indoctrination in public schools via your offered proof?

Your definition of proof needs to be reviewed.

Moron.

Does your ***** hurt?

Let me ask it...
JosefK? Do you hurt?

You get PWNED, as usual, and that's all you have... dumb remarks.

DO you have PROOF of PUBLIC SCHOOL indoctrination by the right... or not???

 

[JoeB131]

[


Is that indoctrination enough for you?

Yeah, I can imagine how calling Al Qaeda terrorists is "indocrination" and praising the First Responders was propaganda!

So maybe we should let Al Qaeda have equal time? Is that the liberal position, guy?

Spin it how you wish; but I provided what you said doesn't exist: an example of right-wing indoctrination of children. I'm sure there are other examples out there (like the Tea Party coloring book), but that one should suffice. Sore loser much?

Guy, is it really your position that terrorists are cool and the first responders weren't brave? Seriously?

 

[bodecea]

EMPHASIZING . . . as in their sexual orientation was pertinent to whatever it was that they did.

What difference does it make if some inventor or explorer or president or whoever was a homosexual or not? Why is this being forced on kids to learn when they are failing miserably at the basics?

I see it only being a factor in the same way that a person's race is a factor...the first gay city councilman (Harvey Milk), the first gay President (James Buchanan), the first gay director of the FBI (J. Edgar Hoover)...only in that fashion

What they did is what should be emphasized; their sexuality doesn't even need to be mentioned. Know why? It doesn't matter.

Why is this being forced on kids to learn when they are failing miserably at the basics? Instead of discussing the sexuality of those in history they ought to be teaching children how to read, write and add.

So..we never ever talk about the First woman who when into space, the first black president....stuff like that?

 

[bodecea]

the first gay President (James Buchanan)

Sorry, but that is a wives tale and is contradictory to known facts.

the first gay director of the FBI (J. Edgar Hoover)

That is, at best, unsubstantiated gossip.

Sure..... You keep on believing that.

 

[bodecea]

I see it only being a factor in the same way that a person's race is a factor...the first gay city councilman (Harvey Milk), the first gay President (James Buchanan), the first gay director of the FBI (J. Edgar Hoover)...only in that fashion

Do the gays want to claim either Buchanan (considered the worst president in history- worse than Obama!) or Hoover (serial violator or civil rights?)

Well, we gays aren't ALL fabulous.

 

[Conservative]

He asked about indoctrination by the right in public schools, and this is what you offer as proof of said indoctrination? Odd... I looked at your link and I did not see where this is mandatory viewing in even 1 public school. Where is the indoctrination in public schools via your offered proof?

Your definition of proof needs to be reviewed.

Moron.

Does your ***** hurt?

Let me ask it...
JosefK? Do you hurt?

You get PWNED, as usual, and that's all you have... dumb remarks.

DO you have PROOF of PUBLIC SCHOOL indoctrination by the right... or not???

I thought not.

Your PWNAGE is now complete.

 

[Zoom-boing]

I see it only being a factor in the same way that a person's race is a factor...the first gay city councilman (Harvey Milk), the first gay President (James Buchanan), the first gay director of the FBI (J. Edgar Hoover)...only in that fashion

What they did is what should be emphasized; their sexuality doesn't even need to be mentioned. Know why? It doesn't matter.

Why is this being forced on kids to learn when they are failing miserably at the basics? Instead of discussing the sexuality of those in history they ought to be teaching children how to read, write and add.

So..we never ever talk about the First woman who when into space, the first black president....stuff like that?

Sure we do. What does their sexual preference have to do with what they accomplished? Saying 'so and so was the first woman' or 'so and so was the first black' . . . and? I can see that someone is a female or black . . . their sexual orientation isn't known unless they make it known. It's private and should stay there. I don't recall being taught that George Washington was the first president of the U.S. and was a heterosexual or that Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire and was a homosexual. Who cares what their sexual preference was/is? Did they accomplish what they did because of their sexual preference?

Si modo articulated it well in an earlier post:

Did I say it was wrong that a person is gay or lesbian?

No.

So you're arguing with yourself on that. I have no desire to participate in an argument that has little to do with me.

Irrespective of that, my point is clear. You, and this program, focus on the label rather than the person.

Labels come in two types - good and bad.

When you and programs encourage labels, don't whine when you get both - it's what you wanted, and then you whine about it.

MLK said it best - focus on the content of character, not the label. This (and you) focuses on the label.

Schools shouldn't be teaching sexuality at all . . . that's what parents are for.

Kids are doing miserably in the three R's and this is what the CA school system is focusing on? Schools are failing in the job they're suppose to be doing and have no business teaching what some historical figure's sexual preference/orientation is.

 

[Harry Dresden]

With all of the bullying and gay bashing going on in US schools, this law could be a good thing for more than one reason. Perhaps teaching kids about the contributions some gay innovators have made to the world will make some of those kids think twice about beating up that gay kid.

yea because that has stopped non-gay kids from being bullied or beaten up.....are you ******* serious?.........

Yeah, I am serious. If this cirriculum causes one kid with a chip on his shoulder to respect gay people, and think twice about beating one up, then it is worth it. Or we could continue to do things the way the cons on this board seem to be in favor of: put the gay kids in the closet and forget about them, and when they do come out of the closet, ridicule them and tell them they're not worth shit.

yea like a bully is going to consider that....if a bully does not like the kid,gay or not,he is going to pick on the kid,he is not going to say"wait i cant pick on you because of Harvey Milk".....most bullies are dumb asses who probably dont know much History as it is........

 

[Inthemiddle]

Sure..... You keep on believing that.

I don't believe in anything. I draw sound conclusions based on all the evidence available. Buchanan was known to be romantically involved with several women through his life. The suggestion that he might be gay was never based on anything more than wild speculation, which was itself based on nothing other than the fact that he was roommates with his best friend and never got married. There is nothing to the claim that he was gay.

Hoover was rumored to be gay based again on nothing more than the fact that he was a bachelor. He was close friends with a co-worker, but there was never anything to ever rationally suggest a gay relationship, and in fact people who knew them rejected the hypothesis. Years later a cross dressing accusation was made, but that was from a known perjurer, and was entirely out of character for Hoover to ever be so sloppy as to get caught doing something like that even if he ever had. The perjurer also made claims about the mob having evidence of this behavior, which it used to blackmail Hoover. But that suggestion flies in the face of Hoover's known actions against the mob. For God's sake, the man was a 33rd degree Mason. You don't reach that level without upholding one's self to a high standard of character, which would not be consistent with Hoover being so sloppy as to ever be caught in a "delicate" situation. Especially considering attitudes toward homosexuality at the time, and the close and secretive nature of Freemasonry, if there had ever been a shred of truth to the whole thing his fellow Masons would have known, and he would never have risen to the highest echelon of Mason culture.

 

[Conservative]

Schools shouldn't be teaching sexuality at all . . . that's what parents are for.

Kids are doing miserably in the three R's and this is what the CA school system is focusing on? Schools are failing in the job they're suppose to be doing and have no business teaching what some historical figure's sexual preference/orientation is.

Who cares if kids can add, or read... as long as they know it's okay to have two mommies or two daddies.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Guidelines for posting

When starting a new Thread, please first check and confirm that there are not Current Threads, on the Same Topic, This will Avoid Merges. Please select the forum that best relates to the subject matter of your topic. Opening Posts require more than a Copy and Paste with a Link, You need to include relevant, on topic material of your own. When posting a new topic do not use the CAPS lock.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

 

[francoHFW]

California schools scrambling to add lessons on LGBT Americans - latimes.com


-

No big deal except for misinformed bigoted idiots...

There was no discussion about sex or gay lifestyles. The exercise simply underscored that families come in all sizes, shapes and configurations.
Œ
From link.

 

[francoHFW]

Schools shouldn't be teaching sexuality at all . . . that's what parents are for.

Kids are doing miserably in the three R's and this is what the CA school system is focusing on? Schools are failing in the job they're suppose to be doing and have no business teaching what some historical figure's sexual preference/orientation is.

Who cares if kids can add, or read... as long as they know it's okay to have two mommies or two daddies.

The most important thing to learn in school is how to learn and have how to have an open mind. Also something that is not taught in many conservative households like yours, dupe.

Many innovators were considered insane at the time.

Not seeing anything here of value.

How is knowing about the obscure gay person who did something that wasn't terribly important going to help make these kids better workers?

Schools need to stop the political indoctrination bullshit and get back to the basics. Teach them to read, write, do math, and know some simple science and basic history.

Is this asking too much?

The most important thing people should learn is tolerance for different people, and it sure as hell isn't taught in plenty of households and Fox News for example or Rush Limbaugh OMG.

 

[jillian]

California schools scrambling to add lessons on LGBT Americans - latimes.com


-

why is that insane? there are an awful lot of LGBT people who contributed to this country.

I know... you're a bigot and can't help being a moron.

 

[Jackson]

California schools scrambling to add lessons on LGBT Americans - latimes.com


-

why is that insane? there are an awful lot of LGBT people who contributed to this country.

I know... you're a bigot and can't help being a moron.

No one is saying that no LGBT contributed to anything. The Irish have contributed to this country and they don't warrant special lessons applauding their existence. Stop with the social engineering and teach math, reading, writing and the content areas.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I see it only being a factor in the same way that a person's race is a factor...the first gay city councilman (Harvey Milk), the first gay President (James Buchanan), the first gay director of the FBI (J. Edgar Hoover)...only in that fashion

What they did is what should be emphasized; their sexuality doesn't even need to be mentioned. Know why? It doesn't matter.

Why is this being forced on kids to learn when they are failing miserably at the basics? Instead of discussing the sexuality of those in history they ought to be teaching children how to read, write and add.

So..we never ever talk about the First woman who when into space, the first black president....stuff like that?

Sure we do. What does their sexual preference have to do with what they accomplished? Saying 'so and so was the first woman' or 'so and so was the first black' . . . and? I can see that someone is a female or black . . . their sexual orientation isn't known unless they make it known. It's private and should stay there. I don't recall being taught that George Washington was the first president of the U.S. and was a heterosexual or that Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire and was a homosexual. Who cares what their sexual preference was/is? Did they accomplish what they did because of their sexual preference?

Si modo articulated it well in an earlier post:

Did I say it was wrong that a person is gay or lesbian?

No.

So you're arguing with yourself on that. I have no desire to participate in an argument that has little to do with me.

Irrespective of that, my point is clear. You, and this program, focus on the label rather than the person.

Labels come in two types - good and bad.

When you and programs encourage labels, don't whine when you get both - it's what you wanted, and then you whine about it.

MLK said it best - focus on the content of character, not the label. This (and you) focuses on the label.

Schools shouldn't be teaching sexuality at all . . . that's what parents are for.

Kids are doing miserably in the three R's and this is what the CA school system is focusing on? Schools are failing in the job they're suppose to be doing and have no business teaching what some historical figure's sexual preference/orientation is.

First of all. Sex is private , but sexuality is another matter. When you say that gays should keep sexuality private, you're basiclly saying that they should be in the closet. And, if closetted, they cannot have the same full life and freedom that heterosexual and cisgender people have. Think about it. Straight people do not have to hide who they are dating and who they marry. They can bring their lover or spouse to family gatherings . They can place their pictures on social media and on their desk at work. They do not have to talk in gender neutral terms when speaking to others about their loved ones. All things that heterosexuals take for granted.

Having said that, the point is not that their sexual preference has anything to do with their accomplishments. The point is that all to often LGBTQ people are cast in a negative light and smeared as perverts and predators and that it is all about the sex acts while ignoring the whole person.

What California is doing is trying to insure that the negative propaganda is countered by positive views of LGBT people and educate children about the fact that they are real people and that sex is only one small aspect of who they are - just like you. They should be trated by educators just like any other minority or group that has been maligned and held back, like blacks and women.

These youngsters are impressionable and could easily deveop into bigots if exposd to the wrong message exclusivly with out that being ballanced out by positive information That in turn will negativly effect them later in life by making it difficult for them to deal with and accept diversity in work and social settings. That is why this program is a legitimate part of the educational process. It is not just about the three R's

Thank you for inspiring me to write this

 

[Jackson]

California schools scrambling to add lessons on LGBT Americans - latimes.com


-

why is that insane? there are an awful lot of LGBT people who contributed to this country.

I know... you're a bigot and can't help being a moron.

And you can't help being rude and mean. We have all learned that. No need to emphasize it.

 

[jillian]

California schools scrambling to add lessons on LGBT Americans - latimes.com


-

why is that insane? there are an awful lot of LGBT people who contributed to this country.

I know... you're a bigot and can't help being a moron.

And you can't help being rude and mean. We have all learned that. No need to emphasize it.

why would I be polite to bigots?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

California schools scrambling to add lessons on LGBT Americans - latimes.com


-

why is that insane? there are an awful lot of LGBT people who contributed to this country.

I know... you're a bigot and can't help being a moron.

No one is saying that no LGBT contributed to anything. The Irish have contributed to this country and they don't warrant special lessons applauding their existence. Stop with the social engineering and teach math, reading, writing and the content areas.

See post 136 and learn why.

 

[Jackson]

California schools scrambling to add lessons on LGBT Americans - latimes.com


-

why is that insane? there are an awful lot of LGBT people who contributed to this country.

I know... you're a bigot and can't help being a moron.

No one is saying that no LGBT contributed to anything. The Irish have contributed to this country and they don't warrant special lessons applauding their existence. Stop with the social engineering and teach math, reading, writing and the content areas.

See post 136 and learn why.

Just as we accept all groups of people, it doesn't need to be in the curriculum at school. It should be discussed in homes, churches and synagogues. Schools no longer meet the educational standards they once did because society demands them to cure all the ills of society. Brace yourself, be schools and teachers can't dlo it ALL. We need the people to teach their own families about justice and injustice in our society.