It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

View homosexually tolerant film, or school faces lawsuit

page: 18
0
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Gotta go with Mac on this one AC. I've been to a gay bar and not only had a good time, was treated no different than anyone else. Straight people could learn from the gay community when it comes to hospitallity.


Same here. I have been to one and was not hassled in ANY way. The sad thing is if I had taken my buddy to a straight bar he would have got his ass kicked. Of course most of our bars around here are a bit on the wild side. You have three kinds Redneck, Biker or Both.




posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Maybe I sued a bad example of a bar. I don't fruequent them anymore so I don't know. But, by focusing on that one fopa on my part, you have all side stepped the real issue. Does sex have any part in schools and should clubs based primarily on an act most deem appropriate for bedroom only be brought into schools. I'm all for controlling abuse emotional or physical but do you ll not get that some kids are never going to think homosexuality is right and there's nothing wrong with that? Its personal opinion ad its their right.

To mandate free thinking is wrong in any case and if we choose to educate people about the homosexual lifestyle, should that not be a voluntary decision? Once again, for the record. I agree with all staff taking training to deal with ANY abuse that is potential and I suspect they already have taken these course ...or at least I hope they have.

There are several reasons that one individual will not socially accept another and thats okay. All we can legally do is make sure everyone is provided the same opportunities. Again, I doubt the priciple or board would have let a hetero support group meet at school either. To use school grounds, one must relate thgeir group back to either acedemics, physical education, or civics. Now, we all know this group could have founded it under a common interest besides sex. Just because one is gay, does not mean you spend your whole existence and all your effort promoting that one sole interest. I'm certain these people could have come up with another common interest which might have been inclusive of others as well. Isn't that what the homosexual community has been fighting for all these years? No all straight groups which excluded them and the first thing they do is form an all gay group....and I have no problem with that if they so choose. Its forcing that subject to be dealt with by our educational system that I have the beef about.



posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 08:22 AM
link   
I agree Astrocreep that these types of groups have no place in schools, but I think everyone is missing a small detail. These groups are not strickly for gays. The group is called "The Gay, Straight Alliance Group" or something like that. Which means that anyone can join.



posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by astrocreep Does sex have any part in schools and should clubs based primarily on an act most deem appropriate for bedroom only be brought into schools. I'm all for controlling abuse emotional or physical but do you ll not get that some kids are never going to think homosexuality is right and there's nothing wrong with that? Its personal opinion ad its their right.


The Gay/straight alliances are not about, sex, they are about toleration of those who are different. While it's the others their right to have their own oppinion, even if others think it makes them bigoted, the group wasn't forcing anyone to join.


Originally posted by astrocreep To mandate free thinking is wrong in any case and if we choose to educate people about the homosexual lifestyle, should that not be a voluntary decision?


What "homosexual Lifestyle"?
The film pointed out thatchildren of gya parents shouldn't be harassed. It never said "gay's don't sin", And while I don't belive that it is, the film just opints out that punishing achild for something it's parent is-or "chooses" to do-is wrong. Or are you sayign that punishing a child for something it's parent did is right?


Originally posted by astrocreep There are several reasons that one individual will not socially accept another and thats okay.


And what does this have to do with a film that asks people not to pick on someone for who their parents are-or what their parents have chosen to do?


Originally posted by astrocreep Again, I doubt the priciple or board would have let a hetero support group meet at school either.


Why not? Are ou saying that a group made to promote tolerance of heterosexuals would not be allowed?


Originally posted by astrocreep To use school grounds, one must relate thgeir group back to either acedemics, physical education, or civics.


How is a club that promotes understanding not a civic activity-because you'd rather they not be tolerated?


Originally posted by astrocreep Now, we all know this group could have founded it under a common interest besides sex.


It was, tolerance.


Originally posted by astrocreep Just because one is gay, does not mean you spend your whole existence and all your effort promoting that one sole interest.


They aren't promoting the fact that they were gay, they were showing that they were not some horrible people, and that they were nota stereotype.


Originally posted by astrocreep I'm certain these people could have come up with another common interest which might have been inclusive of others as well. Isn't that what the homosexual community has been fighting for all these years? No all straight groups which excluded them and the first thing they do is form an all gay group.



It's not an "all gay group" it's a group that allows both in it.


Originally posted by astrocreepIts forcing that subject to be dealt with by our educational system that I have the beef about.


What subject?
Oh, you mean gay sex, right?

The film doesn't deal with that subject anymore than anymore than cinderella deals with hetero sex orgies. It deals with not harming someone because their parents who love each other happen to be the same sex. Do you really have a problem with not punishing the child for something the parent does/is?



posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsingerNo they want special punishments and laws to pertain to them specifically,


No, Hate criime laws would work for you as well. If someone attacks you just because your a christian, then they be charged just as they would for someone who attacks you for being gay(I know your straight that was just an example).



Originally posted by astrocreep we already have the laws on the books about assault, just because it is against one or the other should make the punishment different.


Yes, but hate crime laws punish some one who attacks you for simply being you. It recognizes that intolerance, of say christians-for instance, is a particularly bad thing. And that people who attack you for something that you are( or do)-such as being a christian-is worse that attacking someone for other reasons.



posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Folks, we're beating a dead horse here. How many times does this argument have to be made. It certainly seems that none of us are about to acknowledge the other's points in this discussion.

I can see points on both sides and conceed the need for staff trained to handle abuse and certainly don't think any child deserves it. What i wonder is if anyone had bothered to see just what training faculty has ALREADY been required take? I worked at a major University for 6 years and in that 6 years, I had 6 different training courses on diversity..Yes, this , in KY the same as the afore mentioned school.

If teachers had already been trained to deal with this, would this still be an issue?



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Hmmmm...... IDK, teaching tolerance, is it that bad that the republicans can't allow it? What is wrong with tolerance besides it costs the republicans an easy election? Without tolerance blacks still under jim crow laws, out of good schools, women still the property of men, along with the kids, and of course, anyone dif. is evil. Go ACLU, tolerance is good, no matter what the right wing christian nut cases say.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Wait a minute. Tolerance is an objective thing. Everyones tolerance level for any different subject is not the same as anothers. Why should a school child be forced to watch a film and to bad but you must 'tolerate' it? I have nothing against homosexuals but I think 'tolerance' is the wrong way to measure a feeling or ideal. What should happen? Put a tolerance level law in place so each individual must be able to 'tolerate' any situation?

I think subjects such as this film cause more animosity than 'tolerance'. We have a place in Rehobeth Beach Delaware ( Rehomo Beach as the gay community calls it ). The gay community is NOT tolerated here. They are respected as people just like we all like to be. It is quite an interesting place. The gay folks tend to occupy the northern end of the beach and the family and straight folks the southern end. It is not forced segregation rather that is where people go on the beach that makes them the most comfortable, gay or straight. When on the boardwalk gay and straight alike mingle as people not gay people or straight people but just courtious and respectful of eachother. It should be a poster for how to respect eachother. Who just wants to 'tolerate' anyone?

[edit on 12/23/2004 by just_a_pilot]



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 01:30 AM
link   
The culture AT LARGE has the right to determine this "level" of tolorance.
A given society has the right to self determine how it wishes to define itself, thru its laws, institutions, and "cultural values".

I think the culture has already determined that it is NOT ok, in the school environment, to actively harrass, abuse, or assault ANYONE regardless of their sex, race, creed, religion etc....so why do we need micro managed rules to expouse specific acts of harrassment/assault, when all of it is innapropriate?

doing so puts special emphasis onto one segment, implying that they are "more special" than the others.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 02:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by just_a_pilot
Wait a minute. Tolerance is an objective thing. Everyones tolerance level for any different subject is not the same as anothers. Why should a school child be forced to watch a film and to bad but you must 'tolerate' it? I have nothing against homosexuals but I think 'tolerance' is the wrong way to measure a feeling or ideal. What should happen? Put a tolerance level law in place so each individual must be able to 'tolerate' any situation?

I think subjects such as this film cause more animosity than 'tolerance'. We have a place in Rehobeth Beach Delaware ( Rehomo Beach as the gay community calls it ). The gay community is NOT tolerated here. They are respected as people just like we all like to be. It is quite an interesting place. The gay folks tend to occupy the northern end of the beach and the family and straight folks the southern end. It is not forced segregation rather that is where people go on the beach that makes them the most comfortable, gay or straight. When on the boardwalk gay and straight alike mingle as people not gay people or straight people but just courtious and respectful of eachother. It should be a poster for how to respect eachother. Who just wants to 'tolerate' anyone?

[edit on 12/23/2004 by just_a_pilot]



Well yes, when you talk about something like tolerance there is a subjective element to it and it's hard to define. It's much the same in a place I went to in the Canaries where gay and straight bars existed side by side. The families in one bar looking directly across at the queers in theirs and surprisingly a good deal of intermingling, even the essex lads, tanked up on their 18-30 nights and who would certainly never tolerate a gay bar opening on Dagenham High Street were pretty cool about it. I found it refreshing and optimistic to see Mum, Dad and the kids in Bar Gladiator watching the drag act, while Adam and Bruce held hands at the bar and watched football surrounded by straight lads in the Union Jack Tavern. It basically came down to the fact that the locals and the police would not tolerate any trouble and because it was well known for the diverse mix of bars etc, anyone going there better leave their bias at the door or stay away altogether. It's amazing how people get over their hangups when they know they risk missing out on the best places to go.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Yes, tolerance is hard to define, like terror, but the republicans seem to understan terror well enough to invade countries, why not tolerance?



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Jame the Lesser, Not everyone who thinks school is a place for academics not social indoctrination is a republican. I think this issues is bigger than the narrowminded political rhetoric. But thanks for the input. ..I guess.


Look, you all seem to act as if you have not read the numerous times I stated faculty and staff should be and are trained to deal with abusive behavior and tolerance issues.

Several of you quote me and then reply to an idea not even in the quote. You are all creating the argument you wish to challenge instead of dealing with the issues I put forth. I suspect many of you are likely doing this to avoid the issue at hand. No child should be abused in a public school for any reason and it is lilkely the case the faculty and staff as well as the student body were held to such standards before the ACLU came along.

Like it or not, many of you want to force people who don't accept the idea of homosexuality to do so in the name of tolerance. You have taken it upon yourselves to make that decision not only for yourselves but for everyone else as well.

Don't misunderstand me. I argue not against the gay community but for the right to think and make judgements for ourselves. Not everyone accepts me for everything that I am and thats fine. By law, I cannot be assaulted because of it nor can I force them to change their opinion.

Lets uphold the law and get back to teaching and learning in schools. If we educate our kids, they should be able to see both sides of social issues and make up their own minds just as you and I have done.



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 02:35 PM
link   
HEY! Guess what? BULL#! They did a story on this already, and guess what? This whole topic is bull#. It isn't a gay tolerant film, it is Spongebob, Barney, Big Bird, Kermit the Frog, Miss Piggy, and other muppet/puppet/cartoon characters singing "We Are Family". It has nothing to do with gays. The only way to think it involves gay is if you are an idiot. Use google to find the group doing this, the WeAreFamily group. One link takes you to a "We have a gay/lesbian in our family and we love them anyways" while the other 50million sites are the group actually promoting this film. I can't believe we were all duped by the person who made this post. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GAYS!

Edit. Edsinger, did you knwingly put up false information? I think that is against ATS rules. This film has nothing to do with gays. It is, as stated, different muppets/puppets/cartoons singing we are family. That a frog, a pig, a sponge, a dinosaur, so forth, all get along even though they are different ie frog, pig, dinosaur. It never says anything about gays.


[edit on 22-1-2005 by James the Lesser]



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 05:18 AM
link   


The film doesn't deal with that subject anymore than anymore than cinderella deals with hetero sex orgies. It deals with not harming someone because their parents who love each other happen to be the same sex. Do you really have a problem with not punishing the child for something the parent does/is?
I have a problem about treating SOME citizens more equal or "special" than others by singling them out in a video of this kind....
IF everyone is the same, then "dont pick on others" means EVERYONE...
Who is deciding whom gets "special mention" and why?

[edit on 24-1-2005 by CazMedia]



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Why are so many people so nosey concerning other people's sexual lives/proclivities?
The way I see it, (my Christian teaching aside), I have enuff to worry about and think of in my own personal life without feeling the need to dictate to others how they should behave in THEIR own bedrooms.

The bottom line is this.. We will all have to answer to God one day for our own sins. We'd do well to think more about that than about what someone else may or may not be doing.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 03:04 PM
link   
Caz.... did you not read the post? The video has NOTHING to do with gays. This is a misunderstanding the group has been on tv and such trying to fix. As I said, one link takes you to a gay/lesbian site, the other 50million links take you to the site/group that made this movie. OMG, can no one read? IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GAYS!

And Caz, the Gays are not asking for special treatment any more then the blacks were asking for in the 1950-1970. I swear, how can ignorance be this strong? The people have been on Fox, CNN, MSNBC, so forth, trying to tell people that they have NOTHING to do with gays, it is a mistake!



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:09 AM
link   
Eastcoastkid states,


I have enuff to worry about and think of in my own personal life without feeling the need to dictate to others how they should behave in THEIR own bedrooms.
Me too
BUT,
This is NOT about society trying to pry into peoples bedrooms, that is a feel good lie! Its the other way around, when gays take their bedroom issues and go to the society demanding things like adoption, marriage and in this case tolorance videos (which i believe do specifically mention gay bashing), then who put this in the public spotlight? The gays themselves did. Whenever they come to the culture and demand entitlemnts it becomes a public issue. Dont be fooled.

James, ahh james,
I think we are now mixing up 2 seperate videos here.
The original one being discussed, and the new flap ofer the sponge bob "we are family" video.

I AGREE WITH YOU...(did i just say that?) Sponge bob isnt gay and THAT video IS being misaligned by religious zealots.
But
As to the threads original training video, this does apparently (i havnt seen it to be certain) specifically "single out" gays for note in its sensitivity lesson.

My problem with that is, if we're all equal, then why not just say picking on ANYONE is wrong, why do we need to say dont pick of these people, yet not mention others as well?



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Demanding adoption? Marrige? How is that wanting the spotlight/special treatment? I think getting those would be getting equal treatment, not special, unless they are the only ones allowed to adopt or marry, then it would be special treatment.

And maybe we are confusing the two videos. IDK, probably. Got so many idiots saying everything is gay it hard to tell which is which sometimes. But you are probably right about me confusing the two.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by astrocreep


Like it or not, many of you want to force people who don't accept the idea of homosexuality to do so in the name of tolerance. You have taken it upon yourselves to make that decision not only for yourselves but for everyone else as well.


No...people are not trying to force anyone to accept it... just leave them alone and keep your nose out other people's bedrooms...it's none of your business...zelch. What's hard about that!? They aren't bothering you, unless they are bothering you simply by existing...that's call being a bigot! Why does it bother you so? Have you had a bad experience? Insecure about yourself? Why is it that so may men hate anything that is not like themselves? Why so insecure?



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 01:17 AM
link   
James and lady V,
Your misconstruing what is being said.
LadyV says erroniously for the nth time,


No...people are not trying to force anyone to accept it... just leave them alone and keep your nose out other people's bedrooms...it's none of your business
I KNOW this has been pointed out to you ladyV before, and i just said it 2 posts ago to EastCoastKid....here it is again....
Society isnt trying to get into their private bedrooms....
When the gays went to society to make demands of any kind, this then makes it part of the publics concern.
I dont care what you do in the privacy of your home, but when you base a demand to society off of that behaivior then you just went public YOURSELF! Dont blame society for telling you the way they see things when you show up on the public courthouse or school steps and say "you have to take us". They werent looking for you, you sought them.

James,



Demanding adoption? Marrige? How is that wanting the spotlight/special treatment?
I didnt say those examples were asking for special treatment, i used them as examples to show Eastcoastkid that this action was gays putting things into the public, not the public trying to get into th bedroom.

Now, how does a video thats suposed to teach tolorance, give everyone the same level of attention for not being picked on, when only certain groups are mentioned by name in it?
Is this "special attention"?
what about the message "dont pick on anyone"? If this was your goal, why would you single out some types for more emphasis?
Is this equal?




top topics



 
0
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join