GAY TEACHER READS HOMOSEXUAL STORY TO 3RD GRADERS

What rights did gay marriage take away from anyone?

 

You're just a cultural Marxist if you have a problem with what I said. Begone with you and your ideology.

 

...said the cultural Marxist.

Your original statement reminds me of people in the 50's, "I like ******s. Hell, I even know a couple who are nice folks. But I don't want them in school with my kids."

 

Sounds like bisexuality to me.

 

Would you be bothered if a heterosexual teacher read a book about heterosexual people? If not, why?

 

False equivalency.

You are the one who wants to change the status quo. Forcing your beliefs on our culture. We Americans aren't allowed to draw a line? Should we just let kids watch porn for health class?

 

A bisexual switching teams is not a change in sexuality, it is a demonstration of their bisexuality.

 

Would the same people defending this teacher's choice in books be so adamant if he was reading a book about how awful gun control is or how abortion is wrong etc?

It's third grade, the only books you read in third grade are ones about Spot and Dick and Jane or whatever they were. Innocuous boring books with no subtext to them. If the teacher did in fact read a book that was about gay marriage (assuming it was actually about gay marriage and didn't just happen to mention two guys being married once and then that was the end of it) then he should be reprimanded. This goes for any teacher that tries to bring in materials that promote their own agendas. Third grade is about learning the basics there is absolutely no reason to be pushing this stuff at that age.

 

Moi621;

"switching teams is not a change in sexuality..."?

How would you know? For years, it was thought homosexuality was a mental disorder. Today it's thought to be in one's upbringing, or in one's DNA.

The debate isn't over, so let's not claim it is.

 

See post # 95 the majority of prime time TV now has HOMOsexual characters or references. It's very disproportionate and the intent is obvious!

 

Unless you are being informed by Disney, Beauty did not fall in love with a beast. The beast is meant to be allegorical. It is more analogous to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Beauty was beautiful because of her heart, and she sympathized and loved an angry, tormented man, which made him "a beast". Her love made him whole again. It has nothing to do with beastiality. There are no sexual connotations in the story whatever.

I've said this before - in the mind of a prog, even the story Heidi is filled with sexual perversion. Go ahead and keep your "perverse thoughts" if they are entertaining to you. But know that this is a big reason why the prog Donner party has gone off the deep end.

 

Damn that cultural Marxist Dr. Martin Luther King Jr! He wanted to change the status quo! What's next- black people in our children's story book! THE HORROR!

Wait, you accuse me of making a "false equivalency" and spew out this hyperbolic BS? This has to rank of one of the most idiotic statements I've read, and I consider PF a sea of idiots.

 

Most of Prime time TV has HOMOsexual Characters or references . If advertising doesn't work why is there billions of dollars spent on it.
Their agenda is clear to make the perversion of HOMOsexuality seem like a normal alternative lifestyle to young impressionable and sexually confused adolescents.GET'EM YOUNG AND YOU GOT'EM FOREVER !!!

 

I support civil rights. Segregation isn't right. Sexuality is a personal choice, we shouldn't segregate based on that either. Does that mean we cater to them? No.

What you think about me? I really don't care. This is common sense stuff.

 

There is a difference between trying to sell someone a car and educating childeren on homosexuality. I have seen no evidence that reading a book can make people gay. If you argue that it can then please provide source citation that says as much.

Subjective opinion.

 

No I am saying that award shows are not the place to be promoting politics, right, left, or otherwise

You don't have a right to be protected from homosexual entertainment material any more than gays have from being protected from heterosexual entertainment material. You right begins and ends with your ability to decide to watch what is presented or not. Rent videos that have your preferred content. Read books that lack homosexual material. Heck if you feel there is not enough heterosexual entertainment material out there, create it yourself. According to you, there should be a vast market out there just drooling for it.

Also, you forgot Dr. Who, from which Torchwood spun off from. As for anything else prime time, since I don't watch it, I wouldn't know what did and didn't have such references, nor do I particularly care. I care only about a good story line and good acting.

 

You could look at it more as if marriage is to be a legal institution then the civil right is that alll may participate if they desire. The civil right is more the equal application of law as opposed to what the law is granting.

 

Speaking of stupid, at least as far as concepts go....

They are not seeking to create the homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals and what not. They are trying to appeal to what is already there and get even more market share. If we suddenly found out that the Sidhe were real, the market would suddenly have a lot more Elf centric themes as advertisers and shows would try to draw them in as well. It wouldn't be about creating more Elves.

 

Hardly false. Especiallly since the whole Civil Rights era was about changing the status quo, and people were trying to draw a line.

 

Somehow, you attached my ID with a statement I never wrote!

osbornterry Moi


psst it could be in the water too as
some chemical pollutants have feminizing effects.​

 

You do realize that all those shows do feature more heterosexual relationships than homosexual ones, right?

 

As noted the advertisers know that homosexual dollars spend just as good as heterosexual dollars.

 

That means that we shouldn't cater to the heterosexuals either.

 

Macthecat;

For thousands of years marriage has been an institution (between a man and a woman). Changing its makeup changes its original purpose.

I don't argue the merits of gay marriage (I have a brother who is gay and married); but shouldn't any society have a voice when it comes to altering one of its bedrocks?

Oh wait a minute. Society has spoken.

The majority of elections on this issue have ended in favor of keeping marriage as is. Even though the margins of loss have narrowed over the years, the losers have not waited for change to come through the ballot box. They have gone around the vote to change the outcome.

Something Trump haters are accusing the president of doing.

In the future, the society may have change their minds and accepted gay marriage. We won't know. Instead, the proponents of gay marriage have killed the ballot and spit on the voters.

No wonder society is upset.

 

What exactly are you afraid of? That they teacher will attempt to convert the children to be homosexuals? Are you trying to hide from children that two people of the same sex, regardless of whether it be to men or women, can actually love one another without the physical aspect being described? If they are that opposed they certainly have the option of taking their children out of school system and home-schooling them or send them off to a religious school.

Raising children under the guise of ignorance will only make it tougher for them to adapt as adults when they learn the actual truth how people different then they are do exist.