No guy, I was referring to an awareness of sexuality – even if all the juices weren’t flowing yet.
But, it’s a dead end anyways. Guess the real question is whether sexuality is a good and fun and healthy thing, or if it’s a moral burden and a minefield of over-wrought guilt trips.
Well then I'd say children have no awareness of sexuality unless you want to split the thinnest hairs imaginable and consider puppy-love crushes or knowing boys have one thing, girls have another as sexuality awareness. To me awareness of sexuality means feeling lust for somebody and being able to do something about it.
Anyway that doesn’t have anything to do with the issue of sex-ed being used to convey liberal propaganda to kids.
As to the “real” question, sex in itself is neutral. It can be good, fun and healthy or it can be the opposite. Ultimately it depends on the people.
Hey CC. Sorry that my writing is crap, I guess what I wanted to say got garbled.
It looks like you think I believe total parental control over a child’s education and exposure to the world is a good thing. I do not. Parents passing on their false beliefs and prejudices and blind-spots and falsehoods, is always bad. (Read the post above this one for a perfect example of a parent passing on a prejudice.)
My question was who decides what we should do about parents who pass their moral and mental baggage on to their children.
Thanks for clearing that up, it seemed an odd thought coming from you.
"My question was who decides what we should do about parents who pass their moral and mental baggage on to their children."
Oh jez, that's beyond me. "Who Decides" Over the decades the "deciders" have disappointed the hell outta me time and time again. And I think an objective view of today's global political and economic and consumptive mess objectively supports my perception, that our leaders are pretty near as clueless and petty and self-serving and incapable of thoughtful-reflection as any of the rest of us schmucks.
Well then I’d say children have no awareness of sexuality unless you want to split the thinnest hairs
We were all children here at one time. How many would agree with that?
Of course not an awareness from an adult perspective. But being clueless about something, doesn’t automatically imply obliviousness toward said thing.
I’m mean I was quite young when I discovered a girlie mag my older brother had hidden away - I remember well how it excited the heck out of me even though I didn’t know any thing about any of it. Nor did these pics teach anything, just pretty woman in their birthday suits. Oh but i’d never seen anything as exciting before.
Anyway that doesn’t have anything to do with the issue of sex-ed being used to convey liberal propaganda to kids.
Oh okay, I get it. That damned liberal propaganda, love of science, pursuit of rational constructive learning, open to other perspectives. Hmmmm, the horror, oh the horror! As the say One, 'i get it.' Liberals can be as dunder-headed as anyone, but you know their fundamental principles of honesty, constructive fact-based learning you know that intellectual enlightenment stuff - that remains pretty damned right-on.
What’s the alternative a bunch of ancient self-interested old white guys telling the world how to believe and behave?
We were all children here at one time. How many would agree with that?
Of course not an awareness from an adult perspective. But being clueless about something, doesn’t automatically imply obliviousness toward said thing.
I’m mean I was quite young when I discovered a girlie mag my older brother had hidden away – I remember well how it excited the heck out of me even though I didn’t know any thing about any of it. Nor did these pics teach anything, just pretty woman in their birthday suits. Oh but i’d never seen anything as exciting before.
Liberals can be as dunder-headed as anyone, but you know their fundamental principles of honesty, constructive fact-based learning you know that intellectual enlightenment stuff – that remains pretty damned right-on.
Teaching kids that homosexuality and gender dysphoria are normal and healthy is scientifically incorrect and dishonest.
We need it for procreation, so lets be done with the dirty deed and get back to making money and feeling holy ;- )
Sexuality is neutral – what a curious concept.
Behind every strong man is a strong woman.
The face that launched a thousand ships.
The apple and the serpent.
Pure and impure.
Teaching kids that homosexuality and gender dysphoria are normal and healthy is scientifically incorrect and dishonest.
Guess I'd agree with your there. But I'm not sure "kids" are being taught that. Are you talking about high school kids? Why shouldn't they? Or for that matter - now that you got me thinking about it - even younger kids. There certainly seem to be plenty of examples where kids knew very early they were different, why not discuss that openly? If it becomes an issue in the class room - god forbid dealing with diverse people. Why not talk about it - at an age appropriate level. Kids are often more grown-up about these things than adults.
Problem with folks like you is you always distort shit into your own visions of hell and damnation. Make a big deal out of shit that ain’t no big deal. Why the fuk should I care if my neighbor happens to live with another man, even if the thought for myself is unthinkable. So the fuk what, they aren’t me, where’s the harm.
Sexuality is in our blood, I think the worst sin of all is denying people the right to fulfill who they are inside
( yeah, yeah with out harming others and all those caveats.) But sexual orients, big shit - the person’s honesty and integrity means a hell of lot more to me than their personal preferences.
Like how do these pathetic things become such major issues, while the actual major issues that present a real and present and physical harm, are ignored to the ends of the world. Faith-blindness is such a weird thing.
thatoneguy: "As to the “real” question, sex in itself is neutral. It can be good, fun and healthy or it can be the opposite. Ultimately it depends on the people."
It's bizarre that you somehow understand that "...sex in itself is neutral. It can be good, fun and healthy or it can be the opposite. Ultimately it depends on the people.", yet you claim that being taught that same idea in school is "liberal propaganda".
We don’t teach what is the acceptable hair-style. It’s a personal choice that doesn’t affect others, so we should let others act how they want. Being LGBTQ is like that, but different.
Here’s the big difference…
Being LGBTQ is not a choice (Google it, I’m not going to explain it here.) So it’s critically important to let people be who they truly are.
It’s like if your hair is a type that it can’t be styled the way current society/fashion demands- should you be called out for being a sinner and punished and forced to wear a wig to conform?
You claim sex is neutral, how do you justify shooting your personal load of morality on those who are different?
Maybe being a sexual orientation bigot is not a choice. Maybe they were born that way. If so, perhaps we should tolerate their blowing their loads of morality all over the place. That seems a bit gross, tho.
“Maybe being a sexual orientation bigot is not a choice. Maybe they were born that way. If so, perhaps we should tolerate their blowing their loads of morality all over the place. That seems a bit gross, tho.”
Insofar as there is no free will, certainly. It’s a conditioned reflex.
We should perhaps respect Frankie Howerd’s utterance “It’s wicked to mock the afflicted”
If you’ve never heard of Frankie Howerd, he was one of the last great English Music hall-type comics .Certainly worth a look.
The clip is from a series he did called “Up Pompeii”—Frankie plays the slave ‘Lurkio’. His young master is called “Nauseous” . I’m sure you get the idea. Truly vulgar, in the literal sense of the word.
Guess I’d agree with your there. But I’m not sure “kids” are being taught that. Are you talking about high school kids? Why shouldn’t they? Or for that matter – now that you got me thinking about it – even younger kids. There certainly seem to be plenty of examples where kids knew very early they were different, why not discuss that openly? If it becomes an issue in the class room – god forbid dealing with diverse people. Why not talk about it – at an age appropriate level. Kids are often more grown-up about these things than adults.
Problem with folks like you is you always distort shit into your own visions of hell and damnation. Make a big deal out of shit that ain’t no big deal. Why the fuk should I care if my neighbor happens to live with another man, even if the thought for myself is unthinkable. So the fuk what, they aren’t me, where’s the harm.
Sexuality is in our blood, I think the worst sin of all is denying people the right to fulfill who they are inside
( yeah, yeah with out harming others and all those caveats.) But sexual orients, big shit – the person’s honesty and integrity means a hell of lot more to me than their personal preferences.
Like how do these pathetic things become such major issues, while the actual major issues that present a real and present and physical harm, are ignored to the ends of the world. Faith-blindness is such a weird thing.
I’m talking about the OP.
Teaching about different sexualities, gender ID, ect. is not a bad thing for middleschool-high school students. OP is about parents objecting to their prepubescent children being taught that material. I personally take issue with that and especially the fact that it is obviously an attempt to shape kids views on the subject for sociopolitical reasons.
It’s bizarre that you somehow understand that “…sex in itself is neutral. It can be good, fun and healthy or it can be the opposite. Ultimately it depends on the people.”, yet you claim that being taught that same idea in school is “liberal propaganda”.
Read the OP. It's not about whether sex is "good" it is obviously an attempt at indoctrinating kids too young to know wtf they're hearing.
We don’t teach what is the acceptable hair-style. It’s a personal choice that doesn’t affect others, so we should let others act how they want. Being LGBTQ is like that, but different.
Here’s the big difference…
Being LGBTQ is not a choice (Google it, I’m not going to explain it here.) So it’s critically important to let people be who they truly are.
I’m aware it’s not a choice to be gay. (Nor is it something one is born as). The point is the school in OP needs to be called out for it’s attempt at social engineering.
You claim sex is neutral, how do you justify shooting your personal load of morality on those who are different?
Lol funny description but that doesn't make sense. Where I come from parents can question what public schools are telling their kids without it becoming a moral crisis.
Maybe being a sexual orientation bigot is not a choice. Maybe they were born that way. If so, perhaps we should tolerate their blowing their loads of morality all over the place. That seems a bit gross, tho.
I find constant cheerleading for any positive spin on gay/trans issues -- no matter how inappropriate and false -- to be lame and retarded.
It’s also very common among atheists…….probably because most atheists are nerds who fail at sex/relationships in general.
I find that to be true of theists, not atheists. They tend to be so focused on the “right” and “wrong” 0f sex, they have no time or energy left for thinking rationally about sex.
Straight Pride Parade in Boston, Aug 31st! Yay! Heteros, it is so brave of you to celebrate your pride in your particular sexual orientation! How do you find such courage? I guess that I can come out, now. I used to be hetero, myself. Now I am pretty much asexual. I guess I could have an Asexual Pride Parade, but it seems unnecessary.
