Should Muslims have to let their children be taught LGBTQ lessons in school?

Nov 2005
8,595
3,036
California
#41
Businesses who are concerned about getting sued aren't even going to hire your out and proud student to begin with.
Your responses aren't making any sense in the overall reality. It's like you are just saying things to confirm your own unrealistic view.
Can you explain why I (as an out gay man) would be a risk in the first place?

1) Being sued is a concern for all businesses.
2) There are many states where discriminating based on sexual orientation is illegal.
3) It's much more economical and compliant with the law to punish (or eliminate) people who would make trouble that violates the law and hinders the work-place environment.
I can (and have) work with people who think being gay is a sin and that gays should not marry, without issue. We simply realized that such opinions are not conducive to the business for which we were employed and thus we did our jobs.


There is zero to suggest that teacher's are in any way successful is stopping bullying and harassment. I am not making anyone responsible for anything. I am accepting the reality that if there is a pitbull on the loose, throwing your cat out the front door because they have just as much right to be outside at the dog is not going to end well.
The intelligent response would be either to put the pit bull on a leash or to shoot the pit bull if it can't be made to behave.
But of course, you want to cater to an attack animal...


No your actual formula is to service an agenda.
I am applying a concept unilaterally, unlike you.
Quite frankly, the fact that you recommend gay kids stay in the closet demonstrates it's you who has the agenda. You have an even-minded approach for others that you refuse to apply to gays and you refuse to say why.


Pitbulls and kittens yet again. All I have suggested is that people use their individual discretion and not be lured into a huge mistake when the safety of classroom and your touchy feely teacher are not there.
You seriously don't know much about this topic, do you...
You seem to think that gay kids being in the closet magically keeps them safe, when that is not the case. In fact, as I documented, gay-straight alliances successfully reduce bullying and reduce suicide.


Excessive bullying huh? you aren't interested in stopping all bullying just the kind the exceeds your tolerance level. People are responsible for their own safety. THAT is common sense.
No on all levels..
They are kids, being forced to go to a school and denied many rights in the interests of education. As such, people are responsible for the safety and there are multiple successful lawsuits against schools which look the other way and let the pitbull run wild that have taught schools that they need to be responsible.

Claiming I am not interested in "stopping all bullying" is a dumb strawman argument you created and it shows your desperation.
The fact is it reduces bullying. Period.
The pit bull is being curbed and properly retrained or restrained, which is a good thing.

Strange that you only see gay kids as victims. Their aggressors are victims. Shouldn't we tolerate their behavior just as we do LGBTQ kids? What level of bullying do you find not excessive?
Are you seriously trying to pretend that the kids who bully LGBTQ kids should be considered as the victims?
ROFLMAO!

In many conversations, it takes some work to expose the absurdity of the other person's position.
I don't need to do any work as you just proved your own absurdity!


The issue being discussed was schools teaching students not whether or not to have a club and a study of Canadian schools is hardly comparable to the zoo American public schools have become.
You really like your ignorance, don't you.
That was simply the first study I found. There are others showing the same thing in the U.S.
https://www.usnews.com/news/article...-schools-pay-off-for-all-students-study-finds

You make up delusions in your own mind and declare them as absolute. Pretending that just saying them makes them proof of your opinion, despite the evidence.


And for the umpteenth time, what I have stated and what you perpetually mis-characterize is that this should not be part of the school's curriculum and should not be taught as an edict from on high. I have in no way suggested people should not have one on one discussions with people they feel comfortable discussing these things with. Quite the opposite.
Quote where I mis-assessed your statements.


And you need to learn how to make an argument to begin with. So far, all you have offered up is a bunch of nothing that does not comport with the reality on the ground. Biggest drivers of suicide among LGBT youth are lack of family support--which school instruction does not address--and maltreatment by peers, which your solution very likely aggravates,.
Yet another example of you making claims with no evidence.
But for the moment, let's assume what you claim is true. So what.
The reality is gay-straight alliances do reduce suicide.
Just because you make up a claim and claim schools "do not address" that does not mean that what we are recommending is not an improvement.

Suppose we just continue to blindly make up things and say that the "lack of family support" ranks as #1 while school environment ranks as #9.
Does that mean we shouldn't improve the school environment???
Of course it doesn't. It's very myopic (and foolish) to think that an improvement shouldn't be adopted just because it doesn't address the biggest cause of a problem...
 
Dec 2015
16,536
15,400
Arizona
#42
Did you ever consider that politics is religion in action? Don't we all have some standards of right and wrong? We have threads here where the subject of slavery pops up. But in the Bible, God allowed his people not only to own slaves, but he allowed people to take them (both Judah and Israel into captivity / bondage / slavery.) It's hard to make a case against slavery without a reference point. Since many are sold on America being a democracy AND segregation was done via a majority vote, how can we say it is wrong?

If a parent does not want their children exposed to homosexuality, who are we to interfere? If the majority in a school district vote on the school curriculum, is that not what they should be able to teach OR do we expand the area of who gets to decide where someone 300 miles away gets to vote on what your children are taught? Then, if national opinion is greater than the majority of a state, do we then expand the vote to include the voters of all 50 states? Then what subjects are okay and which are not and why? A teacher was discharged from the job over questioning the Holocaust within the last week. I'm a bit short on details - I wasn't paying a lot of attention, but I wondered why, in all this world of diversity, some people are locked out. It baffles me.

If someone does not believe in inter-racial marriage, by what right or standard do we get to lock them out of society? If a group belongs to an unpopular religion (it wasn't that long ago it was the Mormons), by what standard do we get to pull their non-profit status until they change the tenets of their faith? Just asking. FWIW, I think that the varying religions should have some say in their child's education...it is THEIR children, not the government's.
We have seen what happens when politics becomes religion. We've seen it quite recently and it's not a pretty picture....which is why politics and religion have been separated. Just because something like slavery is mentioned in the Bible doesn't mean it's lawful or acceptable. There are all sorts of things mentioned in the Bible that we find unacceptable and in fact, heinous. The Bible does not rule this country. We've got something called the Constitution for that purpose.
The Muslim community--just like the Catholic community--the Mormon community--the Amish community--and all other segments of our society have choices. If they want to enroll their children in public school they are welcome to do so. If they do not there are other options. Over 2 million children are homeschooled. 10% of the children in this country attend private schools. Decisions about curriculum are handed down by state and federal government. Local school boards make decisions about dress codes, bus routes, school calendars, etc. If parents are unhappy with the decisions they can run for school board positions, vote down propositions and speak up at public forums.
Teachers can be discharged at any time, for any reason and that includes spreading misleading information to their students because their job is to educate children on FACTS. Truth. Objective, proven realities. Not wild speculation or opinion.
There's a difference between teaching religion and teaching ABOUT religion. The same goes for politics. The same goes for lifestyles.
 
Likes: leekohler2
Dec 2006
26,589
11,701
New Haven, CT
#44
Some kids are just hateful and mean and looking for a reason to take it out on another kid to make them feel better about themselves for 5 seconds or vent anger or whatever.
That is true.
And some kids learn at home about n****rs and sp*cs and k*kes and f*ags and d*ykes and towel heads and wet backs and ch*nks.
Having spent twenty-five years as a teacher, I can tell you there are far more of the latter than the former. MOST kids are not naturally hateful and mean.
So the kid who learn the ugly shite at home need to get the other side of the issue from another venue in order to attempt to create a more civilized society for ALL OF US.
No, it won't work on everybody. But it DOES work on most. Look how it changed the attitude towards African Americans in America. Until the schools got involved in teaching diginity and respect for people of color, almost everybody used slurs (not even meant to be derogatory! just naturally!) and treated people of color as second class citizens.
Yes, it didn't nothing to change some minds. But, face it, it did a LOT of the majority.
You may not have lived through it. I did.
 
Likes: leekohler2
Mar 2018
962
165
Grayson
#45
Religion involves being told what to think because some nuts claimed they heard God long before we realized that such behavior needed pills.
That's not politics. Separation of church and state prevent politics from being "religion in action".



Are you serious with this question?
Because if you don't comprehend that, then there is really a lacking in a common reference point to have such a discussion (in the amount of words that are allowed in a post).



If the parent keeps that child in the parent's environment, then they have that freedom to impose such nonsensical standards.
If the parent wants to send the child to a public school paid by the tax-payer, the parent has no more right to dictate the school's behavior than the rest of the tax-payers.



These questions seem needlessly histrionic. They also seem irrelevant to the actual point that was being made.



The details would be necessary to discuss that. I can think of some ways that would be clearly justified and other ways which would be more benign.



What the heck are you even talking about right now? "locking them out of society"???



And it's the government's school, not the parent's school.
I do not reply to multi quote posts such as this. It is an admission that the poster is insecure about their own position. If I respond, point by point, then that post is what the rest would call TLDR.

I will answer the first sentence from this poster as everything that follows is predicated on that. He says:

"Religion involves being told what to think because some nuts claimed they heard God long before we realized that such behavior needed pills."

This is true of secular humanism, which is what we practice in society today. The United States Supreme Court has noted that secular humanism has "the effect of a religion." And, so, all of my questions take that into consideration and pose serious questions that cannot be refuted by a troll trying to post - shame me. He has to to attack all of the post, realizing I DO have points. Even a broken clock has the potential to be right twice a day.
 
Dec 2014
26,864
14,682
Memphis, Tn.
#47
No. Who should have a say over YOUR children... you within a community of parents or other people who cannot even reproduce and add to the future of mankind?
Really? I had a vascetomy in my early 30's after my 3rd son was born.
So, according to you after I could no longer reproduce I should have "no say over" my children's education or anyone else's?
WTF ?
 
Likes: foundit66
Mar 2018
962
165
Grayson
#48
We have seen what happens when politics becomes religion. We've seen it quite recently and it's not a pretty picture....which is why politics and religion have been separated. Just because something like slavery is mentioned in the Bible doesn't mean it's lawful or acceptable. There are all sorts of things mentioned in the Bible that we find unacceptable and in fact, heinous. The Bible does not rule this country. We've got something called the Constitution for that purpose.
The Muslim community--just like the Catholic community--the Mormon community--the Amish community--and all other segments of our society have choices. If they want to enroll their children in public school they are welcome to do so. If they do not there are other options. Over 2 million children are homeschooled. 10% of the children in this country attend private schools. Decisions about curriculum are handed down by state and federal government. Local school boards make decisions about dress codes, bus routes, school calendars, etc. If parents are unhappy with the decisions they can run for school board positions, vote down propositions and speak up at public forums.
Teachers can be discharged at any time, for any reason and that includes spreading misleading information to their students because their job is to educate children on FACTS. Truth. Objective, proven realities. Not wild speculation or opinion.
There's a difference between teaching religion and teaching ABOUT religion. The same goes for politics. The same goes for lifestyles.
"We have seen what happens when politics becomes religion?" Really? That's your comeback?

"The New-England Primer, the principal textbook for millions of colonists and early Americans. First compiled and published about 1688 by Benjamin Harris, a British journalist who emigrated to Boston, the primer remained in use for more than 150 years."

The New-England Primer | textbook

When Thomas Jefferson wrote his misquoted "separation of church and state" letter in 1802, he was promising the Danbury Baptists (who were tasked with educating children at that time) that the state would never impose themselves on the church and their job of educating children. Consider if you will that ALL of the founders / framers were taught from, principally, the New England Primer. Damn those Christian values... Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, Constitution of the United States...
 
Mar 2018
962
165
Grayson
#49
Really? I had a vascetomy in my early 30's after my 3rd son was born.
So, according to you after I could no longer reproduce I should have "no say over" my children's education or anyone else's?
WTF ?

Yeah dude, WTF? Where in the HELL did I say that? Don't drink before you post. Straw man arguments are total bullshit.
 
Dec 2014
26,864
14,682
Memphis, Tn.
#50
Yeah dude, WTF? Where in the HELL did I say that? Don't drink before you post. Straw man arguments are total bullshit.
Right here. You said, "you within a community of parents or other people who cannot even reproduce and add to the future of mankind."
I can't reproduce. Paid good money to make damn sure of that.
 
Likes: Clara007

Similar Discussions