Friday, May 29, 2009

Survey Says...

A majority of Americans still oppose same-sex "marriages" in the U.S. according to a USA Today/Gallup poll, but with no significant changes on either side of the issue as compared to last year.

Read full story HERE.
A question that I found interesting was the following:
Should gays or lesbians be hired as elementary school teachers? What I would like to add to this question is: should gays or lesbians be hired as elementary school teachers IF they are known to be tied to a pro-gay organization, such as GLADD? On the flip side, should heterosexuals be hired as elementary school teachers if they are known to be tied to pro-family organizations?
What do you think??

23 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who cares?

8:37 AM, May 30, 2009  
Blogger The New Village Atheist said...

“Should gays or lesbians be hired as elementary school teachers?”

If they can accomplish the task of educating children, they’re not pedophiles and can put up with the lousy pay, lack of recognition while dealing with screaming kids let them.

“should gays or lesbians be hired as elementary school teachers IF they are known to be tied to a pro-gay organization, such as GLADD?”

What is it about pro-gay organizations that would disqualify a prospective teacher?

“should heterosexuals be hired as elementary school teachers if they are known to be tied to pro-family organizations?”

What is it about pro-family organizations that would disqualify a prospective teacher?

5:10 AM, May 31, 2009  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

You ask:

"What is it about pro-gay [or pro-family] organizations that would disqualify a prospective teacher?

What about the distinct possibility that a pro-gay or pro-family teacher would stear off the curriculum of the day and teach their values to the children? Is that a problem??

7:49 PM, May 31, 2009  
Blogger The New Village Atheist said...

“What about the distinct possibility that a pro-gay or pro-family teacher would stear off the curriculum of the day and teach their values to the children? Is that a problem??”

Teachers always have and should express their opinions. It is the students’ responsibility to think critically and use their teachers’ opinions not as a basis for their own but to help them create their own. I don’t want either to “teach” their particular values and then grade students on those values, but I believe it is important for students to understand how to create an opinion. If a teacher expresses their opinion that homosexuality is evil I’m fine with that as long as the teacher concentrates not on whether the students agree but whether or not the students can form an opinion themselves on the matter and defend it.

One caveat though; if a teacher uses religion as a basis for their opinion they must express that religion is a myth with no rational basis for believing.

4:18 AM, June 01, 2009  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

What if the pro-gay or pro-family teacher is teaching kindergarten aged children? Does your above statement still apply?

7:00 PM, June 02, 2009  
Blogger The New Village Atheist said...

“What if the pro-gay or pro-family teacher is teaching kindergarten aged children?”

Then I don’t think opinions should be part of the lesson. Teach the kids how to read and leave it at that.

12:14 AM, June 03, 2009  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

You said:

"Then I don’t think opinions should be part of the lesson. Teach the kids how to read and leave it at that."

Then what do you think of the David Parker situation? (read the January 2, 2008 post titled "The Latest on David Parker") There are other posts, but this is the first one I bumped into.

7:39 PM, June 06, 2009  
Blogger The New Village Atheist said...

“Then what do you think of the David Parker situation?”

I think David Parker is a media hound. Here’s the difference though Scia; the schools as far as I know wasn’t teaching Mr. Parker’s son whether or not homosexual parents are moral or immoral but rather that same sex couples exist. That’s not an opinion but a fact. And kindergartners should realize that.

3:45 AM, June 07, 2009  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

You said:

"...the schools as far as I know wasn’t teaching Mr. Parker’s son whether or not homosexual parents are moral or immoral but rather that same sex couples exist. That’s not an opinion but a fact. And kindergartners should realize that."

Have you read the book in question in which the Parker's disagreed with? It is called "King & King".

6:54 PM, June 07, 2009  
Blogger The New Village Atheist said...

“Have you read the book in question in which the Parker's disagreed with? It is called "King & King".”

I have not, however I did a search on the book and found it was listed twice at massresistance and it also had a Wikipedia page (I overlooked the amazon page.)

From what I could find out about the book I doubt I would find it objectionable for 2 reasons: It did not place the characters in any kind of sexual intimacy. And it did not discuss the morality or immorality of the relationship. If I were a Christian I believe the book would have brought about time to discuss the morality of the relationship. I would say to my child “This is a type of relationship that does exist in our society today. As we are Christians we believe that type of relationship is immoral. But there are many things in our society that we don’t partake in because we see them as immoral like pornographic material. We can see it behind the counter at the convenience store and leave it be just as we can those that live this kind of relationship. This is one of the many things the Lord was warning us about in the Bible where god tells us to be in the world but not of the world.”

Well, so how did my pretending to be Christian go?

4:58 AM, June 08, 2009  
Anonymous Rufus said...

Actually, if I am remembering correctly, Parker was upset about a different book about who makes up a family. In that book, among many other types of families, a same sex couple with kids was depicted. I thought it was another set of parents (the Wirthlins) who objected to the King & King book, and then Parkers joined them in a law suit about the practice of using any material containing references to SS couples. The material Parker objected to originally contained even less references to SS relationships, and NOTHING sexual whatsoever.

8:12 AM, June 09, 2009  
Blogger SCIA said...

Rufus,

I stand corrected. You are correct about the book the Parkers objected to. My bad.

On the other hand, I am not talking about the sexual content of the book "Whose in a Family"...in which there is none ..., I, as well as the Parkers, do not want our children being exposed to abnormal sexual proclivities under the school bell. Would you want your child, or any child for that matter, being exposed to a book where a prostitute was depicted as being part of a family or a man who liked boys being depicted as being part of a family? I hope you would not, because these sexual inclinations, along with homosexuality, are abnormal behaviors.

7:53 PM, June 11, 2009  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

Your one step away...

7:56 PM, June 11, 2009  
Blogger The New Village Atheist said...

“Would you want your child, or any child for that matter, being exposed to a book where a prostitute was depicted as being part of a family or a man who liked boys being depicted as being part of a family?”

They are part of families Scia. While I would not want a school to glorify prostitution or pedophilia I don’t think that’s what is happening with the issue at hand. And once again you are comparing apples and oranges; crimes and non-crimes. I remember a movie called Milk Money that depicted a prostitute as part of a family, and a movie called Citizen X where a serial killer with sexual dysfunction was depicted as part of a family.

“I hope you would not, because these sexual inclinations, along with homosexuality, are abnormal behaviors.”

Atheism is abnormal in a nation where 84% of the populace is theistic, that does not mean theism is any more factual or beneficial.

“Your one step away...”

One step away from what? Being a Christian? Being blocked? I don’t understand.

4:28 AM, June 12, 2009  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

Homosexuality is not a crime, at least not anymore as it once was. To show children via story books that homosexuality, prostitution and sexual dysfunctions are normal behaviors by showing them that they can successfully exist in a healthy institution, a family in this case, is wrong. Never mind the fact that it is way to early in life to be talking about sex, either of a hetero- or a homosexual lifestyle, to kindergarten aged children.

7:37 PM, June 12, 2009  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

Homosexuality is not a crime, at least not anymore as it once was. To show children via story books that homosexuality, prostitution and sexual dysfunctions are normal behaviors by showing them that they can successfully exist in a healthy institution, a family in this case, is wrong. Never mind the fact that it is way to early in life to be talking about sex, either of a hetero- or a homosexual lifestyle, to kindergarten aged children.

7:37 PM, June 12, 2009  
Blogger The New Village Atheist said...

“To show children via story books that homosexuality, prostitution and sexual dysfunctions are normal behaviors by showing them that they can successfully exist in a healthy institution, a family in this case, is wrong.”

Why is it wrong Scia?

“Never mind the fact that it is way to early in life to be talking about sex, either of a hetero- or a homosexual lifestyle, to kindergarten aged children.”

Than what age would you suggest?

Bu the way; did you like my Christian speech?

4:12 AM, June 13, 2009  
Anonymous Rufus said...

SCIA, your consistant comparison of homosexuality with pedophelia and prostitution is disgusting.

Homosexual behavior is NOT abnormal to those whose nature precludes it. It is unnatural to force them into a heterosexual relationship. The bonding simply isn't there. Would you rather they go against their nature, and lead a life of lies? Or remain celebate and lonely?

8:57 AM, June 15, 2009  
Blogger SCIA said...

Rufus,

You asked:

"Would you rather they go against their nature, and lead a life of lies? Or remain celebate and lonely?"

Go against their "choices" and lead a Godly life, yes. 'Remain celebate and lonely'. If they can remain celebate life and lead a life with a relationship with Christ, yes.

4:33 PM, June 15, 2009  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

You asked 'why is that wrong' to my question of:

“To show children via story books that homosexuality, prostitution and sexual dysfunctions are normal behaviors by showing them that they can successfully exist in a healthy institution, a family in this case, is wrong.”

It is O.K. to glorify and normalize dangerous behaviors, which is what occurs when you read stories about prostitution, ect to young impressionable minds??? Ken,you just stated the following about the sado-masochist, Mr. Boston, chaperoning at the Youth Pride Day prom:

"...I must agree that it is wrong."

What is with the flip-flop??

Your second question asked:

"Than what age would you suggest (to talk about sex)?"

Not kindergarten, that is for sure. Let's try eighth or ninth grade.

6:29 PM, June 15, 2009  
Blogger The New Village Atheist said...

“It is O.K. to glorify and normalize dangerous behaviors, which is what occurs when you read stories about prostitution, ect to young impressionable minds???”

Did you ever see a movie called Milk Money? Would you call that a dangerous movie for kids to watch? If so; why?

“Ken,you just stated the following about the sado-masochist, Mr. Boston, chaperoning at the Youth Pride Day prom:

What is with the flip-flop??”

The difference is that the book King and King was not sexuality based. This Youth Pride Prom seemed to be entirely sexually based.

“Not kindergarten, that is for sure. Let's try eighth or ninth grade.”

I think we could compromise Scia but I won’t go for middle school. Their minds are too solid at that point. 8 to 10 years old (third to fifth grade) would be acceptable to me; do you think you could compromise to that age?

5:39 AM, June 17, 2009  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

You said:

"I think we could compromise Scia but I won’t go for middle school. Their minds are too solid at that point..."

Why not middle school?? Their minds...can you explain??

7:47 PM, June 30, 2009  
Blogger The New Village Atheist said...

“Why not middle school?? Their minds...can you explain??”

You know Scia to be honest I can’t. Every time I try to put down what I mean to say it seems like I’m trying to turn these kids into sex fiends. So hopefully someone else can pick up my slack.

5:03 PM, July 03, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

Sign my Guestbook from Bravenet.com Get your Free Guestbook from Bravenet.com