Teaching kids about homosexuality

[101flyboy]

Homosexuality has no place being 'taught' by anyone. Its something you discover and learn about on your own by whatever means you need, via the internet or otherwise.

For those who say its not abnormal..uh...YEAH IT IS!

Considering purely from a biological standpoint, barring the intervention of science and adoption, anyone who would be in a same-gender relationship would never be able to procreate and their ideas wouldn't be passed on to the younger generation that much, thus ensuring the gradual elimination of those ideas altogether over a lengthy period of time.

Heterosexual relationships are 'normal' from a biological standpoint due to the act of it being necessary to reproduce and then care for your own offspring.

Also, our fellow animals in the animal kingdom by far are still in purely heterosexual relationships, unless there's 'gay dolphins' somewhere that I haven't heard of.

When it gets to the point where our kids have to be taught that homosexuality is 'ok' rather than just accepting it as an alternative viewpoint on things, that's where I draw the line. Its an alternative viewpoint, one that can be taught in the high school years and not before. Hell most people don't even really know their own sexuality completely for sure until after college.

Just because you have an 'alternative lifestyle' that differs from the majority, that doesn't mean I have to like you or be your damn friend. It only means I have to tolerate you at the bare minimum necessary not to rip your face off for trying to tell me how to raise my kids.

Oh look, Focus on the Family stopped by!

I'll address this SHIT later.

 

[ramboondiea]

i think 7 is a little two early, might be a little too complex of an issue for a child to wrap her head around, not that her child should never be taught it, just let her comprehend the basics of relationships so she can use that as a basis point

 

[Boommin]

I saw what you said. You said life is about making babies. And that made me chuckle.

No you clearly didn't you said

top 10 reason why people have sex

Which isn't the same. I said the purpose of life. Meaning naturally we all will grow up and eventually spawn a child. Common sense This doesn't mean every time we have sex its for that purpose. So you didn't say the same thing.

Abnormal doesn't mean wrong, how on Earth would you believe that I said it was? I don't believe in normality. No-one is normal. Like, you believing the purpose of life is to make babies. That certainly isn't normal, but of course you're entitled to your abnormal position.

Ummm maybe you saying

Going against that is abnormal? I guess that means a lot more people are abnormal in your eyes. Since the procreation rate has been going down quite a bit these last years. Must be a lot of abnormality running around.

isnt being sarcastic like I thought you were? Meh bad.

Homosexuality is just a preference? So, when did you choose to prefer women? When you knew you couldn't procreate with men? I didn't think heterosexuals had a choice to decide whether to be with men or women.

Yes homosexuality is just a preference no duh.Just like playing RPGS is my preference. I never choose to love it, but it was chosen by my DNA and my environment bro. You sound like someone who is angry and insecure about your sexuality. Just because you choose to be something doesn't make it impact everything you do. No matter what you do your nerves will still find it pleasant to have sex with a woman. No matter if you prefer men.

Oh, and I never said you like women, either. I don't know what you like, but I guess it wouldn't be a wild assumption that you fuck women just to make babies, and thus think that you've done your duty to the world. How proud a feeling that must be for you, if you've had it

You kinda implied it

So, when did you choose to prefer women?

1)I ADDED that fact, which ties into "life is about babies." You said life was about babies. Most people disagree with that assertion, which is the point I was making. Life isn't just about having babies. What ones' individual purpose of life is, is their individual purpose. There is no absolute purpose of life for everyone.

2)Saying "we all grow up to spawn a child" is a false statement. That's common sense.

3)I was being sarcastic, but does my sarcasm mean I was being negative? No, I was being critical of your assertion that life is about making babies, when most do not agree with that assertion. And you stating it's abnormal to think otherwise. Basically, I was making fun of not the abnormality, but of you. Guess you didn't get it.

4)I'm angry and insecure of my sexuality, because you made a ridiculous assertion life is for babies. Hahahahaha. That's funny.

5)Gay men are not attracted to women. They do not get hard from women. They don't prefer men. They are attracted to men inherently. As far as "not impacting everything you do," being gay means, actually, you're gay. It doesn't mean you are gay, but also straight. Sexual ORIENTATION doesn't work that way, bro.

6)I did imply it. Why? Um, because, you say sexuality is a preference, and you prefer women. Straight men don't have two options, it's not "do I prefer men or women." They are attracted to women because they are straight. So, really, you're implying you are not really straight. But that's up to you to clarify.

1) You failing to comprehend I am speaking form a biological standpoint not a social
2) Again biological
3) Biological!
4)
5) Wrong. Feelings are feelings bro. A soft blanket feels like a soft blanket to you. Blind fold you and you won't know the difference. Same with hetrosexual
6) Never said such a thing try quoting me when I said I prefer women. I am asexual currently.

Where did you get failure from? Being different isn't being wrong. Silly

From the fact that, from your standpoint, if I don't reproduce, I am abnormal. I am not following my purpose. Therefore I am failing. Therefore I fail at life.

Hmm I guess. Kinda negative viewpoint thou EDIT: Never said you had to follow the biological purpose. Hell I don't currently.

 

[101flyboy]

Yes, they should absolutely be informed of both at the same time.
The way I see it, what's the fucking difference?

Its not like giving them information about something will make them more interested in it.
However, it has been proven over and over and over time after time after fucking time that withholding information makes something more interesting to people. We want to know why we're not being told something. Don't make a big deal out of this kind of thing, because it isn't a big deal.

And I'm sorry to OP, but your sister sounds like a bigot to me if she's trying to set heterosexuality up as the "norm". Because that is exactly what all of the bigots do, regardless of what they are prejudiced against: they set their own situation up as the "norm" and devalue everything else or at least whatever they deem to be the "opposite" or "abnormal".

This all stems from how I view the issue as a whole: it doesn't matter if sexuality is biology or if its a choice; neither case is a valid reason to deny someone their human rights.
And encouraging ignorance in children is a step towards encouraging bigotry and hatred in children.

But thats the point, isnt it? It all stems from how YOU view the issue. Which is fine, everyone has opinions. But his sister doesnt view it the same way, nor do I. How does that make it right to call us bigots? No, you didnt call me a bigot directly, but a blanket statement like that certainly includes me.

Then explain to me how keeping children ignorant helps them in the slightest.
And don't reach for "preserving their innocence" because that is a bullshit copout.

You are doing it again. YOU think that by not teaching a CHILD about homosexuality means you are keeping them ignorant. I disagree. You are trying to set up your beliefs as fact, and they most certainly are not fact for me. You have an opinion, and again I will say that its fine, but it most certainly is NOT fact. You think its keeping a child ignorant, and I think that its something that should be approached either if they ask you about it, or at a much older period in their life.

I will also add that 7 years old is honestly too young to be having the discussion.

Yes, you are keeping your kid ignorant, and you specifically are doing it intentionally so you can indoctrinate your kid into your belief system. It's not even about approaching it later in life with you, it's about telling your kids your own VERSION of reality, instead reality itself. You don't care about the facts, you only care about propagating your religious views. Religion isn't fact, it's a belief system. You want to force your beliefs on others, and that is to the detriment of kids who need a proper education.

 

[101flyboy]

Yes, they should absolutely be informed of both at the same time.
The way I see it, what's the fucking difference?

Its not like giving them information about something will make them more interested in it.
However, it has been proven over and over and over time after time after fucking time that withholding information makes something more interesting to people. We want to know why we're not being told something. Don't make a big deal out of this kind of thing, because it isn't a big deal.

And I'm sorry to OP, but your sister sounds like a bigot to me if she's trying to set heterosexuality up as the "norm". Because that is exactly what all of the bigots do, regardless of what they are prejudiced against: they set their own situation up as the "norm" and devalue everything else or at least whatever they deem to be the "opposite" or "abnormal".

This all stems from how I view the issue as a whole: it doesn't matter if sexuality is biology or if its a choice; neither case is a valid reason to deny someone their human rights.
And encouraging ignorance in children is a step towards encouraging bigotry and hatred in children.

But thats the point, isnt it? It all stems from how YOU view the issue. Which is fine, everyone has opinions. But his sister doesnt view it the same way, nor do I. How does that make it right to call us bigots? No, you didnt call me a bigot directly, but a blanket statement like that certainly includes me.

That all depends. Why do you view homosexuality with a negative connotation, personally?

I simply do not believe it is right, personally. However, I wouldnt treat anyone any differently because of it, just like I wouldnt treat anyone differently because of their skin color, or political differences, etc. etc. As per my earlier post, I believe in treating others how you want to be treated, and do so.

I do not believe heterosexuality is right, but I don't treat heterosexuals worse because of it. Because I'm not gay, although secretly, I wish I were, since it's not RIGHT to be straight. Why? Because my Jesus told me so.

 

[Squilookle]

Kids don't "become" attracted to the same-sex. Parents don't turn kids gay.

Who said they did? The point that was raised was that the kid might get the impression that the parents gave them the idea -whether it's possible or not is irrelevant- that's the assumption that could be made by the kid, and deep resentment could come from that.

 

[Boommin]

Yes, they should absolutely be informed of both at the same time.
The way I see it, what's the fucking difference?

Its not like giving them information about something will make them more interested in it.
However, it has been proven over and over and over time after time after fucking time that withholding information makes something more interesting to people. We want to know why we're not being told something. Don't make a big deal out of this kind of thing, because it isn't a big deal.

And I'm sorry to OP, but your sister sounds like a bigot to me if she's trying to set heterosexuality up as the "norm". Because that is exactly what all of the bigots do, regardless of what they are prejudiced against: they set their own situation up as the "norm" and devalue everything else or at least whatever they deem to be the "opposite" or "abnormal".

This all stems from how I view the issue as a whole: it doesn't matter if sexuality is biology or if its a choice; neither case is a valid reason to deny someone their human rights.
And encouraging ignorance in children is a step towards encouraging bigotry and hatred in children.

But thats the point, isnt it? It all stems from how YOU view the issue. Which is fine, everyone has opinions. But his sister doesnt view it the same way, nor do I. How does that make it right to call us bigots? No, you didnt call me a bigot directly, but a blanket statement like that certainly includes me.

That all depends. Why do you view homosexuality with a negative connotation, personally?

I simply do not believe it is right, personally. However, I wouldnt treat anyone any differently because of it, just like I wouldnt treat anyone differently because of their skin color, or political differences, etc. etc. As per my earlier post, I believe in treating others how you want to be treated, and do so.

I do not believe heterosexuality is right, but I don't treat heterosexuals worse because of it. Because I'm not gay, although secretly, I wish I were, since it's not RIGHT to be straight. Why? Because my Jesus told me so.

Dammit I don't believe being a republican is right. I must treat them worse because of it. /sarcasm

 

[101flyboy]

Why would they need to learn about homosexual relations?

People don't usually discover they are gay until they are in their teenage years and by then they know everything they need to know.

COMPLETELY incorrect. For starters, no-one I don't believe is talking about homosexual "relations" ie. sex. Secondly, most kids have same-sex thoughts. There are gay/lesbian teens. They need guidance too. They need support, and they need help to get them through the discovery of their sexuality as well. People aren't fully developed sexually in their teen years. They are still learning. Gay/lesbian kids deserve the same RESPECT as heterosexual kids in understanding their feelings and being led on the right path.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

Yes.

That way you can pre-empt the homophobia.

 

[D Moness]

Also, our fellow animals in the animal kingdom by far are still in purely heterosexual relationships, unless there's 'gay dolphins' somewhere that I haven't heard of.

Please come back after reading this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior

Edit : And yes your friendly neighbourhood dolphin is mentioned among many other animals

 

[101flyboy]

Not everyone is born gay, while people most certainly don't CHOOSE to be gay, that doesn't mean it can't develop because of external stimuli.

BULLSHIT.
http://psychcentral.com/news/2008/06/30/genetics-and-environment-shape-sexual-orientation/2522.html

How does that contradict? If environmental factors help shape it then clearly not everyone is born gay. If all gay people were born gay then environmental factors could not contribute since it would already be determined. So 'Not everyone is born gay' fits. 'while people most certainly don't CHOOSE to be gay' is not contradicted by presenting factors that aren't a choice. And environment is an external stimuli so not sure how 'that doesn't mean it can't develop because of external stimuli' is wrong. Every piece of it seems fine.

Individual-specific environmental factors means environmental factors that are PERSONAL, and NOT INFLUENCED BY OTHERS. That would include things such as biological processes in the womb. That would not include societal attitudes, family, parenting, or friends. It doesn't include "hey, I'm your dad, let me teach you to be gay." No person can make a gay person gay, it's a PERSONAL thing.

Try again now, please.

Okay. No need to be rude.

I apologize. This is a serious issue, though. There is still an extreme amount of ignorance revolving this entire issue of homosexuality. Extreme amount, including by supporters. That needs to change immediately as it is an urgent issue that is part of the reason for the homophobic world LGBT folk currently live in.

 

[Sparcrypt]

Teach them when they're old enough to understand?

Noone taught me when I was a kid.. I can't actually recall WHEN I learned. I'm not homophobic.

 

[Olrod]

People are people. About half of them are men, and about half of them are women. Most of the men like women, and most of the women like men. There are some men who like other men and there are some women who like other women.

[to child] Now, which do you want to learn about?

 

[Boommin]

Why would they need to learn about homosexual relations?

People don't usually discover they are gay until they are in their teenage years and by then they know everything they need to know.

COMPLETELY incorrect. For starters, no-one I don't believe is talking about homosexual "relations" ie. sex. Secondly, most kids have same-sex thoughts. There are gay/lesbian teens. They need guidance too. They need support, and they need help to get them through the discovery of their sexuality as well. People aren't fully developed sexually in their teen years. They are still learning. Gay/lesbian kids deserve the same RESPECT as heterosexual kids in understanding their feelings and being led on the right path.

Well If homosexuals are getting a support group I guess heterosexuals need one too. Since you know they are not being taught that its right either. Just because sex education has the word sex in it doesn't mean its talking about sex. What school do you know of that teaches anything more then reproduction?

 

[101flyboy]

Nope, because she is learning about the "birds and the bees" or reproduction. Homosexual relationships do not result in reproduction so there is no reason to cover it.

Plus it is better to teach the "norm" because that is what it is. (If we graph relationships the mode of the graph will be heterosexual relationships)

Now, when she is old enough to understand sexuality i.e. an adolescent (has feelings with which to relate) it might be appropriate to cover.

Judging from your previous anti-gay comments....................just no.

 

[skywalkerlion]

Well, I say that unless the child brings it up, you shouldn't have to. No need to overwhelm their smaller brains with tons of different things to confuse them.

 

[101flyboy]

Why would they need to learn about homosexual relations?

People don't usually discover they are gay until they are in their teenage years and by then they know everything they need to know.

COMPLETELY incorrect. For starters, no-one I don't believe is talking about homosexual "relations" ie. sex. Secondly, most kids have same-sex thoughts. There are gay/lesbian teens. They need guidance too. They need support, and they need help to get them through the discovery of their sexuality as well. People aren't fully developed sexually in their teen years. They are still learning. Gay/lesbian kids deserve the same RESPECT as heterosexual kids in understanding their feelings and being led on the right path.

Well If homosexuals are getting a support group I guess heterosexuals need one too. Since you know they are not being taught that its right either. Just because sex education has the word sex in it doesn't mean its talking about sex. What school do you know of that teaches anything more then reproduction?

The school I went to didn't teach just reproduction. I learned about STDs. I learned about divorce, and the things revolving around being a family, and also about why being sexually exclusive in a relationship is the best thing to do. And I even learned that some people are not straight.

If others learned what I did during their youth, the ignorance level in the world would definitely be decreased.

P.S. Sex=sex. Reproduction=reproduction.

 

[Eternal_Lament]

I suppose that during sex-ed (assuming of course that the sex-ed class is actually SEX-ED and not "just dont do it") would be a good time to bring up and teach homosexuality. Parents should be the one's to determine if they wish to teach their child about homosexuality before then, but it should nevertheless be something that children learn about before adult-hood at least.

 

[Kazturkey]

No, I do not. I don't think homosexuality should be encouraged, unless it actually comes from the child itself, with as little as external influence as possible.

...or the kid might catch the gay?

I really, really wish the Escapist had signatures.