Watch the videos. What the Gay Agenda is doing, to 1st-3rd graders.

[Fangrim]

To Lullaby and others:

Yes, in many schools and of course society in general, homosexuality is perceived negatively. People use gay as an insult, or a general adjective to describe something that is unfair or dumb.
Even teachers may use the word gay. In fact, even my gay teacher uses the phrase "that's gay." I do not think, however, that most "professional teachers" (as opposed to the up-beat, student-friendly, "chummy" kind) use gay in that sense, ever, in school.

As to acceptance and tolerance of gays, I'm sure that in private conversation, people may discuss homosexuals and how they don't like them. However, when known homosexuals are indeed present, at least in my school, there is definitely a level of tact in approaching that subject. People don't mention it, or criticize the topic.

In fact, when my and two other hetersexuals were working out in the hallway, a gay student and a girl were talking about that gay's sexual escapades, including three-somes. Of course, us three were absolutely mortified, but we didn't make fun of the gay student, even if he hadn't been so...open...about it.

[Zinkovich]

I think homosexuality needs to be explained at least by middle school, around the period in which students become sexually aware of themselves.

I say this with the best interest of the students at heart- if any amongst them are homosexual, there is going to be a degree of personal confusion waiting for them in the near future if they are uninformed about a topic as taboo as "orientation".

Keep in mind it's not just the mockery or intolerance that needs to be dealt with here, people. It's the context in which one grows into realizing he is homosexual.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Fangrim To Lullaby and others: Yes, in many schools and of course society in general, homosexuality is perceived negatively. People use gay as an insult, or a general adjective to describe something that is unfair or dumb.

That wouldn't matter as much.

I'm referring to teachers calling a guy at my school a faggot cause he acts girlish.. or how teachers mock homosexuality in gym class, or christ.. I wish you guys could spend a day at my school. It's sick. And my school isn't the only school like this.

We teach kids to accept racial differences in school despite racists. Yet when we teach kids to accept homosexuals in school there's suddenly a problem 'cause of one of those hate groups? Since when has hate gotten priority over love? We myswell rip those friggen posters of all the kids of different races holding hands around the world.. I do believe RACISTS get priority over love and acceptance, right? I do believe homosexual hate in school is an OK thing that needs not be addressed, right? I'm sure you can at least understand that (I'm talking to everyone.. I'm not addressing this stuff at you Fangrim) a hispanic kid who is constantly ridiculed and abused at school for their race and culture is a bad thing. Could you people please realize that the same thing could, I don't know, happen to homosexual students? Stop giving haters priority.. and if you do, at least be freggin consistent and demand racial acceptance be removed from schools.

[Rinoa]

Zinkovich: I agree, it should be explained by the first year of middle school,(assuming seventh grade is middle school). But I would like the oppurtunity to teach my child on my own before the school does, and I'm not going to start explaining all sexual issues before fourth grade, let alone kindergarden

Againstthewind: All caps is considering yelling, it is rude and a pain in the butt to read. Please be more considerate.

Quote by: againstthewind WHEN WE DO JUDGE, WE ARE TO JUDGE BY SCRIPTURE AND NOT WHAT WE SEE OR ARE HEARD, WE ARE TO JUDGE CAREFULLY AND NOT RASHLY LIKE THE HEATHEN.

We are not to judge at all. God is the judge and it is his wrath that will come down. Not yours. If you must comment, all you need say is that your god does not agree with it, you cannot shove your bible down my throat, it gags me, and does not allow me to learn from it. Also, these children were being taught that they should not call each other(or the parents of other children) nasty names, not that they should start sleeping with one another.

I USED TO BE A HOMOSEXUAL AND I AM NOT ANYMORE BECAUSE IT IS PERVERSION, THE BIBLE CALLS IT THAT AND TEACHING CHILDREN TO TOLERATE PERVERSION IS NOT AT ALL RIGHT.

It is the job of the parent to teach the religion and the bible, not the schools. After that discussion all you need to do is let your child know that god disagrees and show him your bible passages that state that god does not support homosexuals. Through your guidance as a parent they would learn to not agree with it, but also not to be mean to those who do agree with it.

I AM PROCLAIMING SCRIPTURE AND NOT CONDEMNING HOMOSEXUALS BUT POINTING OUT THAT IT IS WRONG AND IS NO BETTER THAN MURDER, STEALING, LYING OR FORNICATING EITHER.

I beg to differ.

Main Entry: con·demn Pronunciation: k&n-'dem Function: transitive verb Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French condempner, from Latin condemnare, from com- + damnare to condemn -- more at DAMN 1 : to declare to be reprehensible, wrong, or evil usually after weighing evidence and without reservation

Main Entry: 1damn Pronunciation: 'dam Function: verb Inflected Form(s): damned; damn·ing /'da-mi[ng]/ Etymology: Middle English dampnen, from Anglo-French dampner, from Latin damnare, from damnum damage, loss, fine transitive verb 1 : to condemn to a punishment or fate; especially : to condemn to hell 2 a : to condemn vigorously and often irascibly for some real or fancied fault or defect <damned the storm for their delay> b : to condemn as a failure by public criticism 3 : to bring ruin on

By declaring that it is a practice of perversion, and allowing your child to use words such as 'fag' or queer and gay as derogatory you are teaching your child to condemn.

Also, who are you to force everyone to adhere to your religious standards? My religion condemns sex before marriage, but you do not see me demanding a law to force that upon everyone. I understand that there is a difference between my government and my religion. My religion is personal, between myself and god. My government is public and must adhere to minimal standards that allow the offense or inconvience of the smallest amount of people. Seperation of church and state.

Also, again, all that need be said to uphold your so-called christian values is that your god does not agree with it. This gives them their warning and is not offensive. How would you like to have a teacher say that god is an imaginary friend and that people who believe in him are crazy? You wouldn't because it contradicts your lifestyle. These lessons were simply taught in order to stop children from name calling those who have differing beliefs.

THE PHARISEES BROUGHT THE WOMAN TO JESUS BECAUSE IT WAS A LEGAL QUESTION THAT THEY WERE CONFRONTING HIM WITH JEWISH LAW- STONE HER ROMAN LAW- YOU CAN'T STONE HER SO IF HE WERE GOING TO SAY YOU CAN'T STONE HER, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE CHARGED HIM WITH BEING AGAINST THE LAW OF MOSES. IF TJESUS WOULD HAVE SAID YES, THEN HE COULD HAVE BEEN ACCUSED OF USURPING THE ROMANS AND SHOWING BLATANT DISREGARD OF THE ROMAN LAW.

If that were all Jesus were attempting to get across why would he not cast judgement on her, telling her that she was a sinful creature bound for hell? Instead he tells her that she is not condemned by him, to 'go and sin no more'. If Christ did not feel the need to condemn her for her sexual sin who are you to decide that a different sexual sin should be condemned by yourself? God will condemn those that he sees in need of condemning, all you need do is live your life as best you can, while making others aware of his standards. While doing so your god will have more benefit if you keep in mind that you catch more bees with honey.

ANOTHER INSTANCE IS WHEN THEY ASKED IS IT LAWFUL TO PAY TAXES TO CAESAR AND HE ASKED FOR A COIN WITH CAESAR'S FACE ON IT AGAIN THEY WERE USING THE JEWISH LAW VS. ROMAN LAW HERE. HE FORGAVE BUT HE ALSO SPOKE OUT AGAINST THE PHARISEES (MANY PEOPLE OFTEN LEAVE THAT OUT) ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BELIEVE ONLY IN THE LOVING JESUS AS OPPOSED TO THE WRATHFUL JESUS WHO IS TO JUDGE ALL MEN BY HIS WORD THE BIBLE.

This has nothing to do with the discussion of tolerance. He stated a disagreement, but he let the pharisees live and make their choices. He did not encourage the jewish people to insult the pharisees, nor did he encourage them to tell the pharisees that they were hell bound. He did it himself, christ states it for all, and then judges when the time is right. He does not encourage our judgement.

HOMOSEXUALS ARE GOING TO BE ASKED, ALONG WITH ADULTERERS, FORNICATORS, LIARS, THOSE WHO PRACTICE MAGIC ARTS, ARE SEXUALLY IMMMORAL, SWINDLERS, IDOLATERS, ETC. WHY DIDN'T THEY LISTEN TO THOSE WHO TOLD THEM THAT IT WAS WRONG ACCORDING TO HIS WORD. THEY WILL HAVE NO EXCUSE BECAUSE IT WAS PROCLAIMED TO THEM BEFOREHAND. ULTIMATELY, THE QUESTION BECOMES, IS THIS JUDGING HYPOCRITICALLY? NO. THE SCRIPTURE SAYS IT IS WRONG AND THE LAW GOVERNING HUMAN BEHAVIOR HAS NOT BEEN REPEALED

You have stated that you were once homosexual. That you have committed(and probably still think about) homosexual acts. So for you, yes it is hypocritical. Also, criticising someone for their sins when you have your own sins is considered hypocritical, making your judgements sin. Do not ignore the beam in your own eye for fear of the speck of sand in your brothers eye.

HOWEVER, PEOPLE WHO PREACH AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS CALL THEM HOMOSEXUALS AND NOT FAGS, DYKES, ETC. THOSE SEEM TO BE THE PEOPLE ON THE STREET

Wrong. An example for you

[againstthewind]

People can't control their feelings, but how they react. I can decide to have sex or not, or to wear a condom or not.

The gay lifestyle is a death trap. The gay lifestyle is a choice, if a man decides to sleep with men, that is a choice.

[Rinoa]

You are correct, it is a choice to actually be sexually active as a gay man. Same as it is a choice to be sexually active as a straight man. However, outside of the bible(which most active gay men don't believe in anyways) what is there showing that homosexuality is wrong, and what evidence do you have to show that no one should practice? Also, please discuss the 'deathtrap' statement further.

[againstthewind]

Rinoa, obviously you don't understand your Bible, it comments on everything we are facing today. If the Bible is not reliable then why has archaeology repeatedly verified its truthfulness? Proclaiming what God says in the Bible about homosexuality is not condemning a person, but the practice and the lifestyle.

Also, didn't God send prophets to preach the coming judgement in Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel and to let people know about the coming judgement in the Gospels as well as the Revelation. Why does God send the two witnesses in Revelation 11 and why does God send Paul to talk about Christ and the fact that Christ came to save the world from sin? Why does Paul talk about the wrath of God being revealed against mankind in Romans 1:18-32 and why warns in Galatians 5:19-21 about flesh being unable to inherit the kingdom.

In order to preach the Gospel message, we must preach and point out sin as the reason for Christ coming into the world to save us from the coming judgement because that is why they need to trust in Jesus (me too) and live our life for him. Jesus saved us by taking God's wrath upon himself. By doing that he opened the doors of heaven to the Jews and Gentiles. He died, was buried and was resurrected, all others stayed dead. Thus, by his resurrection he proclaimed victory over death, hell and the grave. If there was no judgement, Christ did that for naught, and my Jesus died to set captives free and I was once captive to homosexuality but now I am dedicated to fighting the battle for truth.

Who said we will not face temptation? If I were a thief and tell people that stealing is wrong, I can identify with them because I used to be a thief. I can identify with a struggle of a gay man who wants out of that lifestyle and I can be used by God to help them, but they must be dependent on God and not their own strength or they will not succeed.

If there is no such thing as judgement and we can't proclaim it, why did Christ speak against the Pharisees and talk about the coming judgement of the people who rejected him? Why does Jesus tell Jerusalem that he has longed to gather his children together like a hen gathers her chicks, but they would not? (mt 23:37) and about in verse 33 and 34 when he talks about the ones he himself will send to Jerusalem that they will crucify? Why does he proclaim God's Word?

Proclaiming that sin is wrong is not judgement, it is stating a simple fact. sin is sin is sin and one is not higher than the other, God tells us homosexuality is wrong and it will not be tolerated by God, and therefore I don't tolerate it. I won't see it celebrated in my presence because it is morally wrong and I don't want to go back to the lifestyle God has delivered me from

[Jack]

Rinoa, obviously you don't understand your Bible, it comments on everything we are facing today.

Only by interpreting it very broadly. It does not directly and clearly address any social issue that has arisen since the first century.

If the Bible is not reliable then why has archaeology repeatedly verified its truthfulness?

Archeology may agree that certain locations mentioned in the Bible are historical, but that's it. Archeology doesn't speak to the veracity of the contents of the Bible.

Also, didn't God send prophets

Since god has never been shown to factually exist, it's hard to guess what he may or may not have done had he been real.

we must preach and point out sin as the reason for Christ coming into the world to save us from the coming judgement because that is why they need to trust in Jesus (me too) and live our life for him.

If all men have sinned, what good are Christians doing pointing out sin? This is just another "you're evil and going to hell" gloating opportunity for the faithful. I don't believe your mission is what Jesus asked his followers to do. Didn't that have something to do with loving and forgiving?

Jesus saved us by taking God's wrath upon himself. By doing that he opened the doors of heaven to the Jews and Gentiles. He died, was buried and was resurrected, all others stayed dead. Thus, by his resurrection he proclaimed victory over death, hell and the grave. If there was no judgement, Christ did that for naught, and my Jesus died to set captives free

None of this can be supported by any evidence, only by faith. Those that have faith in other religions, or no faith in religion at all, would disagree. It all comes down to which meme you want to believe. Christianity, and others like it, appeal to our human desire to be loved and protected. It also gives people an meaning for death, fanciful as it may be.

God tells us homosexuality is wrong and it will not be tolerated by God, and therefore I don't tolerate it.

God doesn't, the Bible does, and that makes god perhaps the ultimate bigot. He can't even stand those he supposedly created. Anyone can stop behaving like a gay person, just as anyone can quite behaving like a straight person. Altering your behavior does not affect your genetic makeup. Perhaps you were only curious about homosexuality and never really a gay person. I can't say. Neither can you say what makes people gay or straight. We just don't know yet.
This is what I meant about religion being divisive. Sin, salvation, the concept of being god's chosen...all divide people, create artificial differences where there aren't any in the rational world. We all would like to feel special. Feeling special at the expense of other people is vanity.

[Rinoa]

Quote by: againstthewind Rinoa, obviously you don't understand your Bible, it comments on everything we are facing today. If the Bible is not reliable then why has archaeology repeatedly verified its truthfulness? Proclaiming what God says in the Bible about homosexuality is not condemning a person, but the practice and the lifestyle.

I never stated that the bible was not a reliable source. The most I have ever said on that was that some people do not hold those same beliefs and that we cannot legally force them to believe. I also do not believe that constantly telling someone that they are going to hell is an effective way to interest them in religion. As I stated before, you can't shove your bible your bible down my throat, it gags me, and prevents me from learning from it. Causing others to have anger towards god and an animosity for towards church is a sin in that it prevents them from showing interest.

Also, didn't God send prophets to preach the coming judgement in Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel and to let people know about the coming judgement in the Gospels as well as the Revelation. Why does God send the two witnesses in Revelation 11 and why does God send Paul to talk about Christ and the fact that Christ came to save the world from sin? Why does Paul talk about the wrath of God being revealed against mankind in Romans 1:18-32 and why warns in Galatians 5:19-21 about flesh being unable to inherit the kingdom.

Prophets and diciples, not the people themselves. They have been called by christ to mete out certain judgements, and they speak directly with god. As with when christ chooses to judge they are given higher authority. Would you claim to have the same authority in god as a prophet?

In order to preach the Gospel message, we must preach and point out sin as the reason for Christ coming into the world to save us from the coming judgement because that is why they need to trust in Jesus (me too) and live our life for him. Jesus saved us by taking God's wrath upon himself. By doing that he opened the doors of heaven to the Jews and Gentiles. He died, was buried and was resurrected, all others stayed dead. Thus, by his resurrection he proclaimed victory over death, hell and the grave. If there was no judgement, Christ did that for naught, and my Jesus died to set captives free and I was once captive to homosexuality but now I am dedicated to fighting the battle for truth.

I'm christian, and therefore aware of his sacrifice. I don't need it outlined, else I would not have had the capacity to use the example of the pharisees. Almost none of that proved your right in promoting judgement, as for pointing it out, there is a difference betweening stating that god does not approve of homosexuality and judging someone...Again, how effective is constantly telling someone that they are hellbound in your recruitment process?

Who said we will not face temptation? If I were a thief and tell people that stealing is wrong, I can identify with them because I used to be a thief. I can identify with a struggle of a gay man who wants out of that lifestyle and I can be used by God to help them, but they must be dependent on God and not their own strength or they will not succeed.

I certainly didn't, and I don't think I've implied once that we will not. I simply said that to hold someones sins against them, as in the case when using judgemental words, is sin. I haven't seen a thing supporting your right to judge another, only your right to state that god disagrees.

If there is no such thing as judgement and we can't proclaim it, why did Christ speak against the Pharisees and talk about the coming judgement of the people who rejected him? Why does Jesus tell Jerusalem that he has longed to gather his children together like a hen gathers her chicks, but they would not? (mt 23:37) and about in verse 33 and 34 when he talks about the ones he himself will send to Jerusalem that they will crucify? Why does he proclaim God's Word?

Again, out of context. I did not state that there would be no judgement. Only that it will be gods judgement, not that of our peers, as peers we must support and love one another.

Proclaiming that sin is wrong is not judgement, it is stating a simple fact. sin is sin is sin and one is not higher than the other, God tells us homosexuality is wrong and it will not be tolerated by God, and therefore I don't tolerate it. I won't see it celebrated in my presence because it is morally wrong and I don't want to go back to the lifestyle God has delivered me from

Also, there is a difference between stating what god considers to be sin and judging someone for it. Saying it is wrong is one thing, to constantly harrass someone for it, or to hold it against them on a personal level is another. To ridicule someone for their past or current sin is what I was pointing out as sin. That is what is to condemn or to judge, and that condemnation of another persons sins is what these lessons were out to stop.

As for your lack of tolerance, I'm sure there are other areas in which your sins should not be tolerated, perhaps you should look to yourself, worry about what should not be tolerated within you, rather than going after someone else.

As for my lack of understanding you have yet to explain why jesus did not see fit to condemn(judge) the adulterer? Neither stone nor word was used, though word would not have been against roman law. If my understanding in that is incorrect, feel free to better explain it.

I asked for evidence from outside the bible in order to prod you to seek evidence based in something that an atheist might believe in, look at it as finding something to 'help' someone not of your faith. The teachings god has had written often have reasons behind him that are discovered later. For instance(mormon) the LDS church received instruction to no longer smoke about a century before science proved it to be harmful, now science is backing that religious stance.

[Scoobydoo]

I agree with usherwood on the whole age/ developmental issue. I would want my (one example) teen to know about HIV prevention, I would not want my 9 yr old, and certainly my 6 yr old, she would have no clue- what the big people are talking about! It goes further to just teach basic tolerance, in a generic way, which is how it should be anyways, since we don just want people to be tolerant of sexual orientation, we also want them to be tolerant of Cathollics, blacks, whites, mentally challenged people, etc etc. I think it restricts the greater overall picture to narrow it down and make it a sex orientation issue, small children wont be able to grasp that really, and may misunderstand what is being said, it could also imply to them it's ok to be mean to other groups.
I see confusion, disorientation, even fear in youg children possibly as a result. I have studied child dev. and young children tend to become anxious or fearful if something is confusing to them. FOr ex, if they hear their parents whispering and have to guess what's it about, they will tend to think something bad. I think it should be kept easy to understand, generic, we are kind to everyone type of thing, -that they can understand.

One thing I didnt agree with was the comparison of a 1 yr old girl saying 'God did' in reply to a question about who made the flowers, to an automaton. If you dont believe in God, that's fine, but why would a parent teaching a toddler about God make them an automaton. 1 yr olds tend to talk that way anyways -da-da go car, or mama kiss me, typ of talk, it's just how they talk...

[CoffeeSaint]

Quote by: Scoobydoo I agree with usherwood on the whole age/ developmental issue. I would want my (one example) teen to know about HIV prevention, I would not want my 9 yr old, and certainly my 6 yr old, she would have no clue- what the big people are talking about!

I'm not disagreeing with this, because it's obviously a parent's choice how he wants his child raised. But can I ask what the problem is with your child knowing something about sex at an early age? I'm not talking about graphic pornography (though it's entirely likely kids have access to it and have seen it if they have internet access) but just some basic facts: that sex exists, that it is something that people do when they love each other (or however you want to couch it) and so on. I remember having a discussion with a friend when I was 9 about whether men and women faced each other when they had sex or not -- it didn't make me want to go mount a girl, in either orientation.

[againstthewind]

This is it, you don't control who you are attracted to. I used to be gay. I am not anymore, simply because I say this makes people brand me on both sides as a homophobic bigot that can turn on any man at any time and take his anal virginity. That is how people look at me.

By the gay community I am confused when I know that I am meant to have a wife, and a batch of children for which God created expressly for me,

The heterosexual community is wary of me because I feel I can turn on a guy and make him gay. I am on this side, you can control yourself, not all gays sleep around but gays need to stop demonizing those who believe that one can walk away from homosexuality, Heterosexuals have it jsut about right, they are repulsed by the sexual implications and way of life that many gays have.

Homosexuality is wrong, but homosexuals are worthy of love. Sexuality is sacred and of God, homosexuality is not sacred or worthy of observation in the least. Yes, there are homosexuals and we need to pray for them and hope against all hope that they can accept themselves as God created them to be, with the opposite sex and as stated in Genesis "be fruitful and multiply" (within God's ordained design of course).

In no way am I implying that homosexuals are evil, it is the simple fact that homosexuality is not what God designed and not to be celebrated as a valid alternative to heterosexuality. God created sex (rather making love) to be between a MAN and his WIFE not 2 men or 2 women.

Of course, I am expecting to be lambasted over this, I will not apologize to anyone for my theologically correct beliefs, don't believe the hype, any Christians that feel the same way?

[againstthewind]

This is it, you don't control who you are attracted to but you do control yourself and your actions. I used to be gay. I am not anymore (2 Cor 5:17), simply because I say this makes people brand me on both sides as a homophobic bigot that can turn on any man at any time and take his anal virginity. That is how people look at me.

By the gay community I am confused when I know that I am meant to have a wife, and a batch of children for which God created expressly for me,

The heterosexual community is wary of me because I feel I can turn on a guy and make him gay. I am on this side, you can control yourself, not all gays sleep around but gays need to stop demonizing those who believe that one can walk away from homosexuality, Heterosexuals have it jsut about right, they are repulsed by the sexual implications and way of life that many gays have.

Homosexuality is wrong, but homosexuals are worthy of love. Sexuality is sacred and of God, homosexuality is not sacred or worthy of observation in the least. Yes, there are homosexuals and we need to pray for them and hope against all hope that they can accept themselves as God created them to be, with the opposite sex and as stated in Genesis "be fruitful and multiply" (within God's ordained design of course).

In no way am I implying that homosexuals are evil, it is the simple fact that homosexuality is not what God designed and not to be celebrated as a valid alternative to heterosexuality. God created sex (rather making love) to be between a MAN and his WIFE not 2 men or 2 women.

Of course, I am expecting to be lambasted over this, I will not apologize to anyone for my theologically correct beliefs, don't believe the hype, any Christians that feel the same way?

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Isherwood "The Gay Agenda" has a snazzy ring to it, but I've asked many times for someone who uses the phrase to define the agenda for me. No one can. Do people think that kids can be converted into gays? If they do, then they haven't thought much about their own sexual identity and how they came to be straight. What I'm seeing in these videos is an effort to teach tolerance. Is that an evil thing? Does the right not believe in tolerance? Is tolerance limited to liberals? Or is it just a matter of the Christian coalition attempting to institutionalize homophobia?

The "gay agenda" is nothing more than the organized attempts by homosexual activists to gain equal legal recognition in society and to have a particular perverted attraction considered normal.

For the record, I don't believe in "tolerance" or "diversity" or "political correctness." There are only two kinds of people in America: Americans and not Americans.

[ruksak]

Ya thats messed up.

Gay & Lesbian pride day at a god damn elementary school?

To me, the gay agenda is a movement to qualify deviancy as normal, all while hiding its true nature, and subverting an individual parents right to have their children raised in a manner conducive with their wishes.

It has a lot to do with association. Not only do I have issue with the target demographics being small children, but I have issue with the associations that will be made.

Gay & lesbian pride in action on our streets;





Yes, I want my 8 year old learning about behavior like this.
Tolerance is one thing. Sexual deviancy and gender swapping is a bit f*ckin far fetched a concept for a child that still believes in Santa Claus. I don't want my daughter learning tolerance for heterosexuals that behave this way any more that I want her learning about homosexuals that behave this way.

And don't dare accuse me of being selective with these images. These sorts of scenes play out in great abundance at every gay &lesbian pride march.

[againstthewind]

The fact is that it is deviancy and children shouldn't learn about this! Yes, people hate homosexuals instead of homosexuality and turn it into a person hatred as opposed to a hatred for the homosexual actions and things of the sort, but we can't subject children to that. Children should learn about the birds and the bees but in a way that is suitable for a child to learn it. Some parents look at flowers and find out how pollination works, it is male and female part not 2 of one, etc.

[Jack]

For the record, I don't believe in "tolerance" or "diversity" or "political correctness." There are only two kinds of people in America: Americans and not Americans.

Since tolerance and diversity are practically cornerstones of our democracy, does that mean you do not consider yourself an American? I do embrace those attitudes (political correctness is not even close to being equal in gravity) and since I've also served honorably in the military defending my country, I won't abstain from confessing I'm an American.
What any of that has to do with the topic is beyond me, though.

To me, the gay agenda is a movement to qualify deviancy as normal, all while hiding its true nature

Its "true nature"? Well, I'm sure the good theists know all about that. All this prattle about "deviancy" from a group in which every member supposedly considers themselves to be sinful, and has a book in which it is written, "judge not, lest ye be judged". The irrational fear and phobia is far more discouraging in supposedly educated people than the degree of hypocrisy is.

[ruksak]

"teaching tolerance" is separate from teaching tolerance of homosexuals. The purposeful narrowing of the scope to exclude all other forms of intolerant behavior, and focus specifically on gays is indicative of an agenda being pushed.

The use of the words "Gay & Lesbian pride" disturbs me deeply. Its other manifestations are insidious when you understand children as the target. Please view the pics I posted again, and than tell me if you think its appropriate for children to be taught tolerance of this behavior by way of word association.

Listen to the little boy in the first video. His inability to digest what is being taught him is exactly why this is wrong. He is asked about tolerance and what it means. Then the child actually draws out an analogy. He say something to this effect; "Tolerance is like when you see a vegetable you have never tried before, you shouldn't not try it just because you don't know what it is".
You see how thats kinda f*cked up, right?

9 years old and hes being taught homosexual experimentation by his school.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: ruksak "teaching tolerance" is separate from teaching tolerance of homosexuals. The purposeful narrowing of the scope to exclude all other forms of intolerant behavior, and focus specifically on gays is indicative of an agenda being pushed. The use of the words "Gay & Lesbian pride" disturbs me deeply. Its other manifestations are insidious when you understand children as the target. Please view the pics I posted again, and than tell me if you think its appropriate for children to be taught tolerance of this behavior by way of word association. Listen to the little boy in the first video. His inability to digest what is being taught him is exactly why this is wrong. He is asked about tolerance and what it means. Then the child actually draws out an analogy. He say something to this effect; "Tolerance is like when you see a vegetable you have never tried before, you shouldn't not try it just because you don't know what it is". You see how thats kinda f*cked up, right? 9 years old and hes being taught homosexual experimentation by his school.

I am on the same page with you here, ruksak.

But then, I am the chairman of the school board for a little christian school. And I don't approve of taxing the public to pay for children's indoctrination by the State, ie., public school.

I would not want my child told that my values are not correct. I will teach my child what she needs to know about tolerance. I'll teach her not to hate homos or target them in any way. Also not to think that all sex options are on the table and she may choose from the smorgasbord.

She will be taught to go with her own feelings, not be tempted by sanctioned "experimentation." :rolleyes:

[Elminister]

I understand why certain life scenarios would want to be explained to children but, unfortunately, the base word sex inof homo/hetero sexual relationships should not be taught to the youngest children in these videos. I, myself would dub the explanation of same sex couples as a "life lesson" that should/could be explained to the child by their parents or the couple in question if/when the situation calls for it.

If this "education" is to be mandatory it should not be apon children this young IMHO.