Larry Gude said:
...is a Goddamn fact of nature. It just is. Not everybody is gay. Not everybody loves boobs. Or long legs. Or fat azzes. Some women like neanderthals. Some like their men less so. So women like girls. We're tried to tell ourselves for years that people who were told by society to hate and loath themselves were bad people for who they were attracted to. Look how sensitive you Christians are to criticism.
For that matter, what would Christ do in a classroom when the teacher says "Homosexuals are people too, and can live happy, harmonious, productive lives, just like everybody else."
Would he freak out? Would he be a bit more accepting of gay people than his followers?
As for vouchers, fine. I've been for them for years. Give people the power of the purse, their own purse. Just understand that people will tend to segregate by class and race. I hate to say this because I HATE busing, but, one of the reasons blacks and whites are so much more...normal around each other these days is the legacy of busing.
I hate to say that, but, it did some of the good it was intended to do.
Okay, homosexuality is a fact of nature. So what?
What does that have to do with whether it should be taught with acceptance vice tolerance?
This is what I was saying earlier. The statement of the thread was that the schools shouldn't teach something the parents are against, that the school board should have more say than the parents - that our will must bend to the "duty" of the school to educate a particular doctrine. People who are arguing against that thought are arguing that homosexuals are the norm, putting people arguing against it in the idiotic position of seeming to deny that. I don't think there's a soul on here saying there aren't men getting it on with men nor women not getting it on with other women. I don't think there's a 8th nor 10th grader out there not aware that homosexuality exists. So effing what? I've shown you unbiased research that shows they're about 1.5% of the population, I am fully aware they exist. So what?
I don't know what Jesus would do, but my best guess is He would take the same stance He did when He said "let he who is without sin cast the first stone." That's my guiding doctrine when WWJD comes up. Again, so what? This discussion isn't whether homosexuality exists, whether Christians have one view of it with The Christ having another and Elton John another still.
By changing the argument to whether homosexuality is "right" or not, the bigger issue of who gets to decide what for their kids gets kicked to the curb. I don't care if homosexuals exist or not, personally. But, there's a clearly large percentage of the population of Mont. County that doesn't want the issue taught as they believe it is/will be. They have the right to believe that, and to petition the county and state BOEs to get their point across. Furthermore, when they speak, they shouldn't be shut out of the conversation, having the school be the only one allowed to present its version of the view.
I was only trying to help you see you were misreading his original quote about being pragmatic, and what he was being pragmatic about.
ffice:smarttags" /><st1
