School Boards Promoting Homosexuality?

[TreeBeard]

8 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

many take the position that teaching young children about sexuality is harmful.  Where the line is drawn for young and what the content of sex ed should be are certainly debatable.  I’ve made my position clear about what constitutes important sex ed.  Sexual preference is not essential sex ed.  if it’s a topic raised by older students in terms of harm/risk, then I’m not opposed to that discussion taking place in a factual way.  The inclusion/rainbow component as representing various sexualities shouldn’t be in the curriculum

Sure, I agree that it’s open to debate.  It’s debated all the time.    And it seems to be fine, currently, except for a few religious zealots.  
 

Acceptance of gay people is not “sex ed”.  Agreed.  But it’s very important that schools teach students to be accepting of kids who may not be like themselves, including kids with different skin colour, religions, gender or sexual preference.  

[Nationalist]

40 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Disagree completely.  Harm (lack thereof) to others in society should be what drives our morality.  
 

Instincts are fallible.  Instincts drive tribalism and not caring for “the other”.   We’re better than that.  
 

I’m flippant because you haven’t shown that it is any more than that whatsoever.  

If you're intent on ignoring the evidence provided, then we are at an impossible. I will say this though...

Denying your instincts will not end well.

[TreeBeard]

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

If you're intent on ignoring the evidence provided, then we are at an impossible. I will say this though...

Denying your instincts will not end well.

You think we have an instinct to get married?   Why is marriage so recent then?  And why does it take so many forms?  
 

In recent history, they have often been arranged, so there goes “instincts”.  

Edited September 6, 2022 by TreeBeard

[Zeitgeist]

9 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

You think we have an instinct to get married?   Why is marriage so recent then?  And why does it take so many forms?  
 

In recent history, they have often been arranged, so there goes “instincts”.  

Marriage is extremely ancient, probably as old as Homo sapiens if not Hominids and Neanderthal.  

[Zeitgeist]

18 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Sure, I agree that it’s open to debate.  It’s debated all the time.    And it seems to be fine, currently, except for a few religious zealots.  
 

Acceptance of gay people is not “sex ed”.  Agreed.  But it’s very important that schools teach students to be accepting of kids who may not be like themselves, including kids with different skin colour, religions, gender or sexual preference.  

Just remember that acceptance of the person isn’t necessarily approval of the behaviour. 

Edited September 6, 2022 by Zeitgeist

[Nationalist]

15 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

You think we have an instinct to get married?   Why is marriage so recent then?  And why does it take so many forms?  
 

In recent history, they have often been arranged, so there goes “instincts”.  

Marriage is ancient. It takes many forms because we are of many denominations and histories. 

And isn't it interesting that in a world of so many different and isolated denominations, that one of the static characteristics is...marriage.

[Zeitgeist]

19 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Marriage is ancient. It takes many forms because we are of many denominations and histories. 

And isn't it interesting that in a world of so many different and isolated denominations, that one of the static characteristics is...marriage.

Well now you’re talking about universal principles.  This is the subject of comparative mythology and Joseph Campbell’s Hero With A Thousand Faces.  Dismiss these essential human truths at your peril.  

[TreeBeard]

48 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Denying your instincts will not end well.

Could our instincts differ?  

[TreeBeard]

35 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Just remember that acceptance of the person isn’t necessarily approval of the behaviour. 

Nor should there be disapproval.  Why would you disapprove of a skin colour?   Or deny the absolutely natural reaction of one person to love another?

 “I accept you, but just don’t touch another man”?   

That’s bigotry dressed up as something nice.  

[Zeitgeist]

Just now, TreeBeard said:

Nor should there be disapproval.  Why would you disapprove of a skin colour?   Or deny the absolutely natural reaction of one person to love another?

 “I accept you, but just don’t touch another man”?   

That’s bigotry dressed up as something nice.  

I don’t approve homosexual behaviour and never will.  Nevertheless, God loves all his children.  

[TreeBeard]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

I don’t approve homosexual behaviour and never will.  Nevertheless, God loves all his children.  

I know. The questions were rhetorical.  My point was that it is a bigoted view that should be shunned by the rest of society as outdated and irrelevant.  

[Zeitgeist]

6 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

I know. The questions were rhetorical.  My point was that it is a bigoted view that should be shunned by the rest of society as outdated and irrelevant.  

Homosexual acts have been almost universally forbidden or discouraged across cultures for millennia. The cultures that allowed or turned a blind eye to it such as Greece were in decline when they did so.  The recent legal approval in western countries is highly experimental and questionable.  Just because there are flags and bank commercials promoting or approving it doesn’t change the larger context.  Again, it’s not about the person but the behaviour.  Skin colour is not a valid comparison.

Edited September 6, 2022 by Zeitgeist

[I am Groot]

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/grade-1-teacher-who-said-boys-and-girls-no-different-in-gender-fluidity-lesson-cleared-by-rights-tribunal

[Zeitgeist]

11 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/grade-1-teacher-who-said-boys-and-girls-no-different-in-gender-fluidity-lesson-cleared-by-rights-tribunal

The rights tribunal is a far left body that should be dismantled.  They only affirm left wing ideas and don’t protect individual rights.  

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

Could our instincts differ?  

Perhaps slightly. But I think that too might be abnormal. 

[TreeBeard]

28 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Perhaps slightly. But I think that too might be abnormal. 

So you think people in (say) Afghanistan share the same moral instincts that we do in the West?

[Nationalist]

2 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

So you think people in (say) Afghanistan share the same moral instincts that we do in the West?

Yes.

They express the same instincts for partnership and reproduction. Society, hierarchy and rules.

The expression is different...the instincts are basically the same.

Edited September 7, 2022 by Nationalist

[TreeBeard]

Just now, Nationalist said:

Yes.

Would you concur that it’s a human instinct to be tribal?  To not accept outsiders and to stick to our own “kind”, however that might be defined?

 

[Nationalist]

3 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Would you concur that it’s a human instinct to be tribal?  To not accept outsiders and to stick to our own “kind”, however that might be defined?

 

Yes. A clear survival instinct.

[TreeBeard]

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

Yes. A clear survival instinct.

So, in today’s world, you consider tribalism to be a moral virtue?

Edited September 7, 2022 by TreeBeard

[Zeitgeist]

13 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

So, in today’s world, you consider tribalism to be a moral virtue?

It’s natural and pretending we aren’t tribal is a lie.  What’s important is that we don’t favour our in-group for superficial reasons.  Competence is always what’s most important.  Of course that takes different forms.  Competence in mechanics is different from competence in sales, counselling, etc.  

[dialamah]

From National Geographic:

Roy and Silo, two male chinstrap penguins at New York's Central Park Zoo have been inseparable for six years now. They display classic pair-bonding behavior—entwining of necks, mutual preening, flipper flapping, and the rest. They also have sex, while ignoring potential female mates.  

The team caught female Japanese macaques engaged in intimate acts which, if observed in humans, would be in the X-rated category.

Seems homosexuality is instinctive,  natural and normal.  Talking about it should be too.

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

So, in today’s world, you consider tribalism to be a moral virtue?

Somewhat. But we have shrunk the world. That makes tribalism...malleable. 

[TreeBeard]

13 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Somewhat. But we have shrunk the world. That makes tribalism...malleable. 

Somewhat?  But I thought we ignored our instincts at our peril.  
 

Can instincts be wrong?

[Zeitgeist]

8 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Somewhat?  But I thought we ignored our instincts at our peril.  
 

Can instincts be wrong?

You’re saying it’s wrong to be human and that nature is wrong.

 I suggest you read Hariri’s frightening predictions about A.I.   He thinks it’s inevitable that we become cyborgs and describes humans as “hackable animals”.  He even talks about controlling humans “under the skin.”

 I remember reading Hariri’s Homo Deus (Man God) well before the pandemic and thinking he was describing a dystopia that undermined humanity but that was hopefully just a threat instead of a looming reality.  It’s clear now that his warnings/predictions were spot on.  The fact that minds like his are leading global pushes for the reshaping of human behaviour is beyond concerning.

That’s the context for our apparent societal embrace of malleable genders and sexual orientations, especially when biology still tells us that there are only two sexes   Just because someone feels or wants something doesn’t make it good or advisable.  Kids feel a lot of emotions very strongly that come and go with hormonal surges and the desire for care and attention.  We must guard against affirming impulses with life changing surgeries that may not turn out to be what meets the person’s longer term needs.

 I think on homosexuality and even gender identity most people took a “Live and let live” stance because “Who am I to judge?” is generally the default position in a laissez-faire liberal democracy   However, tolerance seems to have morphed in a top down way into something much more like promotion or advertisement. Kids are impressionable   Flying gay pride flags sends a message that is hard to explain except in terms of sexual behaviour and support of such behaviour.  The justification is “inclusivity”, but love/acceptance of the person and support of the behaviour aren’t the same thing   I’m sure some parents support such behaviour, but I’m also sure many don’t, and there has been little debate or discussion about whether boards should be flying such symbols and including discussions of different sexual orientations and identities in child education.  I oppose such messaging in elementary schools and I also oppose any educators advocating for certain sexual behaviours unless they are in the context of my particular religious world view, which is why it’s best to leave it out of public schools altogether.  When in doubt, leave it out.  That’s not the same thing as teaching kids about reproductive systems, cycles, ovulation, mentruation, the risk of STD’s, etc., which is an important component of health education for students entering adolescence.

There’s a lot of dubious experimentation with nature   Technology has made much possible that isn’t healthy or advisable.  Education systems should err on the side of caution.  Whenever I feel pushed to think a certain way that doesn’t sit right, I know there’s reason for concern.

 

Edited September 7, 2022 by Zeitgeist