Gay Book Flap Erupts Again At Lexington School

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Jordon

Typical of you types to drag religion into the fray first thing while I have never even mentioned it.

Then perhaps you'd care to explain your opposition to homosexuality. It's either "it's against my religion" or "it's yucky".

Let's look at some of the new texts for this fall's second graders:
{idiocy}
<IDIOCY>

I'm sorry, does the two princes book include any sex? At all? If not, then it is exactly like any fairy tale that ends up "and they lived happily ever after. I mean, if you want to get into sexual isues of fairy tale characters, then Cinderella's Prince was a massive foot fetishist and Snow White's was a necrophiliac.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

It's OK, we're friends here and won't judge you.

Speak for yourself; I've already judged him. :-)

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Jordon

However, Civil Unions should be available to anyone.

And have equal legal status to straight marriage? Cool...now let's figure out why The State should be involved in it at all.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

I'm sorry, does the two princes book include any sex? At all?

If it does, I withdraw my objection to removing it from an elementary school curriculum...no matter who the Prince[s] is/are boffing.

Originally Posted by Jordon

Typical of you types to drag religion into the fray first thing while I have never even mentioned it.

Let's look at some of the new texts for this fall's second graders:

Daddy likes it up the ass
Pappa's Prolapsed Rectum
Daddy loved sucking dick more than he loved me; (that's why he's all crusted over with Kaposi's Sarcomas)
One Dick, Two Dick, Big Dick, You Dick
Dykes on Tikes
The Fag in the Bag who wants to Shag
My Secret Friend who Lurks in the Restroom
The Leering Queer who gave me Beer

Of course this is a sane and considered response. You hate queers. Why mince your words. You want us to agree with you that its ok to hate them. Sorry, no, I'm not going to agree. It looks most people here don't agree with your hatred, either.

[Jordon]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Then perhaps you'd care to explain your opposition to homosexuality. It's either "it's against my religion" or "it's yucky".

Gosh, you seem to have that all sorted out. Does your whole life fall into two such easy categories?

Who said I was opposed to homosexuality? I disagree with it being pandered to seven year olds.

I don't hate queers either, but if you give me shit, prepare to get it shoved right back down your throat coated with Drano.

Yes, Civil Unions should have equal legal status to marriage. The govt should license Civil Unions to anyone, and let individual religions dispense marriage sacraments.

Among Pagans there are Covens composed entirely of Lesbians and others of Gay men. While some rituals are common to us all, they also have rituals specific to their sexual inclination. No gay man would insist on being allowed to participate in a Moon Lodge ritual for Lesbians. No Lesbian would insist on being included in a Gay coming of age ritual. Homosexuals should write their own rituals and sacraments, rather than simply imitating the heterosexual marriage rite. There is no hatred in that. The hatred is in the minds of you who are so eager to perceive it. But sadly, instead of any genuine debate, all you want to do is fling poo.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Jordon

Gosh, you seem to have that all sorted out. Does your whole life fall into two such easy categories?

This does, unless you're willing to provide a counterexample.

Who said I was opposed to homosexuality? I disagree with it being pandered to seven year olds.

You did, with your "reading list" that implied that if kids are shown fairy tales about two princes in love, the next step is showing them hardcore gay sex. The same is obviously not true for Sleeping Beauty, so why would it be for the two princes?

Yes, Civil Unions should have equal legal status to marriage. The govt should license Civil Unions to anyone, and let individual religions dispense marriage sacraments.

I agree with this. Of course, everyone will still call it marriage, since the ones who think marriage must be religious in nature will have it done by their religion, and the ones who don't won't care what the religions think.

Among Pagans there are Covens composed entirely of Lesbians and others of Gay men. While some rituals are common to us all, they also have rituals specific to their sexual inclination. No gay man would insist on being allowed to participate in a Moon Lodge ritual for Lesbians. No Lesbian would insist on being included in a Gay coming of age ritual. Homosexuals should write their own rituals and sacraments, rather than simply imitating the heterosexual marriage rite.

Marriage ceremonies are based at least as much on culture as religion. In homogenous societies, where there's only one religion and only one culture, that may be hard to distinguish, but a Catholic marriage in Ireland will be considerably different than one in Ghana. "Gay" isn't a religion. If their church performs gay marriages, then their marriage will be whatever their church does. If they do it without a church, it will be whatever they want it to be, which will probably be informed by the culture they grew up in.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Jordon

Who said I was opposed to homosexuality? I disagree with it being pandered to seven year olds.

I see. If we say a man loves a woman, that's romance. But if we say a man loves a man, that's "pandering". But you're not prejudiced against gay people, of course.

(By the way...you need to look up "pandering". Gramatically, if a child is "being pandered to", it's an appeal to his existing vices, not an attempt to seduce him into new ones.)

[Munchkin]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

*snip*
If somebody thinks their kids shouldn't be exposed to the public, maybe they shouldn't be in a public school. There's plenty of "Christian" "academies" founded on creationism, homophobia and other equally wholesome precepts.
*snip*

Wooo I like you people already .. .. well put

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Jordon

Gosh, you seem to have that all sorted out. Does your whole life fall into two such easy categories?
.

Well, either your objection is based on religion or it isn't.. Let's start by answering that one.

I assume we'll now see some handwaving approxiately along the lines of why "Intelligent Design is different from Creationism": religious objections trying to sneak into government policy masquerading as something else.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Jordon

Who said I was opposed to homosexuality? I disagree with it being pandered to seven year olds. ...

Yes, Civil Unions should have equal legal status to marriage. The govt should license Civil Unions to anyone, and let individual religions dispense marriage sacraments.

Confusion began when you did not distinguish between teachings of a lifestyle verses teaching how to live that lifestyle. Having not provided sufficient details - distinguishing between both concepts - your responses assumes you are so opposed to homosexuality as to even condemning teaching of its existence.

To better understand what was posted: first legal marriage requirements. I read you saying that laws should make no distinction between same sex and opposite sex marriages. Is that correct?

Second, religion. You stated that sacraments (I take that to mean Catholic Church) should be denied to same sex marriages. Is that correct?

Third, education. You insist that children should never even be told that homosexual couples exist? That existence of standard society features (lifestyles) should never be taught to kids? That some realities should never be taught to kids (answering this question in detailed terms of what exists and of how it exists)? Is that correct?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Of course this is a sane and considered response. You hate queers. Why mince your words. You want us to agree with you that its ok to hate them. Sorry, no, I'm not going to agree. It looks most people here don't agree with your hatred, either.

I do, I do, I hate queers. The bastards ruined the word gay. Gay was a great descriptive word. There isn't another word that can take it's place and be as effective. I'll always hold it against 'em.

[Jordon]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

Well, either your objection is based on religion or it isn't.. Let's start by answering that one.

I assume we'll now see some handwaving approxiately along the lines of why "Intelligent Design is different from Creationism": religious objections trying to sneak into government policy masquerading as something else.

You're so full of shit you're developing buck teeth. My objection to 7 year olds being exposed to homosexuality is based on simple human decency.

[Jordon]

Originally Posted by tw

You stated that sacraments (I take that to mean Catholic Church) should be denied to same sex marriages. Is that correct?

Nope. Never said that. However your assumption is quite telling.

[Jordon]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I do, I do, I hate queers. The bastards ruined the word gay. Gay was a great descriptive word. There isn't another word that can take it's place and be as effective. I'll always hold it against 'em.

Blythe
Bonnie
Jocund
Merry