Teacher Says Gays Have No Purpose In Life, Wants LGBT Kids Banned From Prom

reply to post by Dustytoad


You are placing the grey area idea as a whole.

Black and white for the situation. IS the action Right or Wrong.

I leave philosophy for the book people.

reply to post by Dustytoad


No worries at all.
Just debating.

Originally posted by Dustytoad

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Dustytoad

 

Ah, you do get it. But, I never claimed to be tolerant of anyone or anything.

Right and I think we are only disagreeing because you are arguing the word choice, which I decided was poor word choice as a response. I'm defending the principal that you should call out ignorance, not the word tolerance.

My post in response to you have little to do with you except to focus you on the idea, that's all. I have no problem with you personally, or publicly.

And with that I'm out of here..

Sorry OP for clogging up the thread..

edit on 2/11/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)

Ah, we disagree here.

I do have a problem with him personally. I'm intolerant of him personally and publicly, really.

This is about the umpteenth gay issue thread on this forum I've seen him chime in parroting the exact same adolescent "OMG INTOLERANCE, TOLERANCE, TOLRUNCEEE" crap that he probably heard from someone else on ATS months ago and decided he was going to proliferate it all over the boards as if it's actually an intellectual standpoint; semantics on a word for god's sake.

And don't bother apologizing, I had a feeling it was going to happen.

reply to post by LightOrange


If you have something to say, then be a big boy/girl and say it directly to me.

If you have a problem, then address it.

reply to post by andypb


There should be more checks and balances. I know plently of good people (gay, straight, christian, atheist, etc.) who have teaching degrees and no job. Then I hear stories like this or those of sexual abuse it makes me sick. It would be hard to interview with these checks and balances though. You can't legally bring up certain things in interviews for public jobs.

(and I can't speak for everyone, but don't worry I was not offended by your post at all)

reply to post by headorheart


Do you have background checks on anybody who wants to work with kids.
Here in th UK, you have to have an extended CRB check to work with kids, special needs or otherwise.

Originally posted by LightOrange
reply to post by headorheart

 

Completely agree.

It's weird, cause I'm gay, but this doesn't offend me as a homosexual nearly as much as it offends me as a libertarian. Secularism is the foundation of this country, and that needs to be reflected in public schools. We can't have religious rules in the public school systems that discriminate against minorities in the student body -- it's completely unnacceptable.

As long as no law is being broken, people should be able to say, do, and be whatever is public schools. You are right. Secularism needs to be reflected. It relates to the whole "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. I personally like it in there. I believe in God though, not everyone does. Therefore, I don't think it should be in the pledge. In a public school, people should not be forced to believe more than facts.

I have similar opinions with gay marriage. I personally am more against gay marriage than I am for it. Please read my reasoning before getting offended since you are gay. I am not trying to be offensive AT ALL. The reason I am against gay marraige is because of my religion. I believe marriage is a sacrament that is between two people preformed by a religious leader. That being said I'm just as much against gay marraige as I am a man and a women going to the court house to get 'married.' I think it should be a civil union. To me marriage is relgious and civil unions are just that civil. However, my opinion is not how society views things so I would absolutely vote in favor of gay marriage. I also would hope that someday the church would be modernized enough to marry two gay people as a sacrament.

I hope I explained that well enough not to offend anybody. If not I sincerily apoligize and I will further explain any comments I have made.

reply to post by LightOrange


the gay kids and the straight kids should invite each other to each others proms as dates and have two proms, that would be the classy move anyway. and it would show the parents that bickering over this and that is pointless in the end.

reply to post by macman


If you have an argument, present it.

If you don't, continue doing what you're doing.

Trolling.

When I wrote the post, I was well aware that you could read it.

Could you read it even though it wasn't formally addressed to you?

Great. Now it's your turn to "address it". Or can I expect another famous macman sidestep?

Let's make it easy for you to understand what you need to address:

Why do you keep showing up in all the gay threads trolling about the term "tolerance"? How many battles do you need to have about the same topic before you move on to something that someone with a brain would care about, e.g. the topic of the damn thread?

reply to post by andypb


Yes we do. I believe they help as well. It is just hard because background checks do not have opinions on them. Sure they keep criminals out of the classroom. They don't keep political or religious extremests out though. You can't ask in a interview the person's political views, social views, religous views, or sexuality. It is against the equal oppurtunity employer act. If a person, like the one in the OP, has these views, they could possibily not effect the classroom or become apparent until the teacher has already been in the class for years. I understand the EEOC, but it can be frusterating in some cases.

reply to post by LightOrange


Just another dim light with an opinion. Some of these teachers just don't get it.

Originally posted by LightOrange


If you have an argument, present it.

Already done. Please, go back and read my first post here. Then read the next and continue on until you reach my last. Within there, you will find my argument.

Originally posted by LightOrange
If you don't, continue doing what you're doing.

Trolling.

And that means what to me?

Originally posted by LightOrange
When I wrote the post, I was well aware that you could read it.

Could you read it even though it wasn't formally addressed to you?

Yes, hence the statement directly to you. Unlike your statement where you speak through someone else.
Do you feel it necessary to speak through another member?

Originally posted by LightOrange
Great. Now it's your turn to "address it". Or can I expect another famous macman sidestep?

Please, see above.
And famous??? Hardly. There are many, more famous people then I.

reply to post by camaro68ss


alexander the great was gay and he ruled one of if not the largest empires the world has ever seen,Socrates invented all kinds of stuff and loved him some males,Leonardo divinci(sp) was most likely gay or at least bi and he invented a bunch of stuff
R.S.S. Baden-Powell (1857-1941), British soldier (and founder of
the Boy Scouts) with the debate on gays in the boyscouts i found this to be funny and informative
www.knowledgerush.com... few inventors on that list too

Sir Isaac Newton FRS (4 January 1643 – 31 March 1727 [OS: 25 December 1642 – 20 March 1727])[1] was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist, and theologian who is perceived and considered by a substantial number of scholars and the general public as one of the most influential men in history.[7] His 1687 publication of the Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (usually called the Principia) is considered to be among the most influential books in the history of science, Newton described universal gravitation and the three laws of motion which dominated the scientific view of the physical universe for the next three centuries. He built the first practical reflecting telescope[8] and developed a theory of colour based on the observation that a prism decomposes white light into the many colours that form the visible spectrum. He also formulated an empirical law of cooling. Newton shares the credit with Gottfried Leibniz for the development of the differential and integral calculus. He also demonstrated the generalised binomial theorem, Newton's gravitational theory Newton's theory of colour.[30] Robert Hooke, FRS (18 July 1635 – 3 March 1703) was an English natural philosopher, architect and polymath who played an important role in the scientific revolution, Mechanics, invented several scientific instruments still in use today. He discovered the law of elasticity which bears his name Result: balance spring or hairspring, which for the first time enabled a portable timepiece - a watch - to keep time with reasonable accuracy. This formed the basis of the chronometer without which accurate navigation would be impossible. He pursued studies in gravity and movement of celestial bodies Newton was primarily a pioneer in mathematical analysis and its applications as well as optical experimentation, while Hooke was a creative experimenter of immense range. Micrographia, is a book describing his microscopic and telescopic observations, and some original work in biology. Hooke coined the term cell for describing biological organisms.

christiangays.com... list of notable people who were gay/lesbian/bi
en.wikipedia.org...

homosexuality is older then most religions and while the terms gay lesbian and bisexual were coined in the 1920s the practice has been around for thousands of years

reply to post by LightOrange


The teacher is wrong. Simple as that.

Without those people, who are only different from others by way of whom they happen to be more attracted to sexually, our world would be hugely poorer.

For instance, Alan Turing..a brilliant Mathematician and computer scientist was directly responsible for helping to save thousands upon thousands of lives and shipping at sea, and helped to prevent hundreds of thousands more in Britain from starving due to supply losses during the second world war, due to his work on breaking the codes used in the German Enigma Naval code machine.

He also greatly aided the advancements in computer science, which helped pave the way, ultimately, to the computers we are all using to write and read these posts.

Alan Turing also happened to be Homosexual.

After the war, Turing endured a hate campaign directed at him due to his sexuality, which was actually illegal in those times.

The ultimate result of this was Turing committing suicide.
A brilliant man, who had saved countless thousands of lives, ironically driven to suicide by people not too dissimilar to the teacher we're talking about here i suspect.

Others who have been massively influential are countless in number, throughout history.

Great artists, literary giants, stars of theatre and screen, one in a million musicians, the list is as full as there are areas of Human endevour.

The 'teacher' is obviously a complete twit, who seems to know nothing of history or the world around her.

reply to post by RalagaNarHallas

homosexuality is older then most religions and while the terms gay lesbian and bisexual were coined in the 1920s the practice has been around for thousands of years

Homosexuality has probably been around for as long as people have been around...probably longer in fact, as many species of animals have homosexuals among them too.

Before many of the world religions sprang up, homosexuality was actually revered among ancient tribal peoples. Shamans who demonstrated the male and female aspects were considered to be closer to, and therefore blessed by the Earth mother goddess of Pagan religions...a kind of spiritual and sexual duality that was thought to be sacred.

How times change eh.

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by kaylaluv

 

Ahhh. Groups backed by gays push their agenda all the time. By force in instances.

Saying one holds the moral ground over the other is pretty ignorant.

By force, you mean .....? Killing? Torturing? If gays were allowed to live their life without harassment, bullying, fear of retribution for simply loving one another, maybe it wouldn't be necessary to "push an agenda".

There are good gay people and there are not very nice gay people. You could say the same thing about heterosexuals. If I hear a gay person saying a mean hateful thing to someone who didn't deserve it, I would call them on it, just the same as I would a heterosexual person.

Having read the article the following can be stated:

The first question is, was there no one in the LGBT community to stand up and speak out against this? Or are they still in the proverbial closet as it were in Indianna?

The second question is: Is this the students actions and voice or that of say a parent or the church? After all it is a question that should be asked, before any decision is made.

And finally the third question that should be asked to the teacher who spoke out: If Gay people have no purpose in life, then how can she justify the following activities in her life: The music she listens to, the tv shows she may watch and the clothing that she wears?

After all how can any of the teens who feel so strongly and agree with this, even consider wearing the latest fashion to any event or any formal dress? After all the major producers of clothing and fashion, the biggest names in such, most of them have gay people who create such for all of us to wear or use.

The very statement coming from a teacher, is not so shocking, as they are entitled to such, and ultimately she knows who these students are, but now the question is can any student thus trust this person to help them with any problem ever again? For that matter, how can anyone? While we can not condone her for speaking or believing how she does, ultimately, the statement that gay people are useless, that in itself shows alot of ignorance on her part that any other. You may not believe that people were born gay, but insult a group of people, that is ultimately the start and essence of discrimination.

And then there is one final question, what of the students who are or are not, have not told anyone, will they now be banned from attending the prom all on the grounds of suspicion?

reply to post by LightOrange


This poor lady (and community) is just really scared. As the poor lady stated: " I don't understand it" , "it's a choice" and "I believe we are all born equal", is just saying it all. She doesn't understand it, she's afraid that she could make that choice if she understood it and she really don't know the meaning of equal. That poor lady is just saying what everyone else around her have told her all her life and has been taught by others who didn't understand it either. Often when there is something we don't understand, we condemn and alienates it. But what is really unfortunate, is that she feeds the new generation with the same kind of teaching and believing, without even questioning her own insecurity.

Those two teenagers said: "1)We believe what the Bible says. And it says that it [homosexuaity] is wrong. 2)We love the homosexuals but we do not condone what they are 3) doing".

Well let's brake it down: First 'Homosexuality' definition: Homosexuality (from the Greek homos; same) is a sexual orientation characterized by romantic and / or physical attraction to persons of the same sex.

1) Homosexuality is directly mentioned in the Bible a couple of places.
In the Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 and again in Romans 1:25-27 and Pauls letter to the Corinthians, you'll find the mention of the SEXUAL ACT between two men as an abomination. The ACT it self is mentioned directly as repulsive, but no where in the Bible is mentioned the romantic feelings as wrong. But God nor Jesus talks about homosexuality as a sin. Before people state that Jesus condemns sexual immorality (Mark 7:20-23), then yes he did, immorality, he didn't mention homosexuality. That is up to you what you consider as sexual immoral. So if I should follow these kids fine logic, I must correct them when they state that the Bible say that homosexuality is wrong - that is not the whole truth.

2) One thing Jesus do talk about tho is malice and arrogance (Mark 7:20-23). In the exact same sentence she uses the word love and another phrase for intolerant about their feelings towards homosexuals. That could be interpreted as a devotion for human kind, but when these Christians say "not condone" they mean business. They really do not condone! They kick you out of the party (literally) and keep you out. That is malice to me. In this context the "love" is just an arrogant word which is used in a manipulative way, which are said by them to be superior to you - that is arrogant to me. We don't have to agree with one another, but we owe to a self to evolve and educate a selves.

3) When she uses the word "doing", I wonder if that is a reference to the above mentioned sexual act or the active choice they believe the homosexuals make when they 'choose' to be homosexuals and offend these fine Christians with their choice. If she is referring to the act it self, it is forbidden in Christian communities to have sexual intercourse before marriage anyways. So I don't think the homosexuals kids are 'doing' a whole lot yet. Well they have chosen to be homosexuals, so they will probably have an orgy instead of a prom.

Either way, I see are new generation of condemning, self-righteous and Bible referring people, which I don't consider as good Christians. And that is a damn shame for everyone.

EDIT: I know the teacher said that they didn't have a place in life, but doesn't know what she is talking about, and I do not consider her a Christian. It is just sad.


//HamP

Originally posted by headorheart

Originally posted by LightOrange
reply to post by headorheart

 

Completely agree.

It's weird, cause I'm gay, but this doesn't offend me as a homosexual nearly as much as it offends me as a libertarian. Secularism is the foundation of this country, and that needs to be reflected in public schools. We can't have religious rules in the public school systems that discriminate against minorities in the student body -- it's completely unnacceptable.

As long as no law is being broken, people should be able to say, do, and be whatever is public schools. You are right. Secularism needs to be reflected. It relates to the whole "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. I personally like it in there. I believe in God though, not everyone does. Therefore, I don't think it should be in the pledge. In a public school, people should not be forced to believe more than facts.

I have similar opinions with gay marriage. I personally am more against gay marriage than I am for it. Please read my reasoning before getting offended since you are gay. I am not trying to be offensive AT ALL. The reason I am against gay marraige is because of my religion. I believe marriage is a sacrament that is between two people preformed by a religious leader. That being said I'm just as much against gay marraige as I am a man and a women going to the court house to get 'married.' I think it should be a civil union. To me marriage is relgious and civil unions are just that civil. However, my opinion is not how society views things so I would absolutely vote in favor of gay marriage. I also would hope that someday the church would be modernized enough to marry two gay people as a sacrament.

I hope I explained that well enough not to offend anybody. If not I sincerily apoligize and I will further explain any comments I have made.

You shouldn't go around walking on eggshells when you express an opinion... especially to this guy right here .

I honestly think the pledge of allegiance is just a silly thing altogether. The US republic and it's government is one of the last things on this planet that I would pledge my allegiance to at this point. I was raised to be honest, skeptical, and strong-willed. So, naturally, I stopped saying the pledge of allegiance in the fourth grade when I decided it was empty nationalism which I had no attachment to. I was Christian back then, too and I never really payed attention to the phrase "Under God", nor did I, or do I, really care at all.

I had no idea the government even controlled marriage until my late teens and that's when I began to question why the government has a role in marriage at all. The problem, obviously, is that marriage now offers a plethora of financial benefits that are not afforded to citizens who are single, so there is a ton of pressure for people to be getting married. Financial benefits in mind, and the fact that the government controls marriage and the government is a secular institution, there is no reason for a man and another man not to be married under law by civil contract in the same way that a man and a woman would be. To say that gay people can't marry each other in this same way would be, and strictly is, completely unconstitutional. However, to say that even a man and a woman need to identify themselves with the government to declare themselves as being in love in order to obtain tax benefits, visitation rights at hospitals, and insurance benefits is patently nonsensical as I see it.

Originally posted by DocHolidaze
reply to post by LightOrange

 

the gay kids and the straight kids should invite each other to each others proms as dates and have two proms, that would be the classy move anyway. and it would show the parents that bickering over this and that is pointless in the end.

That's a pretty great idea, actually... although... I'm sure this teacher would be there supervising and if they saw one of the gay kids walk in she'd throw a fit and rip out her hair and cry.

I don't think this "separate prom" is going to have a very big turnout... I think kids are smart enough to realize that a prom just ain't a prom without gay people on the decorating committee. Hellurrr!