forestgrove111 wrote:I don't care who you are or what you are, leave the children alone.
Boom, There it is! Sharp as a tack, I see! Never again- you mental slob- will you get any respect, response, or even one iota of attention from me. What? You don't care? Good, then we're even. You just keep on incessantly- and apparently- ignorantly cutting and pasting, there, forestgrove.
so you mean to say don't leave the children alone? Hawk:
No, I am not saying "don't leave the children alone." While I don't agree with this Kevin Jennings methods, I do clearly understand his spiritual message. I'm going to leave it to the general consensus of school educators and administrators to decide at what age children should be taught sex ed.- but I think that it should be inclusive of glb&t youth. I don't think that the obsolete one-sex-fits-all approach should be taken. I think that it should be viewed and presented as being just as natural as heterosexuality. I absolutely DO NOT think that children need to learn about all the extreme eccentricities of straight or
gay sex. Those things need not be taught to children, period. And definitely, no x-rated materials should or need be used, imo. That being said...
I was probably too harsh with FG, and I'm sorry for that- perhaps he meant well. If you read every word, though, of every post in this thread that I posted, you would probably have a better understanding as to why I was so "hateful. I am not going to repeat any of that, you can go back and read them, and then come back and discuss if my answers don't satisfy
The citizens of Massachusetts have had enough! End
judicial tyranny, homosexual "marriage"
, and homosexual activist recruitment of our children in the public schools!
Preserve our Judeo-Christian heritage, the Culture of Life, and free speech!
First of all, let's just lump it all together, I mean after all, it's all the same thing, isn't it? No- it's not. There is a total failure of making distinctions between these several, very different and separate issues, in this jumbled mess of a headline. I
have some questions. Judicial tyranny? I'm certain that they would undoubtedly enjoy the combining of church and state- as long as it was their
church. What does ending gay marriage have to do with this topic? Since when did sexuality become recruitable? Last I heard, it was a well researched fact that psychologists,sociologists, and others in the medical and social scientific fields have determined quite the opposite.. Is every child in their public schools of Judeo-Christian heritage? I doubt it. Basic, decent, and positive values are not
by this Judeo-Christian heritage collection of people- and to put it all under that umbrella is enough to piss me off, in and of itself. Also- public schools and Judeo-Christian heritage? Church and state? Again, I know that most Christians don't have a problem with that, but what if you're not a Christian? Culture of Life? Who's culture of life? Freedom of Speech? I have no problem or issue with that, this is mine. Although, I don't know what their point is, regarding this, or how it affects them adversely , they are having their say, after all. No?
I think that Jennings is extreme in his actions, but with an essential message that many agree with- in terms of the spiritual point that he makes in his letter to his cousin, who had reprimanded him for his "immoral homosexuality." This is a man that has apparently had it up to his eyeballs with moral opposition, homophobia, gay-bashing, and who knows whatever other consequences he's suffered just for being something that he can not help but be. What if you were treated in this manner throughout your whole life- your entire life- you were told you were an abomination to God, or that you were a shame to your family, or that you are mentally ill, or that are less than a man- for being heterosexual.
If your honest, I don't believe that you can come up with a reasonable answer to such a question within a very short period of time. If you're truthful, then you would probably have to take a considerable amount of time to answer such a question- unless you were truly in that position, unless you had spent your life walking in those shoes. If such were the case, you might lose a few marbles of reason, as well. I'm not saying that he's right in what he's doing. But you can't just look at the way that I responded to FG's response to me, and tell me that I should be satisfied with that answer. He posted the entire article- the title, the body, as it is. Is he not responsible for posting it? He, in effect, is saying every word that the article says- title and all. Truly, though, he didn't say anything- himself- that's why I asked him the initial questions that I asked him. Does he feel that gay marriage should be disallowed? I don't know. Does he feel that homosexuals can be recruited? I don't know. Does he feel that God is a loving and forgiving God? I don't know. Does he feel that gays are treated fairly and equally? I don't know. Does he feel that gays are an atrocity? I don't know. Did he look for and find the validity of all that he attached his name to? I don't know. Did he look closely at the assertions made, or that he inferred? I don't know. I'm sorry, his response does not satisfy the responsibilities that he took on here, with this thread. All that he said to me was: "I don't care who you are or what you are, leave the children alone."
I'm sorry, but after reading what he posted, that just isn't enough, it doesn't cut it, no way. At that point he should have answered to support what he posted, or deny that it was entirely correct, or something other than just one little simplistic sentence. Some might view this as me shooting the messenger, but Jesus Herbert Christ, he has total control over what messages he chooses to deliver. Total and absolute control.
I know this, when asked if he was gay, FG said: "no im straight, this is not about the gay folks it's about Pedifiles / Child Molesters." Come on! This is about gay folks- and about children. One cannot deny that. Once again, a very difficult, double edged, topic. One that cannot, and should not, be taken lightly or nonchalantly. If you cannot decipher or understand something that you are going to post, and then skirt around some of what was said in that post, without denial or validation, then you have no business posting it. Take some responsibility. I have hastily posted things in the past, a couple of times, without being thorough in my assessment prior to posting. And you know what, I came back and apologized for being an idiot, for presenting something to the community that I either didn't really agree with, or made false assumptions about, or recognized after the fact, that it was a dud. Take ownership. I respond to you, because, right or wrong, I am taking ownership of what I have said, explaining to you why I said it, and telling you how I feel about it. I posted it, you asked about it, and you deserve to know why. Sorry again, this is my opinion- freedom of speech.
Not too long ago, I ran across this very interesting and enlightening article distinguishing homosexuality, from pedophilia, molestation, etc. I thought that that might give him a better understanding of what these things actually are, and how they relate, and don't relate to the topic, and also thought that some others might benefit from reading it. It was not my intention to steal the thread, but to add a bit of actual fact to it. Gary:
why are you being so hateful when he clearly stated that he doesn't care who or what you are, meaning he doesn't care if you are gay or straight, don't mess with children, plain and simple, that's what foxglove wrote, I got it, did you get this? I'm sorry, but it looked as though from this that your anger came out of nowhere unwarrented.Hawk:
I hope that what I've written above at least somewhat explains my anger, and my reasoning. It was anger at the whole issue, the jumbled mess of the thread title- all the things that I mentioned combined. Gary:
my thought on this subject are as follows, teachers should not use their sexual orientation to influence students in any way, and as far as sexual orientation, it is the childs decision, when they are of age to do so, to make their own choices........NO ONE ELSES.Seahawk:
I agree with this. This is not a country-wide issue, though, and i doubt that it will be an issue in Mass. for much longer either. I would think so, anyway.Gary:
I'm a straight man, and it always made me wonder why some people feel threatened by homosexuality, it poses no real threat to me what they do, who are we to dictate what love is?Hawk:
Good on you, you are apparently a well-educated, level-headed, good-hearted, and fair-minded individual. Wish there were more like you. I understand your defense of FG, it is not unlike something that I would do myself, if in your shoes, and regarding a different issue. I didn't and don't mean to hurt FG's feelings- if he does in fact mean well, but when you post something that is potentially an inflaming issue, then you had better be prepared with an extinguisher.
I hope that you will read the rest of what I posted to gain additional insight as to where my anger came from. Sorry for offending anyone with my temper. And FG, sorry if I hurt your feelings or offended you.