It Begins: California Begins Indoctrinating Children Into The LGBT Lifestyle Against Parents Wishes

[rightwinger]

This is not a case of anybody promoting oppression. It is a case of schools indulging in social engineering.

Horseshit!! It's teaching history. It's teaching respect and inclusiveness. It is combating bigotry

How dare you teach my children not to hate gays?

. Not the governments job to teach on these subjects, and the nation has laws against discrimination that cover every angle needed, so why do people think that they need the schools to teach the kids apart from their parents teaching such things, in which keeps their kids out of trouble with the law ? Is there a fear that the majority of parents won't teach their children to obey the law, and so those parents have to be by passed when the children are away from their care and influence ?

Teaching good citizenship is a schools job

. Wrong... It's the parents job.

Parents are teaching them hate
Schools are not obliged to support it

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It is absolutely the job of government in a decent society to protect minorities from bigots.

Just like government would step in if someone tried to make it illegal to pray in the manner you wish.

Bigots are pathetic.

It is absolutely the job of government in a decent society to protect children from those who would indoctrinate them with sexually-perverted filth.

Pedophilic perverts are pathetic, as are those who would defend them.

Who is defending pediphiles?

Anything else you'd like to lie about, ignorant twit?

People who think it is a good idea to Teach kids sex, gay or otherwise, what else would you call them?

And who the fuck is doing that??!! What exactly do you mean ?? Older kids will have sex, its a fact of life . No one has to teach them how, but we have to teach them how to be safe. Is that a fucking problem?? I will add, that has nothing to do with the topic of this moronic and dishonest OP....just for the record.

That's the argument the French used for having sex with teen and preteen girls. They need to be taught how to properly how to have sex by a mature man who can teach them all the tricks then they can turn around and teach the younger boys in turn. Lolita.

Some sweet stuff there.

What the fuck asshole ? The French? When was that.? What the fuck does it have to do with sex education in reality here and now? There is something seriously wrong with you if you think that teaching kids- who are going to have sex anyway with other kids- is grooming them for sex with adults is just as fucking stupid as stupid gets. And if by some chance your are not so stupid as to believe that, you are a deceptive and dishonest reprobate who is using a feigned concern for children to push your right wing agenda . Oh, and what does this have to do with the moronic and dishonest OP ? ( who apparently abandoned this thread knowing how stupid it is)

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

How dare you teach my children not to hate gays?

. Not the governments job to teach on these subjects, and the nation has laws against discrimination that cover every angle needed, so why do people think that they need the schools to teach the kids apart from their parents teaching such things, in which keeps their kids out of trouble with the law ? Is there a fear that the majority of parents won't teach their children to obey the law, and so those parents have to be by passed when the children are away from their care and influence ?

It is absolutely the job of government in a decent society to protect minorities from bigots.

Just like government would step in if someone tried to make it illegal to pray in the manner you wish.

Bigots are pathetic.

. You like calling people bigots because they don't believe in what you believe, but yet don't you ever think that it could be you that is wrong ?

I for one call people bigots who are in fact bigots. Not for disagreeing with me. Rather, for being a fucking bigot. If someone expresses contempt for your BIGOTRY it does not make them a bigot. Quite the contrary!! Despising and calling out bigots is hardly bigotry. Get your fucking head on straight, cowboy.!!

. You speak this from a position in which suggest that you are right (by your own thinking), but are you truly right in accordance with the majority opinion on such issues ?

It is only the voices in your head that tells you that you are in the majority

 

[jillian]

How dare you teach my children not to hate gays?

. Not the governments job to teach on these subjects, and the nation has laws against discrimination that cover every angle needed, so why do people think that they need the schools to teach the kids apart from their parents teaching such things, in which keeps their kids out of trouble with the law ? Is there a fear that the majority of parents won't teach their children to obey the law, and so those parents have to be by passed when the children are away from their care and influence ?

It is absolutely the job of government in a decent society to protect minorities from bigots.

Just like government would step in if someone tried to make it illegal to pray in the manner you wish.

Bigots are pathetic.

. You like calling people bigots because they don't believe in what you believe, but yet don't you ever think that it could be you that is wrong ?

I for one call people bigots who are in fact bigots. Not for disagreeing with me. Rather, for being a fucking bigot. If someone expresses contempt for your BIGOTRY it does not make them a bigot. Quite the contrary!! Despising and calling out bigots is hardly bigotry. Get your fucking head on straight, cowboy.!!

. You speak this from a position in which suggest that you are right (by your own thinking), but are you truly right in accordance with the majority opinion on such issues ?

No you are not the majority.

If you were, it would still be our obligation to point out your bigotry.

You might want to try getting out of your bubble into the world.

 

[jillian]

It is absolutely the job of government in a decent society to protect minorities from bigots.

Just like government would step in if someone tried to make it illegal to pray in the manner you wish.

Bigots are pathetic.

It is absolutely the job of government in a decent society to protect children from those who would indoctrinate them with sexually-perverted filth.

Pedophilic perverts are pathetic, as are those who would defend them.

Who is defending pediphiles?

Anything else you'd like to lie about, ignorant twit?

People who think it is a good idea to Teach kids sex, gay or otherwise, what else would you call them?

And who the fuck is doing that??!! What exactly do you mean ?? Older kids will have sex, its a fact of life . No one has to teach them how, but we have to teach them how to be safe. Is that a fucking problem?? I will add, that has nothing to do with the topic of this moronic and dishonest OP....just for the record.

That's the argument the French used for having sex with teen and preteen girls. They need to be taught how to properly how to have sex by a mature man who can teach them all the tricks then they can turn around and teach the younger boys in turn. Lolita.

Some sweet stuff there.

What are you blathering about imbecile?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

For all those here who want to make historical figure's sex lives the stuff of school curriculum for children, shouldn't we be inclusive? I thought this was all about inclusion?


"During the first meeting of the Continental Congress, Patrick Henry, who was a bit of a back door man, John Jay, who had a bevy of midgets he had sex with regularly , Stephen Crane, who liked to get pegged and Samuel Adams, who was into golden showers as well as interracial sex, all got together and.....

 

[Silhouette]

For all those here who want to make historical figure's sex lives the stuff of school curriculum for children, shouldn't we be inclusive? I thought this was all about inclusion?


"During the first meeting of the Continental Congress, Patrick Henry, who was a bit of a back door man, John Jay, who had a bevy of midgets he had sex with regularly , Stephen Crane, who liked to get pegged and Samuel Adams, who was into golden showers as well as interracial sex, all got together and.....

^^ Definitely kid appropriate stuff.

NOT.

Point well made. Why segregate kinks? I thought LGBTQ was inclusive to all kinks? Or are just theirs "special kinks"?

 

[beagle9]

Horseshit!! It's teaching history. It's teaching respect and inclusiveness. It is combating bigotry

How dare you teach my children not to hate gays?

. Not the governments job to teach on these subjects, and the nation has laws against discrimination that cover every angle needed, so why do people think that they need the schools to teach the kids apart from their parents teaching such things, in which keeps their kids out of trouble with the law ? Is there a fear that the majority of parents won't teach their children to obey the law, and so those parents have to be by passed when the children are away from their care and influence ?

Teaching good citizenship is a schools job

. Wrong... It's the parents job.

Parents are teaching them hate
Schools are not obliged to support it

. So basically you're a communist, and you desire communism as a means for this country to operate on ? I mean, so you are ready to transform this nation into a communist nation over this issue ? Taking away the parents rights to raise and/or to teach their children is Communism/Socialism/Marxism or some kind of ism, and it is in full view here. So you're a communist or worse ?

 

[Silhouette]

So basically you're a communist, and you desire communism as a means for this country to operate on ? I mean, so you are ready to transform this nation into a communist nation over this issue ? Taking away the parents rights to raise and/or to teach their children is Communism/Socialism/Marxism or some kind of ism, and it is in full view here. So you're a communist or worse ?

That sounds like a really well thought out argument...until...the reader realizes what you're advocating for is the "right" for adults to sexualize young children. Then the reader sits up in their chair and says "Oh fuck, this is about child abuse!"...and ignores the rest of your posts..

 

[beagle9]

So basically you're a communist, and you desire communism as a means for this country to operate on ? I mean, so you are ready to transform this nation into a communist nation over this issue ? Taking away the parents rights to raise and/or to teach their children is Communism/Socialism/Marxism or some kind of ism, and it is in full view here. So you're a communist or worse ?

That sounds like a really well thought out argument...until...the reader realizes what you're advocating for is the "right" for adults to sexualize young children. Then the reader sits up in their chair and says "Oh fuck, this is about child abuse!"...and ignores the rest of your posts..

. Uh, you may want to re-write this post Sil... Not sure unless I'm crazy, but the way it is written or reads, is to suggest that I was advocating something in the way of Sexualizing the children, and then it says the reader sits up in the chair and says "this is about child abuse ! Maybe I wasn't your intended target on this post. Seen that before.

 

[bodecea]

trumpanzees still throwing their poop over this story?

 

[Silhouette]

trumpanzees still throwing their poop over this story?

Yeah, I mean, what the fuck is wrong with teaching little kids about deviant sex acts in grade school under the cloak of "teaching tolerance" (for people's behaviors, not any static state of being)?

It's just cloaked-pedophilia reaching straight into your kids' elementary school. What the hell is everyone so upset about?

 

[beagle9]

So basically you're a communist, and you desire communism as a means for this country to operate on ? I mean, so you are ready to transform this nation into a communist nation over this issue ? Taking away the parents rights to raise and/or to teach their children is Communism/Socialism/Marxism or some kind of ism, and it is in full view here. So you're a communist or worse ?

That sounds like a really well thought out argument...until...the reader realizes what you're advocating for is the "right" for adults to sexualize young children. Then the reader sits up in their chair and says "Oh fuck, this is about child abuse!"...and ignores the rest of your posts..

. Care to address this post Sil ?? I'm waiting.

 

[emilynghiem]

Before they were just suggesting it. Now, California parents have no choice: It Begins: California Announces Ban for Parents

It Begins: California Announces Ban for Parents
By
Warner Todd Huston
-
December 27, 2017
Share
Despite their reputation for being the “Party of choice,” Democrats in California have ruled that parents are not allowed to opt their school-aged children out of the mandatory LGBT indoctrination in the state-sponsored school system.

Naturally, far left-wing California has become the first state in the Union to force kids to use LGBT inclusive textbooks. But at the same time it left no legal way for parents to opt out from the propaganda.

The gay propaganda law supposedly requires a “‘fair, accurate, inclusive, and respectful’ treatment of homosexual, bisexual, transgender, and lesbian Americans despite the historical insignificance,” according to Truth Revolt.

State publisher Mark Jarrett cited several historical figures who *might* have been gay saying that his textbooks will essentially make these historical figures gay icons.

“We’re not trying to make anybody gay; we’re not saying there’s an agenda; we’re not saying that these people are better than other people; what we’re saying is this is another group of Americans and they face certain prejudices,” said state publisher Mark Jarrett, whose history textbooks include special mention of the sexual preferences of historical figures like Jane Adams, Emily Dickinson, Nathaniel Hawthorne, President James Buchanan, though it’s inconclusive if these prominent Americans were gay or not.

“I think we should say, ‘Buchanan, he never married. He had a very good friend who was living with him. He may have been gay,’” Jarrett added. “On the other hand, at that time, being gay was seen as something evil and wrong.”

It should be noted that men sharing expenses with other men and living together was an extremely common thing in our country’s history. Senators did it, Congressmen did it, and so do regular Americans all across the nation.

In Fact, it was extremely common even into the 20th century. It has only been since WWII that Americans developed a sense that living completely on alone with no co-habitating partners, whether platonic or romantic, was considered the thing to do.

As to President Buchanan, gay activists have tried to claim him as their own for decades but there is no direct proof of his sexual proclivities.

Gay activists have also ridiculously tried to make President Abraham Lincoln gay, as well.

The radical gay agenda is infused throughout California’s textbooks, Truth Revolt report:

California approved the textbooks written by Jarrett, a Ph.D, to be used in the 8th grade. Students will read that legendary stagecoach driver Charlie Parkhurst “was a woman who identified as a man,” according to Fox News. They will read that George Washington’s chief of staff Baron Von Steuben “may have been gay,” and that poet Walt Whitman “was drawn to young men… but denied his same sex preferences in public.”

Critics say much of these accounts are speculation, but California rejected any publisher that didn’t mention the homosexual preferences or claims against historical figures in their textbooks. In one textbook, the state forced the publisher to add “lesbian” to describe NASA astronaut Sally Ride.

So, to appease the radical gay lobby, California is now taking what are supposed to be factual school textbooks and filling them with “speculation” on the sexual leanings of historical figures despite the FACT that the facts are not known.

California is now officially indoctrinating, not educating, its children.​

And if Christians refused to let parents/children opt out of school prayer and indoctrination,
we would hear no end to the lawsuits from the ACLU and Freedom from Religion groups across the country!

 

[Silhouette]

And if Christians refused to let parents/children opt out of school prayer and indoctrination,
we would hear no end to the lawsuits from the ACLU and Freedom from Religion groups across the country!

Excellent points. Are there zero Christian parents in California who would file a lawsuit on this problem of cloaked-pedophilia in grade school there?

 

[beagle9]

trumpanzees still throwing their poop over this story?

Yeah, I mean, what the fuck is wrong with teaching little kids about deviant sex acts in grade school under the cloak of "teaching tolerance" (for people's behaviors, not any static state of being)?

It's just cloaked-pedophilia reaching straight into your kids' elementary school. What the hell is everyone so upset about?

. Yes, the doors that can be opened are endless. Just as the topics get out of control and off topic here, the same will result in these moves that are attempted to be made on issues like this.

 

[Aba Incieni]

. Not the governments job to teach on these subjects, and the nation has laws against discrimination that cover every angle needed, so why do people think that they need the schools to teach the kids apart from their parents teaching such things, in which keeps their kids out of trouble with the law ? Is there a fear that the majority of parents won't teach their children to obey the law, and so those parents have to be by passed when the children are away from their care and influence ?

It is absolutely the job of government in a decent society to protect minorities from bigots.

Just like government would step in if someone tried to make it illegal to pray in the manner you wish.

Bigots are pathetic.

. You like calling people bigots because they don't believe in what you believe, but yet don't you ever think that it could be you that is wrong ?

I for one call people bigots who are in fact bigots. Not for disagreeing with me. Rather, for being a fucking bigot. If someone expresses contempt for your BIGOTRY it does not make them a bigot. Quite the contrary!! Despising and calling out bigots is hardly bigotry. Get your fucking head on straight, cowboy.!!

. You speak this from a position in which suggest that you are right (by your own thinking), but are you truly right in accordance with the majority opinion on such issues ?

No you are not the majority.

If you were, it would still be our obligation to point out your bigotry.

You might want to try getting out of your bubble into the world.

The majority support heterosexuality. So many heterophobes on this forum.

 

[beagle9]

Before they were just suggesting it. Now, California parents have no choice: It Begins: California Announces Ban for Parents

It Begins: California Announces Ban for Parents
By
Warner Todd Huston
-
December 27, 2017
Share
Despite their reputation for being the “Party of choice,” Democrats in California have ruled that parents are not allowed to opt their school-aged children out of the mandatory LGBT indoctrination in the state-sponsored school system.

Naturally, far left-wing California has become the first state in the Union to force kids to use LGBT inclusive textbooks. But at the same time it left no legal way for parents to opt out from the propaganda.

The gay propaganda law supposedly requires a “‘fair, accurate, inclusive, and respectful’ treatment of homosexual, bisexual, transgender, and lesbian Americans despite the historical insignificance,” according to Truth Revolt.

State publisher Mark Jarrett cited several historical figures who *might* have been gay saying that his textbooks will essentially make these historical figures gay icons.

“We’re not trying to make anybody gay; we’re not saying there’s an agenda; we’re not saying that these people are better than other people; what we’re saying is this is another group of Americans and they face certain prejudices,” said state publisher Mark Jarrett, whose history textbooks include special mention of the sexual preferences of historical figures like Jane Adams, Emily Dickinson, Nathaniel Hawthorne, President James Buchanan, though it’s inconclusive if these prominent Americans were gay or not.

“I think we should say, ‘Buchanan, he never married. He had a very good friend who was living with him. He may have been gay,’” Jarrett added. “On the other hand, at that time, being gay was seen as something evil and wrong.”

It should be noted that men sharing expenses with other men and living together was an extremely common thing in our country’s history. Senators did it, Congressmen did it, and so do regular Americans all across the nation.

In Fact, it was extremely common even into the 20th century. It has only been since WWII that Americans developed a sense that living completely on alone with no co-habitating partners, whether platonic or romantic, was considered the thing to do.

As to President Buchanan, gay activists have tried to claim him as their own for decades but there is no direct proof of his sexual proclivities.

Gay activists have also ridiculously tried to make President Abraham Lincoln gay, as well.

The radical gay agenda is infused throughout California’s textbooks, Truth Revolt report:

California approved the textbooks written by Jarrett, a Ph.D, to be used in the 8th grade. Students will read that legendary stagecoach driver Charlie Parkhurst “was a woman who identified as a man,” according to Fox News. They will read that George Washington’s chief of staff Baron Von Steuben “may have been gay,” and that poet Walt Whitman “was drawn to young men… but denied his same sex preferences in public.”

Critics say much of these accounts are speculation, but California rejected any publisher that didn’t mention the homosexual preferences or claims against historical figures in their textbooks. In one textbook, the state forced the publisher to add “lesbian” to describe NASA astronaut Sally Ride.

So, to appease the radical gay lobby, California is now taking what are supposed to be factual school textbooks and filling them with “speculation” on the sexual leanings of historical figures despite the FACT that the facts are not known.

California is now officially indoctrinating, not educating, its children.​

And if Christians refused to let parents/children opt out of school prayer and indoctrination,
we would hear no end to the lawsuits from the ACLU and Freedom from Religion groups across the country!

. Exactly, and so why shouldn't the same result when see things like this ? The double standard is a real deal going on in this country big time.

 

[Silhouette]

At least Christian prayer in school doesn't involve cloaked-pedophilia. This policy must be challenged. Both are ideologies which have no place in schools for indoctrinization. Even under the well-crafted cloak of "anti-bullying!"

 

[emilynghiem]

Horseshit!! It's teaching history. It's teaching respect and inclusiveness. It is combating bigotry

How dare you teach my children not to hate gays?

. Not the governments job to teach on these subjects, and the nation has laws against discrimination that cover every angle needed, so why do people think that they need the schools to teach the kids apart from their parents teaching such things, in which keeps their kids out of trouble with the law ? Is there a fear that the majority of parents won't teach their children to obey the law, and so those parents have to be by passed when the children are away from their care and influence ?

Teaching good citizenship is a schools job

. Wrong... It's the parents job.

Parents are teaching them hate
Schools are not obliged to support it

Dear rightwinger
it sounds like the opposite here.
It's not the schools opting out of teaching hate
but requiring parents/students to biased indoctrination
that excludes and rejects Christian love and forgiveness that
has healed abuse and changed people's orientations that weren't natural for them.

this indoctrination required of parents/students
isn't recognizing equal choices but REJECTING some,
and is just as problematic to FORCE people to undergo without respect for their
choice of beliefs.

That FREE CHOICE OF BELIEFS is what's being left out.

If the laws on accommodations and equal civil rights were enforced and taught
correctly, then BOTH the people for or against LGBT beliefs and/or Christian beliefs
would be given Equal free choice to OPT OUT of either one! That would be fair.

You are right that the liberals can choose NOT to receive or follow this information.
But cannot require parents/students to be indoctrinated in that choice to REFUSE
the healing power, message and natural process that Christianity teaches.