The Homosexuality Discussion Thread

  • Thread starter Duke
  • 9,138 comments
  • 413,534 views

I think homosexuality is:

  • a problem that needs to be cured.

    Votes: 88 6.0%
  • a sin against God/Nature.

    Votes: 145 9.8%
  • OK as long as they don't talk about it.

    Votes: 62 4.2%
  • OK for anybody.

    Votes: 416 28.2%
  • nobody's business but the people involved.

    Votes: 765 51.8%

  • Total voters
    1,476
I do not like that because they know how to get on and they will, just fine without all your meddling.

I have 2 words that can quite easily prove that wrong, trailer parks. Now don't get me wrong, I do know that good people have and do come from trailer parks, but by and large from what I've seen they are really not nice to deal with. They are the most racist and gay hating group of people I've met hands down, and most of them are definitely not the sharpest knives in the drawer. So, you're proposing that these people, these parents, teach their children everything they need to know about in the world? Those children certainly won't learn much and a lot of the girls would probably end up in the teenage pregnancy statistics. Then the cycle starts over again with an arguably smaller pool of knowledge to teach and that specific population slowly become less and less smart.

Brilliant plan.

If we don't teach what others have already learned the world would slowly slip back through time in a technological sense.

I never thought I would say this but, I can't even. I can understand and empathize a lot of things, but a mindset where the school system is deemed an unnecessary waste of taxes? I can't even.
 
That is a good post 👍

I might add some things later but for the moment all I can ask is, "what makes you right to say"

In case you did not realize, I am all for liberty, all for that, gay or whatever, I don't give a rats ass.
 
I just can't take you seriously anymore. Take a moment and really ponder what our world would be like if the only thing youth were taught is what their parents wanted them to learn.

You can't honestly believe that that would be a better world to live in, can you?

What is taught is not necessarily learned or accepted. Also unless someone only interacts with their parents, they are likely to come across differing viewpoints eventually.

If a message needs to be spread, sending it through the school system is not the only option, and even if parents were able to to choose exactly what their children learn (home schooling?) that doesn't mean that they will necessarily be able to control their children's thoughts.

I do not like that because they know how to get on and they will, just fine without all your meddling.
You don't know that because you can't.
 
Well said 👍

I don't know if it is rude or not to ask, I assume that GT is in the education business, but if I may, do you have kids?
 
You are not the other kat lol. Or do I not understand.

Oh, my words were not clear, I seem to have a problem with that. I wasn't asking you Exorcet.

EDIT, it is interesting though, the question. Those little buggers have a way of changing your whole thought processes ;)
 
Last edited:
You are not the other kat lol. Or do I not understand.

Oh, my words were not clear, I seem to have a problem with that. I wasn't asking you Exorcet.

It's fine, I tend to wonder if I'm getting my point across at times too.

EDIT, it is interesting though, the question. Those little buggers have a way of changing your whole thought processes ;)
I guess I won't know for sure until it happens, but it's not something I don't think about. If someone begins getting ready at the very first moments of pregnancy, it's too late. In preparation for my own I'm already looking out for them.
 
It really is something that will or at least for me, changed your mind in many ways. Damn, having kids is a whole different game 👍
 
Well said 👍

I don't know if it is rude or not to ask, I assume that GT is in the education business, but if I may, do you have kids?

Well alright then, here we go.

First off, your assumption is only very partially correct as I am in the business of educating, myself. That is to say I am a student, which I have been for all 22 years of my life and intend to stay for my whole life. I want to learn as much as I can about anything I can because knowledge is power. I'm not staying I will stay in colleges my whole life, no that's silly, but I endeavor to learn about cultures, science, anything really. I have been in school systems for a long enough period of time with a mind with which I have been gifted that is able to understand a truly wide spectrum of things, which has allowed me to see where education systems have flaws, errors, or areas that are totally not covered.

One of my many goals which I would be happy to achieve is to become education minister in Ontario because I see flaws and things that desperately need fixing.

So that's the education business covered.

Second, no, I do not have kids.

I do however know what I would want my future kids to be taught in school, and the current system is not teaching quite a lot of those things. Something that needs to be understood about children and education is that together they form a product. That product is what progresses human society forward and establishes countries and economy. If the people who come out of a country's education system are not up to industry's snuff, they plain and simple won't get jobs. Companies right now see which countries have the smartest people and which ones will work for the cheapest, they combine those two things they are looking for and base their manufacturing or whatever they want in that country. It's the reason why Western countries are having problems getting people full time jobs, because those people aren't as smart as the companies want them to be, they want to work as little as possible, and want to be paid the highest they can possibly be paid.

Anyway, wow that was quite a tangent from the thread topic. If education systems teach children more, society as a whole will be able to progress further, which is where teaching more subjects such as 'how to not be "homophobic"' come in.

Parents would not be able to do the job schools do because they must learn all the subjects a child would need to know themselves, and with the currently quite high divorce and single parent rates they likely have to provide the food on the table and the roof under which the child lives. Whereas a school has many teachers who have studied the subject they teach and can provide a better understanding to the child.

Knowledge is power, and when you really get down to it, where would any species be without it.

Also, some confusion could be resolved by hitting the reply button on the post you are replying to.
 
p

Parents would not be able to do the job schools do because they must learn all the subjects a child would need to know themselves, and with the currently quite high divorce and single parent rates they likely have to provide the food on the table and the roof under which the child lives. Whereas a school has many teachers who have studied the subject they teach and can provide a better understanding to the child.

Oh, you don't think I have some know how? World experience? capable of successfully raising two youngings? You would be incorrect my man. I put the bread on the table as well.

20 years of heaven or hell, depending on your perspective.
 
Oh, you don't think I have some know how? World experience? capable of successfully raising two youngings? You would be incorrect my man. I put the bread on the table as well.

20 years of heaven or hell, depending on your perspective.

I'm not saying you don't know how to do things, but the way I understood these
No, 8 year olds deserve to be left alone, except for what their parents decide of course.
Of course. You are the one that forced the kid to attend.
Of course I can, but I think of a responsible people. I will never be down with your 'village' approach.

Education is a great thing, if it is educating. I firmly believe that some of you are trying to make up for your own short comings through our children. I do not like that because they know how to get on and they will, just fine without all your meddling.

It is my opinion, I happen to be correct btw. You will die before they do.

and previous posts you do not think the education system is necessary and tax dollars should be spent elsewhere or not collected at all. So if you'll just bear with me for a bit on this thought of school is an unnecessary spend of tax dollars and I'll compare the amount of time a parent would have to teach a child everything they need to know compared to a school.

So a whole week contains 168 hours
The world standard for sleeping time is 8 hours/night, so that means 56 of those hours are gone.
I'll be generous and say the average person works 40 hours per week, even though many work well over that.
So 96 hours are already gone out of 168 leaving the average person with 72 hours to teach their child
But wait, everyone needs to get out of bed and ready for work, I'll assume 1 hr morning routine, 5 more hours gone.
No one can live without eating, so we'll say 30 minute breakfast and 1.5 hours for dinner all prep time included.
so 15 hours just went out the window, now there's 58 hours teaching time.
Can't forget the commute, can we? Google quotes this at 25.4 minutes, but we have to go both ways, 4.25 hrs/week
Have to shop for food too, probably about an hour a week.
Now we have just 53.75 hours in our week
Oh right, we're so conservative that we don't pay tax for school, off to Sunday church we go.

So, 52.75 hours in a week leftover in this bare minimum of a life to teach our kids every single thing they need to know.

The average school week for grades 1 to 4 in America is quoted as 33 hours by the NCES for 2007/08 year. This doesn't account for time spent on homework outside of classes. The statistics were taken on 4 core subjects and in order were English, Mathematics, Social Studies, and Science.

So our average American parent is down to 19.75 hours per week to teach their child everything else they need to know, but wait there's more. In 2007 the average number of children in an American family was (rounded off) 3. So we've taught one child their 33 hours and can get in approximately 60% of the second child's education before parent has run completely out of time in their week.

I can hear you now, what about the second parent, indeed what about the second parent? A quick Google search reveals that 60.2% of American families have both parents working. By using the higher percentage of families for this we find that yes, an average American family can indeed homeschool their children in their spare time from work with a grand total of 6.5 hours to spare in their lives each week. This all assumes everything is perfect in their lives, no one has any health issues, and everything happens exactly as it is supposed to.

What a boring life.
 
It will take me a moment to digest all that, I won't be multi quoting and such, but I will reply.

Ok, first off, I am not against a voluntary school system, and I believe only people with children should pay for it.

It was a great value to me, I liked having the resource at my disposal.

Many of you will not like this statement, but this statement is law where I come from; My children are my property. Sorry, they are not yours to bend.
 
Last edited:
You will die before they do.

Which proves what, exactly?

In case you did not realize, I am all for liberty, all for that, gay or whatever, I don't give a rats ass.

You need to stop saying you're for liberty, because it's not true. Your views on mandatory service and people as property make it not so.

Oh, you don't think I have some know how? World experience? capable of successfully raising two youngings? You would be incorrect my man. I put the bread on the table as well.

You think that you can educate a child to Year 12 level in any and all subjects while providing a decent living as well?

Pull the other one. There's a handful of people that can actually do that, and chances are that you're not one of them. At the very least, you've demonstrated that your communication skills aren't good enough to be teaching Year 12 English.

You know some stuff, like we all do. But you do not have the ability to teach an entire school curriculum on your own. That's why schools have different teachers for different subjects, because having a great enough mastery to be able to teach a subject effectively is not trivial. In high school, very few teachers will teach more than a couple of subjects, because that's what they specialise in.

It's possible that you're a genius and you're just hiding it really well. But statistically, I'm safe in saying that's not the case.

My children are my property.

That is a disgusting attitude to have towards another human being. Liberty, my ENTIRE arse.

Children are a responsibility. They are not your slaves. They are not anybody's slaves.
 
Yes, I did a very good job of it.

It's very odd that you would think you have more of a right to my kids than I do.

A good job of what? If it's failing to articulate your words enough for anyone to not have to make leaps of assumption to understand your posts, I would say you are doing fan-bleeding-tastic

No one owns their children, in fact raising children is a lot closer to a privelege than a right because Children's Aid Society or equivalent in other countries can come and take your children away for so many things you haven't even thought of. Children can just as easily (although the age at which it is allowed I do not know) disown their mother or father from that 'position' as it were. Just because you brought them into the world does not at all mean you have complete control over them.
 
Both of them are great, they are different but that is to be expected. One already has a double BS and is moving on to graduate school, very driven and all that. The other is more about life and people, has moved up with a job, is going to school for some sort of hippy medicine message deal, fine. I could not be more proud.

Both are self sufficient and loving life, I can't fathom either considering condemning a gay.

Oh it was a great honor to have the two, a gift from my on and off again lady whom I love to death. The truth is, sure a responsibility, but one that was mine and not yours.

........

You guys should look me up after you have tried it :lol:
 
You are not the other kat lol. Or do I not understand.

Oh, my words were not clear, I seem to have a problem with that. I wasn't asking you Exorcet.

EDIT, it is interesting though, the question. Those little buggers have a way of changing your whole thought processes ;)

I have three, with the youngest now sixteen, and totally and utterly disagree with you.
 
Yes, I did a very good job of it.

Of what, educating them to Year 12 level? You're telling me that you and you alone educated two children to Year 12 level in a number of subjects? Which subjects?

I'm sorry, but some sort of proof is definitely required of this. My step-father was a teacher, and I've known a lot of teachers. While most could teach more than one subject, I can't think of any who would claim to even be able to teach all the basic English/Math/Physics/Chemistry/Biology/Geography/History, let alone potential arts and music, languages, economics, accounting, handicrafts, and other more fringe subjects.

Either you offered only a very limited education based only on what you know, or you had help. Or you're a genius, but you're not making a very good case for that.

It's very odd that you would think you have more of a right to my kids than I do.

It's very odd that you would think that. I never said anything of the sort, yet you assumed that the only alternative that I could be proposing to you having rights to your kids was for me to have rights to your kids.

You see how again your assumptions speak loudly about your deep held beliefs? You assume that someone needs to own a child.

Perhaps there's some third way, where nobody needs to assert ownership of the children.

You guys should look me up after you have tried it :lol:

Go ahead, how do we look you up? You're by your own admission highly educated, so tell us how we may look you up and learn more about you. If all these things that you say are true, then there's much for the rest of us to learn.
 
At the very least, you've demonstrated that your communication skills aren't good enough to be teaching Year 12 English.
Speaking as the guy who teaches Year 12 English (including Extension 1 and 2), I concur. My Year 7 class could craft a better argument.
 
It will take me a moment to digest all that, I won't be multi quoting and such, but I will reply.

Ok, first off, I am not against a voluntary school system, and I believe only people with children should pay for it.

It's more correct to say that only the people who once were school children should pay for it. Definitely, schooling is fair if only the people who use the school system pay for it... or if everyone has equal access to the schooling system, whether they use it or not... which is the case for the US Public School system.

The question of whether you benefit indirectly from it is another matter, and the level of that indirect benefit is where the justification of socializing costs comes from. (but that's for another thread)


It was a great value to me, I liked having the resource at my disposal.

Many of you will not like this statement, but this statement is law where I come from; My children are my property. Sorry, they are not yours to bend.

I was going to say: NO, because of the United Nations Charter on Children's Rights, but apparently the USA is not a signatory.

But it's still no. Because children receive full protection under law and can be removed from their parents if their parents do not provide for them. They can also sue for emancipation given the right circumstances.

-

More generally, from an ethical point of view, no, children are not property. No parent has the right to treat a child as property or to view them in this manner. As a parent, you have the responsibility to guide their education, but they have the right to make up their own minds.


Of course I can, but I think of a responsible people. I will never be down with your 'village' approach.

Education is a great thing, if it is educating. I firmly believe that some of you are trying to make up for your own short comings through our children. I do not like that because they know how to get on and they will, just fine without all your meddling.

People are not born responsible or irresponsible. Their environment helps shape whatever they will become.

It's funny that you deride the village, because you are a part of the village. All children will be shaped by the community, whether you like it or not, and the only way to avoid that is to homeschool your kids on a secluded ranch out in the middle of nowhere. Which would be difficult... the only way to properly homeschool children is if you are an educator (like myself and my spouse), and even then, our level of knowledge is quite limited. We do tutor our kids, but we don't have the ability to teach them everything they need to know, and certainly not within the time constraints levelled by work and by other daily chores in the household. Unless you're a millionaire with a lot of free time, there's no way you can do it alone. You will always need some form of help.

And once you do have somebody besides yourself and your children, you are now more than just a family. The small size of the community doesn't change the fact that every person your child interacts with regularly will play a role in shaping what they become, whether you like it or not. Would you rather those people treat your children with dignity, or like dirt?

Education is not meddling or mind control. Education is simply education. It equips children with the tools of life, and one of those tools is social interaction. Whether you like it or not, the training in terms of social interaction did indeed affect your children, and did play a role in shaping their personalities.

As a parent, it's uncomfortable to admit that other people have played as big a role as yourself, or even bigger, in shaping your childrens' personalities. Whether you like it or not, your children already live in a village, and whatever they've become is thanks in part to that village, whether you are willing to admit that or not.

What we, as educators, strive to do, is to make sure that the village is a nice place to live in. Why you see that as a problem is beyond me, but given how you deride the idea of social sensitivity, believe eight year olds are capable of synthesizing and internalizing a perfectly workable ethical system without external modelling or input and talk about children being "property" is rather telling.
 
Way out of line, I am literate, give me a break. In fact, those are personal attacks mind you.

Not a personal attack at all. Being literate simply means being able to read and write, and I've never said otherwise. There are times when you border on incoherency, but you're still literate.

However, you have claim to have personally educated your children to Year 12 and to have given them a high quality education at that. Presumably, one of the subjects you educated them in was English, what with that being a fundamental subject in most curricula. I don't know if it still is (or if it's the same where you are), but when I went to school English was the one mandatory subject through Year 12.

I'm simply questioning a claim you have made based on the evidence that you have presented to me. Your skill with language is on display in this thread, both in terms of being able to communicate an idea clearly and in being able to construct a well-supported and coherent argument. I submit that based on the evidence, you are incapable of teaching English at a Year 12 level.

There's a difference between being literate and being able to pass (or teach!) Year 12 English. As you would know if you were capable of teaching Year 12 English.

But maybe it's not necessary to teach English and still have a good education, or maybe your children were simply bright enough to teach themselves language and the other associated skills while you attended to the rest of their education. So I'll ask again, which subjects did you personally educate your children to a Year 12 level in?

You seem to be attempting to make the case that your children's education is proof that your way is a valid alternative to the public school system based on the outcomes you achieved. So why don't you share some more of the details?
 
There's a difference between being literate and being able to pass (or teach!) Year 12 English. As you would know if you were capable of teaching Year 12 English.
There's an easy enough way to figure that out. If @squadops is capable of teaching Year 12 English, then he should be able to discuss the growing disenchantment with the American dream in light of the ideological shift that took hold in the 1970s and 1980s, particularly with the perception that political leaders were trading the stable and legitimate power of national values for the transient and ephemeral power of political influence at home and abroad - with specific reference to Paul Theroux's The Mosquito Coast.

And bear in mind that the above is nothing special; it's a Monday morning for me.
 
It's even odder that you think you have more right to your kids than your kids do.
I don't think that at all, and I think you realize that. While they were minors they were my responsibility, not the state or the schools.

I find it odd you responded that way tbh, my kids are free as birds. I made sure of that.
 
There is not much to explain, can you read the law?

Please, enlighten us all as to where one has to live in order to be able to own their children. I know of no such country or state where this is written into law, so please elaborate.
 
Back