Turn on thread page Beta

Homosexuality encouraged in schools. watch

Announcements
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    And why would teaching kids about relationships take away their childhood. It wouldn't.
    As for teaching kids about sex by age 11, that isn't exactly something new.
    And the (correct) logic about it is that some people will have sex in their early teens, so it is better that they know the risk first.

    As for the article, yes I have. But it isn't exactly a reliable source. In any case, I've seen pictures / videos of male cheerleaders ages ago. Showing that it happens isn't exactly encouraging it.

    And are you trying to say this image is wrong? If so, why?

    you are trying to argue that it wouldn't take away their childhood, but I argue it would because children don't need or want to be thinking about those things at 5.

    It doesn't matter if it's something new, if nothing ever changed we wouldn't have the world we lived in today. Some teens would have sex in their early years regardless, however I think that the reson we have the highest teen pregnancy rate in europe is not because we are doing something right by teaching 5 years olds about sex.

    OK, so thanktyou for telling me that you spend your time looking at videos of male cheerleaders, but that isn't the point, is it.

    I don't understand your last point, it sounds like a loony left comment.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smophy)
    The article says that this (teaching acceptance of homosexuality) has no place in a healthy, normal society.

    The BNP has no place in a healthy, normal society!
    no, it says that the teaching of sex to children of 5 is wrong, and I agree.

    Your second point - you clearly aren't a person who thinks that democracy extends to anyone other than the people with the same opinion as yourself - and that has no place in a healthy society.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mathperson)
    you are trying to argue that it wouldn't take away their childhood, but I argue it would because children don't need or want to be thinking about those things at 5.
    But children, even at 5, know about relationships. Maybe not in much detail, but kids still play kiss chase etc. I don't see the problem in just saying that its not always a man and a woman.

    (Original post by mathperson)
    I think that the reson we have the highest teen pregnancy rate in europe is not because we are doing something right by teaching 5 years olds about sex.
    Exactly. You think. As far as I am aware, there is no evidence to suggest that teaching children about relationships (not sex!) leads to higher teen pregnancy. If anything, the evidence (other countries) suggests that it helps reduce it.

    (Original post by mathperson)
    I don't understand your last point, it sounds like a loony left comment.
    My point was that how the bloody hell can something like that harm a child. It is madness to even suggest it. Now, if we were talking about a poster showing how gay people have sex, I would agree with you. But we are not talking about that. We are just talking about a poster that shows families can be different, in terms of size and genders within it.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    There is nothing wrong with homosexuality.

    /thread
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imperial maniac)
    Cannibalism is not normal or socially acceptable, so saying that kinda undermines your argument, doesn't it?
    CANNIBALISM IS NORMAL! Cannibalism happens for different reasons- sometimes it is necessary in times of famine or because it is sanctioned by cultural norm (This is the point I'm getting at- cannibalism is socially acceptable in many socieites, just because it's not in ours, it doesn't give us the right to condemn it as "unnatural" and "wrong". You have absoultely no right to criticise another culture or society when you have no comprehension of what it is even like).

    It don't undertand how it can undermine my argument...
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    But children, even at 5, know about relationships. Maybe not in much detail, but kids still play kiss chase etc. I don't see the problem in just saying that its not always a man and a woman.



    Exactly. You think. As far as I am aware, there is no evidence to suggest that teaching children about relationships (not sex!) leads to higher teen pregnancy. If anything, the evidence (other countries) suggests that it helps reduce it.



    My point was that how the bloody hell can something like that harm a child. It is madness to even suggest it. Now, if we were talking about a poster showing how gay people have sex, I would agree with you. But we are not talking about that. We are just talking about a poster that shows families can be different, in terms of size and genders within it.
    the point about this whole thread is the age, not whether homosexuality is 'right or wrong', you just don't get it do you.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LauriC)
    CANNIBALISM IS NORMAL! Cannibalism happens for different reasons- sometimes it is necessary in times of famine or because it is sanctioned by cultural norm (This is the point I'm getting at- cannibalism is socially acceptable in many socieites, just because it's not in ours, it doesn't give us the right to condemn it as "unnatural" and "wrong". You have absoultely no right to criticise another culture or society when you have no comprehension of what it is even like).

    It don't undertand how it can undermine my argument...
    Cultural relativism is a facile concept.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Err, just encouraging non-self hatred in those people who are and acceptance in those who arent. Whats wrong with that? And whats so bad about showing homosexuality is as acceptable as heterosexuality.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mathperson)
    the point about this whole thread is the age, not whether homosexuality is 'right or wrong', you just don't get it do you.
    I do "get it". That is why I am disagreeing with you. I just don't agree that telling children that homosexuality is not wrong and is "normal" would be harmful to them.
    If we are talking about the specifics of sex, then I would agree with you. But as far as I am aware, that is not what is going on.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aexis)
    Cultural relativism is a facile concept.
    Yes. What's your point? That's why I'm so frustrated that 'imperial manic' doesn't seem to achnolwledge what I'm saying.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mathperson)
    no, it says that the teaching of sex to children of 5 is wrong, and I agree.

    Your second point - you clearly aren't a person who thinks that democracy extends to anyone other than the people with the same opinion as yourself - and that has no place in a healthy society.
    Racism and homophobia have no place in a healthy society. These are hateful and negative views. I accept anyone with opinions different to mine as long as they are not hateful and negative like those of the BNP.

    Can you give me a quote from that (very unreliable) article that says they are teaching sex to children as young as five please because I seemed to of missed that part.

    Even if that article says so I am more than certain that NO school is teaching 5 year olds about sex. Five year olds are taught about relationships! None of the five year olds i teach are taught about sex and no 5 year olds in the other schools I work in are taught it either and never will be as the teachers and parents would find it absolutely barbaric.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    I do "get it". That is why I am disagreeing with you. I just don't agree that telling children that homosexuality is not wrong and is "normal" would be harmful to them.
    If we are talking about the specifics of sex, then I would agree with you. But as far as I am aware, that is not what is going on.
    the most backward comment I have ever seen on TSR.

    Encouraging acceptance is fine, but forcing your opinions down the throats of 5 year olds is perverse.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smophy)
    Racism and homophobia have no place in a healthy society. These are hateful and negative views. I accept anyone with opinions different to mine as long as they are not hateful and negative like those of the BNP.

    Can you give me a quote from that (very unreliable) article that says they are teaching sex to children as young as five please because I seemed to of missed that part.

    Even if that article says so I am more than certain that NO school is teaching 5 year olds about sex. Five year olds are taught about relationships! None of the five year olds i teach are taught about sex and no 5 year olds in the other schools I work in are taught it either and never will be as the teachers and parents would find it absolutely barbaric.
    Firstly I just want to say this, using the big buzz work: 'race', at me won't get me in a flap and stop debate. Race is nothing to do with it.

    The only reason you say that the article is unreliable is because of it's authors, despite not knowing how they got the information. I bet you're one of these who thinks that the BNP is a bunch of dishonest people, and that labour are a bunch of angels. If you want to talk about which parties are unreliable, I'm more than happy to.

    If you would find it barbaric teaching 5 year olds about sex, why don't you find it barbaric teaching them about adult relationships. Its pathetic, it should be left to parents, and children should have a childhood.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mathperson)
    Firstly I just want to say this, using the big buzz work: 'race', at me won't get me in a flap and stop debate. Race is nothing to do with it.

    The only reason you say that the article is unreliable is because of it's authors, despite not knowing how they got the information. I bet you're one of these who thinks that the BNP is a bunch of dishonest people, and that labour are a bunch of angels. If you want to talk about which parties are unreliable, I'm more than happy to.

    If you would find it barbaric teaching 5 year olds about sex, why don't you find it barbaric teaching them about adult relationships. Its pathetic, it should be left to parents, and children should have a childhood.
    For starters I only mentioned race because that article does. The BNP can't go two minutes without bringing it up.

    I said that the article is unreliable as the authors are biased. I haven't said anything about Labour so what is to say that I support them?! I do not think that the labour party are all a bunch of angels and neither have I said that the BNP are dishonest. I said they support racist and homophobic ideologies.

    How is telling a child " some children have a mummy and daddy, some have just a mummy or just a daddy and some have two mummy's or two daddy's" is taking away their childhood?!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smophy)
    For starters I only mentioned race because that article does. The BNP can't go two minutes without bringing it up.

    I said that the article is unreliable as the authors are biased. I haven't said anything about Labour so what is to say that I support them?! I do not think that the labour party are all a bunch of angels and neither have I said that the BNP are dishonest. I said they support racist and homophobic ideologies.

    How is telling a child " some children have a mummy and daddy, some have just a mummy or just a daddy and some have two mummy's or two daddy's" is taking away their childhood?!
    well let me put it like this, if I was sat in my classroom at 5 and a my teacher started talking about homosexual relationships, I would have thought that she would have suddenly gone mental, not because I believe people can't do what they like, but because it is innappropriate for 5 year olds, and why the hell would anyone want to. I'd love to meet the person who first suggested "I know, lets start teaching 5 year olds about homosexuality", weirdo.

    You did not mention race because the article mentions it briefly, you thought you'd use the buzzword and suddenly I would jump up and get my pc high visibility jacket on and stop questioning and telling people I don't think it's right.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mathperson)
    well let me put it like this, if I was sat in my classroom at 5 and a my teacher started talking about homosexual relationships, I would have thought that she would have suddenly gone mental, not because I believe people can't do what they like, but because it is innappropriate for 5 year olds, and why the hell would anyone want to. I'd love to meet the person who first suggested "I know, lets start teaching 5 year olds about homosexuality", weirdo.

    You did not mention race because the article mentions it briefly, you thought you'd use the buzzword and suddenly I would jump up and get my pc high visibility jacket on and stop questioning and telling people I don't think it's right.
    Don't tell me why I said something. I said it because it is relevant to the BNP and the article that this thread is discussing.

    No teacher is going to just start talking about homosexual relationships. They would discuss the different relationships and different home lifes just as they would discuss different cultures and they would encourage the acceptance of these differences.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smophy)
    Don't tell me why I said something. I said it because it is relevant to the BNP and the article that this thread is discussing.

    No teacher is going to just start talking about homosexual relationships. They would discuss the different relationships and different home lifes just as they would discuss different cultures and they would encourage the acceptance of these differences.
    on the contrary, it isn't. Also, it doesn't matter who wrote the article, you can't claim an article is bias just because it doesn't suit what you believe based on who wrote it, you need to know where they got the information from, which you don't know.

    Like the other guy, you just do not get it do you, it... isn't.... right... for... 5... year... olds.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I just tried to comment on the article, it said a moderator has to check my comment before it can be published. No hope then. The BNP are a barrel of laughs.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mathperson)
    on the contrary, it isn't. Also, it doesn't matter who wrote the article, you can't claim an article is bias just because it doesn't suit what you believe based on who wrote it, you need to know where they got the information from, which you don't know.

    Like the other guy, you just do not get it do you, it... isn't.... right... for... 5... year... olds.
    It does matter who wrote the article. The article is written by or for a political party that has openly cited homophobic ideologies. It doesn't matter where they got their information from as it is how they have written the article that is biased. A party that is in favour of homosexual rights could use the same information source and develop a completely different article.

    I think you are the one that doesn't get it. It is right for 5+ year olds to be taught about relationships!! Before you get on your high horse I do NOT mean sexual relationships.

    The more children that are taught acceptance the less people there will be to write such articles in the future.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    People don't choose their sexualities, so teaching that it's normal isn't going to make more people gay! There's nothing wrong with being homosexual, so I don't see where there's be any problems to be honest; teaching that same sex couples are fine is making sure that there's little-no hatred towards them in the furture.
 
 
 
Poll
Cats or dogs?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.