[Accygirl wrote:] My mom's a teacher, so I know that most schools are very sensitive to the wishes of the parents. I very much doubt that a majority of the schools would force that on five year olds.
If this were true, there would be no need for organizations such as the ACLJ to represent Christian parents whose children have been subjected to teaching in public schools, teaching that violates the Christian parents beliefs, including, I've read, pro-homosexual teaching and materials.
You honestly mean to tell us you've never heard one news story about homosexual groups, or those sympathetic to them, trying to force kids to read "Heather Has Two Mommies" and other such literature?
And that the sexual ed courses teach the kids there is "nothing wrong" with homoexuality?
Wasn't it during the 1980s when the Surgeon General thought it would be a good idea to have first graders learn about homosexuality (specifically anal sex between two men) and how to put a condom on a cucumber?
On a similar note, we have homosexuality crammed down our throats in TV shows and in movies (e.g. Brokeback Mountain, Queer Eye, Will and Grace, the L Word, and homosexual characters on other shows) all of which is seeking to "normalize" homosexuality and make us think it's okay.
One of the common refrains one began hearing sometime in the late 1980s or 1990s in regards to homosexuality was,
"[Insert critical comment about homosexuality here], not that there's anything wrong with it [homosexuality]."
That, to me, was one of the first things that demonsrated that the homosexual activists had made some in-roads: people had to qualify any criticism of homosexuals or homosexualty by tacking on the phrase, "not that there's anything wrong with it."
[Accygirl wrote - to another poster -] First, the fact that you think that all gay people are sexual predators is offensive.
So only straight people commit crimes? There is no such thing as a homosexual who has ever molested a child, shop lifted, stolen, lied?
I don't know if the other poster stated that all homoexuals are pedophiles, but there are connections. See, for instance, this:
The tragic story of Jesse Dirkhising
or this -
Pedophiles Argue Their Case in the Journal of Homosexuality
Why would homosexuals give pedophiles a platform from which to expound their views?
If homosexuals don't like the complaint that they foster pedophilia, one would think they would have absolutely nothing to do with any group who promoties it, but that isn't the case. They are chummy with NAMBLA.
and there's many straight people who engage in risky sexual behavior or use intravenous drugs that do...
Two wrongs do not make a right, which, I've noticed, has had to be repeated in this thread many a time by others.
Straight people engaging in fornication or sexual deviancy is not excusable. Neither is homosexuality.
Of interest:
There has been a lot of sloppy thinking in this thread, such as the oft- repeated argument that "because some straight parents are abusive, this means that homosexuality is morally acceptable, and it's perfectly acceptable for homosexuals to be parents."
(I don't think great white sharks would be decent parents to a human child either, but I fail to see how that automatically legitimizes homosexual unions / parentage.)
Then there are the bizarre arguments of the strawman variety stated early in the thread that one who is against lesbians having a baby must necessarily want, demand, or wish for the abortion of that baby.
Further sloppy arguments:
that what two public figures do in their bedroom is nobody's business so nobody is permitted to pass any sort of judgment about the situation, (or anyone who has an opinion on the subject should keep it to himself or herself).
Not a sloppy argument but an observation of mine:
People who are, for reasons of morality, against homosexual parenthood are not all necessarily in favor of the government enforcing laws against it.
- But the critics in this thread continue to attribute this view to any and all socially conservative types here.
Great post!