Muslims and Christians unite on the streets of Ottawa, trampling the Gender Ideology Flag

[I am Groot]

36 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Trampling on a flag already sounds a bit unhinged. The thing is that every country has gay people but many force them to hide who they are. As a civilized state Canada doesn’t do that and if you can’t accept such tolerance of difference this may not be the right place for you. Perhaps a short video might help? 
 

https://www.foxnews.com/story/dutch-immigrants-must-watch-racy-film

 

Or maybe this one?

Think this will win any converts?

[Zeitgeist]

The Netherlands is a packed country that has done a lot of experimenting with euthanasia, lax drug enforcement, and so on.  Unfortunately videos like that miss the boat and make the very people that the government is trying to keep out look like the sane ones.  It makes the country look like nothing more than a hedonist camp, which is offensive to people from many religions and people who have more traditional values.  I still remember when people in Amsterdam became up in arms about all the strung out tourists laying on sidewalks and the sex tourism in the red light district.  It seemed pretty wild and fun when I was twenty something travelling with friends, but as a father living in the city trying to have a healthy family life, I would feel quite differently.

Edited June 26, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[SpankyMcFarland]

6 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

The Netherlands is a packed country that has done a lot of experimenting with euthanasia, lax drug enforcement, and so on.  Unfortunately videos like that miss the boat and make the very people that the government is trying to keep out look like the sane ones.  It makes the country look like nothing more than a hedonist camp, which is offensive to people from many religions and people who have more traditional values.  I still remember when people in Amsterdam became up in arms about all the strung out tourists laying on sidewalks and the sex tourism in the red light district.  It seemed pretty wild and fun when I was twenty something travelling with friends, but as a father living in the city trying to have a healthy family life, I would feel quite differently.

The Dutch are sensible. They’re not all out in Amsterdam’s red light district every night. It isn’t compulsory to do that. Ditto being gay. People from developing countries have a lot of misconceptions about homosexuality which is not surprising given what they have been told about it. The gay lifestyle isn’t contagious and we don’t foist it on every immigrant. 

[Army Guy]

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

The Dutch are sensible. They’re not all out in Amsterdam’s red light district every night. It isn’t compulsory to do that. Ditto being gay. People from developing countries have a lot of misconceptions about homosexuality which is not surprising given what they have been told about it. The gay lifestyle isn’t contagious and we don’t foist it on every immigrant. 

We all have questions regarding other cultures, but no one is forcing anyone to study these issues... While it is not contagious, lets not pretend it is not In some provinces the law, it is foisted on every child attending public school...Ontario is one provinces... the question is do we do this with every group that makes up a minority of the total population, do we have continuous classes strictly on Muslim culture, indigenous culture, black culture.. why not ?

Quote

It is no more acceptable to allow students to opt out of events representing 2SLGBTQ+ culture, history and identities than it is to allow students to opt out of events representing the diversity of race, ancestry, ethnicity, and ability.

Human rights and 2SLGBTQ+ education should not be optional | The Star

[CdnFox]

Oh look Everybody - some more gay pride examples of how they're TOTALLY not exposing their male genitalia to children!!! Remember - kids LIKE kink!

And YES THAT IS a Canadian federation of nudists poster with a bunch of naked children (Mostly female) on it.   Adults would be one thing but you're spreading around pictures of naked kids?

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

We all have questions regarding other cultures, but no one is forcing anyone to study these issues... While it is not contagious, lets not pretend it is not In some provinces the law, it is foisted on every child attending public school...Ontario is one provinces... the question is do we do this with every group that makes up a minority of the total population, do we have continuous classes strictly on Muslim culture, indigenous culture, black culture.. why not ?

Human rights and 2SLGBTQ+ education should not be optional | The Star

Many, many years ago, I was taught about Islam, Buddhism etc. in high school. AFAIK it didn’t harm me irreparably. By the same token, why wouldn’t we teach kids about their peers who are gay? It seems like the prudent thing to do. 

Edited June 26, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

8 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Many, many years ago, I was taught about Islam, Buddhism etc. in high school. AFAIK it didn’t harm me irreparably. By the same token, why wouldn’t we teach kids about their peers who are gay? It seems like the prudent thing to do. 

They are not talking about teaching them in high school. THey're talking about teaching them in elementary.  And - some pretty "detailed' stuff. 

And while you may have been educated on the basics of those faiths i doubt very much that the material encouraged you to 'switch faiths'.

ALSO i doubt any people of that religion showed up and put their penises in the kids faces.

So there are significant differences.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Trampling on a flag already sounds a bit unhinged

Its misplaced hate. 

They are angry at the perceived indoctrination of gender ideology onto their kids.

However, stomping on the flag, hurts decades of progress within the LGBTQ community, and more importantly, feeds into the far left narrative.

Its the worst thing you could do for PR for your cause.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, CdnFox said:

TOTALLY not exposing their male genitalia to children!!!

What if they are identifying as women? Those then aren't penises. Those are vaginas, and they could also identify as fully clothed. 

[Zeitgeist]

I think that the “human rights” argument to support promoting LGBTQ2S+ is fallacious because it pretends that by promoting these lifestyles and identities one is not trouncing on the fundamental long-held and valued rights of women, religious people, etc.  It’s one thing for the law to permit; it’s another to support or teach, as one cannot, for example, oppose non-biological gender and same sex marriage on religious grounds yet accept one’s children being educated to believe these things are fine.  It’s best to leave them out of publicly funded education altogether.  

[SpankyMcFarland]

10 hours ago, CdnFox said:

They are not talking about teaching them in high school. THey're talking about teaching them in elementary.  And - some pretty "detailed' stuff. 

And while you may have been educated on the basics of those faiths i doubt very much that the material encouraged you to 'switch faiths'.

ALSO i doubt any people of that religion showed up and put their penises in the kids faces.

So there are significant differences.

I’m not going to defend the detail involved in every case but I don’t see why introducing the topic of gayness to kids in elementary school is inherently wrong if done in a careful way. Some of these kids know they are different already and many older grade school kids are entering puberty. In addition, we live in a sexualised culture. Any kid with a cell phone has a world of explicit images at their fingertips.. Providing them with an alternative narrative to what they’ll be exposed to on the Internet seems sensible. 

Edited June 26, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[I am Groot]

5 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Its misplaced hate. 

They are angry at the perceived indoctrination of gender ideology onto their kids.

However, stomping on the flag, hurts decades of progress within the LGBTQ community, and more importantly, feeds into the far left narrative.

Its the worst thing you could do for PR for your cause.

Even worse than this?

Or perhaps this?

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

5 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Its misplaced hate. 

They are angry at the perceived indoctrination of gender ideology onto their kids.

However, stomping on the flag, hurts decades of progress within the LGBTQ community, and more importantly, feeds into the far left narrative.

It’s the worst thing you could do for PR for your cause.

 

Indeed. I understand that this is an emotive subject for some parents but if you behave like a yob the rest of what you say is going to be dismissed. 

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Even worse than this?

Or perhaps this?

 

Worse than that, are the parents in attendance, choosing to have their kids watch this stuff, yet canceling comedians for "offensive" content.

At this rate, Louis CK should be allowed to whip it out on stage, and rub one out in front of his horrified fans, vs being canceled for doing it in front of a horrified comedian in a hotel room.

Crazy part, is if he identified as a woman and was draped with an LGBTQ flag, it would be seen as art and defended under his freedom of expression, based on him not having ejaculated into anyone's drinks: "she clearly turned aside, and politely finished off on stage. If you're offended by this, it says more about you being a bigot".

6 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

 

Indeed. I understand that this is an emotive subject for some parents but if you behave like a yob the rest of what you say is going to be dismissed. 

Basically. It's such a hot topic subject, but worse, are the politicians behind deliberately dividing the cause because it consolidates power and votes.

[SpankyMcFarland]

In fairness, I’m a long way (in every way) from some of the specifics of what they’re up to in these parades. There should be some common sense shown on what is reasonable in a public place. 

Edited June 26, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

I’m not going to defend the detail involved in every case but I don’t see why introducing the topic of gayness to kids in elementary school is inherently wrong if done in a careful way.

For the same reason that teaching heterosexuality to children in elementary school is inherently wrong. Children are by and large not mature enough to deal with complex issues regarding sexuality at that age.  If there are some who are and their parents feel they should be educated that early they can make those arrangements privately.

Some people (not saying you) like to pretend that sex is just another mundane topic, like learning how to boil an egg or what various nations capitals are.  But we know that it has a very complex effect on our psyche and it is NOT a casual concept. Very bad things can happen introducing children to sex at too young an age. There's a REASON we don't allow minors to have sex for example.

Teaching them that some people have two mommies or two daddys  (or a mommy OR a daddy - single parents get no love in our school system) is fine as long as it's kept to that. You're not really touching on sex at all. and its inclusive for children who have same sex parents or single parents.

But beyond that? Oh hell no.

Quote

Any kid with a cell phone has a world of explicit images at their fingertips.. Providing them with an alternative narrative to what they’ll be exposed to on the Internet seems sensible. 

Parents have direct control over that. If you're letting your 10 year old have unrestricted access to the internet on their personal cell phone without supervision or blockers then that's your business i guess, i don't think that's very good parenting.  But - so be it.  That does not mean it should be taught in schools.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

I don’t see why introducing the topic of gayness to kids in elementary school is inherently wrong if done in a careful way.

Thats the thing, though. It isn't done sensibly.

Some kids have been left confused as to their sense of identity. Some never even having thought about this until it was brought up.

I didn't think of my sexuality until high school. I didn't need to.

I don't understand how this has any business in grade school.

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Some of these kids know they are different already

They have all the right to be. I knew I was different since childhood.

I never was a gender conforming individual. Most in the LGBTQ community aren't.

One thing was always certain, however. I was a boy.

Bringing this into doubt with gender or queer theory, may help a few, but ignores the collateral damage.

Its not my teachers job to explore my sexuality. That's my job. Its their job to ensure my environment has zero tolerance on bullying. Me being different isn't grounds for assault.

Shoving this down throats, doesn't help people like me. It makes us all targets.

Am asexual.

Its hard enough being wired this way as a black male. But with ideology being shoved into throats and divisive rhetoric? What do you think will happen?

Its those at the bottom of the food chain that will be targeted with that anger. People are shocked at the spike in assaults?

2 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Any kid with a cell phone has a world of explicit images at their fingertips..

Isn't that like justifying theft because the item is heavily stocked or low in cost?

"They could easily replace these types of items".

Uh, no. Its theft. It doesn't belong in a store. Why invest in cameras and detectors, if giving away product was the intent all along?

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

Thats the thing, though. It isn't done sensibly.

Some kids have been left confused as to their sense of identity. Some never even having thought about this until it was brought up.

Yes, and the challenge now is even if you claim you want to do it sensibly NOW there is the very justifiable concern that they'll try to sneak in inappropriate stuff in the future. The quickest way to scare people into thinking you have a hidden agenda is to start off with it being your actual agenda and then try to hide it  

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Yes, and the challenge now is even if you claim you want to do it sensibly NOW there is the very justifiable concern that they'll try to sneak in inappropriate stuff in the future. The quickest way to scare people into thinking you have a hidden agenda is to start off with it being your actual agenda and then try to hide it  

Am just happy I will be long dead before I see what comes from this generation of children (IE by the time they are embedded into politics). Kind of scary when I see my nieces and nephews and kids talking about fat shaming, dead naming and all that kind of stuff before reaching 10 years of age o_O

If you thought there were a lot of Ken's and Karen's now. Hold onto your seat. It will be a rough ride.

[SpankyMcFarland]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

For the same reason that teaching heterosexuality to children in elementary school is inherently wrong. Children are by and large not mature enough to deal with complex issues regarding sexuality at that age.  If there are some who are and their parents feel they should be educated that early they can make those arrangements privately.

Some people (not saying you) like to pretend that sex is just another mundane topic, like learning how to boil an egg or what various nations capitals are.  But we know that it has a very complex effect on our psyche and it is NOT a casual concept. Very bad things can happen introducing children to sex at too young an age. There's a REASON we don't allow minors to have sex for example.

Teaching them that some people have two mommies or two daddys  (or a mommy OR a daddy - single parents get no love in our school system) is fine as long as it's kept to that. You're not really touching on sex at all. and its inclusive for children who have same sex parents or single parents.

But beyond that? Oh hell no.

Parents have direct control over that. If you're letting your 10 year old have unrestricted access to the internet on their personal cell phone without supervision or blockers then that's your business i guess, i don't think that's very good parenting.  But - so be it.  That does not mean it should be taught in schools.

Children in the later years of grade school are starting puberty. That’s too late to introduce the topic of sex to them in school. They’re going to learn some highly unreliable stuff from their peers and the Internet as well which needs to be balanced by responsible content. The notion that parents can control completely what kids see just doesn’t work. The fact is they don’t. The kids we want to counsel most are often those with the poorest parental supervision. 

Edited June 26, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[SpankyMcFarland]

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

Thats the thing, though. It isn't done sensibly.

I’ve no argument there. What exactly should be taught is a whole other matter. 

 

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

Some kids have been left confused as to their sense of identity. Some never even having thought about this until it was brought up.

I didn't think of my sexuality until high school. I didn't need to.

I don't understand how this has any business in grade school.

Because in middle school you’re right into these issues. I think kids should have advance warning of what’s about to happen so they are prepared for it. 

Do many people change their gender identities because of what they are told in school? I don’t believe so but it’s an issue that has been raised. 

Edited June 26, 2023 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

11 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Children in the later years of grade school are starting puberty.

A small handful are, and it's the first stage.  How many 12 year olds are able to be sexually active? At most a course on what happens to people during puberty is appropriate but those kids won't be sexually active or enter the later stages of puberty anytime soon for the most part.

And if their parents feel they're a little more 'advanced' that way then they can make arrangements.

But entering puberty is not the same as becoming sexually active and there's no need to be teaching sexual positions and techniques to kids who are 12.

17 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

The notion that parents can control completely what kids see just doesn’t work.

Then parents can make arrangements if they feel their kids are suddenly about to become sexually active at 12.

And again - sex ed when it IS taught can focus on misconceptions and physical realities such as std's and prevention etc. it doesn't have to have anything to do with homosexual or transgender issues.  It's pretty much the same for everyone. Some understanding of pregnancy risks are also important but there really aren't a lot of threats associated with gay sex that don't also apply to heteros.

I"m sorry but there just is no 'responsible' way to mass-teach children who are under the age of 12 about the complexities of sexual relationships.  If some need it then individual parents can address it.

[SpankyMcFarland]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

A small handful are, and it's the first stage.  How many 12 year olds are able to be sexually active? At most a course on what happens to people during puberty is appropriate but those kids won't be sexually active or enter the later stages of puberty anytime soon for the most part.

 

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

I"m sorry but there just is no 'responsible' way to mass-teach children who are under the age of 12 about the complexities of sexual relationships.  If some need it then individual parents can address it.

For girls, puberty usually starts between the ages of 9 and 13. The median age of menarche in Canada is approximately 12.7 years, so half of girls have their first period before that. I would argue that sexual education of some sort should start ahead of menarche. More generally, children of any age can be taught about appropriate relationships, e.g. the unacceptability of violence, and at some point a sexual element could be introduced. 

 

[PIK]

I can imagine many gay people are horrified themselves over this. Time to put the clothes back on.

[CdnFox]

46 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

 

For girls, puberty usually starts between the ages of 9 and 13. The median age of menarche in Canada is approximately 12.7 years, so half of girls have their first period before that. I would argue that sexual education of some sort should start ahead of menarche. More generally, children of any age can be taught about appropriate relationships, e.g. the unacceptability of violence, and at some point a sexual element could be introduced. 

 

First stage only.  Girls are not interested in finding a sex partner at age 9    And that would mean a lot of them wouldn't even be in first stage puberty till after they hit high school.

I mean seriously - what age did you start having sex at? I was younger than average and i was definitely in high school.  Lets not pretend it's desperately important for 8 year olds to have a working understanding of sex in case their boyfriend wants to fool around.

And as to their first period - yeah the 'puberty' talk might be valuable but they're not rushing out to have sex at age 12.  Sorry, it's just not a thing. Not for consensual sex anyway. The vast majority won't have sex till after 16 (sometimes LONG after)  and the remainder almost all start a 15. 

So fine - sex ed at 13 -14 when they're in high school might be approprate.  They are a hell of a lot older and more able to deal with issues than they are when they're 7.