Jaybear Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 I can't they recently took the lesson plan off the website. My fault really, when I commented in a GLAAD website that I found it to be reprehensible stating that you should be gay before you decide whether its god or not. They removed it. But did not change their tactics.As I said, I not going to accept at face value your characterization of what someone else said that you found be offensive. You need to stop making factual assertions that you can't back up in response to a CFR.
LDSToronto Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Imagine a school district teachings kids to embrace gay sex.(edit: I have seen the lesson plans, it does advocate for gay sex with a "try it to know for sure" message)CFR. I have seen you "summarize" or "restate" my words far too many times to take you at face value.I can't they recently took the lesson plan off the website.If this is a public school system, you can request the lesson plans. At least I can in Canada. Until you can backup your assertion, I'd suggest you go back and edit your original post.H.
Jason Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 there is an opt-out, its called "Tell you son/daughter to walk out of school, then sue the school/district when your son/daughter is suspended" While I can understand a District making an agreement for its staff, I see no reason why a school district can enter a legal settlement which forces students to do something."Sue us" doesn't really sound like much of an "opt-out" option.
Jason Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 I think the point that is being missed is that this is not a freedom of expression issue. Of course it's a legal issue whether one can wear a shirt with either slogan. I happen to interpret one of the slogans as an expression of pride and solidarity amongst a class of people, and the other to be an expression of intolerance of a class of people.I would view it as criticism of a type of behavior/lifestyle rather than of a class of people.
LDSToronto Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 I would view it as criticism of a type of behavior/lifestyle rather than of a class of people.Does that then make the choice to wear the shirt morally right, or at the very least, morally consistent with the teachings of the LDS church?H.
Jeff K. Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 If this is a public school system, you can request the lesson plans. At least I can in Canada. Until you can backup your assertion, I'd suggest you go back and edit your original post.H.No, I can only witness what has been removed. The plan was proposed not presented. Canadians now call the Bible hate speech don't they? Or is that in the courts still?
LDSToronto Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Canadians now call the Bible hate speech don't they? Or is that in the courts still?You are referring to Bill C-250 which protects Canadians from hate speech. No, the bible is not hate speech. The application of biblical verses to promote hatred towards any particular group can be ruled as hate speech. Such as biblical verses on bumper stickers, if it can be reasonably asserted that the intention is to promote discrimination against a group of people.C-250 does not single out the bible as hate speech any more than it singles out Huckleberry Finn or Invisible Man. However, extracting specific lines or phrases from those books to promote any type of discrimination can get you in hot water.H.
Jason Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Does that then make the choice to wear the shirt morally right, or at the very least, morally consistent with the teachings of the LDS church?H.No, not necessarily. But I don't see it as outright wrong in every circumstance.
frankenstein Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Canadians now call the Bible hate speech don't they? Or is that in the courts still?The Bible has not pronounced has not hate speech in Canada (those that promote such as truth are deliberate lieing and promoting propoganda); just as the United States, quoting text from the Bible (depends on the circumstances) could be hate speech. ------------Jason: "Sue us", that doesn't sound like an opt-out.Suing a school district or even threat of a suit works wonders in some cases. Districts don't want to spend the money on the suit, so they settle, which what we have hear, the District settle a suit. I still say the District does not the legal authority to bind students to a contract, a contract to which the students had no representation in the negotions or final approval. The District can bind the staff but not the students.
Jason Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Jason: "Sue us", that doesn't sound like an opt-out.Suing a school district or even threat of a suit works wonders in some cases. Districts don't want to spend the money on the suit, so they settle, which what we have hear, the District settle a suit. No doubt. But it requires first allowing your child to be expelled, and then hiring a lawyer. Disrupting your child's education and costing considerable money in order to correct the school district's overreach. A typical "opt-out" is simply signing a piece of paper, hence my "this doesn't sound like much of an opt-out" comment.I would prefer to have responsible people running my school district rather than having to lawyer up to make them act responsibly, but perhaps that isn't an option in California.
frankenstein Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 No doubt. But it requires first allowing your child to be expelled, and then hiring a lawyer. Disrupting your child's education and costing considerable money in order to correct the school district's overreach. A typical "opt-out" is simply signing a piece of paper, hence my "this doesn't sound like much of an opt-out" comment.not so much so. the child wont need to be expelled, the parent, child and attorney ONLY need to know that the child is is forced to attend, that there is NO option what so ever for non-attendance other than expulsion or being sick that day. As for money, contact the "Alliance Defense Fund" they are a AZ based "Christian" lawyers group, if the ACLU had a Christian opposite, the Alliance Defense Fund would be close to that opposite. (an lds Lawyer could probably not work for ADF as their statement of faith goes against LDS beliefs, but that does not mean the ADF would not help out an LDS person)as for having to lawyer up for get things done, that is the state of affairs.
Jeff K. Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 You are referring to Bill C-250 which protects Canadians from hate speech. No, the bible is not hate speech. The application of biblical verses to promote hatred towards any particular group can be ruled as hate speech. Such as biblical verses on bumper stickers, if it can be reasonably asserted that the intention is to promote discrimination against a group of people.C-250 does not single out the bible as hate speech any more than it singles out Huckleberry Finn or Invisible Man. However, extracting specific lines or phrases from those books to promote any type of discrimination can get you in hot water.H.The fact that Canadians have to dance around the idea that homosexuality is wrong and are not allowed to say it out right.And yet, the truth be told, Dire Straits cannot be shown to have "hate speech" in its "I want my MTV song but can be "interpreted" as such makes one wonder when the Bible will be redacted in Canada.Give it a couple of years. As a good loyal Canadienne, you will also of course endorse the banning of all books that contain the germ ideal that homosexuality and homosexual acts are wrong.
LDSToronto Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 The fact that Canadians have to dance around the idea that homosexuality is wrong and are not allowed to say it out right.Um, some people in Canada *do* say that homosexuality is wrong. They do it with civility in public. Saying, "Homosexuality is wrong because God said so" is perfectly legal in Canada. I happen to be on the side of the debate that feels homosexuality is fine. And yet, the truth be told, Dire Straits cannot be shown to have "hate speech" in its "I want my MTV song but can be "interpreted" as such makes one wonder when the Bible will be redacted in Canada.The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council is a non-governmental agency created by the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) to administer standards established by its members, Canada's private broadcasters. The CBSC does not represent Canadian citizens.Give it a couple of years. As a good loyal Canadienne, you will also of course endorse the banning of all books that contain the germ ideal that homosexuality and homosexual acts are wrong.Your comments confirm your intelligence.H.
BCSpace Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 I think you've characterized the program fairly - it teaches kids to embrace homosexuality as a normal behaviour and to accept those that are homosexual. Thank goodness, because, by the reaction of some on this board, it is needed.Yet homosexual behavior as normal and acceptable in society is contrary to LDS teachings and doctrine.
LDSToronto Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Yet homosexual behavior as normal and acceptable in society is contrary to LDS teachings and doctrine.And I believe those teachings and doctrines are false.H.
Jason Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Um, some people in Canada *do* say that homosexuality is wrong. They do it with civility in public. Saying, "Homosexuality is wrong because God said so" is perfectly legal in Canada.Except, apparently, when you say it with a bumpersticker and a bible verse. Is it having it on a bumper sticker that makes it uncivil, or the use of a bible verse, one wonders?
BCSpace Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Yet homosexual behavior as normal and acceptable in society is contrary to LDS teachings and doctrine.And I believe those teachings and doctrines are false.I see. So you accept re-educating someone's children contrary to the religious values of their parents? That is also contrary to LDS doctrine.Ladies and gentlemen, here is a primary example of the type of sex education that goes on world-wide which as you can plainly see, has subsumed even members of the Church. In addition to the organizations mentioned, the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) is at the forefront of teaching the acceptance of homosexuality, abortion and the sexualization of young children through experimentation with peers and adults. Your local Planned Parenthood organization gets it's philosophy and marching orders from the IPPF. They have websites and classroom cirriculum designed to lure children into their sexual philosophy.If ever there was a modern organization of moral Gaddianton robbers, this is it. Their modus operandi is to separate the parents from the process of sex education because their enemy is the Gospel of Jesus Christ which many parents still believe to this day despite the concerted assault against it from this direction.
LDSToronto Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Except, apparently, when you say it with a bumpersticker and a bible verse. Is it having it on a bumper sticker that makes it uncivil, or the use of a bible verse, one wonders?I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that the fact that a phrase may come from the bible has no bearing on a decision. Rather, it's the message and the intent and the public display, combined, that informs the decision. Like I said before, one can take lines from any literary classic and, if used to promote a hateful message towards a group, would land one in hot water.H.
Jeff K. Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 The thought police of Canada will tell you what your intent is. Remember that. Free speech or the ability to converse freely is limited in Canada and you can be arrested for what you say.
Jeff K. Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Do Canadians in sacrament meeting stand up and bear their testimony that while God feels homosexuality is abnormal they have a testimony of the truth that homosxuality is a normal part of modern society and should be accepted?
frankenstein Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 The thought police of Canada will tell you what your intent is. Remember that. Free speech or the ability to converse freely is limited in Canada and you can be arrested for what you say.I dare no other county in the world allows free speech as found in the United States. Europeans can be arrested and imprisoned for denying the holocaust, or Bonsian called her spouse a lazy serb or something like that and the Bosnian was arrested for hate speech. mcdonalds sued several brits for speaking reasonable information, when the brits confronted the american mcdonalds reps about how if they were all in America mcdonalds couldn't do anything, the americans just got more upset. Free Speech is unique to America, but don't count on Americans allowing other the same right.
LDSToronto Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 I see. So you accept re-educating someone's children contrary to the religious values of their parents? That is also contrary to LDS doctrine.Geez, well, we'd better do away with the public education system and either have separate schools for each moral leaning, or move to mandatory home-schooling. I accept that kids will pickup moral values from their schooling. I also accept that a parent's responsibility is to raise a child to be morally responsible. How parents do that is their own choice. Ladies and gentlemen, here is a primary example of the type of sex education that goes on world-wide which as you can plainly see, has subsumed even members of the Church. In addition to the organizations mentioned, the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) is at the forefront of teaching the acceptance of homosexuality, abortion and the sexualization of young children through experimentation with peers and adults. Your local Planned Parenthood organization gets it's philosophy and marching orders from the IPPF. They have websites and classroom cirriculum designed to lure children into their sexual philosophy.Hyperbole at it's best. Maybe you could show us all how you arrive at these conclusions?If ever there was a modern organization of moral Gaddianton robbers, this is it. Their modus operandi is to separate the parents from the process of sex education because their enemy is the Gospel of Jesus Christ which many parents still believe to this day despite the concerted assault against it from this direction.Parents can never be separated fro the process of sex-ed unless parents allow themselves to be separated.H.
LDSToronto Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 The thought police of Canada will tell you what your intent is. Remember that. Free speech or the ability to converse freely is limited in Canada and you can be arrested for what you say.Jeff, seriously?H.
LDSToronto Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Do Canadians in sacrament meeting stand up and bear their testimony that while God feels homosexuality is abnormal they have a testimony of the truth that homosxuality is a normal part of modern society and should be accepted?No.H.
blackstrap Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Yes , Jeff, invariably a couple of members will arise at testimony meeting and praise the government for its enlightened view of homosexuality and abortion and prostitution and marijuana laws. They also applaud the government when it restricts "christians" from offering a public prayer at the site of an airline disaster in order to avoid offending minorities which ,by the way, were encouraged to give public displays of their faith. We are just that accepting and tolerant and inoffensive. Amazing,eh ?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.