View homosexually tolerant film, or school faces lawsuit

Originally posted by CazMedia
Lecky,
You seem as obsessed and rabid to bash a religious ideology (which is not the sole reason people oppose gay issues) as you claim they are to bash gays.

Sorry, I don't tolerate bigotry, you people can go about bashing homosexuals by comparing them to pedophiliies all you want...just don't get defensive when someone labels you a bigot...I don't care how many bible verses you throw my way.

(i prefer to leave religious judgmentalism OUT of my stance against gay issues, if i walk into church, im lible to burst into flames...so get off the religious evil kick....some of us saying NO to gay issues dont practice a religion at all.)

umm...congratulations???

Let me make something else very clear, I am not on a religion-is-evil kick, all of the Christians I know have no problems whatsoever with homosexuals. I'm talking about "Christians" who corrode this country with their hatred and stupidity then defend their behavior with Bible verses. There is no reasoning with these morons and I'm sick of trying...fortunately for me I don't come into contact with these pathetic excuses for human beings very often...except on ATS.


I WILL NEVER tolerate people like this...for me they are just as bad as members of the KKK!



[edit on 11/30/2004 by Lecky]

LostSailor,

Um... I went to Private schools also. I'll teach my kids the tolerance they need. It shouldn't be taught in public schools. Not if religion can't that is.

My point was that being raised in a religious environment and/or being shielded from things like homosexuality negates the possibility of a child growing up to be gay. Simple truth of the matter is it doesn't, I'm proof of that.

(sorry UBER, you know i have to say this AGAIN)

Lecky says,

Sorry, I don't tolerate bigotry, you people can go about bashing homosexuals by comparing them to pedophiliies all you want...just don't get defensive when someone labels you a bigot...I don't care how many bible verses you throw my way.

I wont need to throw the bible at all. Comparisons to other "questionable" groups are NOT meant to EQUATE one to another, but to illustrate the idea of "which special interest minority group of questionable ideology is next to attempt to circumvent the democratic process of cultural identity?".

Name calling is name calling however you wish to justify it and it is devicive. You will never build a majority concensus here with that "us or them" attitude...you push away moderates that MIGHT side with you if it werent for the nasty (and subversive) tactics being used to prop up gay issues.

SO just to be clear here....
You are just as bigoted against those that you disagree with on gay issues as you accuse them of being?

Hello pot, this is the kettle calling....

I suppose you support the san fran mayor and his pocket judges STEALING the votes of californians that said NO to gay marriage, by attempting to legislate this from the bench too eh? (PS this was found unconstitutional in CA) In essence this act HIJACKED DEMOCRACY from the citizens of that state and attempted to substitute rule by an elite few onto the citizens that FOR WHATEVER REASON (religion, constitutionality, cultural identity, historical heritage etc etc etc) chose to decline this proposed legislation.

Are you for this yes or no?

Who's rights are you advocating are removed next and for what special interest minority group agenda?

Who's persecuting whom here?

Originally posted by edsinger

1 Cor 6:9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 1 Cor 6:10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

*buzz* Wrong.


1 Corinthians 6:9-10:

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor cowards (incorrectly translated as "effeminate;" The Greek word means "soft" or "pliable"), nor abusers of themselves with men (The Greek word is used only here and in 1 Timothy 1:10 in lists. The word literally means "male bed" and is not found in contemporary Greek until many years after the time of Paul. To translate it "homosexuals" or other similar words is abusive and incorrect.),

cor 6:9

As a christian, I cannot tolerate hatred and deception, much like you cannot tolerate gays. I still can't seem to grasp why God would hate people that he created.

There's more important things to worry about than a 'tolerance' film. gh. This film isn't saying "Hey you! Be gay!" Any way, they agreed to show it in the first place, and if they weren't going to they'd face a lawsuit. Now, to the 'holier than thou's,' if you made a deal that a public school had to show a film about how homosexuality is wrong (and I'm sure the ideas been approached countless times) you'd prolly sue if they didn't show your film. So Lets move on.

And please no one give me that "But what about morals and the defacing of christian values?" crap, who are you to define morals or what God actually believes on every subject? Does he call you say "You know what I think? I think gays are despicable and women need to get back in the kitchen..." No, I think not. Last time I checked not 1 of the 10 commandments says anything similar to "thou shall not be gay."

I'll be saying an prayer to guide people who embrace ignorance and blindly persecute tonight.

(And yes, good news, contrary to popular belief, not all christians hate gays and think Pat Robertson is immaculate)


[edit on 11/30/2004 by Verdis Quo]

Originally posted by CazMedia
Name calling is name calling however you wish to justify it and it is devicive.

I don't care what other bigots think of me *shrug*

You will never build a majority concensus here with that "us or them" attitude...you push away moderates that MIGHT side with you if it werent for the nasty (and subversive) tactics being used to prop up gay issues

This isn't my personal campaign, there is no way I can convince someone else that being gay is a natural occurence if they already think they know all the answers themselves. This is something I learned in my own experiences with homosexuals as well as using some common sense. LOL, what nasty and subversive tactics am I using? You act like I have some gay agenda...I'm heterosexual, what am I gaining here by defending homosexuals?

SO just to be clear here....
You are just as bigoted against those that you disagree with on gay issues as you accuse them of being?

I am intolerant to those who bash gays, that includes comparing homosexuality to pedophillia and beastiality. Yes those people are morons.
Call me a "bigot" against bigots if you want.

I suppose you support the san fran mayor and his pocket judges STEALING the votes of californians that said NO to gay marriage, by attempting to legislate this from the bench too eh? (PS this was found unconstitutional in CA) In essence this act HIJACKED DEMOCRACY from the citizens of that state and attempted to substitute rule by an elite few onto the citizens that FOR WHATEVER REASON (religion, constitutionality, cultural identity, historical heritage etc etc etc) chose to decline this proposed legislation.

Not aware of that story...doesn't change my views. Here's a refresher for ya ...
I am intolerant against those who bash gays, that includes comparing homosexuality to pedophillia and beastiality. Really... it's 2004, no excuse for this nonsense.

No...I'm not a violent person so you won't see me commiting hate crimes against bigots, nor do I wish them any physical harm...I just find them foul. Chances are...they probably won't like me very much either, which is fine too

I've already posted like 100000 threads on this topic...trying to reason with people at ATS. There is no reason to argue this issue...people are already set in their beliefs...maybe they will just have to learn for themselves.

(BTW we are off topic)

I was a scout. My parents were both scout leaders.

The Boy Scouts of America made me ashamed of my past association with scouting worldwide by their bigoted actions.

Remember in Skokie, Illinois, the ACLU spoke in court in favour of the Nazi Party's right to march. It plays the law equally for all. That's why equal rights are just that, equal.

Doesn't the US contitution state that "all men are created equal" and something about these rights being self-evident?

My point is that assualt is already illegal and schools are to already show zero tolerance for violent behavior in schools. Now that includes hetero fights over potential boyfriend/girlfriend, violence concerning race, religion, and sexual orientation. There should be no tolerance for any violent acts in public schools neither should their be time wasted with socialization issues. If, and only if, we had students scoring so high on academic testing, might I agree with any sort of added socialization and only then for civics and such classes that teach them how to interact with society.

Until that becomes a reality and considering the budget problems and the state of public education, the only saving grace I can see for it is if public education dropped the socialization issues and went back to basic acedemics until they get that right.

Am I the only one who sees how absolutly ignorant it is to have highschool graduates who cannot read and write tackling social issues to which they have only one side of the coin because they lack the ability to research the other?

Its illegal to assualt anyone in public schools. We do not need training courses to implant ideology in place of personal opinion. We should encourage our children to be free thinkers and give them the education to become just that instead of programming them to accept ideas that they might not when presented with all the facts.

The liberal agenda in America relies on ignorant un-educated drones who will lap up everything they dole out because they have not the ability to assertain the knowledge otherwise. Lets teach our kids to read and let them make their own decisions on what they socially accept.

This crap does not belong in acadamia. Its not what we pay for and its costing us some potentially great minds.

As for the sodomy law, I did not know the federal government had once again trumpt states rights but I cannot say I'm suprised. There is a reason why these states made this illegal and I can admit that the religious tie is not substancial to enact a law but surely we cannot ignore the health risks and complications from these acts. How can we when STDs are running rampant? Sure, I am aware it comes from infected hetero partners as well but people, medically, how can any one of you support this as a healthy act?

Which then brings us to the physician's delima. How do you treat a patient whom you cannot correctly diagnose. If we're too fat, a doctor will put us on a correct diet. If we have bad lungs, a doctor will help and encourage us to stop smoking. But how can we expect a doctor to tell a gay person the reason he's having rectal bleeding and tell him to stop injuring himself when he can turn around and launch a lawsuit for discrimination? If every day, I bashed my hand with a hammer and ran to the doctor. How stupid is it for him to have to re-set the same fractures day after day while he is not allowed to tell me to stop doing that? And, what if every visit is being paid for by medicaid? By the taxpayers? Could you say I'm justified for using this program to help treat something I'm intentionally causing knowing better all along?

I mean, we can attribute gay to mean a good sense of style and decorating sense all day long but its always going to boil down to a nasty, unsanitary act. You can say that being gay doesn't have to mean anal sex but come on? They have been trying to sell that one for years and if the past state elections on gay unions are any indication, the people haven't bought it.

Why? Because the majority of voters attended school before the latest wave of brainwashing began. Now, in 20 years or so, I look for it to be repealed and homosexuality to be accepted if the program has done its job and the next generation will be getting the same "education" from the next step of deviation, pedofilia.

Each and every step down the slippery slope of sexual deviation we accept serves only to bring the next one up to bat. If any of you believe once gays have special rights, it will stop, you're going to end up in the same shape as those who can not accept gay rights today.

Now, I realize my opinions aren't PC and really, I could give a damn less. No one worries about hurting my feelings nor should they because I'm an edcuated adult who realizes that not everything I say and do will be accepted with open arms. Why, then should I not expect the same from everyone else? I'm not scolding children, I'm giving a personal opinion on an adult subject to other adults. Deal with it. Its a cold harsh world out there and if we are to discuss such subjects then all the whining and crying and feelings to be hurt need to leave us in puberty.

Originally posted by astrocreep
The liberal agenda in America relies on ignorant un-educated drones who will lap up everything they dole out because they have not the ability to assertain the knowledge otherwise.

I understand that you are not referring all liberals by this, but I'm curious why you think that this is exclusively a liberal trait. It seems to me that liberals are not the only ones preying on the uneducated and ignorant.

bg

Originally posted by beergoggles


I understand that you are not referring all liberals by this, but I'm curious why you think that this is exclusively a liberal trait. It seems to me that liberals are not the only ones preying on the uneducated and ignorant.

bg

I agree in general however, we are discussing a specific institution which is being heavily influenced by the liberal socialistic ideology. You may think its a good thing or you may think its a bad thing which is all a matter of opinion but we can hardly deny where the influence is coming from in "public schools".

My opinion (opinion only mind you) is that its a bad thing and takes away resources from acedemics. I feel the same about school sanctioned sports too. Its good if a school wants to have a team after hours but when we begin allowing athletes to skip classes and get by with missing tests , I think we need to draw the line, so to speak. I send my son to school for an academic education. I'll take him sports events afterward and teach him social values at home. You may not agreew with what I teach him but we're all not always going to get things our way everytime.

I, for instants, have a problem with kids parents who teach them to grow up and get on welfare as a way of life. I can't really stop it as ticked as it makes me but if they have an outlet to an education, maybe they will be able to make their own decision.

I'll teach my son hard work, responsibility, and traditional values and that may tick you off. Whatever programming he receives at school, I will counter at home with the truth of both sides of it.

I refuse to allow my tax dollars to pay for hetero or homosexual movies in school. Sex has very little place in school outside a biology lab. This is a subject that should be handled by parents. You know our responsibilities as parents doesn't end at conception or birth. Its a job and a serious one at that for a lifetime.

Originally posted by astrocreep
I'll teach my son hard work, responsibility, and traditional values and that may tick you off. Whatever programming he receives at school, I will counter at home with the truth of both sides of it.

and there is nothing wrong with this at all, I do the same. However, I think the point of the matter is tolerance. You'd be surprised what this "centrist/liberal" teaches his kids.

I refuse to allow my tax dollars to pay for hetero or homosexual movies in school. Sex has very little place in school outside a biology lab. This is a subject that should be handled by parents. You know our responsibilities as parents doesn't end at conception or birth. Its a job and a serious one at that for a lifetime.

On this, we agree. It is not the responsibility of anyone but the parent to teach the children about sex.
While I disagree with the concept of homosexuality on many levels, I also understand that it is not my life. There is a serious bias against people who choose this as their lifestyle and because of machismo attitudes and religious convictions we are becoming a nation that treats anyone �different� as second class citizens. This does indeed start at home.
Tolerance for other beliefs and lifestyles does not equate to acceptance of said way of life. I am not condoning the activity; I am promoting tolerance toward them as human beings.

As for the original topic, I also find it absurd that people be forced to watch anything


bg

Its all well and good to say that morals should not be taught in schools, and that it should be up to the parents. Its even nice to hear that the majority of people here are bringing their children up to be respectful and tolerant of others.

But the simple fact is that not everyone is bringing their children up this way. As such I think it is important that the education system at least try to expose children to the idea that people are different.

Frankly the more that can be done to help children be more tolerant of others the better. There is enough strife caused in the world today by ignorance and intolerance that to try and stop children from learning tolerance yet still claim the high moral ground is ridiculous.

Like I said thats why my kids are gonna go to private school. I don't want the learnng social values, moral values or anything other than mathe science hstory etc. at school. I will teach them the rest not the school board.

Caz, by all means challenge reverse discrimination and liberal bigotry but you don't seem to be questioning some of the pretty heavy duty assertions being made against gay/gay issues, if you have then sorry for this statement I just haven't seen it. Imagine you walk into a room and someone keeps screaming bastard at you or whenever you're name is mentioned they make slanderous connections between you and peadophilia sooner or later you're going to react. I've yet to meet one homosexual whos anti Xtian stance hasn't resulted from Xtian anti gay abuse, we are human after all as much as some think otherwise.

To the posters that think tolerance should be taught at home and schools should concentrate on education, yeah so do I, the more educated you are the less likely you are to arrive at a predjudiced veiwpoint. The harsh reality is that many parents do not teach tolerance merely pass their own predjudices onto their children, if that starts bleeding into the education system and impacting the lives of other kids then do we leave them to fight it out for themselves or as a responsible, civilised society do we step in and try to undo some of the damage.

ubermunche - While I agree that peopl should teach thier children tolerance the fact is parents have the right to teach thier children intolerance if they wish.
Ask yourself why those parents who take thier kds to KKK rallies havent had thier kids taken from them.
As a parent you have the right to teach your children damn near anything you want, intolerance hate, Buddhism, satanism, Comunnism etc.
Whether you agree with what they are teaching thier children is irelevant its thier right and you cant do a damn thing about it.
Thats why I think this is wrong, it takes away a parents constituional right to teach thier children to hate.
I may not agree with what you say but I will fight for your right to say it. I may not agree with what you teach your kids but I will fight for your right to teach it.

Originally posted by mwm1331
Thats why I think this is wrong, it takes away a parents constituional right to teach thier children to hate.

That's damn funny.

On a serious note though. I fail to see how teaching kids tolerance would qualify as unconstitutional.

Well I guess if you are teaching something anathema to a parents religous/social beliefs, Then it could be argued that you are infringng upon thier rights. Its a loose interpertation but I think a smart lawyer could make it stick.
I am actaully kinda surprised that neither the Neo-Naz's or KKK has tried this tack.

I mean if I have the right to teach my children to wrship jesus. why don't you have the right to teach your children that (nsert minority, religon etc here) are abominations, inferior etc.?

Originally posted by mwm1331
Well I guess if you are teaching something anathema to a parents religous/social beliefs, Then it could be argued that you are infringng upon thier rights. Its a loose interpertation but I think a smart lawyer could make it stick.
I am actaully kinda surprised that neither the Neo-Naz's or KKK has tried this tack.

I'd love to see them try. That would certainly be an interesting case to follow.

I mean if I have the right to teach my children to wrship jesus. why don't you have the right to teach your children that (nsert minority, religon etc here) are abominations, inferior etc.?

While I doubt it's illegal per say for parents to teach their children to be racists, there most probably will be legal troubles when the kids grow older and start acting on what they've been thought.

Depends on how you act on it.
Luckily most racists aren't too smart. But think about someone who teaches thier kids to hate and teaches them the law?
Someone who teaches thier kids to avoid all contact with gays, blacks whatever group it is they dislike, but also teaches them to try and work within the system to make the lives of that group difficult.

On a related subject would it be legal to start a political party dedicted to resegregating america?

[edit on 30-11-2004 by mwm1331]

Originally posted by mwm1331
Depends on how you act on it.
Luckily most racists aren't too smart. But think about someone who teaches thier kids to hate and teaches them the law?

I'm pretty sure this actually happens but I'd say the only thing you'll achieve by doing so is raising confused kids.

True but my point is isn't it your right to raise #ed up kids?