School sued over same-sex fairy tale

[GameSnake]

"Two families filed a lawsuit today against a Massachusetts town and its public school system after a teacher read a gay-themed fairy tale to children without notifying them first. The suit against Lexington, about 19km west of Boston, seeks unspecified damages after the book King & King was read to a classroom of about 20 mostly seven-year-olds."
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,18955997%255E1702,00.html

WOW. There must have been something more appropriate then a gay book to read to those kids?

[Sidoh]

God, what a stupid teacher.  How can someone possibly lack that much insight?

[MyndFyre]

God, what a stupid teacher.  How can someone possibly lack that much insight?

The teacher knew precisely what he/she was doing when it was done.  Think about it.  It's in MA.  Can't get much more liberal than the state of Teddy Kennedy.

[RoMi]

Massachusetts represent.  Most socialist state in the union, yes.  Now we have state funded health care, can't wait to see the taxes off my paycheck this year.  Anyways, considering this is going to go through the same court that legalized gay marriage, I don't see it going anywhere.  In my opinion children are too young to be exposed to this kind of stuff, what ever happened to being a child, and not being bombarded with everything in the world all at once?

[trust]

Hopefully she's fired or something. I would pull my kid right then and put them in a nice Christian private school.

[rabbit]

Does anyone realize that being gay is not something people choose?  7 year olds play violent videogames and watch R rated movies all the time.  Why don't you try to stop that before bitching about a fucking FAIRY TALE?

[RoMi]

There's a difference from the kid playing video games because this was in school.  If the parent wants to read them that story then it would be fine by me.  I think parents should teach what their values are and not the school.

[Joe]

Which brings up sex ed..

[GameSnake]

All gay bashing aside I really do think there is better material to read to 7 year olds than that.

[RoMi]

Which brings up sex ed..

They don't teach sex-ed in 2nd grade last time I checked.  I don't know how they do it in other states, but here in Mass they do it from a scientific basis, they get into homosexuality, and by the time they are teaching it everyone knows what it is, and don't have a problem.

[Joe]

All gay bashing aside I really do think there is better material to read to 7 year olds than that.

Signed.

They don't teach sex-ed in 2nd grade last time I checked.  I don't know how they do it in other states, but here in Mass they do it from a scientific basis, they get into homosexuality, and by the time they are teaching it everyone knows what it is, and don't have a problem.

In Baraboo WI, they teach it in 6th grade (health class, covering STDs, etc). In Columbus WI, they teach it in 6th grade (life science, anatomy of humans). I took the class in Columbus, but I live in Baraboo now, where we covered it again in 8th grade.

As for everyone knowing, let me tell you a little secret: I thought girls had penises back in 6th grade, and when we were at my cousin's house one time the conversation between me, her, and her friend Sarah (all in the same grade), Sarah said that she thought guys had vaginas (before the class, obviously), so not everyone is all that smart.

[deadly7]

As for everyone knowing, let me tell you a little secret: I thought girls had penises back in 6th grade, and when we were at my cousin's house one time the conversation between me, her, and her friend Sarah (all in the same grade), Sarah said that she thought guys had vaginas (before the class, obviously), so not everyone is all that smart.

Wow.  Now I know why you're so fucked up.  Tell me, did you even like girls when you were in 6th grade because you thought that?

[Sidoh]

The teacher knew precisely what he/she was doing when it was done.  Think about it.  It's in MA.  Can't get much more liberal than the state of Teddy Kennedy.

A person with any decent amount of common sense should realize the high potential for radical reprocussions ...

[MyndFyre]

Does anyone realize that being gay is not something people choose?  7 year olds play violent videogames and watch R rated movies all the time.  Why don't you try to stop that before bitching about a fucking FAIRY TALE?

No, that doesn't occur to me, and I've seen nothing substantive that indicates it, either.

[Eric]

From Publishers Weekly
When a grouchy queen tells her layabout son that it's time for him to marry, he sighs, "Very well, Mother.... I must say, though, I've never cared much for princesses." His young page winks. Several unsatisfactory bachelorettes visit the castle before "Princess Madeleine and her brother, Prince Lee" appear in the doorway. The hero is smitten at once. "What a wonderful prince!" he and Prince Lee both exclaim, as a shower of tiny Valentine hearts flutters between them. First-time co-authors and artists de Hann and Nijland matter-of-factly conclude with the royal wedding of "King and King," the page boy's blushing romance with the leftover princess and the assurance that "everyone lives happily ever after." Unfortunately, the multimedia collages are cluttered with clashing colors, amorphous paper shapes, scribbles of ink and bleary brushstrokes; the characters' features are indistinct and sometimes ugly. Despite its gleeful disruption of the boy-meets-girl formula, this alterna-tale is not the fairest of them all. For a visually appealing and more nuanced treatment of diversity in general, Kitty Crowther's recent Jack and Jim is a better choice. Ages 6-up.

Interesting.

[iago]

Children need to understand that there are gay people in the world.  Otherwise, they'll grow up afraid of gays and, if the kid is gay, he won't understand it and have a confusing adolescence with feelings that he doesn't understand properly.  I think it's very important to expose children to all aspects of the world. 

You guys are saying it as if it's an erotic book.  Although I haven't read the book and I've never even heard about it, I imagine that it isn't erotic.  There's nothing wrong or weird about same-sex relationships, unless you're still living in the past. 

I think that they should make a book like that required for children. 

[GameSnake]

To be honost I'd rather see a 7 year old reading a fairy tale then watching a violent/sex movie.

[rabbit]

My point exactly.  Those of you who believe that fairy-tale books are read exclusively at school raise your hand.

I suggest to all of you to go see or watch the Laramie Project, it's really good, and you might learn something.

[Warrior]

I personally think being gay is probably the most degrading thing a man could do to himself.
I mean who DOESNT LIKE GIRLS..what the HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU?? Maybe part of their brain (the man part) it dead??

This doesn't mean I go attacking gays, I just don't associate myself with them. Theres a difference between having tolerance and accepting being gay as something right.

You can tolerate someone withought embracing their beliefs.

I personally think this is way out of line to be taught in any class room prior to Middle school. Seriously if my son came home and said
"Hey dad we learned about gays today" I'd have to show him porn asap.

[Sidoh]

Children need to understand that there are gay people in the world.  Otherwise, they'll grow up afraid of gays and, if the kid is gay, he won't understand it and have a confusing adolescence with feelings that he doesn't understand properly.  I think it's very important to expose children to all aspects of the world. 

I agree, but if you introduce them to these sorts of things when the children are too young to fully understand them, I fail to see any point in introducing them at all.  I think homosexuality should be thoroughly covered as soon as the kids are old enough to be educated on the subject of sex.

You guys are saying it as if it's an erotic book.  Although I haven't read the book and I've never even heard about it, I imagine that it isn't erotic.  There's nothing wrong or weird about same-sex relationships, unless you're still living in the past. 

It's clearly strange to the children since its obvious they haven't been introduced to the subject yet (and lack proper education creating the possibility of fully comprehending it).  Their parents are filing lawsuits.  I don't think the school system has any right to interfere with how parents are governing they way they raise their children.  If they want to shield them from homosexuality, I don't see it at all just for a teacher to suddenly push this sort of subject on children.  I wouldn't argue this point in the least bit if the teacher had asked permission from the parents.

I think that they should make a book like that required for children. 

I agree that this should be introduced to children, but not when they're seven years old ....

[Blaze]

In elementary school I used to have some of those 5:00am religion pushers in my class and in music class they had to sit out due to all the themes of the stuff we did. 

[GameSnake]

Children need to understand that there are gay people in the world.  Otherwise, they'll grow up afraid of gays and, if the kid is gay, he won't understand it and have a confusing adolescence with feelings that he doesn't understand properly.  I think it's very important to expose children to all aspects of the world. 

I agree, but if you introduce them to these sorts of things when the children are too young to fully understand them, I fail to see any point in introducing them at all.  I think homosexuality should be thoroughly covered as soon as the kids are old enough to be educated on the subject of sex.

You guys are saying it as if it's an erotic book.  Although I haven't read the book and I've never even heard about it, I imagine that it isn't erotic.  There's nothing wrong or weird about same-sex relationships, unless you're still living in the past. 

It's clearly strange to the children since its obvious they haven't been introduced to the subject yet (and lack proper education creating the possibility of fully comprehending it).  Their parents are filing lawsuits.  I don't think the school system has any right to interfere with how parents are governing they way they raise their children.  If they want to shield them from homosexuality, I don't see it at all just for a teacher to suddenly push this sort of subject on children.  I wouldn't argue this point in the least bit if the teacher had asked permission from the parents.

I think that they should make a book like that required for children. 

I agree that this should be introduced to children, but not when they're seven years old ....

iago's point was it is obserd to try to shield children from gay people and other facts of life, parents can raise thier kids but not control the random enviorment of the world around thier children.

[Sidoh]

iago's point was it is obserd to try to shield children from gay people and other facts of life, parents can raise thier kids but not control the random enviorment of the world around thier children.

I believe it's necessary to shield small children (they're 7 years old, for Christ's sake) from this sort of thing.  You can tell them about penis loving men when they're older.

[rabbit]

If parents are going to sue schools for reading gay fairytales, they need to sue stores for selling violent games and movies, and the companies that produce them, when their kids play/see those things, because they have absolutely no control over them.  This entire thing is stupid.  OMFG A FAIRYTALE, get over it.

To quote a brilliant cartoon man, Peter Griffin:

If gays wanna get married and be miserable like the rest of us, I say let 'em.

What kind of philosophy is "I don't like something a teacher did, so I'm going to sue the school."  Do parents sue for failing grades?  No.  Fuck that.

[trust]

There's nothing wrong or weird about same-sex relationships, unless you're still living in the past.

Yes there is and I do not want my children, especially when they're 7 years old, exposed to it.

[iago]

I agree, but if you introduce them to these sorts of things when the children are too young to fully understand them, I fail to see any point in introducing them at all.  I think homosexuality should be thoroughly covered as soon as the kids are old enough to be educated on the subject of sex.

You make it sound like it's something dirty and wrong.  What do you mean they're too young?  Being gay isn't just about sex, it's a way of life that many people are forced to accept.  If kids understand that a man and woman can fall in love and be married, they should also understand that two men can.  It's a part of the world, and children should be seeing it while they're young.  It's not just about sex. 

I agree that this should be introduced to children, but not when they're seven years old ....

I'll say it again: this isn't about sex, or anything dirty. 

[Armin]

Like iago was saying, the school is obviously doing it so kids don't grow up against gays. Just like how they teach kids about slavery when they're young, and how wrong it is so they don't grow up against blacks. They're not trying to make you black, just in the same way that they're not trying to make you gay. Just to be aware of it, and not be against it.

[trust]

No, it's different. Children are taught that slavery is BAD, and thus they're against it.

However, now they're being taught that homosexuality is acceptable and OK...so they'll be for it and probably experiment with it. And that's wrong.

Read a recent article from Time magazine (2 months old or so) - it said that a large percentage of teens are become "bicurious" because it's "cool" - this will just further that and it's wrong.

My sister is in 2nd grade and her homework consists of how Jesus is different than other kings (ie. not concerned over land) and she's required to memorize bible versus that discuss living a good life and not stealing and etc. She is not recieving assignments or stories or anything else that involves two gay fairies. I will be placing my children in private school.

[rabbit]

This country is ruled by the Constitution, not the Bible.  The Constitution says nothing about homosexuality being wrong, bad, evil, etc.. just as it doesn't say heterosexuality is good, supreme, right, etc...  Shut the fuck up about your Bible shit.  This isn't Church, it's the United Fucking States.

This entire country was founded on the basis that everyone is equal and allowed.  If you can't accept that, get the fuck out of my country.

[GameSnake]

No, it's different. Children are taught that slavery is BAD, and thus they're against it.

However, now they're being taught that homosexuality is acceptable and OK...so they'll be for it and probably experiment with it. And that's wrong.

Read a recent article from Time magazine (2 months old or so) - it said that a large percentage of teens are become "bicurious" because it's "cool" - this will just further that and it's wrong.

My sister is in 2nd grade and her homework consists of how Jesus is different than other kings (ie. not concerned over land) and she's required to memorize bible versus that discuss living a good life and not stealing and etc. She is not recieving assignments or stories or anything else that involves two gay fairies. I will be placing my children in private school.

Umm.. No.. If a child is raised thinking homosexuals are acceptable they are not more likely to be gay, just more tolerant; a child raised by gay parents  has the same chance of being homosexual than anyone else,.

[rabbit]

Studies show that genetics plays a part:

• The more older brothers you have, the more likely you are to be gay
• If you're left handed, the above does not apply

etc...
Homosexuality is not a choice, it's the way some people are.  And if you believe it IS a choice, then you can't possibly believe in survival of the fittest, otherwise all gays would have been wiped out due to them being "inferior".

See: http://www.geocities.com/southbeach/boardwalk/7151/biobasis.html

While we're on the topic of gayness, let's address gay marriage.  Why should it be allowed?  For the 2017 laws that apply only to married couples, of course.  These are only some of them.

[trust]

This entire country was founded on the basis that everyone is equal and allowed.  If you can't accept that, get the fuck out of my country.

If everyone is equal and allowed, why should I leave?

[trust]

No, it's different. Children are taught that slavery is BAD, and thus they're against it.

However, now they're being taught that homosexuality is acceptable and OK...so they'll be for it and probably experiment with it. And that's wrong.

Read a recent article from Time magazine (2 months old or so) - it said that a large percentage of teens are become "bicurious" because it's "cool" - this will just further that and it's wrong.

My sister is in 2nd grade and her homework consists of how Jesus is different than other kings (ie. not concerned over land) and she's required to memorize bible versus that discuss living a good life and not stealing and etc. She is not recieving assignments or stories or anything else that involves two gay fairies. I will be placing my children in private school.

Umm.. No.. If a child is raised thinking homosexuals are acceptable they are not more likely to be gay, just more tolerant; a child raised by gay parents  has the same chance of being homosexual than anyone else,.

Being bicurious isn't the same as being gay. If you disagree with me, that's fine, just in the future disagree with points that I actually make.

[GameSnake]

No, it's different. Children are taught that slavery is BAD, and thus they're against it.

However, now they're being taught that homosexuality is acceptable and OK...so they'll be for it and probably experiment with it. And that's wrong.

Read a recent article from Time magazine (2 months old or so) - it said that a large percentage of teens are become "bicurious" because it's "cool" - this will just further that and it's wrong.

My sister is in 2nd grade and her homework consists of how Jesus is different than other kings (ie. not concerned over land) and she's required to memorize bible versus that discuss living a good life and not stealing and etc. She is not recieving assignments or stories or anything else that involves two gay fairies. I will be placing my children in private school.

Umm.. No.. If a child is raised thinking homosexuals are acceptable they are not more likely to be gay, just more tolerant; a child raised by gay parents  has the same chance of being homosexual than anyone else,.

Being bicurious isn't the same as being gay. If you disagree with me, that's fine, just in the future disagree with points that I actually make.

I was only commenting on: "However, now they're being taught that homosexuality is acceptable and OK...so they'll be for it and probably experiment with it. And that's wrong." I disagree.

[rabbit]

This entire country was founded on the basis that everyone is equal and allowed.  If you can't accept that, get the fuck out of my country.

If everyone is equal and allowed, why should I leave?

Because you refuse to accept our laws.

[CrAz3D]

re:Homosexuality as NOT a choice.
-Well then, it is obviously a mental disease & should be treated.  Homosexuality is maladaptive, it benefits society in no way.  Schizophrenia isn't a choice but is regarded as a disease, homosexuality ought to be classified as something similar if it is infact not a choice.  If we don't stop this "disease" it could spread & then human civilization might end because of it. ()

re:Homosexuality IS a choice
-We shouldn't legislate morality, but we shouldn't be teaching kids something that is wrong.  Homosexuaity is a bad choice in life because it is does nothing to benefit society.  As I said before, it is illogical to be homosexual, it can't be right.



Choice or not, it doesn't make sense, it isn't logical, it does not benefit society, it is wrong.

[trust]

This entire country was founded on the basis that everyone is equal and allowed.  If you can't accept that, get the fuck out of my country.

If everyone is equal and allowed, why should I leave?

Because you refuse to accept our laws.

There are no laws saying that my seven year old has to be read a book that is in support of homosexuality. There are no laws saying that I must teach my children that homosexuality is acceptable. There are no laws that say I must agree with homosexuality, and last but not least there are no laws saying that I myself must be homosexual. I do not see where you are going with this...

Furthermore, wouldn't your term - everyone - include even those who don't accept the laws?

I'm assuming you don't accept laws in some states banning gay marriage, maybe you should leave?

[MyndFyre]

Being gay isn't just about sex, it's a way of life that many people are forced to accept.

I still haven't seen evidence supporting this viewpoint.

If parents are going to sue schools for reading gay fairytales, they need to sue stores for selling violent games and movies, and the companies that produce them, when their kids play/see those things, because they have absolutely no control over them.  This entire thing is stupid.  OMFG A FAIRYTALE, get over it.

To quote a brilliant cartoon man, Peter Griffin:

If gays wanna get married and be miserable like the rest of us, I say let 'em.

What kind of philosophy is "I don't like something a teacher did, so I'm going to sue the school."  Do parents sue for failing grades?  No.  Fuck that.

Fact: homosexuality is a very controversial topic in America right now.
Fact: everybody in America who is over the age of 13 knows it.
Fact: it is not a teacher's job to be an activist in the classroom.

Studies show that genetics plays a part:

• The more older brothers you have, the more likely you are to be gay
• If you're left handed, the above does not apply

etc...
Homosexuality is not a choice, it's the way some people are.  And if you believe it IS a choice, then you can't possibly believe in survival of the fittest, otherwise all gays would have been wiped out due to them being "inferior".

See: http://www.geocities.com/southbeach/boardwalk/7151/biobasis.html

While we're on the topic of gayness, let's address gay marriage.  Why should it be allowed?  For the 2017 laws that apply only to married couples, of course.  These are only some of them.

A couple things.  1.) You'll forgive me if I don't count a Geocities website as authoritative.  2.) Genetics has no relevance on how many older brothers you have.  Seems more of a "nature vs. nurture" thing -- seems that the "nurture" part plays more of a part.

Also, since you suggest that there is evolutionary relevance, I'll ask you -- how would the homosexuality gene be passed on in a population that inherently cannot reproduce?  It's not like gay people think "I need to pass my gayness onto another generation, so I'll go hump a chick for a quickie, as much as I'll hate it."  Even if evolution is true, you have to admit that the human race has short-circuited it, because we do not apply selective pressures the way nature would.

[iago]

Being gay isn't just about sex, it's a way of life that many people are forced to accept.

I still haven't seen evidence supporting this viewpoint.

If parents are going to sue schools for reading gay fairytales, they need to sue stores for selling violent games and movies, and the companies that produce them, when their kids play/see those things, because they have absolutely no control over them.  This entire thing is stupid.  OMFG A FAIRYTALE, get over it.

To quote a brilliant cartoon man, Peter Griffin:

If gays wanna get married and be miserable like the rest of us, I say let 'em.

What kind of philosophy is "I don't like something a teacher did, so I'm going to sue the school."  Do parents sue for failing grades?  No.  Fuck that.

Fact: homosexuality is a very controversial topic in America right now.
Fact: everybody in America who is over the age of 13 knows it.
Fact: it is not a teacher's job to be an activist in the classroom.

Studies show that genetics plays a part:

• The more older brothers you have, the more likely you are to be gay
• If you're left handed, the above does not apply

etc...
Homosexuality is not a choice, it's the way some people are.  And if you believe it IS a choice, then you can't possibly believe in survival of the fittest, otherwise all gays would have been wiped out due to them being "inferior".

See: http://www.geocities.com/southbeach/boardwalk/7151/biobasis.html

While we're on the topic of gayness, let's address gay marriage.  Why should it be allowed?  For the 2017 laws that apply only to married couples, of course.  These are only some of them.

A couple things.  1.) You'll forgive me if I don't count a Geocities website as authoritative.  2.) Genetics has no relevance on how many older brothers you have.  Seems more of a "nature vs. nurture" thing -- seems that the "nurture" part plays more of a part.

Also, since you suggest that there is evolutionary relevance, I'll ask you -- how would the homosexuality gene be passed on in a population that inherently cannot reproduce?  It's not like gay people think "I need to pass my gayness onto another generation, so I'll go hump a chick for a quickie, as much as I'll hate it."  Even if evolution is true, you have to admit that the human race has short-circuited it, because we do not apply selective pressures the way nature would.

Have you ever talked to a gay person?  They don't choose to be gay.  Maybe it's how they were brought up when they were very young, or maybe it's genetic.  Either way, it's not up to the person. 

If it does involve nurture, it has to be something that happens very young.  You don't here a story about a gay person when you're 7 years old and all of a sudden you're hot for guys.  However, if he was already gay (either by nature or nurture), then they will grow up understanding what's "wrong" with him, or why he is different.  Do you think it's easy for a gay person to realize what's going on?  I suspect it isn't, especially in a world like the one we're in. 

There was a time when reading books about philosophy was wrong.  There was a time when teaching children that women are equal was wrong.  There was a time when teaching children that black people are equal was wrong.  Currently, it seems that teaching children about gay people is wrong.  I think that the gay issue is something that has to be dealt with, and the best way to deal with it is to explain it to children.  We've all been brought up thinking that being gay is dirty/wrong/evil/something, and that's not fair to gay people.  Whether it's nature or nurture, they are still gay, and they don't have a choice in the matter.  It's no different than singling outs blacks or women. 

[CrAz3D]

If homosexuality is not a choice nor is it genetic and is all based on nurture, then we ought to rid it from our society to stop this mental malfunction.

Whether or not women are truly equal to men (inferior or superior) isn't exactly true.  Other people on earth believe whole heartedly that women aren't equal, why aren't they just as right as we are?  They're just conflicting opinions.

It is very different than singling out blacks/women/etc.  Women don't become nurtured into womanhood, they are born that way, same as black people.  Homosexuality is not a genetic coding...and if it is, it ought ot be "cleansed" from society as it is an obvious "disease".

[trust]

Blacks and women benefit society. Without women we'd have no children or dinner and without blacks we'd have no clothes or crack.

In all seriousness, gay people provide nothing to society. At the VERY most it controls the population SOMEWHAT...but the percentage is SO low that even that isn't a benefit.

[rabbit]

Just because it's Geocities doesn't automatically make it wrong or unacceptable in a debate.

If you don't care anyway, think of it this way: the Y chromosome is NOT present in the mother until the sperm delivers it.  Y chromosomes are treated as invaders and antibodies are built up.  Over time (IE: lots of sons), the antibodies attack the Y chromosomes, and the mother's system naturally repairs things.  Since the mother doesn't have any construction info about the Y chromosomes, it improvises.  As for first-born male gay sons, or any LGBTQ for that matter, nobody is 100% certain of what's going on.

Homosexuality was considered a mental disease until a few years ago.  It was removed because unlike EVERY OTHER mental disease, it cannot be treatable.  Why?  Because it isn't a mental disease.

Until you stop bashing them, especially when you don't KNOW any, I refuse to discuss this with you anymore.

@CrAz3D: Ridding society of a specific group of people because of bias is called "genocide".  You may remember this happening to the Jews or the Tibetans.  It's also banned by the Geneva convention, which is extremely important.  People in other societies believe what they believe, and you know what?  You're not in their society because you don't agree.

Singling out any group of people because you do not consider them "good" or you think they are "inferior" is called prejudice.  Acting upon this by exterminating ("cleansing") the world of these people is GENOCIDE.  If you all agree with genocide, how about you go join the neo-nazis?

[MyndFyre]

Until you stop bashing them, especially when you don't KNOW any, I refuse to discuss this with you anymore.

I like how you assume that I would support homosexuality if I knew gay people.  The problem with that assumption is that you necessarily imply that I don't know any.  Which is wrong.  Two of my good friends are gay.

@CrAz3D: Ridding society of a specific group of people because of bias is called "genocide".  You may remember this happening to the Jews or the Tibetans.  It's also banned by the Geneva convention, which is extremely important.  People in other societies believe what they believe, and you know what?  You're not in their society because you don't agree.

Singling out any group of people because you do not consider them "good" or you think they are "inferior" is called prejudice.  Acting upon this by exterminating ("cleansing") the world of these people is GENOCIDE.  If you all agree with genocide, how about you go join the neo-nazis?

It seems to me that if homosexuality was genetic, it would have disappeared a long time ago.

If it's not genetic, it's behavioral.

[rabbit]

Until you stop bashing them, especially when you don't KNOW any, I refuse to discuss this with you anymore.

I like how you assume that I would support homosexuality if I knew gay people.  The problem with that assumption is that you necessarily imply that I don't know any.  Which is wrong.  Two of my good friends are gay.

I never said you'd accept it, I meant you might not be stir crazy about "cleansing".

@CrAz3D: Ridding society of a specific group of people because of bias is called "genocide".  You may remember this happening to the Jews or the Tibetans.  It's also banned by the Geneva convention, which is extremely important.  People in other societies believe what they believe, and you know what?  You're not in their society because you don't agree.

Singling out any group of people because you do not consider them "good" or you think they are "inferior" is called prejudice.  Acting upon this by exterminating ("cleansing") the world of these people is GENOCIDE.  If you all agree with genocide, how about you go join the neo-nazis?

It seems to me that if homosexuality was genetic, it would have disappeared a long time ago.

If it's not genetic, it's behavioral.

Mutation happens.  Mutation is where something changes, ie: something new.

[MyndFyre]

OK, mutation happens, but in 10% of the population?   

[rabbit]

Don't look at me.

[MyndFyre]

Don't look at me.

I don't get it.

[rabbit]

I have no control nor do I have complete understanding of the whole mutation and percentage thing.

[trust]

Blacks and women benefit society. Without women we'd have no children or dinner and without blacks we'd have no clothes or crack.

In all seriousness, gay people provide nothing to society. At the VERY most it controls the population SOMEWHAT...but the percentage is SO low that even that isn't a benefit.

[iago]

Blacks and women benefit society. Without women we'd have no children or dinner and without blacks we'd have no clothes or crack.

In all seriousness, gay people provide nothing to society. At the VERY most it controls the population SOMEWHAT...but the percentage is SO low that even that isn't a benefit.

How about these:

- They're human beings
- They have jobs
- They can raise children that nobody else wants to raise

[MyndFyre]

- They can raise children that nobody else wants to raise

It's interesting you raise this point.  There has not been any data on the possible impact of homosexual parents on a child in a measured longitudinal study.

[trust]

Blacks and women benefit society. Without women we'd have no children or dinner and without blacks we'd have no clothes or crack.

In all seriousness, gay people provide nothing to society. At the VERY most it controls the population SOMEWHAT...but the percentage is SO low that even that isn't a benefit.

How about these:

- They're human beings
- They have jobs
- They can raise children that nobody else wants to raise

Soooooo, what you're saying is:

-They're taking up resources.
-They're taking up jobs.
-They're the cause of children getting teased.

[iago]

Soooooo, what you're saying is:

-They're taking up resources.
-They're taking up jobs.
-They're the cause of children getting teased.

All right.  Assuming you're true, then let's look at people with red hair. 

- They're taking up resources
- They're taking up jobs

We shouldn't allow red-hair people to breed either, for that reason.  That kind of thing can be applied to any group of people.  I like to think that a person is a person.  We're all human beings. 

As for your third point, you're right.  Kids don't understand or accept gays, so they get teased.  That's my whole point about why this kind of book is good. 

[deadly7]

Trust, if people like you didn't exist in the world, the children wouldn't be teased... would they?  Your hatred of gay people is retarded.  But then again, you need to find a scapegoat to blame problems the world faces on, don't you?  You can't accept the fact that people exist in the world that and they live in a manner you don't like, and thus you have a regime against them.

[iago]

Trust, if people like you didn't exist in the world, the children wouldn't be teased... would they?  Your hatred of gay people is retarded.  But then again, you need to find a scapegoat to blame problems the world faces on, don't you?  You can't accept the fact that people exist in the world that and they live in a manner you don't like, and thus you have a regime against them.

Shush you.  Indians also take up resources, take up jobs, and are the cause of children getting teased.  ;-)

[rabbit]

So are Canadians and White people!

[iago]

That's my point

[Sidoh]

If parents are going to sue schools for reading gay fairytales, they need to sue stores for selling violent games and movies, and the companies that produce them, when their kids play/see those things, because they have absolutely no control over them.  This entire thing is stupid.  OMFG A FAIRYTALE, get over it.

They already do, if their kids are young enough.

What kind of philosophy is "I don't like something a teacher did, so I'm going to sue the school."  Do parents sue for failing grades?  No.  Fuck that.

That analogy sucked.

I don't have the time to further argue this subject, but I will say this: I do not want my seven year old children exposed to anything like this.  I'll tell them about homosexuality when I see it fit.  The school has absolutely no right in educating them on subjects such as this.

[iago]

That analogy sucked.

I don't have the time to further argue this subject, but I will say this: I do not want my seven year old children exposed to anything like this.  I'll tell them about homosexuality when I see it fit.  The school has absolutely no right in educating them on subjects such as this.

100 years ago, would you have said "I'll teach my kid about black people when I see fit"?  What's wrong with the subject of gay people?  It's not like they're showing ass-fucking pictures. 

[CrAz3D]

That analogy sucked.

I don't have the time to further argue this subject, but I will say this: I do not want my seven year old children exposed to anything like this.  I'll tell them about homosexuality when I see it fit.  The school has absolutely no right in educating them on subjects such as this.

100 years ago, would you have said "I'll teach my kid about black people when I see fit"?  What's wrong with the subject of gay people?  It's not like they're showing ass-fucking pictures. 

Because homosexuality is wrong.

Singling out any group of people because you do not consider them "good" or you think they are "inferior" is called prejudice.  Acting upon this by exterminating ("cleansing") the world of these people is GENOCIDE.  If you all agree with genocide, how about you go join the neo-nazis?

You're not singling them out because we say they are inferior, we're singling them out but they have a disease.  I haven't said we should kill them, just that we need to stop this disease.

[deadly7]

Shush you.  Indians also take up resources, take up jobs, and are the cause of children getting teased.  ;-)

Just because we accept $5 a week of payment for faulty tech support doesn't mean you can be mad at us!

[iago]

You're not singling them out because we say they are inferior, we're singling them out but they have a disease.  I haven't said we should kill them, just that we need to stop this disease.

How do you suggest you stop the disease of homosexuality, then? 

Let's say that homosexuality IS a disease.  Should kids not learn about what cancer is? 

[CrAz3D]

You're not singling them out because we say they are inferior, we're singling them out but they have a disease.  I haven't said we should kill them, just that we need to stop this disease.

How do you suggest you stop the disease of homosexuality, then? 

Let's say that homosexuality IS a disease.  Should kids not learn about what cancer is? 

No, I'm saying it should be taught like it is, something bad.
You have to accept people for what they are, but you should also try to help them become better.

[iago]

No, I'm saying it should be taught like it is, something bad.
You have to accept people for what they are, but you should also try to help them become better.

How is homosexuality a disease, exactly?

[CrAz3D]

No, I'm saying it should be taught like it is, something bad.
You have to accept people for what they are, but you should also try to help them become better.

How is homosexuality a disease, exactly?

A mental disease.

Homosexuality (either by choice or genetic w/e in the brain) is maladaptive and doesn't further society.  Mental diseases don't help people, it is something wrong in our head that makes us worse off (liberalism;)).  If homosexuality isn't a disease how is ADD, schizophrenia, and anything else a mental disease?
Something is wrong, something needs to be fixed, we need to help them.

[iago]

A mental disease.

Homosexuality (either by choice or genetic w/e in the brain) is maladaptive and doesn't further society.  Mental diseases don't help people, it is something wrong in our head that makes us worse off (liberalism;)).  If homosexuality isn't a disease how is ADD, schizophrenia, and anything else a mental disease?
Something is wrong, something needs to be fixed, we need to help them.

ADD and schizophrenia are proven medical conditions. 

Being gay, in my mind, is more akin to how some people like sour candy and some people hate sour candy.  There's no real reason why one person enjoys one flavour and another person enjoys another, it's just how they are. 

If you're implying that liberalism is the same as homosexuality, then I think your point is more damaged than ever.  Liberalism is nothing like homosexuality, a person makes a conscious decision about which, if any, political stance to take.  Although I think that making that stance is stupid, that's besides the point.  Homosexuals, on the other hand, don't have a choice.  It's the same way I never chose to enjoy spicy food, it's just the way I am (nature or nurture?  Well, I was never encouraged to like hot sause, and my parents certainly don't, so where else could it come from?)

[Sidoh]

100 years ago, would you have said "I'll teach my kid about black people when I see fit"?  What's wrong with the subject of gay people?  It's not like they're showing ass-fucking pictures. 

That's not a very good analogy.  This is a matter of sexual preference, not racism.

Because it'll lead to curiosity.  Curiosity will eventually lead to the discovery of unwanted knowledge.  Again, I'll teach my kids about homosexuality when I want.  If the school decides to do it without my consent, maybe I will sue them.

Homosexuals who do not "recover" to be heterosexuals generally have a hormone imbalance.

[iago]

That's not a very good analogy.  This is a matter of sexual preference, not racism.

Because it'll lead to curiosity.  Curiosity will eventually lead to the discovery of unwanted knowledge.  Again, I'll teach my kids about homosexuality when I want.  If the school decides to do it without my consent, maybe I will sue them.

Homosexuals who do not "recover" to be heterosexuals generally have a hormone imbalance.

What "unwanted knowledge"?  When I hear a fairytale about a prince and a princess falling in love, I don't go reading about "fucking".  Are you talking about the knowledge that somebody doesn't necessarily have to be with a woman to be happy?  What's unwanted about that?

It's very close to rasicm.  It's a group of people who are singled out and made fun of by most others.  My grandma still points and complains about niggers, and my friend still points and complains about fags.  Do you not see a parallel?

[Sidoh]

What "unwanted knowledge"?  When I hear a fairytale about a prince and a princess falling in love, I don't go reading about "fucking".  Are you talking about the knowledge that somebody doesn't necessarily have to be with a woman to be happy?  What's unwanted about that?

That's because it's natural.  When sex is finally discussed with the young child, I don't want to have to tell him or her about gay fucking as well.  I think that should be a seperate topic.

I see your point, but homosexuality defies the norm.  As I've already said, that deviation causes curiousity.

It's very close to rasicm.  It's a group of people who are singled out and made fun of by most others.  My grandma still points and complains about niggers, and my friend still points and complains about fags.  Do you not see a parallel?

Yes, but they're for different reasons.  Homosexuality is a choice.  Race is not.  You aren't born a homosexual.  You are born with the ethnicity of your biological parents.

[Warrior]

I agree with Sidoh, I mean you have to deal with blacks at a young age. It's not like you're going to have a gay kid in 1st grade.
These things should be explained in the home as they occur. I think the same would go for sex talks but that's something else.

[rabbit]

Homosexuality is not a choice, is not a disease, and is not only about sex.  Your narrow minds anger me,

[Sidoh]

Homosexuality is not a choice

Yes ... it ... is.

By definition, homosexuality is someone who has sexual intercourse with someone of the same gender.  Sounds like it's only about sex to me.

[CrAz3D]

A mental disease.

Homosexuality (either by choice or genetic w/e in the brain) is maladaptive and doesn't further society.  Mental diseases don't help people, it is something wrong in our head that makes us worse off (liberalism;)).  If homosexuality isn't a disease how is ADD, schizophrenia, and anything else a mental disease?
Something is wrong, something needs to be fixed, we need to help them.

ADD and schizophrenia are proven medical conditions. 

Being gay, in my mind, is more akin to how some people like sour candy and some people hate sour candy.  There's no real reason why one person enjoys one flavour and another person enjoys another, it's just how they are. 

If you're implying that liberalism is the same as homosexuality, then I think your point is more damaged than ever.  Liberalism is nothing like homosexuality, a person makes a conscious decision about which, if any, political stance to take.  Although I think that making that stance is stupid, that's besides the point.  Homosexuals, on the other hand, don't have a choice.  It's the same way I never chose to enjoy spicy food, it's just the way I am (nature or nurture?  Well, I was never encouraged to like hot sause, and my parents certainly don't, so where else could it come from?)

Ok, the liberalism thing was jokingly.

As for sour vs. sweet preference, neither of those help society more than the other, they are equal.

[GameSnake]

Do not make this a political debate, please, it's a culture topic..

[Sidoh]

Do not make this a political debate, please, it's a culture topic..

Politics often dictate culture.

[GameSnake]

Do not make this a political debate, please, it's a culture topic..

Politics often dictate culture.

This is an article-topic for godsake, what do you expect?

[Sidoh]

This is an article-topic for godsake, what do you expect?

Cool story.

[MyndFyre]

ADD [... is a] proven medical [condition]. 

Really?  News to me.  Find me ADD in a DSM.  Also find me where it says it's "proven."

If you're implying that liberalism is the same as homosexuality, then I think your point is more damaged than ever.

I think it was a joke.  I thought it was funny.  I even laughed.

What "unwanted knowledge"?  When I hear a fairytale about a prince and a princess falling in love, I don't go reading about "fucking".  Are you talking about the knowledge that somebody doesn't necessarily have to be with a woman to be happy?  What's unwanted about that?

It's very close to rasicm.  It's a group of people who are singled out and made fun of by most others.  My grandma still points and complains about niggers, and my friend still points and complains about fags.  Do you not see a parallel?

I don't see how a secular society can prohibit gay marriage and whatnot, although I don't agree with it.  However, I don't think it's the prerogative of a school I put my kid in to teach my kid anything about sex.  That's my job as a parent (or parent to be, anyway).  I realize that a lot of people just want the government to take care of their kids so that they don't have to have the responsibility of being a good mommy or daddy, but tough shit.  Those of us who care about our kids want to be able to raise them how we see fit.

I am amazed how many people are describing homosexuality as a disease.  While I certainly see it as wrong and a deviant behavior, I hesitate to take that step.

[Blaze]

So you're saying my cousin should be killed/put in a hospital/something else, just because he pefers men?  You're the sick bastard, here, not him.

[Sidoh]

So you're saying my cousin should be killed/put in a hospital/something else, just because he pefers men?

Yes.  Lock 'em up.

By the way, my cousin is gay too.

[MyndFyre]

Hell, lock 'em up together!

(I'm kidding).

[Sidoh]

Hell, lock 'em up together!

(I'm kidding).

HAAHAHAHHAAHAHAH OMG !!!! HAHAHAHAAH

[iago]

Homosexuality is not a choice

Yes ... it ... is.

By definition, homosexuality is someone who has sexual intercourse with someone of the same gender.  Sounds like it's only about sex to me.

Well, heterosexuals prefer having sexual intercourse with somebody of another gender.  But like I said, that doesn't mean the story about the Princess and the Pea has a fuck scene at the end. 

Ok, you CAN choose to have sex with another guy, but you can't choose whether or not you fall in love with him or other men.  But like I said, this isn't about fucking, this is about people who prefer men.  NOT ABOUT SEX. 

As for sour vs. sweet preference, neither of those help society more than the other, they are equal.

Let's not tell children about absinence either, then.  Because two people who don't have sex also don't have kids, so we should be explaining to children that they should have lots of sex. 

[CrAz3D]

As for sour vs. sweet preference, neither of those help society more than the other, they are equal.

Let's not tell children about absinence either, then.  Because two people who don't have sex also don't have kids, so we should be explaining to children that they should have lots of sex. 

uhm, I think you don't understand the point of abstinence.


I'd like to note, I'm not totally sure whether or not its a disease, I'm just using that to reason with people that don't agree.  But I do think it is wrong.  I support gay marriage, though.

[Sidoh]

Well, heterosexuals prefer having sexual intercourse with somebody of another gender.  But like I said, that doesn't mean the story about the Princess and the Pea has a fuck scene at the end. 

Ok, you CAN choose to have sex with another guy, but you can't choose whether or not you fall in love with him or other men.  But like I said, this isn't about fucking, this is about people who prefer men.  NOT ABOUT SEX. 

It seems like it's a spiral effect to me.  But still, homosexuality is a choice.

As I've said about five times already, I do not want schools teaching my kids about homosexuals when they're seven years old.  I don't really care about all of the moral strings attached.  That's just how it is.  I don't want to risk them discovering any of the details behind homosexuality...

[rabbit]

Prove to me it's a choice.  Prove to me it's a disease.  I don't mean you saying "O it's bad for society [blah blah]".  Give me medical studies and proof it's a disease.  Give me reputable surveys of gay people which show it is a choice.  Until then, do NOT try to tell me what it is or isn't.

@Myndy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-IV_Codes section 1.6  ADD was officially renamed ADHD a little while back.  Also, I do agree with you about wanting to raise your child the way you see fit, but a lawsuit is uncalled for.

[Sidoh]

Prove to me it's a choice. 

(Wikipedia):

The adjective homosexual is also used for same-sex sexual relations between persons of the same sex who are not gay or lesbian.

I don't understand the potential for an argument that it's a choice.  If it's rape, I don't think it should be considered "sexual relations."  Homosexual intercourse is, by all reasonable standards (unless rape is considered), a choice.

Prove to me it's a disease.

I don't think it's a disease.  I think persistant homosexual traits can be caused by hormone imbalences, which are obviously the result of genetic mutations.  I don't think that's a disease.  I think it's a disorder.  I'm not saying that all homosexual tendancies result from this, but I am saying that it's a very possible source.  Depending on your definition of "disease," I suppose that could be considered as such, but I think that's going too far.  I think "disorder" is different than "disease."

I don't mean you saying "O it's bad for society [blah blah]".  Give me medical studies and proof it's a disease.  Give me reputable surveys of gay people which show it is a choice.  Until then, do NOT try to tell me what it is or isn't.

I don't really care if it's bad for society.  The relative number of homosexuals is so minimal that it isn't even worth considering that argument.  The lack of testosterone leads to the lack of "manly" traits, which would surely help construct homosexual tendancies.

@Myndy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-IV_Codes section 1.6  ADD was officially renamed ADHD a little while back.  Also, I do agree with you about wanting to raise your child the way you see fit, but a lawsuit is uncalled for.

I thought ADD and ADHD were aliases, but were later merged into one: "ADD?"  ADHD used to describe people that had a hard time focusing, but were generally hyper, spastic and random in persona and action.  ADD was used to describe someone with the same ultimate effects, but were caused by milder, less hyperactive personalities.

I could be wrong.  I could ask my mom.  She's an elementary school teacher; she'd probably know.

[trust]

As for sour vs. sweet preference, neither of those help society more than the other, they are equal.

Let's not tell children about absinence either, then.  Because two people who don't have sex also don't have kids, so we should be explaining to children that they should have lots of sex. 

We should teach our children to have sex as many times as it takes to conceive. Of course, this is when they are of age both physically and mentally.

[rabbit]

So then clergy are useless too!  They don't procreate.  We should wipe them out for not fufilling their duty as humans.

[Sidoh]

So then clergy are useless too!  They don't procreate.  We should wipe them out for not fufilling their duty as humans.

What was that in response to?  If it was to me, I've already expressed my disagreement with this argument.

I don't really care if it's bad for society.  The relative number of homosexuals is so minimal that it isn't even worth considering that argument. 

[rabbit]

It was a general response to "homosexuality is wrong because they produce no children", which seems to be where Trust is going.

[MyndFyre]

It was a general response to "homosexuality is wrong because they produce no children", which seems to be where Trust is going.

Although, clergy do not procreate by choice.  Homosexuals are biologically unable to do so unless they do something against their sexual orientation.

[Sidoh]

It was a general response to "homosexuality is wrong because they produce no children", which seems to be where Trust is going.

Yeah.  This world has enough babies and baby-makers.  If anything, I think homosexuality (or abstinence, in that case) helps society because of the looming population limit.  It's really not that far away.

[dark_drake]

It's nice to see parents taking an interest in their child's education....

[dark_drake]

It was a general response to "homosexuality is wrong because they produce no children", which seems to be where Trust is going.

Although, clergy do not procreate by choice.  Homosexuals are biologically unable to do so unless they do something against their sexual orientation.

Now supposing being homosexual is a choice, does that mean homosexuals don't procreate by choice?

[MyndFyre]

Now supposing being homosexual is a choice, does that mean homosexuals don't procreate by choice?

Yes, but I'm using that as the biological argument.  Evolutionarily speaking, homosexuality has a selective pressure applied against it, *if* it is a biological thing.

[dark_drake]

Yes, but I'm using that as the biological argument.  Evolutionarily speaking, homosexuality has a selective pressure applied against it, *if* it is a biological thing.

If it is biological, many genetic disorders have had selective pressure applied against them for years, they're still around.  Cystic Fibrosis is genetic, and it's still around

[Towelie]

Does anyone realize that being gay is not something people choose?  7 year olds play violent videogames and watch R rated movies all the time.  Why don't you try to stop that before bitching about a fucking FAIRY TALE?

agreed. People make WAY too much of a big deal about gay people. Just accept the fact that they didn't chose it, but their genetics/environment they grew up in did. Reading books like this to the children may make being gay more socially acceptable in the future. Shit like this reminds me of history, where similar things happened.

[GameSnake]

I love just sitting back and watching the mayhem I have created.

[rabbit]

Twisted fuck...

[CrAz3D]

Does anyone realize that being gay is not something people choose?  7 year olds play violent videogames and watch R rated movies all the time.  Why don't you try to stop that before bitching about a fucking FAIRY TALE?

agreed. People make WAY too much of a big deal about gay people. Just accept the fact that they didn't chose it, but their genetics/environment they grew up in did. Reading books like this to the children may make being gay more socially acceptable in the future. Shit like this reminds me of history, where similar things happened.

But why not try to "fix" it?

[Armin]

No, it's different. Children are taught that slavery is BAD, and thus they're against it.

However, now they're being taught that homosexuality is acceptable and OK...so they'll be for it and probably experiment with it. And that's wrong.

Read a recent article from Time magazine (2 months old or so) - it said that a large percentage of teens are become "bicurious" because it's "cool" - this will just further that and it's wrong.

My sister is in 2nd grade and her homework consists of how Jesus is different than other kings (ie. not concerned over land) and she's required to memorize bible versus that discuss living a good life and not stealing and etc. She is not recieving assignments or stories or anything else that involves two gay fairies. I will be placing my children in private school.

Children are taught discrimination against blacks is bad, because they're people just like us. That is exactly what this teacher was trying to teach to his students about homosexuals. There is absolutely no reason for a straight teacher to try and turn straight students gay. He's simply trying to make homosexuality not looked down apon as much. You're also no psychologist, so don't act like you know what effects this will have on kids.