Some of you may recall a few weeks ago there was a thread asking people's opinion on Gay couple's right to marry. I basically stated that I was morally against it but that in a strictly legal sense they should not be banned. My larger concern was that I didn't want my children taught that homosexual unions were a perfectly acceptable alternative lifestyle. Well it seems that a school in Massachusetts has decided that it was appropriate to teach kindergarteners that homosexuality is perfectly normal and a parent has gone to jail because he objected.


Lexington father arrested over gay kindergarten curriculum

Lexington, Mass., father of 6-year-old arrested and taken to jail over objections to homosexual curriculum
in son’s kindergarten class.

Demanded that school inform him and allow child to opt-out; superintendent refused.

Spending night in jail; arraignment Thursday in Concord District Court.

LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS, APRIL 27

Lexington parent, David Parker, was arrested today by the Lexington Police for “trespassing” at his son’s
elementary school during a scheduled meeting with the principal and the city’s Director of Education over his objections to homosexual curriculum materials and discussions in his son’s kindergarten class.

At the meeting, Parker demanded that the school inform him when homosexual subjects are to be discussed with his son, and allow his son not to be included in such
activities. He said he would not leave until his request was granted. The Principal and the city’s Director of Education both refused his request.

They then telephoned the Superintendent of Schools who also
refused. Police were called, who told Parker that unless he left the school he would be arrested.

Statement by David Parker(April 27, 2005):

“I, David Parker, am the father of a kindergarten student at Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington,
Massachusetts. Since the beginning of this school year, my wife and I have learned that school materials
and discussions about gay-headed households/same-sex union issues have been exposed to the children.

There are definitive plans to increase the teacher/staff/adult mediated discussions of these subjects.

“We have officially stated on many occasions—to the Lexington school administration—a request that we be
notified when these discussions are planned, and want our 6-year-old opted out of such situations when
arising “spontaneously”.

“Our parental requests for our own child were flat-out denied with no effort at accommodation. In our meeting
on April 27, I, insisted that such accommodation be made and refused to leave the meeting room. I was
informed that I would be arrested.”

Parker will be arraigned on Thursday, April 28, in Concord District Court at 9 am. “This is an unbelievable outrage,” said Brian Camenker, a friend
and Newton, Mass. parent. “It’s where last year's same-sex 'marriage' ruling has brought us.”

Slightly off topic, but I'm suprised that there is anyone that conservative left in Massachusets. Thought they would have got out a long time ago.

Slightly off topic, but I'm suprised that there is anyone that conservative left in Massachusets. Thought they would have got out a long time ago.

You'd think so but actually Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney is a republican.

Seriously though. You think it's right that the parent can't even have his 6 year old kindergarten child excused from lessons based on homosexuality. I mean wtf? The guy wasn't even *****ing to change the curriculum. He just didn't want his child taking part.

You'd think so but actually Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney is a republican.


Is he a "real" Republican.

I'm in California and Arnold Swarch - i can't spell thi **** - nager, it the most democartic republican I have ever seen.

He's no communist or anything but the dude is NOT conservative at all.

No, Romney's pretty conservative. Massachusetts is pretty funny in that way. Although there are clearly more liberals than conservatives in the state, there are very few moderates. There's a large extremely liberal base, and a large extremely conservative base.

That would suck. You go to work or school or your just in starbucks and no matter what slips out of your mouth some one is going get in your face.

I love Utah. In my home state everybody agrees about everything.

That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of!!!

Why in the hell are KINDERGARTNERS learning about that stuff anyhow? IT's supposed to be about learning your ABC's and your 123's and learning to socialize etc. Good golly, what is our world coming to?

Makes me glad my kids are older now (high school)but what about my future grandchildren??

UPDATE:

Dad Becomes Icon in Battle Over Homosexual Agenda in Schools
Jim Brown and Jenni Parker
AgapePress


May 18, 2005

A Massachusetts father who was arrested for protesting a homosexual curriculum being used in his son's kindergarten class is considering legal action against the school district.

Lexington parent David Parker had repeatedly asked for parental notification and the right to opt his son out when same-sex and transgender issues are discussed by authority figures at Estabrook Elementary School. But instead of granting his request, school officials had him arrested for trespassing after he refused to leave the campus, vowing he would not leave until he was granted the right to remove his son from classes dealing with homosexuality.



And according to Parker, the school district went even further. "They also, at their discretion, have banned me from setting foot on any Lexington school grounds," he says, "and I used to go there to ride bikes with my kid." But now, the concerned parent is forbidden to go onto the school's play areas, walking trails, or any other part of the premises. He adds, "I'm banned even when my child is in class in kindergarten, to pick him up and drop him off."

All this has been upsetting, but Parker is making every effort to channel his anger over the situation into positive action. He maintains that because of his Christian convictions and the fact that he is a Lexington taxpayer, he has no intention of giving up his fight for parental rights.

"When I talk, I seem calm," the Massachusetts dad says. "But, the thing is, I'm trying to convert the rage into a galvanized will to take this thing as far as I can. I do not accept what has happened. I get questioned as to whether I've taken it too far, and it makes me laugh in a way. They definitely have taken it too far."

According to Parker, he feels as though he is caught in an "ultraliberal twilight zone" in his state and, in retrospect, cannot believe what has taken place there recently. He says he will announce whether or not he will file litigation in the matter sometime before his June 1 court appearance.

Grassroots Support for Parker, Parents' Rights, and Traditional Marriage

Many other Massachusetts parents and pro-family citizens are equally incredulous over what is happening in their state. The conservative group Article 8 Alliance scheduled a press conference at Boston's City Hall Plaza to discuss "the dark underbelly of one year of 'gay marriage' in Massachusetts" and how it has harmed the state.

The Article 8 Alliance also plans to hold a statewide rally in support of Dave Parker and traditional marriage on Sunday (May 22). Meanwhile, a newly formed parents group in Parker's city has scheduled a confrontation with the Lexington School Committee over their fellow parent's arrest and over the issue of the radical homosexual agenda being carried out in their community's schools.

The group, Lexington Parents for Respect, plans to attend the school committee's 7:00 p.m. meeting tonight at Clarke Middle School. They have also called a 6:00 press conference in order to outline their concerns prior to the meeting. Gerry Wambolt, a spokesman for the parents, says the indoctrination of their children by the schools on the moral and political issue of homosexuality is not only "an arrogant intrusion into the privacy of family values and parental rights," but is also "a colossal misuse of instructional time and resources."

The Lexington School Committee is beginning to conform to the profile of a totalitarian state, Wambolt contends. And since only 10 minutes total are allowed for all community comments at the school committee meetings, he wonders whether the disgruntled parents will be risking arrest if they are not quick enough to be first to the microphone yet still insist on being heard.

"How many more parents does the Lexington school system intend to arrest?" Wambolt asks. He goes on to suggest that perhaps it is the school committee that should be arrested for violating the parental notification law.

The Lexington Parents for Respect spokesman feels it is ironic that David Parker was arrested in a city that is historically significant as "The Birthplace of American Liberty." It is likewise ironic, he says, that the School Committee is reconvening on the one-year anniversary of legal same-sex "marriage" in Massachusetts.

Wambolt says the ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court that legalized homosexual marriage in the state is "directly linked to the growing arrogance of our schools." Because of that arrogance, he asserts, school officials are tacitly telling parents they can no longer disagree with pro-homosexual curricula in their children's schools because same-sex marriage is now legal.


I would take legal action if this were me.

I'm not excited about my son being conditioned to "pledge allegiance to the flag" daily, something he certainly won't understand at age 5 when he begins kindergarten, in the fall, but it's not something I should fight because I'm sending my son to a public school. I doubt he will be taught about condoms, blowjobs, AIDS and whatnot - but if there's a unit about children living in different types of families, I'm not going to freak out about it. One kid who has been over here to play with him spends half his time living with his "two mommies". A carefully worded, illustrated children's book about that is, to me, not a reason to try to get myself arrested.

In my town, you can claim hardship and get tuition to St. Bernard's Catholic school for 90 bucks a month. If it's that important to you, you can find 90 dollars to send your kid somewhere where this "Gay agenda" won't be prevalent. If you can't come up with 90 bucks a month, you should sit on your welfare checks and homeschool your kid.

I'm a working class, entry-level factory worker who wouldn't blink at an extra bill like that a month. We chose not to send our son there (I was in favor) because my wife was concerned about the Catholic agenda (PRotestants rule and catholics drool! lol) and I wasn't dead-set on paying to piss her off, so he's going to public school as well.

He'll learn that soldiers are heroes and he'll learn his pre-written country loyalty monologue and when he's old enough to think things through for himself, he'll choose to buy into it or not. I'm guessing the little boy in Mass. will do the same. I don't imagine that teacher has as much influence in his life as his father. His father's anti-gay stance will probably register more in the indoctrination rivalry.

You'd think so but actually Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney is a republican.

That doesn't mean he's conservative. Look at McCain. He's as liberal as they come, but he claims he's a Republican.

I'm not excited about my son being conditioned to "pledge allegiance to the flag" daily, something he certainly won't understand at age 5 when he begins kindergarten, in the fall, but it's not something I should fight because I'm sending my son to a public school. I doubt he will be taught about condoms, blowjobs, AIDS and whatnot - but if there's a unit about children living in different types of families, I'm not going to freak out about it. One kid who has been over here to play with him spends half his time living with his "two mommies". A carefully worded, illustrated children's book about that is, to me, not a reason to try to get myself arrested.

In my town, you can claim hardship and get tuition to St. Bernard's Catholic school for 90 bucks a month. If it's that important to you, you can find 90 dollars to send your kid somewhere where this "Gay agenda" won't be prevalent. If you can't come up with 90 bucks a month, you should sit on your welfare checks and homeschool your kid.

I'm a working class, entry-level factory worker who wouldn't blink at an extra bill like that a month. We chose not to send our son there (I was in favor) because my wife was concerned about the Catholic agenda (PRotestants rule and catholics drool! lol) and I wasn't dead-set on paying to piss her off, so he's going to public school as well.

He'll learn that soldiers are heroes and he'll learn his pre-written country loyalty monologue and when he's old enough to think things through for himself, he'll choose to buy into it or not. I'm guessing the little boy in Mass. will do the same. I don't imagine that teacher has as much influence in his life as his father. His father's anti-gay stance will probably register more in the indoctrination rivalry.


neil i disagree. teachers are something that kids look up to. they are,as we are taught after all, the ones we are to learn from. while a father has influence on a child it is not instilled in a 6 year olds head that a teacher is wrong about some things. if we try to teach a 6 year old that a teacher isn't always right imagine the chaos it could create for a 6 year old mind. what is the teacher right about and what are they wrong about? children are influenced by everyone around them. i just think that kindergarten is the wrong age to be taught about gay marrages. drinking beer is legal as well. so should we teach our 6 year olds that parents drinking beer and liquor till you pass out drunk is ok as well. i mean chances are that they will be exposed to that somewhere along the way. what about s&m..."the gimp"? its legal and some kids parents are pretty open with it as well. surely we should be teaching them about that as well @ 6 years old. the list goes on and on. my point is that schools should not be teaching this material to 6 year olds. if they are then the parent should be able to have the child opt out as this father wants.

The gays are taking over the world...They are trying to teach their doctrine ot our children, so their immoral lifestyle will be more openly accepted in the future...I guess we have found a solution for overpopulation?

I respect most people's opinions on this site, even when they might considered to be pretty extreme. However, I really, really don't understand the way some people hate homosexuality so much. I'm not talking "gay marriage" here or **** like that...I mean people calling gay people immoral and ****.

Now look, I find gay sex to be disgusting. I think that they whole "queer guy for the straight guy" persona to be one of the most annoying things to come out of our culture in decades. I hate the whole flamboyant man routine, whether it's from a gay or straight guy. I like people who drink and fight and generally keep their mouths shut, not those brodway-style theatrics that people seem to imitate so much these days. Having said that, who the hell cares what some people choose to do with their lives? How does it affect you any? Why the hell do you think and talk so much about it?

The thing is that I think that hating gay people is just some sort of genetic issue. Like, when you want to **** some chick it's basically just your instincts kicking in and trying to get you to reproduce and propagate the species. Similarly, when you are confronted with someone who does things that don't add to the population, your instincts tell you to not like this person.

So stop listening to your instincts is what I'm saying. Who the hell cares what a couple of dudes do in the privacy of their own home. You'll find a lot worse **** in the houses of a lot of straight people anyway. You're telling me that wrapping yourself in garbage bags and pissing on your girlfriend is more normal than what gay people do?

Seriously though. You think it's right that the parent can't even have his 6 year old kindergarten child excused from lessons based on homosexuality. I mean wtf? The guy wasn't even *****ing to change the curriculum. He just didn't want his child taking part.


....Yeah, this is a ****ed up situation. Being a homo is not a choice and it's not normal and it shouldn't be taught period. It doesn't mean that I believe in discriminating against gays, but don't try and feed me this **** that's it's just another choice. What a ****in crock. The conspiracy theorists think the religious right is taking over, but look at how the liberal left slowly force feeds their views and agenda down the throat of the Anmerican public. If that school had tried that **** in 1950 the principal would have been strung up.

Homosexuality and Massachusetts go together like horse and carriage.

Frankly I think its too early for those kids to be told about that. And the father in that case was right in wanting his child to opt out. Hell at 6 years old most kids dont even know about sex yet.

Homosexuality should be left to the parents to discuss with their kids or told about in school much later in life.

Frankly I think its too early for those kids to be told about that. And the father in that case was right in wanting his child to opt out. Hell at 6 years old most kids dont even know about sex yet.

Homosexuality should be left to the parents to discuss with their kids or told about in school much later in life.


....Your absolutely right!!!

Exactly. My son is in first grade and the school sent home a notice saying that they would be receiving a "sex education" lesson but that if we wanted our child not to attend to return the notice checked appropriately. They were not teaching homosexuality but we decided to have our son not attend the lesson because we felt he was too young and that it was our job as parents to discuss those issues with him.

How a public school could refuse a parents request to have his child opt out of a lesson on homosexuality is outrageous, and borders on brainwashing and indoctrination.

If I was the parent I would sue the **** out of the school district. Just because the state permitts gay marriage doesn't mean they can force a child to be taught information the parents are sensative too.

When I was teaching I had a few instinces where parents didn't want their kids involved in activities and I allowed the aid to take the child to the library during that time. Once it was a child who was a Jehova's witness and they didn't want her participating in a current events discussion on the war in Kosovo. The second time was a debate I had the kids preparing for in which they had to make constitutional arguements for or against president Clinton being impeached. This was a highschool level class and I still had a parent who didn't want her child particip[ating in a discussion in which sexual indiscretion could be brought up.

I agree. Teaching about homosexuality has no place in PUBLIC schools, where my taxpayer dollars are paying for it. People complain about religion forcing their views on others...what the heck is this then? 60% of the population doesn't believe in gay marriage, yet it is shoved down their kids throats.

On another topic, someone asked me, "Why should an atheist have to pay attention to your religion?" First of all, if I said all people must be baptized or pray five times to Allah a day, that would be putting a religion into law. I can find Mormons, Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Jehovah's Witnesses, and yes, even some atheists, who oppose gay marriage. It's not a subject that applies to any one religion, it's a MORAL issue. Then people say "Why can't gays have the right to be happy?" Listen, cheating on my wife might make me happy, but that doesn't make it right. Since when did happiness decide morality of certain things?

You guys make good points. I hope everyone realizes that my earlier post was not directed at everyone who supported this father. I just wanted to make a few general points. Maybe I should have posted elsewhere because it wasn't related exactly to this topic, but I didn't want to start yet another "gay" thread.

I respect most people's opinions on this site, even when they might considered to be pretty extreme. However, I really, really don't understand the way some people hate homosexuality so much. I'm not talking "gay marriage" here or **** like that...I mean people calling gay people immoral and ****.

Now look, I find gay sex to be disgusting. I think that they whole "queer guy for the straight guy" persona to be one of the most annoying things to come out of our culture in decades. I hate the whole flamboyant man routine, whether it's from a gay or straight guy. I like people who drink and fight and generally keep their mouths shut, not those brodway-style theatrics that people seem to imitate so much these days. Having said that, who the hell cares what some people choose to do with their lives? How does it affect you any? Why the hell do you think and talk so much about it?

The thing is that I think that hating gay people is just some sort of genetic issue. Like, when you want to **** some chick it's basically just your instincts kicking in and trying to get you to reproduce and propagate the species. Similarly, when you are confronted with someone who does things that don't add to the population, your instincts tell you to not like this person.

So stop listening to your instincts is what I'm saying. Who the hell cares what a couple of dudes do in the privacy of their own home. You'll find a lot worse **** in the houses of a lot of straight people anyway. You're telling me that wrapping yourself in garbage bags and pissing on your girlfriend is more normal than what gay people do?
I think it all refers back to religious beliefs. If you believe in god, and the creation of the world, or any religious books (bible, quran, torah etc...)then you would already know that being gay is unnatural. But if you don't believe in god and or any religious teachings then you will say that you don't see what the big deal is...and believe what the scientist say about being born that way, don't have a choice etc...I personally feel that it should be common knowledge that being gay isn't right...In the most primal sense, sex is for reproduction, we human find pleasure in it, so we do it a lot, but it's design is for reproduction...A man & man and A woman & woman can never reproduce, so therefore then having sex isn't right...Now I know that everyone chooses their own destiny, but I don't want you teaching that **** in school and plastering it all on billboards and tv so that my kids can think this **** is cool...Children learn from adults and my times the child follows in the footsteps of the father...Bumping bushes and banging butts isn't right, but what's even worse is teaching it to our kids...

I think it all refers back to religious beliefs. If you believe in god, and the creation of the world, or any religious books (bible, quran, torah etc...)then you would already know that being gay is unnatural. But if you don't believe in god and or any religious teachings then you will say that you don't see what the big deal is...and believe what the scientist say about being born that way, don't have a choice etc...I personally feel that it should be common knowledge that being gay isn't right...In the most primal sense, sex is for reproduction, we human find pleasure in it, so we do it a lot, but it's design is for reproduction...A man & man and A woman & woman can never reproduce, so therefore then having sex isn't right...Now I know that everyone chooses their own destiny, but I don't want you teaching that **** in school and plastering it all on billboards and tv so that my kids can think this **** is cool...Children learn from adults and my times the child follows in the footsteps of the father...Bumping bushes and banging butts isn't right, but what's even worse is teaching it to our kids...

I respect that you took the time to put together such a well thought-out reply, Living Legend :cool: .

Just to reply to some of what you're saying, I think that some people (certainly not all) that use the religious argument are just using it as an excuse to discriminate against people that they instinctively find unusual, or whatever. Where in the Bible is there a detailed description of gay people and how we should feel about them? I don't mean just a vague reference in a sentence here or there. The Bible in written in such an oblique way at times that you can use it to justify anything...ask Jewish people, who have been persecuted over and over throughout history because of what the bible supposedly "said".

Thing is that the people that created these religions wouldn't exactly be pleased by what some of their followers do...hell, birth control was frowned on by most people until modern times. imo if you're using religion to justify not liking gay people than you better have stright-up regular sex, and only for the purposes of reproduction. Otherwise, you're sinning too.

As for teaching this sort of thing, seems like 6 years old is too young to have this sort of discussion in school, just as it is too young to teach them much at all about sex. Think about this, though: if they hear everything about what's wrong and right from you, are they really getting the whole picture? What I mean is, we all have our biases and prejudices. Everyone does, no matter how perfect they might think they are. Maybe these kids are too young to be learning this in school, but would you be upset if they debated the issue say when they were in high school? Wouldn't it better for them to get a range of opinions so they can make up their own minds?

id never let my kid learn about gays and there life style , plain and simple its just not important.

and dont even get me started on gay marriages, which are totally pointless. they aint having kids anytime soon :boxing:

Science says NOTHING about being born gay. Scientists have tried fruitlessly for years to find the "gay gene" to no avail. If I am born with a temper, does that make it OK to go out and hit someone? Of course not. In the same way, people may be born with gay tendencies, but the action is 100% a choice, unlike race. To compare a gay relationship to a heterosexual one is disingenuous. Heterosexuals, in the norm, can do something that gays can never do...reproduce children naturally. I know some couples cannot have children, but when you get married, no one asks, are you impotent? There is an exception to every rule if you look hard enough, but that is not a reason not to have rules.

Bombardier. Read Romans 1:26-28. It is very, very clear that homosexual practices are perverse and wrong. The Bible says nothing about treating gays badly, but it says over and over that marriage is between a man and a woman, dating back to Adam and Eve. The funny thing is, I hear how intolerant religious people are, yet I find many homosexuals who are completely intolerant of any religious opinion, much more so than the other way.

How were Jewish people persecuted because of what the Bible supposedly said. Hitler was a secular nationalist and an athiest, not a Christian. In fact, many people think Christians were next on his hit list. He said "Secular Naziism and Christianity cannot co-exist."

Religion SHOULD not be used to mistreat or not like gay people. However, people certainly have the right to disagree with the action of gay marriage and it's effect on marriage and society. Gays deserve equal pay and rights at jobs (except those of a pastor or church leaders)

Science says NOTHING about being born gay. Scientists have tried fruitlessly for years to find the "gay gene" to no avail. If I am born with a temper, does that make it OK to go out and hit someone? Of course not. In the same way, people may be born with gay tendencies, but the action is 100% a choice, unlike race. To compare a gay relationship to a heterosexual one is disingenuous. Heterosexuals, in the norm, can do something that gays can never do...reproduce children naturally. I know some couples cannot have children, but when you get married, no one asks, are you impotent? There is an exception to every rule if you look hard enough, but that is not a reason not to have rules.

If they can't find the gene, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. What about babies born with both gentetalia? Are they a boy or a girl? I would never want to be in that position as a parent to have to "decide" my child's gender, but it happens.

On the original issue, the school district denied the parents' rights by not following the notification law. It's my personal opinion that early elementary aged students should NOT be exposed to anything of a questionable nature AT ALL. 6th grade is the earliest (in my opinion) that "sex education" should be introduced to the cirriculum. That's because that is when most kids start to go thru the pre-pubescent stages. Unfortunately most kids out there don't get the info from their parents, but from their friends. Hence the original reason for introducing that information into the cirriculum. I allowed my kids to take the course, but I went over it with them at home. We're also allowed to go to the class to witness how the information was being presented. I've had to fight my local school district for other reasons, but in the end, I won. My son's right were violated and we went to the mat.

This dad needs to do the same so those running the district can be the ones taught the lesson in life of that just because you can, doesn't mean you should. They violated the parents' rights and I think it's great that the community is rallying around him. I'm interested to see what happens at the meeting.

Scientists don't even need to find a gay gene.

Homosexuality occurs in all animals, IN ALL OF NATURE. Humans included. That makes it natural.

Just because you want to say it is unnatural doesn't make it true.

Scientists don't even need to find a gay gene.

Homosexuality occurs in all animals, IN ALL OF NATURE. Humans included. That makes it natural.

Just because you want to say it is unnatural doesn't make it true.\


...Joe, your right it does happen in nature with other creatures.a It's also a fact that "gey" animals that have been disected and studied after death all had something wrong with their brains. There was a study done on goats that proved conclusively that they had ****ed up brains and that was their problem. It's not natural pal and if you think it is then you have issues.

natural = occuring in nature. Gays happen in nature, so gay is natural.

This isn't even an opinion of mine. This is fact. IF YOU THINK IT IS NATURAL PAL THEN YOU HAVE ISSUES.

natural = occuring in nature. Gays happen in nature, so gay is natural.

This isn't even an opinion of mine. This is fact. IF YOU THINK IT IS NATURAL PAL THEN YOU HAVE ISSUES.

.....By a strict definition and only basing it on the concept of "occuring in nature" then your right. But it's not natural or normal to have a brain "abnormality".

.....By a strict definition and only basing it on the concept of "occuring in nature" then your right. But it's not natural or normal to have a brain "abnormality".


So according to you all gays in nature have brain "abnormalities" that were obvious when the animals were dissected.

Do you have any evidence for this?

do you think that human homosexuals also have brain abnormalities?

Is that what you would teach the children about gays.

You'd think so but actually Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney is a republican.

that dude is probably gay..

So according to you all gays in nature have brain "abnormalities" that were obvious when the animals were dissected.

Do you have any evidence for this?

do you think that human homosexuals also have brain abnormalities?

Is that what you would teach the children about gays.


.....My answers in order are Yes(I can find it), Yes, and Yes.

.....My answers in order are Yes(I can find it), Yes, and Yes.


Well if it is true that homosexuals have brain abnormalities (which I'm not convinced of)

Wouldn't that make them handicapped? Like depression or schitzophrenic?

How can you disapprove of a hanicap, or handicap lifestyle?

Would you take away a womans wheelchair because wheelchairs arn't normal?

....According to a study of sheep at the University of Oregon's school of medicine, in the U.S. northwest, animal sexuality could be determined -- among other variables -- by a network of nerves located in the hypothalamus (a region of the brain responsible for the production of several hormones), which conditions sexual behavior.

In the study published in 2004, physiologist Charles Roselli and his team said they discovered groups of brain cells that were different amongst the sheep and that showed a strong correlation with their sexual preference. Roselli dubbed this knot of nerve cells ''ovine sexually dimorphic nucleus, oSDN.

The team examined 27 adult sheep, four years old and of different breeds, raised on an agricultural research station in the northwestern state of Idaho. The sample included eight males who manifested heterosexual behavior, nine with homosexual behavior and 10 females.

The research determined that the oSDN of the males who preferred females was considerably larger and contained many more neurons than in the other 19 sheep.

''Ours and other similar studies strongly suggest that the sexual preference among animals is biologically determined,'' Roselli told a press conference. When he presented the report the physiology and pharmacology professor added, ''This possibility is also valid for humans.''

If that is true, the Bremerhaven penguins are homosexual, and even though the females brought in from Sweden show all their charm, their efforts will be futile.

....Apparently gay males can smell a pair os sweaty balls clear across the room.


Study: Gay men's brains react differently to scent
Monday, May 9, 2005 Posted: 8:37 PM EDT (0037 GMT)








WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- A compound taken from male sweat stimulates the brains of gay men and straight women but not heterosexual men, raising the possibility that homosexual brains are different, researchers in Sweden reported on Monday.

It also strengthens the evidence that humans respond to pheromones -- compounds known to affect animal behavior, especially mating behavior, but whose role in human activity has been questioned.

The pheromone in question is a derivative of testosterone called 4,16-androstadien-3-one, or AND.

"AND is detected primarily in male sweat," the researchers write in this week's issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

In a previous study, Ivanka Savic of Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm and colleagues found that the hypothalamus region of the brain became activated when women smelled AND and when men smelled a corresponding compound in female urine called EST.

This time they compared the reactions of 12 women, 12 heterosexual men and 12 homosexual men.

They let them smell EST, AND, and ordinary odors such as lavender, and used positron emission tomography to watch their brain responses.

"In contrast to heterosexual men, and in congruence with heterosexual women, homosexual men displayed hypothalamic activation in response to AND," Savic's team wrote.

And a region of the brain called the anterior hypothalamus responded most strongly -- an area that in animals "is highly involved in sexual behavior".

But other smells were processed the same in all three groups.

"These findings show that our brain reacts differently to the two putative pheromones compared with common odors, and suggest a link between sexual orientation and hypothalamic neuronal processes," Savic's team wrote.

In most animals, pheromone signals go to the hypothalamus region of the brain via a pit-like structure in or near the nose called the vomeronasal organ.

People have a vomeronasal pit but there are no nerves connecting it to the brain, leading biologists to question whether humans respond to pheromones.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright 2005 Reuters. All rights

Most people would say that your evidence would support that homosexuality is genetic, like skin color or height.

How can you discriminate against someones genetics?

Most people would say that your evidence would support that homosexuality is genetic, like skin color or height.

How can you discriminate against someones genetics?

...I don't discriminate at all. I have had many homo friends in the restaurant/bar business and I have several gay neighbors. I have no problem with their choice or what they do in their private time. I just don't want the gay agenda forced down my throat(metaphoricaly speaking) and the attempts to make it seem like anormal thing to do. Quick story. My accross the street neighbors are gay. Great guys and great neighbors. My kids have no idea that they are homo's and I don't want them to know. My gay neighbors don't hang on each other or show effection when they are over our house. If they did that **** they wouldn't be over my house. They know exactly where I stand on my kids seeing that kind of behavior but they also know that I respect their lifestyle and we can still be friends.

....If there are no more questions then. CLASS DISMISSED!!! Carry on

Nobody should be making out in front of your kids, gay or straight.

Its cool you don't discriminate.

But if its a genetic thing that happens in somebodys brain, why not let your kids know about it?

Nobody should be making out in front of your kids, gay or straight.

Its cool you don't discriminate.

But if its a genetic thing that happens in somebodys brain, why not let your kids know about it?


...I will discuss it with them when it comes up. Hopefully it won't come up for many many years though. I certainly won't explain it like it's right or normal though and that's for sure. Anyway, time to carry my ass to bed man. Night night

Animals also eat their own...cannibals! Are you sure you want to use animals as an example? The bottom line is, humans are created and God's image and animals are not, so they should not be compared.

Animals also eat their own...cannibals! Are you sure you want to use animals as an example? The bottom line is, humans are created and God's image and animals are not, so they should not be compared.

A lot of people act more like animals than human beings...that has little to do with the topic of this thread, but I thought I'd post something that I'm sure everyone can agree with :D .

Well, Mike Tyson is somebody that would fit into that category!

Well, Mike Tyson is somebody that would fit into that category!

He's even a cannibal.

for this thread all i got to say is "HELL MOTHER ****ING NO THEY DIDNT GO THERE!!!!!!!"

Animals also eat their own...cannibals! Are you sure you want to use animals as an example? The bottom line is, humans are created and God's image and animals are not, so they should not be compared.


You believe that and that's fine but not everybody does. You can't expect other people to conform to your sense of what is right and wrong if it is based on a book (the bible) that they don't believe in.

Here is a thread on that exact topic and what a piece of **** the bible is. (At least the OLD TESTAMENT anyway)

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36112

Your point on cannibalism is also rediculous. No one is using animals as a judge of what is right and what is wrong. But if homosexuality occurs in nature it is natural by definition.

You can make off topic statements all you want but it doesn't realte to the discussion.

You believe that and that's fine but not everybody does. You can't expect other people to conform to your sense of what is right and wrong if it is based on a book (the bible) that they don't believe in.


According to Christianity people who don't follow the Bible are heretics, so, you know, what they think doesn't matter. Not that all the other religions aren't the same way.

According to Christianity people who don't follow the Bible are heretics, so, you know, what they think doesn't matter. Not that all the other religions aren't the same way.

But if you live in the United States you do not live in a Christian Society. We are in a society were many people may be christians but that does not mean that they are the source of authority.

We believe in a seperation of Church and State, so regardless of how heretical someone is you cannot force your moral opinion on them.

But if you live in the United States you do not live in a Christian Society.

We believe in a seperation of Church and State, so regardless of how heretical someone is you cannot force your moral opinion on them.

Problem is your president doesn't even believe this. Not trying to play politics, it's just a known fact.

Problem is your president doesn't even believe this. Not trying to play politics, it's just a known fact.


Our President is also not the source of all authority or the person who decides what is right and wrong in this country.

(If he could, then he would have saved Shiavo, changed the constitution to make gay marriage illegal, and done alot of other **** that he want to)

There is nothing about forcing your moral opinion on someone. What separation of church and state says is that there cannot be one national religion, or that one religion's beliefs cannot be thrust into law.

Moral opinions are forced on people all the time. No trespassing laws, DUI laws, drug laws, paying taxes, not burning the US flag, speed limit laws...these are ALL moral laws. Being against gay marriage is not only Christian (Protestant, Catholic). There are Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and yes, even atheists who disagree with gay marriage. This is a MORAL law, not a religious one.

There is nothing about forcing your moral opinion on someone. What separation of church and state says is that there cannot be one national religion, or that one religion's beliefs cannot be thrust into law.

Moral opinions are forced on people all the time. No trespassing laws, DUI laws, drug laws, paying taxes, not burning the US flag, speed limit laws...these are ALL moral laws. Being against gay marriage is not only Christian (Protestant, Catholic). There are Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and yes, even atheists who disagree with gay marriage. This is a MORAL law, not a religious one.


You are soooooo wrong. If its not about religion then why did you say because "we are made in Gods image" you are using religion to back up your points.

And Moral opinions can be forced on people. I agree with you. Just not based on religion. Jesus never said anything about speeding, I law based on common agreement and and rational observation like (speeding gets people hurt) is fine. This is the same with paying taxes and everything else you said.

Laws regarding homosexuality have nothing to do with rationality. they are based on religious text. Religious text, that really sucks sometimes. Did you look at the like I posted?

The Bible says "Do not kill". It also says "Do not steal." Are you saying those laws aren't allowed because they are based on the Bible?

I have plenty of religious reasons for being against gay marriage, but if you want statistics and other reasons for why I am against it, there are plenty of those. Marriage between a man and a woman creates structure in society and both spouses live longer in that arrangement than when single. Gay marriage or relationships have proved just the opposite. Gays suffer in much higher percentages in the following: Sexually abusing children, drugs, alcohol, STD's, depression, die at a younger age. Why would we push people into a destructive lifestyle that breaks up families? It was said in the Netherlands or Denmark, I forget which, that of those who said they had a long term sexual partner, they admitted to having 8.5 partners per year! That's not marriage, that's an arrangement. I believe gays have a harder time with monogamy within marriages and that many of these marriages will be shams for benefits.

Gays might have a harder time with monogomy because people won't let them get married.

If straight couples never married, don't you think they would sleep with more people too.

And "Do not kill" and "Do not steal" are in the bible but that is not why they are our laws. They are our laws because they are rational principles everyone can agree on.

And according to Romans 1:32

Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

It doesn't even seem to me like that the bible has that big of a problem with killing.

any updates on this????

nope but where has Blind melon been?

Our President is also not the source of all authority or the person who decides what is right and wrong in this country.

(If he could, then he would have saved Shiavo, changed the constitution to make gay marriage illegal, and done alot of other **** that he want to)

He couldn't because of the seperation of powers....AKA Those 'Activist' judges.

nope but where has Blind melon been?

Thanks for asking hot stuff.

I've actually been a little under the weather lately, but I'm starting to feel a little better.

As for an update on this story, the father david Parker appeared in court yesterday. Here is the story.

As a plea deal fell through yesterday for a Lexington father who didn't want his kindergartener learning about homosexuality from his teacher, a group of townies attended his court hearing to counter any perception the leafy town is unfriendly to gay people.

``If you follow his logic, you would conclude that he would preclude a kindergartener from (telling the class), `My two moms and I went apple picking,' '' said Laura Tully, a 48-year-old mother who has a son in elementary school. ``These are public schools.''

But David Parker has maintained he wants to be the person to decide when and how to educate his son about homosexuality.

``These people are here to intimidate him,'' said Brian Camenker of Newton, who has advocated to remove homosexual material from the classrooms in his community.

``He wants to know when adults are talking to his kid about homosexual and transgendered issues and he wants the right to opt his kid out of those discussions.'' (bear in mind that his son is a 5 year old kindergartener)

When books depicting diverse families were sent home with his son, Parker -a Christian who is against gay marriage - asked school officials to notify him ahead of time when homosexuality would come up in the classroom. He wanted to have the right to decide whether his son would participate. (which is his right under Mass law!)

When he didn't get those reassurances from Estabrook School officials Jan. 24, Parker refused to leave the grounds and was charged with trespassing.

Trespassing, said his attorney, is a bogus charge since it was an act of civil disobedience.

``He is a man of principle,'' attorney Jeffrey Denner said of Parker.

But the members of Lexington CARES (Community Action For Respect and Safety) say Parker is a bigot and resent him for drawing what they argue is an unfavorable national spotlight on their affluent New England town.

``Mr. Parker staged his arrest in our school to promote a discriminatory social agenda,'' said Craig Cyr, 47, whose daughter is in the same Estabrook kindergarten class as Parker's son. ``Can a kid not come in, draw a picture of his parents and not put it on the wall? It's about inclusion, not exclusion.''

Lisa Perry-Wood, a Lexington resident and former principal in Lynn, was saddened by Parker's actions. She has three children and is married to a woman. (lol, that figures)

``It's sad because I think schools should be a place where children learn about the world they live in,'' she said.

Parker is due back in court Aug. 2.

Massachusetts Governor supports David Parker with statement on television:

"We have in Massachusetts a parental notification statute specifically in matters related to human sexuality. If a parent wants to be informed of what is being taught in a classroom and wants to have their child withdrawn from the classroom for that portion of the class dealing with human sexuality, that parent has the right."

Chapter 71: Section 32A Sex education; policy regarding notice to parents, exception

Massachusetts State Law Section 32A. Every city, town, regional school district or vocational school district implementing or maintaining curriculum which primarily involves human sexual education or human sexuality issues shall adopt a policy ensuring parental/guardian notification. Such policy shall afford parents or guardians the flexibility to exempt their children from any portion of said curriculum through written notification to the school principal. No child so exempted shall be penalized by reason of such exemption.

The Lexington School district is blatantly ignoring state law. Public schools pushing the gay agenda on kindergarteners just makes me sick. Disregarding a parents request to allow his child to opt out od said indoctrination is criminal.

...Welcome back homie!! Glad your feeling better.

http://img64.echo.cx/img64/3151/gasyjesus4my.jpg

Not sure if i can post images, but next they might be promoting this.... :rolleyes:

...Welcome back homie!! Glad your feeling better.

Thanks man, but actually I think I have an inner ear infection. I'm going to the Doc tomorrow.

It started out as a soar throat accompanied by sinus congestion. Now the throat and sinuses are a little better but it feels like I have a balloon in my ear.

Sucks big time! :mad:

Thanks man, but actually I think I have an inner ear infection. I'm going to the Doc tomorrow.

It started out as a soar throat accompanied by sinus congestion. Now the throat and sinuses are a little better but it feels like I have a balloon in my ear.

Sucks big time! :mad:


....Yeah, Connor gets those sometimes and I understand they are very painful. Hope it gets better.

So, he wasn't jailed for his objections to the curriculum, but for going into the principle's office and yelling at them?

That is kind of a misleading headline.....

So, he wasn't jailed for his objections to the curriculum, but for going into the principle's office and yelling at them?

That is kind of a misleading headline.....

No. The parent was arrested by the Lexington police and charged with "trespassing" at his son’s elementary school during a scheduled meeting with the principal and the town’s Director of Education over his objections to homosexual curriculum materials. Parker had asked for notification and possible opt-out for his son for homosexual curriculum or ad-hoc discussions by adults in his son’s kindergarten class. After several months of communication, he was repeatedly told that his requests are "not possible." He finally said he would not leave the meeting until this was resolved. There was no yelling or intimidation of any kind.

Ah, reading is fundamental. I misread the paragraph above where it says he refused to leave. Pardon me.

http://img207.echo.cx/img207/440/angellike9ur.jpg

"Like really...come on...if i got MY wings, aint it obvious fellas....course, suggest that their peculuar attraction to sheep...might be a cause for review... :rolleyes: http://img207.echo.cx/img207/3029/sheephillybilly8pe.jpg

....Yeah, Connor gets those sometimes and I understand they are very painful. Hope it gets better.

everytime i see your avatar i think its robin williams. but i know its sonny. just thought i say that.

Scientists don't even need to find a gay gene.

Homosexuality occurs in all animals, IN ALL OF NATURE. Humans included. That makes it natural.

Just because you want to say it is unnatural doesn't make it true.
.. width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GnMJU9RrNhQ"></param><embed allowScriptAccess="never" allownetworking="internal" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GnMJU9RrNhQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed>..>

Anyone who thinks homosexuality is an "alternative" is wrong.

Teaching 6 year olds about these supposed "alternatives" is only storing up trouble aswell. We dont need more gays, we need less gays. Havign said that I stand with Pbds. Just because they are gay they shouldnt be discrimnated against. But discriminating against gays, and not wanting a 6 year old to learn about them, are 2 different things. Otherwise I might aswell just say "you are discriminating against heterosexuality. Im heterosexual and you are allowing more rights to be given to the homosexual couple than you are to heterosexual couple. Thats an inequality."

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89181

Ultimate and PDBS hit the nail on the head. It's total bull**** that young kids that age are taught such controversial issues. It should be left up to the parents, period.

As for the flag issue, is not even comparable, Niels. Any school I have been to, the kid had the right to sit down during the pledge and not take part in it. Pledging allegiance never made a bunch of patriotic nitwits sprout up. I go to college with plenty of kids who grew up saying the pledge...and they are far from patriotic. Any patriotic holiday is just another chance to take a day off and drink beer to them.

Homosexuality is a whole different hot button issue. The Pledge of Allegiance is getting ciriculum time in Mass and having the faculty devote time to telling all the little kiddies how awesome The Pledge is. They are devoting time however to telling em that the gay lifestyle is A-ok...whether or not the parents agree with it.

And that is wrong. Period. It has nothing to do with hating gays. Anyone who says 'if you don't let em teach 6 year olds that homosexuality is ****in sweet, you are a bigot' should perhaps seek the jaws of life from their nearest Fire Department to wrench their head from their ass.

Some of you may recall a few weeks ago there was a thread asking people's opinion on Gay couple's right to marry. I basically stated that I was morally against it but that in a strictly legal sense they should not be banned. My larger concern was that I didn't want my children taught that homosexual unions were a perfectly acceptable alternative lifestyle. Well it seems that a school in Massachusetts has decided that it was appropriate to teach kindergarteners that homosexuality is perfectly normal and a parent has gone to jail because he objected.


Lexington father arrested over gay kindergarten curriculum

Lexington, Mass., father of 6-year-old arrested and taken to jail over objections to homosexual curriculum
in son’s kindergarten class.

Demanded that school inform him and allow child to opt-out; superintendent refused.

Spending night in jail; arraignment Thursday in Concord District Court.

LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS, APRIL 27

Lexington parent, David Parker, was arrested today by the Lexington Police for “trespassing” at his son’s
elementary school during a scheduled meeting with the principal and the city’s Director of Education over his objections to homosexual curriculum materials and discussions in his son’s kindergarten class.

At the meeting, Parker demanded that the school inform him when homosexual subjects are to be discussed with his son, and allow his son not to be included in such
activities. He said he would not leave until his request was granted. The Principal and the city’s Director of Education both refused his request.

They then telephoned the Superintendent of Schools who also
refused. Police were called, who told Parker that unless he left the school he would be arrested.

Statement by David Parker(April 27, 2005):

“I, David Parker, am the father of a kindergarten student at Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington,
Massachusetts. Since the beginning of this school year, my wife and I have learned that school materials
and discussions about gay-headed households/same-sex union issues have been exposed to the children.

There are definitive plans to increase the teacher/staff/adult mediated discussions of these subjects.

“We have officially stated on many occasions—to the Lexington school administration—a request that we be
notified when these discussions are planned, and want our 6-year-old opted out of such situations when
arising “spontaneously”.

“Our parental requests for our own child were flat-out denied with no effort at accommodation. In our meeting
on April 27, I, insisted that such accommodation be made and refused to leave the meeting room. I was
informed that I would be arrested.”

Parker will be arraigned on Thursday, April 28, in Concord District Court at 9 am. “This is an unbelievable outrage,” said Brian Camenker, a friend
and Newton, Mass. parent. “It’s where last year's same-sex 'marriage' ruling has brought us.”

That is sad.


oh, yeah, http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89181

Problem is your president doesn't even believe this. Not trying to play politics, it's just a known fact.

Bush does believe in it. It's proveable.

According to Christianity people who don't follow the Bible are heretics, so, you know, what they think doesn't matter. Not that all the other religions aren't the same way.

I attend many Christian meetings and hang out with many Christians. Heresy ha snever come up as a discussion topic and furthermore, we would never say that because someone is not a Christian that it doesn't matter what they think.

I dont think teaching kids about homosexuality will magically make tham gay.

U can edjucate kids about drugs, war and sex but not homosexuality?

I dont think teaching kids about homosexuality will magically make tham gay.

U can edjucate kids about drugs, war and sex but not homosexuality?
Why did you just put education of drugs, war and sex with homosexuality?

Making juveniles aware of the problems of sex and drugs etc is CONSTRUCTIVE. Making juveniles aware of homosexuality is the opposite. Its DESTRUCTIVE. The reason being that they are never gonna get involved in that in the first place anyway (most of them) and if they do they should be left alone, not sympathised with.

I dont think teaching kids about homosexuality will magically make tham gay.

U can edjucate kids about drugs, war and sex but not homosexuality?



...Yeah, I kind of agree in that we should educate kids on how to avoid ***gots and pedophiles. :D

Why did you just put education of drugs, war and sex with homosexuality?

Making juveniles aware of the problems of sex and drugs etc is CONSTRUCTIVE. Making juveniles aware of homosexuality is the opposite. Its DESTRUCTIVE. The reason being that they are never gonna get involved in that in the first place anyway (most of them) and if they do they should be left alone, not sympathised with.

Get involved with it?
If u live in a society where a percentage of the population is gay, than u are in a way 'involved in it'.

Why do u think schools are making an issue out of it? Because of bigotry and ignorant abuse. The only way to combat that is through edjucation.

I dont see how it can be destructive, unless u believe kids are going to be 'turned gay'. Which i dont.

Thats complete bull****. Making a kid sit through a class his parents are strickly against. Plus sending him to jail. If that were me I think I would come completely unglued on that Superintendant and beat some ass. Hell if you have to serve time might as well make it worth your while.

Get involved with it?
If u live in a society where a percentage of the population is gay, than u are in a way 'involved in it'.

Why do u think schools are making an issue out of it? Because of bigotry and ignorant abuse. The only way to combat that is through edjucation.

I dont see how it can be destructive, unless u believe kids are going to be 'turned gay'. Which i dont.
Well, who's to say they wont be turned into bum bandits? The very fact it would be presented as an alternative will bring a whole new factor into choosing your sexuality. "Choosing your sexuality" -- i mean come on. That sounds ridiculous straight away. Listen kids, there arent any alternatives... just be straight, is it hard to comprehend?

As far as bigotry goes, I dont think there is any bigotry involved at all. If parents dont want their children to learn about homosexuality at 6 then I think that is something they should have disgresion over. Its not like any other subject... its actually very controversial, so it needs to be handled sensitively.

Personally I wouldnt want my kid learning about that stuff. They can learn from me; "dont discriminate against them. Equally dont be one". Its quite simple... its like if a parent doesnt want their kid to have an earing... up until 18 its basically the choice of the parents, by which time the kid would have grown out of it and thought "thanks mum/dad".

Well anyway, keep that sort of stuff up to the parents, is what I say. If Joe Bloggs' dad wants him to learn about it, then let them. But just because the gay community calls for what they think is "equality" it doesnt mean that I should have to respect their opinion, in some forced way. Perhaps they should respect my opinion, let my kid learn what I want him to learn, and quit being ****ing heterophobes.

Some of you may recall a few weeks ago there was a thread asking people's opinion on Gay couple's right to marry. I basically stated that I was morally against it but that in a strictly legal sense they should not be banned. My larger concern was that I didn't want my children taught that homosexual unions were a perfectly acceptable alternative lifestyle. Well it seems that a school in Massachusetts has decided that it was appropriate to teach kindergarteners that homosexuality is perfectly normal and a parent has gone to jail because he objected.


Lexington father arrested over gay kindergarten curriculum

Lexington, Mass., father of 6-year-old arrested and taken to jail over objections to homosexual curriculum
in son’s kindergarten class.

Demanded that school inform him and allow child to opt-out; superintendent refused.

Spending night in jail; arraignment Thursday in Concord District Court.

LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS, APRIL 27

Lexington parent, David Parker, was arrested today by the Lexington Police for “trespassing” at his son’s
elementary school during a scheduled meeting with the principal and the city’s Director of Education over his objections to homosexual curriculum materials and discussions in his son’s kindergarten class.

At the meeting, Parker demanded that the school inform him when homosexual subjects are to be discussed with his son, and allow his son not to be included in such
activities. He said he would not leave until his request was granted. The Principal and the city’s Director of Education both refused his request.

They then telephoned the Superintendent of Schools who also
refused. Police were called, who told Parker that unless he left the school he would be arrested.

Statement by David Parker(April 27, 2005):

“I, David Parker, am the father of a kindergarten student at Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington,
Massachusetts. Since the beginning of this school year, my wife and I have learned that school materials
and discussions about gay-headed households/same-sex union issues have been exposed to the children.

There are definitive plans to increase the teacher/staff/adult mediated discussions of these subjects.

“We have officially stated on many occasions—to the Lexington school administration—a request that we be
notified when these discussions are planned, and want our 6-year-old opted out of such situations when
arising “spontaneously”.

“Our parental requests for our own child were flat-out denied with no effort at accommodation. In our meeting
on April 27, I, insisted that such accommodation be made and refused to leave the meeting room. I was
informed that I would be arrested.”

Parker will be arraigned on Thursday, April 28, in Concord District Court at 9 am. “This is an unbelievable outrage,” said Brian Camenker, a friend
and Newton, Mass. parent. “It’s where last year's same-sex 'marriage' ruling has brought us.”


Homosexuality should not be taught in school and the state of Massachusettes should be ashamed of themselves for this action.

I have stated many times in the past that I have no problem with homosexuals or marriage between homosexuals; but having a class on homosexuality is an absurdity and a waste of time. I can see it as an optional course in high school for all who care to know about homosexual culture; but for a 6 year old child, the introduction of sex of any kind is an abomination....and don't give me any of that "they're maturing faster now" crap. If a parent wants to talk to his or her 6 year old about sex, fine...that's their perogotive as the child's parent; but no tax dollars should be spent on this abomination to education.

SHAAAMMMME ON YOU, MASSACHUSETTES!! :mad:

Anyone who thinks homosexuality is an "alternative" is wrong.Teaching 6 year olds about these supposed "alternatives" is only storing up trouble aswell. We dont need more gays, we need less gays. Havign said that I stand with Pbds. Just because they are gay they shouldnt be discrimnated against. But discriminating against gays, and not wanting a 6 year old to learn about them, are 2 different things. Otherwise I might aswell just say "you are discriminating against heterosexuality. Im heterosexual and you are allowing more rights to be given to the homosexual couple than you are to heterosexual couple. Thats an inequality."

There is absolutely no such thing as right or wrong, only perception. That is what creates the reality for each individual. You are only subject to that which you believe.

There is absolutely no such thing as right or wrong, only perception. That is what creates the reality for each individual. You are only subject to that which you believe.
That was me being a bigot.

I did it to provoke a reaction. :D

People act like they're doing a step-by-step demonstration of how a man sucks another man off. That is not how "homosexuality is being taught"

The recognition that there are different family units - from that of grandparents raising kids, mother and father, single parent, or, yes, two same-sex parents is not quite the big deal that some of the homophobes on the board would have it. What if the curriculum also includes recognition that two parents of different races or religions might have a child? Oh, the horror! (smilie)

People act like they're doing a step-by-step demonstration of how a man sucks another man off. That is not how "homosexuality is being taught"

The recognition that there are different family units - from that of grandparents raising kids, mother and father, single parent, or, yes, two same-sex parents is not quite the big deal that some of the homophobes on the board would have it. What if the curriculum also includes recognition that two parents of different races or religions might have a child? Oh, the horror! (smilie)
What would it be in aid of neils? Considering the mind of a 6 year old.

people don't choose to be homosexual nor do they "turn" homosexual. i believe it to be purely biological. as for the people who have heterosexual realtionships, married, or even had kids, just to get divorced and "become gay", my belief is that they were homosexual the whole time. they just struggled with it and WANTED to be straight, but utlimately realized they could not fake it anymore. some just cheat on their spouses because they are indeed gay but want to hide it. i am not referring to the sexually deviant acts of some men which i think are more about the sexual act itself - not about being a homosexual (being physically and emotionally attracted to someone of the same gender and capable of loving that person)

i think many woman who have suffered some sort of trauma, such as rape or abuse, may prefer a lesbian relationship because they feel safer and better understood. it fullfills an emotional need rather than a sexual one.

as for the topic at hand, i think teaching sex education or sexuality in any form to 6 year-olds is inappropriate.
sex education is not human "sexuality" education - at least in america. sex education is more of a health and biological class. kids are basically taught the biology of puberty, life cycle, consequences of unprotected intercourse - all without really explaining what intercourse is exactly - they keep that part vague.
sex education should be for older kids 4th or 5th grade and parents should absolutely have a say whether their child is involved or not.

People act like they're doing a step-by-step demonstration of how a man sucks another man off. That is not how "homosexuality is being taught"

The recognition that there are different family units - from that of grandparents raising kids, mother and father, single parent, or, yes, two same-sex parents is not quite the big deal that some of the homophobes on the board would have it. What if the curriculum also includes recognition that two parents of different races or religions might have a child? Oh, the horror! (smilie)
i was thinking along the same lines, that family systems could be described and understood by kids...not to talk about sexuality though. in america guidance counselors usually teach this kind of thing in a class (45 minutes or so).
just to make kids aware of all the different types of families:
intact families, blended famiies, single-parent families, parent with a step-parent, adoptive families, grandparents or other relative raising kids, foster families, same gender parents (homosexual parents), interracial parents, etc.

it's not advocating anything, just factual, just describing all the different types of families that different kids have.

What would it be in aid of neils? Considering the mind of a 6 year old.
It would teach them to understand that their classmates don't all come from the same background. Kids are scared of/make fun of/hide from other kids they don't understand. It's about this age that the cliques and bullying is already beginning...

Homosexuals and mexicans is what this country has come down to. I hope to get enough money so I can leave this place.

People act like they're doing a step-by-step demonstration of how a man sucks another man off. That is not how "homosexuality is being taught"

The recognition that there are different family units - from that of grandparents raising kids, mother and father, single parent, or, yes, two same-sex parents is not quite the big deal that some of the homophobes on the board would have it. What if the curriculum also includes recognition that two parents of different races or religions might have a child? Oh, the horror! (smilie)


Speaking as a non-homophobe....shouldn't these kids being learning "readin', writin', and rithmatic"? I mean, where's finger-painting and show-n-tell and the alphabet...or computer skills? Why is it necessary to teach kids about "family"; isn't that something that they will hopefully be familiar with already? I mean, isn't the aside purpose of "public school" to branch out socially away from "the family", which is something all kids hopefully have already developed their own personal definition of?

School is school and needs to be utilized to start getting these kids ready of the next grade and eventually life...by the time their ready for life without mom and dad or mom or dad or mom and mom or dad and dad or grandma....****, you get the idea.....they need to know their math and science and life skills. What has different types of families got to do with kindergartners?

Speaking as a non-homophobe....shouldn't these kids being learning "readin', writin', and rithmatic"? I mean, where's finger-painting and show-n-tell and the alphabet...or computer skills? Why is it necessary to teach kids about "family"; isn't that something that they will hopefully be familiar with already? I mean, isn't the aside purpose of "public school" to branch out socially away from "the family", which is something all kids hopefully have already developed their own personal definition of?

School is school and needs to be utilized to start getting these kids ready of the next grade and eventually life...by the time their ready for life without mom and dad or mom or dad or mom and mom or dad and dad or grandma....****, you get the idea.....they need to know their math and science and life skills. What has different types of families got to do with kindergartners?
I believe that would fall into the "life skills" that you mentioned in your next to last sentence.

Later on it will fall into sociology.

These kids will spend the next 12 years studying for that standardized test that is dumbing down our brightest students. Surely in kindergarten we can take a small step to head off people learning to hate each other...

Homosexuals and mexicans is what this country has come down to. I hope to get enough money so I can leave this place.
Do you and pbds go to the same church? (smilie)

Speaking as a non-homophobe....shouldn't these kids being learning "readin', writin', and rithmatic"? I mean, where's finger-painting and show-n-tell and the alphabet...or computer skills? Why is it necessary to teach kids about "family"; isn't that something that they will hopefully be familiar with already? I mean, isn't the aside purpose of "public school" to branch out socially away from "the family", which is something all kids hopefully have already developed their own personal definition of?

School is school and needs to be utilized to start getting these kids ready of the next grade and eventually life...by the time their ready for life without mom and dad or mom or dad or mom and mom or dad and dad or grandma....****, you get the idea.....they need to know their math and science and life skills. What has different types of families got to do with kindergartners?
regular subjects & curriculum are taught by the classroom teachers, whereas social skills, life skills, and the like (family systems) are generally taught by guidance counselors. guidance is often considered a specialist like PE/Gym, Music, Art, etc.
the content should obviously be dependent on the age level of the students so that content is dewvelopmentally appropriate.

like i said earlier, i really don't think human sexuality is appropriate for elementary aged children.

I believe that would fall into the "life skills" that you mentioned in your next to last sentence.

Later on it will fall into sociology.

These kids will spend the next 12 years studying for that standardized test that is dumbing down our brightest students. Surely in kindergarten we can take a small step to head off people learning to hate each other...

I really, honestly, think it's a waste of time. Society is moving more and more towards acceptance every day. That's something that is taking care of itself in the real world. Kids in school, I don't think, need to be introduced to any particular "culture" until their Freshman year because they are not psychologically or socially mature enough to fully digest it.

regular subjects & curriculum are taught by the classroom teachers, whereas social skills, life skills, and the like are generally taught by guidance counselors. guidance is often considered a specialist like PE/Gym, Music, Art, etc.
the content should obviously be dependent on the age level of the students so that content is dewvelopmentally appropriate.

like i said earlier, i really don't think human sexuality is appropriate for elementary aged children.

You and I are on the same page.

Well, I dont really feel there is anything to gain from it. Its just more "appease the gays" if you ask me. And the feelings of gay people do not rank higher than the feelings of myself, especially when im talking about my own child (hypothetically of course).

Was I taught about gays at 6? No...

Do I understand them? Yes...

Do I discriminate against them? No...

Then perhaps the government should promote the upbringing that I had, which did not involve being taught about homosexuality at 6. Luckily to me it appeared that there was only one way to go, and that was with girls. Had I been taught that "yes, Jim lives in a happy family with 2 daddies" I might have thought this was an acceptable way to live my life.

Well, I dont really feel there is anything to gain from it. Its just more "appease the gays" if you ask me. And the feelings of gay people do not rank higher than the feelings of myself, especially when im talking about my own child (hypothetically of course).

Was I taught about gays at 6? No...

Do I understand them? Yes...

Do I discriminate against them? No...

Then perhaps the government should promote the upbringing that I had, which did not involve being taught about homosexuality at 6. Luckily to me it appeared that there was only one way to go, and that was with girls. Had I been taught that "yes, Jim lives in a happy family with 2 daddies" I might have thought this was an acceptable way to live my life.
If you want a specific moral character taught to your children, you should put them in the appropriate private school.

You weren't exposed to that when you were in kindergarten because 15 years ago it was still an acceptable prejudice. In 2006, that's starting to change...

If you want a specific moral character taught to your children, you should put them in the appropriate private school.

You weren't exposed to that when you were in kindergarten because 15 years ago it was still an acceptable prejudice. In 2006, that's starting to change...
Well actually I disagree. And that also didnt really answer my post.

Firstly, I shouldnt have to pay for an education I believe should be given anyway. I would flip it around. If gays want kids to learn about homosexuality then stick them in the appropriate private school. Gays are a minority so, unfortunately for them, they cannot dictate what the rest of the population does, and should therefore seek the appropriate education for the kids in their control. (How lucky I was to be born in a normal family).

And I know the reason why I was never taught it... but why cant my example be followed?

Well, I dont really feel there is anything to gain from it. Its just more "appease the gays" if you ask me. And the feelings of gay people do not rank higher than the feelings of myself, especially when im talking about my own child (hypothetically of course).

Was I taught about gays at 6? No...

Do I understand them? Yes...

Do I discriminate against them? No...

Then perhaps the government should promote the upbringing that I had, which did not involve being taught about homosexuality at 6. Luckily to me it appeared that there was only one way to go, and that was with girls. Had I been taught that "yes, Jim lives in a happy family with 2 daddies" I might have thought this was an acceptable way to live my life.


People arent taught 'which way to go'. Boys arent taught to fancy girls. And gay people werent taught, or shown an example of 'how to be gay'.

Many people wish they werent gay, but its not a choice.

This "teaching" about different lifestyles to kids is a step in the wrong direction. Kids will be cruel. That is a fact of life. Now your letting them in on the fact that Johnny's dad sucks ****. When before then they weren't the wiser.
Plus it sends mixed singnals to kids. On one hand a teacher tells them its normal or ok. Then they get home and the kids parents say homosexuality is not ok.

I agree with Sonny.
Kids should not think it's ok, because it's not.

Thank god I don't live in MA and don't ever plan on living there.

People arent taught 'which way to go'. Boys arent taught to fancy girls. And gay people werent taught, or shown an example of 'how to be gay'.

Many people wish they werent gay, but its not a choice.
Actually boys are taught to fancy girls... by example.

Why isnt anyone answering my points?

Um no. The State does not and should not get to decide what to teach kids on hot-button issues. This 'we are the world' bull**** is just propaganda. All this waking sympathetic is a farce. These kids are 6 years old...period. Anyone who thinks they are able to comprehend the gay issue at this age is kidding themselves...or is well aware of the fact and just ignores it because they want what they perceive to be bigots (in actuality, people just want to have a say in what their kids learn when the topic is very controversial...as they should) to be 'enlightened'.



There is absolutely no such thing as right or wrong

This is a weak attempt to avoid debates. Moral relativism is a sham. Not on every single issue is there no such thing as right or wrong.

If you want a specific moral character taught to your children, you should put them in the appropriate private school.

BS...what Mass. is doing already IS an example of teaching a specific moral character.

And moral principles are taught in schools anyway as it is. But when it is a hot-button issue such as this, the school has no right to decide to take the matter in its own hands.

BS...what Mass. is doing already IS an example of teaching a specific moral character.

And moral principles are taught in schools anyway as it is. But when it is a hot-button issue such as this, the school has no right to decide to take the matter in its own hands.
I don't particularly care for our county's "Character Counts" curriculum either, which features various pillars of how they determine a kid should act.

Stating that different families live in different ways, though, doesn't endorse it, it only acknowledges their existence.

We learned about different religions in school as well. Doesn't mean I converted every time we moved from one to another...

They should surely be teaching some sort of tolerance class, and probably when theyre older that this. And If a father doesnt want his son taught something like that, I think he souldnt be taught it. The government are not his parents, that is being too controlling.as said its a hot button issue

just out of interest how would you feel if it was on african american people, and the kid and father was white and he wanted his kid taken out

I don't particularly care for our county's "Character Counts" curriculum either, which features various pillars of how they determine a kid should act.

Stating that different families live in different ways, though, doesn't endorse it, it only acknowledges their existence.

We learned about different religions in school as well. Doesn't mean I converted every time we moved from one to another...
What is the benefit to the kiddies, to acknowledge homosexuality?

Answer me that question. How does it benefit anyone? Period.

What is the benefit to the kiddies, to acknowledge homosexuality?

Answer me that question. How does it benefit anyone? Period.
You do have sociology classes in England, no?

You do have sociology classes in England, no?
Neils, just answer the damn question. :D

Here it is:

How does acknowledging homosexuality, at 6, benefit a child?

Neils, just answer the damn question. :D

Here it is:

How does acknowledging homosexuality, at 6, benefit a child?
It benefits a child to realize that there is a world outside of what they know, and that people live different ways, and just because of that, there's no reason to fear those kids. Or to bully those kids. Or to feel inferior/superior. It's a good start to have children starting to think about someone other than themself. At that age, you're lucky if kids are willing to share their toys for Christ's sake...

It benefits a child to realize that there is a world outside of what they know, and that people live different ways, and just because of that, there's no reason to fear those kids. Or to bully those kids. Or to feel inferior/superior. It's a good start to have children starting to think about someone other than themself. At that age, you're lucky if kids are willing to share their toys for Christ's sake...
Even if my kids were being taught about homosexuality all of those things you listed would still occur.

Not to mention that I was never taught about homosexuality at 6, and still turned into a well rounded individual. I dont fear those kids. I dont bully those kids. I dont feel inferior or superior. I think about people other than myself too.

You can take your homosexuality education, your 40pence, and thats your loaf of bread. It means nothing... especially at 6.

What about the freedom of a family wether they want to choose to address homosexuality? I dont think the government should be able to force my kids to show tolerance or acceptance whatever to my young children. You did make a good point Neil. My kids do go to private school. Best investment I can think of.

It benefits a child to realize that there is a world outside of what they know, and that people live different ways, and just because of that, there's no reason to fear those kids. Or to bully those kids. Or to feel inferior/superior. It's a good start to have children starting to think about someone other than themself. At that age, you're lucky if kids are willing to share their toys for Christ's sake...

Good post.

I just dont see wat harm it could do.

Even if u didnt have that kind of edjucation and grew up with no problem with gays, there is still alot of homophobia and intolerance towards gays. As is often shown in these forums.

Kids get their moral fiber from their parents. Not the ****ing government. The government shouldn't have to show a video everytime there is a new deviation from the old way of having a family. Two parents who are married. (For those of you born in 1980 or later.)
I teach my kids how to respect people and value their privacy. I dont need somebody just out of junior college who stops into a classroom once a week to pop in a video tape, And say something like "there are all kinds of families out there and though they may be different from yours you shouldn't alienate them." How much money are we wasting on this bull****?
Government hear this. I can raise my kids without your help. Much easier actually.
Plus I meant no disrespect to social workers I have a very good friend who is one. She helps people with problems all the time and loves the work. But their talents need to be used at helping people who actually need help. Not wasting time talking to 5 and 6 year olds about different lifestyles. Its ridiculous.

It would be nice if all parents talked to their kids about all issues.
But i believe most of the time parents dont. Plus kids dont ask their parents about issues like sex.

I think alot of racism and bigotry is handed down from their parents.

But it should be up to the parents wat they want their kids to be taught in school.

Good post.

I just dont see wat harm it could do.

Even if u didnt have that kind of edjucation and grew up with no problem with gays, there is still alot of homophobia and intolerance towards gays. As is often shown in these forums.
When these kids grow to adults, it will not be acceptable in public to display this prejudice. So in a public school, it's probably good to convey that.

A private school can pick and choose what they want to teach based on the values and faiths of their students' families.

I used to work with a guy who was a member of the Church of the Creator. For those of you not familiar with that religion, it is a white separatist organization. So that his children were not indoctrinated with values that were not consistent with his, he chose to homeschool the children. And that, for him, was the appropriate way to shelter his kids from the "agendas" that public schools possess. To me, that's an acceptable alternative. But if he had stormed the school during the Martin Luther King unit and made an ass of himself, he probably would have gotten arrested the same as this guy in the article.

Looks like i offended the ***s and mexicants on this forum, as I was hit by a wave of bad karma.

oh, thats right, I don't care.