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.

 

School Clams Up on 'Gay' Pledge Cards Given to Kindergartners

page: 28
15
<< 25  26  27    29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2008 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by fmcanarney
 



No. A persons behavior defines who they are, and in the case of homosexuals, you can't say "Oh hi I like you a lot! I just hate your beliefs and practices because they are wrong."




posted on Nov, 24 2008 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by 7H3Y 4R3 C0M1N6
 


"A persons behavior defines who they are>"

So why the pledge cards to coerce five year olds to modify their impulsive behavior.

Just let them be defined as who they are as bullies and hate thought children.

It is more reasonable to have adult GTHLB modify their own behavior.

See the GTHLB want five year olds to meet the standards imposed by the majority of adults who disapprove of hateful, bullying language, but the GTHLB refuse to modify their behavior in line with the standards of the majority of adults.

GBTHL want five year olds held to a greater accountability than they are willing or able to hold themselves. Which I see as an indictment of the level of irresponsibility and blame shifting the GTHLB does all of the time.

The GTHLB want five year olds to control their impulses, urges and desires to call names, but they avoid holding themselves to that same standard to control their own impulses, desires and urges to have anti natural sex.

Pretty funny and pretty pathetic.



posted on Nov, 24 2008 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by fmcanarney
reply to post by 7H3Y 4R3 C0M1N6
 


"A persons behavior defines who they are>"

So why the pledge cards to coerce five year olds to modify their impulsive behavior.

Just let them be defined as who they are as bullies and hate thought children.

It is more reasonable to have adult GTHLB modify their own behavior.

See the GTHLB want five year olds to meet the standards imposed by the majority of adults who disapprove of hateful, bullying language, but the GTHLB refuse to modify their behavior in line with the standards of the majority of adults.


Such as....?



The GTHLB want five year olds to control their impulses, urges and desires to call names, but they avoid holding themselves to that same standard to control their own impulses, desires and urges to have anti natural sex.



Ummm. Did we not already cover this. Homosexual behavior is found in nature.

Natural -adjective - that which is found in nature.

Sorry, try again.


[edit on 24-11-2008 by angel of lightangelo]



posted on Nov, 24 2008 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by fmcanarney
 


I would almost agree with that, except adults have had (in legal terms) 18 years more experience in life and that much more time figuring out who they are. These "impulses" are years in the making in some cases, with others showing up at young ages. I know a very young child my sisters age (four) who is very feminine already. Whether this is a sign of being homosexual or not, he is obviously not educated about all of these moral issues and standards; he is just that way.

As far as controlling impulses of kids goes, you can change a bully, you can't change a homosexual (completely, although making it seem so is possible I guess...), just like you can't a mentally handicapped person--it's how they were born.



posted on Nov, 25 2008 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by 7H3Y 4R3 C0M1N6


, you can't change a homosexual (completely, although making it seem so is possible I guess...),


Oh yeah, just ask Ted Haggard. You can change a homosexual into a heterosexual, it is just getting him to stop having gay sex with his male prostitute that seems to be the hard part.



posted on Nov, 25 2008 @ 06:36 AM
link   
reply to post by angel of lightangelo
 


Other "natural" behaviors found in the animal kingdom:
So dogs have sex in front of other dogs, and in front of people.
Some dogs try to have sex with your leg.
Prarie dogs cannabilize their nephews.
Chickens, horses, hogs all bully each other to establish a heirarchy and pecking order.

I think that nature has a lot of behavior that we as humans can rise above and are suppposed to rise above due to we have a larger cerebral cortex which contains reason and morals and values.

Basic human nature is evil. Basic human nature is lustful, hostile, aggressive, petty, prideful. Lucifer was the first prideful being mentioned and he got the s$$$ kicked out of him so he could be cast into H33L.
I take little pride in my instincts, urges or desires as I examine them with my cerebral cortex and see the pettiness and vanity of them.

The GTHLB want five year olds to control their impulses, urges and desires to call names, but they avoid holding themselves to that same standard to control their own impulses, desires and urges to have unnatural sex.

Pretty funny and pretty pathetic.


spelling

[edit on 25-11-2008 by fmcanarney]

[edit on 25-11-2008 by fmcanarney]



posted on Nov, 25 2008 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by fmcanarney
 


I think you meant frontal lobe, and by volume ours is larger but proportionally it is about the same as those in the great apes. Humans are not the only creatures with reasoning skills either. It could be argued that most animals have some form of reasoning skills, which explains why a dog will shrink away from you if you kick it a few times. It's reasoning skills tell it that you have kicked it, being kicked hurts, and if it stays out of reach you can't kick it again. Just because they don't think just like we do, doesn't mean that animals don't have reasoning skills. As for morals and values, as soon as we figure out how to understand them we can ask them if they have those.


The GTHLB want five year olds to control their impulses, urges and desires to call names, but they avoid holding themselves to that same standard to control their own impulses, desires and urges to have unnatural sex.


Actually what's funny is you think that telling little kids to not be mean is the same as telling an adult not to have consensual sexual relations with another adult. Some heterosexual couples have "unnatural" sex as well, it's not something only homosexual couples do. It's simple really, you don't think that homosexual urges are natural so don't do anything homosexual.



I just don't get why some people care so much about what someone else does in the privacy of their own home...



posted on Nov, 25 2008 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by fmcanarney
 


You can debate what is good behavior and civil behavior all you like. You cannot debate what natural is. Sorry.

Edit to clarify - Should we all do what is natural and behave like animals? No.

Is being homosexual unnatural? No.

Just helping you with your vocabulary.

[edit on 25-11-2008 by angel of lightangelo]



posted on Nov, 25 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


I said cerebral cortex, and that is what I meant.

The gthlb was not acting in their own private home in this instance they were interacting with five year olds.

So do I care that GTHLB use their natural functioning body organs for unnatural purposes and clain that it a natural urge/desire/impulse in the privacy of their own homes? Not at all. They are adults and so are free to do so.

That is akin to a black couple coming to kgarten in 1962 to plead for children to stop calling people of their color names.

Natural urges and desires like sexual, hitting, homicidal, name calling, being mean are natural. Resisting those urges and not allowing them to transform into actions is what morals, values, taboos are all about. Humans form communities and by doing so have to agree to follow some code of behavior.

Sorry, I am in now way a determinist since I believe in free will so acting on impulses and primal desires, while at the same time possessing morals and values in a reasoning cerebral cortex is alien and sinful to me.

The only way GTHLB evade the difficult moral hurdle is to claim they were born that way. We don't accept that an an excuse for a five year old soiling his drawers, or hitting a classmate, (acting with no reason or moral or value) but we accept that as an excuse/reason fron GTHLB.



posted on Nov, 25 2008 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by fmcanarney
reply to post by Jenna
 


That is akin to a black couple coming to kgarten in 1962 to plead for children to stop calling people of their color names.
.



So if you are opposed to gays interfering with kids, then you are opposed to black people doing the same thing in order to promote greater good?



posted on Nov, 25 2008 @ 07:57 PM
link   
That is not what I said nor is it what I meant.

Get five year olds to squelch their urges and impulses and desires but leave the adults to act theirs out.

That is what I said.



posted on Nov, 25 2008 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by fmcanarney
 


The frontal lobe is the area of the brain responsible for reasoning. It is located within the cerebral cortex, but the specific area is the frontal lobe. So you were partially correct, but the cerebral cortex is responsible for many things including our senses. I merely named the specific region responsible for reasoning.



Humans form communities and by doing so have to agree to follow some code of behavior.


Well now it would appear that that was the intended purpose of those pledge cards. Demeaning and hurtful words should not be used towards anyone. The specific cards they handed out in this case were not age-appropriate, as has been pointed out by myself and others and the school even admitted as much. The purpose behind the cards was to get school kids to agree to follow a code of behavior. Namely, to not use bigoted, hurtful language towards those different from themselves. The intended goal was an admirable one, the pledge cards themselves were not age appropriate.



Sorry, I am in now way a determinist since I believe in free will so acting on impulses and primal desires, while at the same time possessing morals and values in a reasoning cerebral cortex is alien and sinful to me.


Not everyone has the same values and not everyone shares your version of morality. Personally, I see nothing morally wrong with two consenting adults who love each other being together in whatever way they agree to regardless of their gender. My values tell me that two consenting adults who love each other and are in a relationship is a good thing regardless of their gender. Yours may tell you something different. Neither of us is in a position to dictate someone else's morals or values.

I think we both can agree that teaching children to not tease, bully, and use demeaning language towards someone different from themselves is a good thing. I also think we can agree that the specific cards in this case were not age appropriate, especially in light of the fact that they were intended for middle and high school kids not those in elementary school.


The only way GTHLB evade the difficult moral hurdle is to claim they were born that way


Just out of curiosity, has it occurred to you that perhaps they are not trying to "evade the difficult moral hurdle" but instead actually are born that way?



posted on Nov, 25 2008 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Of course I have considered the accident of birth.

Scientifically there is an observable documentable medical condition of XXY chromosomes.

Lots of "diseases" end up being caused by choices, including the famous quote "I am wired that way."

These diseases are the result of poor choices, and ultimately get blamed on birth, genes, hereditary, when in fact they are the result of the sick individuals own irresponsibility.

So I have had urges, desires, impulses to do things which were personally irresponsible and choose to not do the act.

Born that way is too simple of a disregard of personal moral responsibility.

So I do not accept that or condone the resultant behavior.

Gender identity disorder was listed in DSM III up till the time that the APA was infiltrated by gay and HTGBL friendly shrinks.



posted on Nov, 25 2008 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by fmcanarney
Of course I have considered the accident of birth.

Scientifically there is an observable documentable medical condition of XXY chromosomes.


Is it your assertion then that only those born with two X chromosomes and one Y chromosome can say they were born gay? If so, what about the millions of people who were not born with that combination of chromosomes yet still were born gay?


Lots of "diseases" end up being caused by choices, including the famous quote "I am wired that way."

These diseases are the result of poor choices, and ultimately get blamed on birth, genes, hereditary, when in fact they are the result of the sick individuals own irresponsibility.


If we were talking about lung disease, sexually transmitted diseases, etc. you would be correct. However, we are talking about sexuality which could hardly be classified as a disease.


So I do not accept that or condone the resultant behavior.


You do not have to accept it or condone it to the point where you engage in it yourself. But to refuse to accept that there are those who are in fact born homosexual, lesbian, etc. is to refuse to accept facts. I also doubt they seek your approval to live the life they were born into, nor should they.


Gender identity disorder was listed in DSM III up till the time that the APA was infiltrated by gay and HTGBL friendly shrinks.


Or perhaps it is no longer listed as an identity disorder because Evelyn Hooker came along and actually did a study to compare the mental status of heterosexual and homosexual men and the results of the study were that there were not any remarkable differences between the two groups? That would appear to be a more likely reason than yours. Considering she did in fact do such a study, a scientific one no less, and did find exactly that. Prior to her, no one had bothered to see if there actually was any difference aside from their sexual identity/preferences.

edit to fix quote tags and spelling

[edit on 25-11-2008 by Jenna]



posted on Nov, 26 2008 @ 05:51 AM
link   
Sexual preference says it all.
I prefer strawberry ice cream over vanilla.
Chevrolet over Ford.
Those are the direct result of my experience and taste and CHOICE.



posted on Nov, 26 2008 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by fmcanarney

I prefer strawberry ice cream over vanilla.

God no! Vanilla is better! Christians eat strawberry. Intolerant! Bigots! Quick, we need to tell all children of age 5 or older to only eat vanilla ice cream, or else they might eat strawberry! Oh, the horror!



OK, that was silly, right? Surely we can all agree on that fact. I just wanted to emphasize how silly it is to indoctrinate children of that age in any way over an argument that can go nowhere. It's not about homosexuality, heterosexuality, or hate in general. It's all about what's appropriate for the children.

Thanks for letting me use your quote, fm.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 26 2008 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by fmcanarney
 


Preference was a poor choice of words on my part. Though really preference doesn't necessarily mean choice. I was born heterosexual, therefore I have a preference for members of the opposite sex. It does not discount the rest of my post that you ignored in favor of picking out one word though.



posted on Nov, 26 2008 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Just curious here. All the folks who claim sexual preference is a choice, could you please elaborate on when you chose yours? Did you try both and see what you liked better? Or was there a more natural draw in one direction or the other?



posted on Nov, 26 2008 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iblis Smiley
Just curious here. All the folks who claim sexual preference is a choice, could you please elaborate on when you chose yours? Did you try both and see what you liked better? Or was there a more natural draw in one direction or the other?



I never chose, I never really made any decision...I never felt it was right for me either, I am just not attracted to people of the same sex.



posted on Nov, 26 2008 @ 07:10 PM
link   
I find it funny some people equate something like this to teaching children about sexuality. And cry out "TOO YOUNG!". That's like saying the red wrist band schools make children wear during drug awareness week, is actually teachings kids about the different highs you get from different drugs.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 25  26  27    29 >>

log in

join