LGBT lessons in schools

Dec 2015
3,511
USA
I can't lie either. You may be honest, but that doesn't make you right.To argue people shouldn't be parents based upon the context of this thread is just pure wrong. Holding that view is quite incredible. Let me be honest, anybody who believes that 5 or 6 year olds should be exposed to such adult themes has something terribly amiss in my opinion. No child at that age should have to be exposed to such a complex issue that they cannot grasp in any manner. What other adult themes do you teach your children at age 5?
As you know the unfortunate issue wrt internet posting is we can not clarify our position right away. My position is that schools should teach children about LGBT rights just as they do with religious rights or so called racial equality. I have also said itt Im not sure about the age as to when a child should be taught about civil rights.

But also keep this in mind...Its not like we are talking about regular everyday parents, we are talking about parents that teach their kids its ok to discriminate against LGBT people, for all we know the same people could easily be religious or so called racial bigots as well. I would think these types of parents are the last people we would defend. One can assume these parents are never going to stop teaching their kids bigotry no matter the age of their kids. I would argue we are on the same page in this regard. I cant imagine that you or David agree with a parent teaching their children(w/e the age of the child) that discrimination based on sex, so called race or religion is ok. As for the issue of taking kids away from parents, yes its a different issue. But again we are not talking about most parents, most parents do not teach their kids discrimination. Personally I would like a society where everyone treats each other with respect and surely only a minority of parents are intolerant parents so It can be argued that its best for society to ensure that kids are not brought up by intolerant parents.

At the age of 5 and 6 I feel children should be taught basic education but civil rights could be held off until perhaps age 10 or 11.
 
Jan 2010
4,374
Atlanta, Georgia USA
Well to both you and David let me say I respect you guys incredibly. I think I would be doing a disservice to you both if I simply lied and said I agree that LGBT lesson should not be taught in school. It’s much better if we’re all just open about view points here.

I understand that it appears that you and David and perhaps others disagree with me and the types of people who agree with me

LGBT people have killed themselves due to bullying. I feel as do billions in our world that it is imperative that schools teach children that LGBT people are human beings just like anybody else. In fact I see nothing wrong at all with taking away the children from parents that feel that LGBT people are not equal to non-LGBT people and I feel that’s a very strong position and a very proper position to have.

I am still the same person we both like baseball I’m sure we can grab a beer sometime if we ever meet
Why not start a program to stop bullying, regardless of the reason behind the bullying?

I agree that homosexuals are people like everyone else—the only difference is behaviour, and so no one is going to know that someone is homosexual unless he or she expresses it. And bullies are going to bully other kids—I was bullied as a child and so probably were you. So any program that is meant to draw attention to a difference is going to give the bullies something else to pick on other kids about. Remembering my own school experiences, when bullies called me « queer », which some did, they didn’t mean I was actually homosexual—they probably did not even know what they were saying, except that it was something bad. They were trying to provoke me.

Why not start a program to stop bullying, no matter what the pretext? That will apply to all kids equally, almost all of whom are bullied but very few of them are actually homosexual. That is, let’s stress our commonalities and not our differences: that’s a big enough lesson to try to teach children.
 
Jan 2010
4,374
Atlanta, Georgia USA
As you know the unfortunate issue wrt internet posting is we can not clarify our position right away. My position is that schools should teach children about LGBT rights just as they do with religious rights or so called racial equality. I have also said itt Im not sure about the age as to when a child should be taught about civil rights.

But also keep this in mind...Its not like we are talking about regular everyday parents, we are talking about parents that teach their kids its ok to discriminate against LGBT people, for all we know the same people could easily be religious or so called racial bigots as well. I would think these types of parents are the last people we would defend. One can assume these parents are never going to stop teaching their kids bigotry no matter the age of their kids. I would argue we are on the same page in this regard. I cant imagine that you or David agree with a parent teaching their children(w/e the age of the child) that discrimination based on sex, so called race or religion is ok. As for the issue of taking kids away from parents, yes its a different issue. But again we are not talking about most parents, most parents do not teach their kids discrimination. Personally I would like a society where everyone treats each other with respect and surely only a minority of parents are intolerant parents so It can be argued that its best for society to ensure that kids are not brought up by intolerant parents.

At the age of 5 and 6 I feel children should be taught basic education but civil rights could be held off until perhaps age 10 or 11.
I would defend the right of any parent to teach his or her children than homosexuality is wrong. Homosexuality is very different from « race », religion, etc.—it’s behaviour and not status. So those parents are not teaching their children to discriminate in the ordinary meaning of that term: they are teaching their children that certain behaviours are wrong. As I believe they are.
 
Jun 2016
1,811
England, 200 yards from Wales
I would defend the right of any parent to teach his or her children than homosexuality is wrong. Homosexuality is very different from « race », religion, etc.—it’s behaviour and not status. So those parents are not teaching their children to discriminate in the ordinary meaning of that term: they are teaching their children that certain behaviours are wrong. As I believe they are.
Certainly, but does wider society not also have the right to inform children that more than one view on the matter is available? (Saying nothing now about the appropriate method or age to teach that).
Sexuality is different from race I suppose, but why from religion - that is choice too, people choose both to adopt and to leave religions?
Why anyway should something being a choice give other people (unless they are hurt by it in some way) any more right to discriminate against it, or even to disapprove?
 

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
33,145
T'Republic of Yorkshire
I would defend the right of any parent to teach his or her children than homosexuality is wrong. Homosexuality is very different from « race », religion, etc.—it’s behaviour and not status. So those parents are not teaching their children to discriminate in the ordinary meaning of that term: they are teaching their children that certain behaviours are wrong. As I believe they are.
Well, religion is a choice. Arguably then, teaching children that such and such a religion is wrong is also acceptable.
 
Jan 2010
4,374
Atlanta, Georgia USA
Certainly, but does wider society not also have the right to inform children that more than one view on the matter is available? (Saying nothing now about the appropriate method or age to teach that).
Sexuality is different from race I suppose, but why from religion - that is choice too, people choose both to adopt and to leave religions?
Why anyway should something being a choice give other people (unless they are hurt by it in some way) any more right to discriminate against it, or even to disapprove?
The choice you’re talking about is whether to indulge in certain sexual practices that have no other aim than to gratify lust. unprotected homosexual sex has hurt all of society by diverting medical resources and research to HIV as well as infecting thousands—in Africa millions—of women (and men) who were given no choice in whether to become infected or not because their partners failed to tell them of the risk. All were, and apparently still are being, infected by a disease that is absolutely preventable.

There is no shortage of voices—loudly amplified voices—that inform everyone of the view that homosexuality is nothing to be criticized. I read and hear them every day. No need to talk about this in school.
 
Likes: tomar
Jun 2016
1,811
England, 200 yards from Wales
The choice you’re talking about is whether to indulge in certain sexual practices that have no other aim than to gratify lust. unprotected homosexual sex has hurt all of society by diverting medical resources and research to HIV as well as infecting thousands—in Africa millions—of women (and men) who were given no choice in whether to become infected or not because their partners failed to tell them of the risk. All were, and apparently still are being, infected by a disease that is absolutely preventable.

There is no shortage of voices—loudly amplified voices—that inform everyone of the view that homosexuality is nothing to be criticized. I read and hear them every day. No need to talk about this in school.
If you don't start from a particular ethical assumption maybe gratifying lust is not such a bad thing, why should anyone not have what pleasure they wish (whether it's sex or fly-fishing) so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else?

HIV has been spread by unprotected (and yes sometimes deceitful) sex, both hetero- and homo-sexual. It's the carelessness or deceit that is the problem, not one sort of sexuality.
For instance the highest incidence of HIV in South Africa is among female sex workers - mostly infected by hetero-sexual men. Second-highest is indeed among male homosexuals, largely blamed on "social stigma and homophobic violence as a result of traditional and conservative attitudes within the general population. There is also a lack of knowledge around the issues that face men who have sex with men, this makes it difficult for these men to disclose their sexuality to healthcare workers and get the healthcare they need. " Maybe they could do with more diversity teaching there, so homosexual men could more openly access health care,
(HIV and AIDS in South Africa)

If there is no harm being done to any other person homosexuality is nothing to be criticised, it's, in that case, a private preference that is no business of any outside moralist.
Children will, as they grow, hear "traditional and conservative attitudes", maybe from their families, I don't see it's a bad thing to show that those views are not universal, provided it is done on a basis and in a way that is suitable for their age.
 
Jan 2010
4,374
Atlanta, Georgia USA
If you don't start from a particular ethical assumption maybe gratifying lust is not such a bad thing, why should anyone not have what pleasure they wish (whether it's sex or fly-fishing) so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else?

HIV has been spread by unprotected (and yes sometimes deceitful) sex, both hetero- and homo-sexual. It's the carelessness or deceit that is the problem, not one sort of sexuality.
For instance the highest incidence of HIV in South Africa is among female sex workers - mostly infected by hetero-sexual men. Second-highest is indeed among male homosexuals, largely blamed on "social stigma and homophobic violence as a result of traditional and conservative attitudes within the general population. There is also a lack of knowledge around the issues that face men who have sex with men, this makes it difficult for these men to disclose their sexuality to healthcare workers and get the healthcare they need. " Maybe they could do with more diversity teaching there, so homosexual men could more openly access health care,
(HIV and AIDS in South Africa)

If there is no harm being done to any other person homosexuality is nothing to be criticised, it's, in that case, a private preference that is no business of any outside moralist.
Children will, as they grow, hear "traditional and conservative attitudes", maybe from their families, I don't see it's a bad thing to show that those views are not universal, provided it is done on a basis and in a way that is suitable for their age.
While AIDS has been spread by all kinds of sex, it started among male homosexuals.

As I said, read the newspaper or watch télévision. The standard narrative is that homosexuality is a very good thing. Do you think the public schools should add their weight on that side?

Also, a good bit of my reaction is based on my perception is that professed homosexuals, at least in the US, do not appear to be content just to be left alone. They appear to want everyone to share their view that homosexual acts are normal and in some cases (e.g. same sex « marriage ») are to be celebrated.
 
Last edited:
Likes: tomar

Similar History Discussions