Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imperial maniac)
    For the Love of God.

    I will NEVER EVER accept eating other people as a sane and normal way to go about things, I don't care if its for a ritual, in fact in many ways that's far worse.

    I may be persuaded to see homosexuality as normal, but not if people come out with ridiculous arguments like "homosexuality is like cannibalism".

    Seriously guys, WOW, how could you ever consider cannibalism as acceptable, have you all lost your minds????
    Merely being the devil's advocate. And it would be one person who have lost their mind if that's the case, you can't extrapolate the entirety of the opposition from one person (me).

    On a serious note, hmm, I've never thought about cannibal rights etc. as an issue. It doesn't come up often in my part of the world so I don't really have a view on it. We eat people all the time, if you ever had someone else cook you a meal you've eaten part of them (skin sheddings etc. inevitable) and if you've ever had a kiss you've consumed a part of them. Epithelial cells etc. On the other hand those are individual cells and an unavoidable action and there's a clear moral dissonance between visible body parts and invisible cells.

    Let's not get into coprophilia and the implications on cannibalism there.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    Is it really that controversial? Maybe for Christian or Islamic fundamentalists, but I don't see how anyone except those extremist minorities would find it controversial.
    There is nothing extremist about objecting to the teaching of homosexuality in schools. Stop trying to sideline any argument with your cheap tactic of buzzwords. Extremist lefties, on the other hand, get on my tits.

    Are you the guy that believes incest is ok? (apologies if not, username is similar)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This article only strengthens my point...

    He insisted, however, that very young children would not be given sexually explicit lessons. “We are not talking about five-year-olds being taught about sex . . . What we are talking about in Key Stage 1 [when children are aged 5 to 7] is children learning about themselves, their differences, their friendships, how to manage their feelings,” he said.

    That is what I have been saying all along!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imperial maniac)
    Yes they are, according to the source, that's the whole point of the thread, to discuss whether they should be teaching about homosexual relationships.

    Personally if I was a parent and my child came home one day asking about homosexual relationships, I would ring up the school and ask why the hell they're teaching kids about sexuality when they should be teaching them to read,write, do maths, and bake cakes.

    It's up the parents to teach the kid what is right and what is wrong, not the schools, schools are there to teach skills, not dictate what my child's views are on homosexuality.
    So you actually believe that a teacher is just going to talk about homosexuals?! They will discuss different relationships and different home lifes like I have all ready said. They won't just say "So today kids we are learning about Gay's so everyone put on a frock" as the BNP article would have you believe. It would be part of their PSHE lesson and would integrated with learning about friendships, feelings and differences.

    Personally if my child came home and told me how they had learnt about all the differences between people and showed respect for these differences I would be damn proud and would be praising the school. School has changed from the days when it was solely academic. Now teachers have more responsibility to develop children emotionally and socially.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imperial maniac)
    Homosexual relationships ARE sexual relationships!

    When I was 5 I didn't know where babies came from, and I didn't care.
    OMG! Heterosexual also has the word sex in it :O

    I really shouldn't have to explain this. They are teaching about relationships! Just because this includes homosexual relationships doesn't mean it will be about sex. They teach about heterosexual relationships (i.e mummy and daddy) but not sex.

    I will just quote the article again that you so kindly pointed out to me...

    He insisted, however, that very young children would not be given sexually explicit lessons. “We are not talking about five-year-olds being taught about sex . . . What we are talking about in Key Stage 1 [when children are aged 5 to 7] is children learning about themselves, their differences, their friendships, how to manage their feelings,” he said.

    Ffs how hard is it to understand. There is more to a homosexual or heterosexual relationship than the sexual part and you know this and you know that this was my point. That they will be taught about the emotional side of relationships and everything else that a relationship incorporates without having to discuss sex!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smophy)
    OMG! Heterosexual also has the word sex in it :O

    I really shouldn't have to explain this. They are teaching about relationships! Just because this includes homosexual relationships doesn't mean it will be about sex. They teach about heterosexual relationships (i.e mummy and daddy) but not sex.

    I will just quote the article again that you so kindly pointed out to me...

    He insisted, however, that very young children would not be given sexually explicit lessons. “We are not talking about five-year-olds being taught about sex . . . What we are talking about in Key Stage 1 [when children are aged 5 to 7] is children learning about themselves, their differences, their friendships, how to manage their feelings,” he said.

    Ffs how hard is it to understand. There is more to a homosexual or heterosexual relationship than the sexual part and you know this and you know that this was my point. That they will be taught about the emotional side of relationships and everything else that a relationship incorporates without having to discuss sex!
    Yes I understand that it will only be teaching about the relationships.

    But when a child asks where babies come from, one would say something along the lines of "When a mummy and a daddy who love each other very much, they get married and have children." if you then say "oh btw, you can have two daddies or two mummies and the child in the family isn't their own." It's going to screw with the kid's head.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imperial maniac)
    Yes I understand that it will only be teaching about the relationships.

    But when a child asks where babies come from, one would say something along the lines of "When a mummy and a daddy who love each other very much, they get married and have children." if you then say "oh btw, you can have two daddies or two mummies and the child in the family isn't their own." It's going to screw with the kid's head.
    With children that young the teachers will not be saying anything of the sort. The only time teachers get involved in the "where do babies come from" part is in sex education around age 12.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i wish i went to that school
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imperial maniac)
    Yes I understand that it will only be teaching about the relationships.

    But when a child asks where babies come from, one would say something along the lines of "When a mummy and a daddy who love each other very much, they get married and have children." if you then say "oh btw, you can have two daddies or two mummies and the child in the family isn't their own." It's going to screw with the kid's head.
    But you wouldn't say that. There are lots of children who are adopted who are in these schools so explaining that two daddies or two mummies could adopt is not really that hard to explain. Or explaining that the child may be to only one of the daddies seeing as though there are lots of children who have say a biological mummy and a daddy who isn't biologically theirs but plays that role.

    I think you underestimate children's ability to understand these things. By explaining these things early on in life will only lead to less confusion.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imperial maniac)
    It's obviously controversial, a mere 60 years ago homophobia was viewed at the norm by the government.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17u01_sWjRE
    60 years ago blacks were second class citizens, but I wouldn't stop myself bringing a cihld into the world just because he was black.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xXxiKillxXx)
    I am, and proud ahahah
    :facepalm2:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Someone should tell them that the muslims aren't massive fans of the gays, Griffin will go gay in a heartbeat.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aexis)
    There hasn't been any controversial stories about Muslims recently, so the BNP are obviously targeting the group they dislike the most after Muslims and ethnic minorities -- homosexuals.
    Sadly I've run out of rep today, but YES YOU ARE SO RIGHT
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I doubt I could be "persuaded" to be gay.

    End of story for me.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imperial maniac)
    Yes I understand that it will only be teaching about the relationships.

    But when a child asks where babies come from, one would say something along the lines of "When a mummy and a daddy who love each other very much, they get married and have children." if you then say "oh btw, you can have two daddies or two mummies and the child in the family isn't their own." It's going to screw with the kid's head.
    I think you underestimage children tbh. They accept some pretty mental things. Explaining a tiny bit about adoption isn't going to mess them up lol.

    Children are probably the most accepting to things other people view as strange, because they have to accept so much all the time.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hanvyj)
    I think you underestimage children tbh. They accept some pretty mental things. Explaining a tiny bit about adoption isn't going to mess them up lol.

    Children are probably the most accepting to things other people view as strange, because they have to accept so much all the time.
    This. Kids arent tainted like adults are.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imperial maniac)
    Is this a good thing?

    Acceptance of homosexuality is one thing, but actively teaching it as the norm to children, is that crossing a line?

    http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/homosexua...ren-young-five

    ofc the source isn't exactly, erm...unbiased, but assuming what it says is true, do you see this as a victory for equality or as the BNP puts it "homosexual propaganda."

    Edit: Thanks for the neg guys... maybe I should I've pointed out that I'm not agreeing with the BNP in any way here, it's just an interesting point of contention and I wanted to see what people's opinions were on this. I don't think my post in any way suggests that I agree with them on this matter, I'm sitting on the fence, and made the thread so I could make a more informed decision after listening to the arguments for and against.
    The source isn't the most reliable, but if that's true then in my opinion that's wrong. I'd be very offended if my children came home telling me they learned about Tom and Dan's wedding or something.

    I have no issue with homosexuality, but pushing it as 'the norm' is in my eyes, unacceptable. It's also not something I'd want my children exposed to at five years old, it would confuse the poor things.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I see nothing wrong with teaching children homosexuality is normal.
    Because it is.

    There is much more harm in teaching them it isn't normal.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    The source isn't the most reliable, but if that's true then in my opinion that's wrong. I'd be very offended if my children came home telling me they learned about Tom and Dan's wedding or something.

    I have no issue with homosexuality, but pushing it as 'the norm' is in my eyes, unacceptable. It's also not something I'd want my children exposed to at five years old, it would confuse the poor things.
    If it isn't taught as a socially acceptable conduct and part of the fabric of society then... isn't it being pushed or at least implied by omission as something that is out of line with normal moral conduct and therefore likely to be seen as unacceptable?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    The source isn't the most reliable, but if that's true then in my opinion that's wrong. I'd be very offended if my children came home telling me they learned about Tom and Dan's wedding or something.

    I have no issue with homosexuality, but pushing it as 'the norm' is in my eyes, unacceptable. It's also not something I'd want my children exposed to at five years old, it would confuse the poor things.
    If you see nothing wrong with homosexuality then you should see it the same as heterosexuality ergo you should be fine with it. The fact that you don't believe it's a norm means you're not okay with it.
 
 
 
Poll
Who do you think it's more helpful to talk about mental health with?
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.