No opting out of pro-gay school propaganda

[Jeff K.]

I think the studies are often times influenced by those whose prevalent position is political and they claim their political stance the most rational.

Morality does play a part in the overall mix. One cannot deny it. If we choose to ignore morality, then basically all kinds of legal things that are immoral also come into the mix. One can say "well, I won't go past this", but really that becomes the new "grey area". The assertion that it doesn't goes against known history.

Women were for the longest time denied a position in the military. Then they were given positions which were non combat. Then the new grey area became combat ready. Now they are in combat. And of course pregnancy rates from the front have increased costs and reduced unit cohesiveness (irrelevant to the example). But the new grey area almost always becomes the new way of acceptance. The fact that people do not wish to go further into more outragous positions and call them grey should have some merit to it.

I think homosexuality as a chosen lifestyle is wrong, and I don't think it should be considered marriage. If one wants union, ie the acceptance by the secular state, that is already provided for. But I do not want to change the definition and value of marriage. I do not want marriage defined out of existence to mean nothing. I agree with what President Kimball said.

"There are those who would define the family in such a nontraditional way that they would define the family out of existence."

President Spencer W. Kimball 1980

[TAO]

Ah, so you are part of the younger generation that have been brainwashed by liberal media and entertainment to accept gays as "normal."

Brainwashed... no. Convinced... yes, many of them are. The fear is not all that off place... it is exaggerated though a bit. It has a basis in truth which is blown out of proportion oftimes.

According to a recent CA poll: More than two-thirds of voters between the ages of 18 and 29 approve of allowing gay marriage, while a majority of those over 65 oppose it.

I dunno what'd it be in Orange County

I am curious how Prop 8 plays with Mormon youth. For mormon youth in your peer group, what percentage would you estimate favors gay marriage? Is there much, if any push back, by the youth, or do they pretty much tow the party line like you do.

From what I notice, Prop 8 plays in Mormon youth in nearly the same way it plays in Mormon adults... perhaps slightly more favor... but so very slightly that it is insignificant.

And nah, it doesn't really have to do with party line much, because we're exposed to both sides quite commonly, I think. Choice, I guess, and church has alot of value.

[TAO]

Orange County Tao? I live in Mission Viejo.

The AP European History teacher we have in CAPO is one of the most liberal you will ever see. He degrades religion of any sort and says Christianity is for stupid people. While forced to take sensitivity training classes after he was recorded degrading a students religion, he is fighting it because he doesn't think he did anything wrong. He believes he needs the academic freedom to teach in the manner he desires. He calls it "challenging the students". But you don't take a bunch of 10th graders as a captive audience, and as the person who controls your grades, give them political lectures and then call it challenging. Let him pick of people his own age.

He takes a significantly different tact when parents are in the room.

Hehe, I think there are teachers like that at every school... well, in mine they aren't so extreme necessarily, but there are opinionated teachers. Most of them are quite normal though, luckily... moderate so to say. I think moderacy is a growing thing... or at least I hope it is.

I would hope he doesn't give grades based on responses he doesn't think are politically correct =0.

Hmmm... just curious... has anybody pulled the 'you can't prove that your observing anything with your eyes' on this guy before... I think it'd be interesting to watch what he makes of it ;-).

[Mordecai]

..It is not merely coincidental that someone who is either well educated or not religious is more likely to support marital rights for gays...

I know it's not a coincidence. In the United States, the "well" educated and those that are not religious are often elitists who gauge their own social status by how trendy/anti-traditional they are. Need I again point out that secular nations, Japan and France, have rejected "gay marriage" as the garbage that it is? It's mindless jibberish with no basis whatsoever in reality. The irreligious and "well educated" were also big supporters of eugenics. They certainly turned out to be on the "right side of history," just like you are now.

That your arguments consist of, "Your REAL motive is OBVIOUSLY...," and, "Truly SMART people disagree!" is telling and sadly predictable. You have no rational basis for the homosexually insecure, trendy dogma that a gay union is the same as a real marriage. You never have.

[Jason]

It is not merely coincidental that someone who is either well educated or not religious is more likely to support marital rights for gays. Likewise its not coincidental that people who are poorly educated, or deeply religious are more likely to share your view on the matter.

Yes, playing up invidious stereotypes of the elites vs. the unwashed masses is certainly a way to win your argument. Not.

Moreover a person relying on reason and not rhetoric does not begin the discussion referring to a nebulous, subjective concept such as the "value of marriage". Marriage are not bought and sold on the free market.

Despite their not being sold on the free market, it is obvious that marriages do have a value.

[semlogo]

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.

How convenient for you!

[Jeff K.]

Not really for me, it makes it most inconvenient when groups act disengenuously rather than attempt stand honestly for an opinion. It is one reason I have so little such for those groups, and the sheep that follow them.

[Jeff K.]

If you want, here is the original link, but like I said, its gone.

http://gsanetwork.org/resources/pdf/SB71FactSheet2.pdf

[Jaybear]

If you want, here is the original link, but like I said, its gone.

http://gsanetwork.org/resources/pdf/SB71FactSheet2.pdf

Nothing is gone on the internet. Here is the cached version of your link.

Please show me on that link, where you base your allegation that:

I have seen the lesson plans, it does advocate for gay sex with a "try it to know for sure" message

[Jeff K.]

Whoops, wrong link.

Let me see if I have it buried somewhere.

[Jaybear]

Whoops, wrong link.

Let me see if I have it buried somewhere.

Woudn't it be easier just to retract your baseless and patently absurd allegation that to go through this charade?

[semlogo]

Woudn't it be easier just to retract your baseless and patently absurd allegation that to go through this charade?

It plays into the conspiracy theories that some people love to entertain, that the gays are "recruiting" kids. As if that's even possible. It would be like recruiting someone to be tall. Either you are or you aren't.

[Jeff K.]

Woudn't it be easier just to retract your baseless and patently absurd allegation that to go through this charade?

But you never do, and we all respect your for it...... really.

[Jeff K.]

Of course you can call me a liar, but even if you look to the agenda of the link that was taken off, you will see how they want to force you to take their classes and the lesson plans were available.

Given that you are both proponents and against the church on this issue, I don't think you would have much credibility in calling me a liar. Truth is a rather vaporous form for both of you. For if it doesn't agree with you it simply must be a lie.

[Jaybear]

But you never do, and we all respect your for it...... really.

Of course you can call me a liar, but even if you look to the agenda of the link that was taken off, you will see how they want to force you to take their classes and the lesson plans were available.

Given that you are both proponents and against the church on this issue, I don't think you would have much credibility in calling me a liar. Truth is a rather vaporous form for both of you. For if it doesn't agree with you it simply must be a lie

So instead of retracting a scurrilous statement for which you have no evidence, you resort to calling those who asked for reference liars.

Very poor form. Just man up. Admit you were wrong, and apologize.

[semlogo]

So instead of retracting a scurrilous statement for which you have no evidence, you resort to calling those who asked for reference liars.

Very poor form. Just man up. Admit you were wrong, and apologize.

+1

[semlogo]

Of course you can call me a liar, but even if you look to the agenda of the link that was taken off, you will see how they want to force you to take their classes and the lesson plans were available.

Given that you are both proponents and against the church on this issue, I don't think you would have much credibility in calling me a liar. Truth is a rather vaporous form for both of you. For if it doesn't agree with you it simply must be a lie.

This was your original claim:

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.

I didn't see that anywhere in the document.

[Jeff K.]

So instead of retracting a scurrilous statement for which you have no evidence, you resort to calling those who asked for reference liars.

Very poor form. Just man up. Admit you were wrong, and apologize.

You mean as you and semlogo have suggested I am lying personally? That way?

I won't retract a statement I was witness too. I can't. Mormons know the importance of not retracting a statement of something they have witnessed. Some non MOrmons may not understand the concept, and those who call themselves Mormon in name only may do the same. But Latter-Day Saints simply cannot. If you witnessed it, then you make yourself a liar by retracting it.

One would think you would understand that.

Perhaps not.

[Jeff K.]

This was your original claim:

I didn't see that anywhere in the document.

Different website, quite some time ago.

I saw it, it was there, it as part of the organization. Why do you think they took the strategy in having students forced to sit through gay orientation taken off their website?

[semlogo]

Different website, quite some time ago.

I saw it, it was there, it as part of the organization. Why do you think they took the strategy in having students forced to sit through gay orientation taken off their website?

Surely there must be some documentary evidence to back up this claim. You gave us the source for this claim, and it didn't pan out. Do you have anything else?

[semlogo]

The silence is deafening.

[Jeff K.]

I suppose I could pander to you semi, but why bother?

I find your inability to even see what was wrong with the last website to be louder than any shout somoene else can make. I don't troll gay websites looking for such things. And frankly they have pulled them for a very good reason. I am sure you imagine that pulling such documents from has no ulterior motive but to update. But you were always an easy read regarding such things.

[semlogo]

I suppose I could pander to you semi, but why bother?

I find your inability to even see what was wrong with the last website to be louder than any shout somoene else can make. I don't troll gay websites looking for such things. And frankly they have pulled them for a very good reason. I am sure you imagine that pulling such documents from has no ulterior motive but to update. But you were always an easy read regarding such things.

I can see why you are motivated not to post evidence to to back up your claims, since it's clear you don't have any.

It's clear that, for you, anything not denouncing gays as wicked filth-mongers damned to the blackest pit of Apollyon is pandering to the "gay agenda."

[Jeff K.]

Semi

You shouldn't bait the hook half way, it makes you look silly. Maybe that is why you are Semi....

[semlogo]

Semi

You shouldn't bait the hook half way, it makes you look silly. Maybe that is why you are Semi....

Still no evidence to back up your claim? Surprise surprise. And no apology or retraction either. I'm shocked!