Listen to the exact words in the exact books Democrats want in our public school libraries

[j-mac]

and that's what bothers you, that they validate gay practices, not that it's sexual content for children.

Are you crazy? What would make you twist yourself into a pretzel on this topic, other than your own perverted thought process on the matter?

 

[j-mac]

Society has a right to protect your children from your own neglect.

Over my dead body…fuck off pervert.

 

[Curried Goats]

Over my dead body…fuck off pervert.

Sure, internet tough guy.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Two responses to "what about the Bible?"

First, none of the passages in the bible that talk about sex are nearly as explicit as the details in "Lawn Boy," "Gender Queer" and "All Boys aren't Blue." Instead it has phrases like "Adam knew Eve, and she conceived," and "the firstborn went in and lay with her father."

That is much different from "I pulled out of him and kissed him while he masturbated," and "pleasure mixed in with the pain." The bible briefly mentions that sex acts occurred, it does not explicitely describe them for the purpose of arousing the reader.

Second, if a librarian decided that topics such as incest, rape, adultery, drunkeness are not approprate at an elementary library or junior high library, and shelved instead a children's version of the Bible, as are used in Sunday Schools, I would have no objection to that. I'm not going to scream that she is a "book burner," or any of the other nonsense directed at people who want their tax money spent on appropriate materials.

 

[HeyNorm]

Again, kids can find far more explicit stuff online.

Do right wingers suffer from some sort of amnesia where they forget how horny they were as teenagers.

I was horny, but the schools were not a part of grooming my potential partners. That is exactly the difference Moron.

 

[HeyNorm]

It certainly was cringe worthy but many things are cringe worthy but there may be children that need to here it. If a child asks about the subject what should our reaction be?
There is movement by the Right to limit what children can read about slavery. That period was cringe worthy but that knowledge is valuable. The Holocaust was cringe worthy but that knowledge too is valuable. Where is the line? Violence is OK but sex is not?

The more you justify it, the more perverted you look.

 

[Curried Goats]

Two responses to "what about the Bible?"

First, none of the passages in the bible that talk about sex are nearly as explicit as the details in "Lawn Boy," "Gender Queer" and "All Boys aren't Blue." Instead it has phrases like "Adam knew Eve, and she conceived," and "the firstborn went in and lay with her father."

That is much different from "I pulled out of him and kissed him while he masturbated," and "pleasure mixed in with the pain." The bible briefly mentions that sex acts occurred, it does not explicitely describe them for the purpose of arousing the reader.

Second, if a librarian decided that topics such as incest, rape, adultery, drunkeness are not approprate at an elementary library or junior high library, and shelved instead a children's version of the Bible, as are used in Sunday Schools, I would have no objection to that. I'm not going to scream that she is a "book burner," or any of the other nonsense directed at people who want their tax money spent on appropriate materials.

That's right. They are much different. One is an accounting of a gay man's experiences through, childhood, adolescence and adulthood and the other is a fantasy book about angels and zombies.

 

[j-mac]

Sure, internet tough guy.

It’s not about being a tough guy….At my age, I avoid physical violence…But, this is so wrong, we have to question why now? All of the sudden you want teens to be taught filth instead of math or science?

 

[Curried Goats]

It’s not about being a tough guy….At my age, I avoid physical violence…But, this is so wrong, we have to question why now? All of the sudden you want teens to be taught filth instead of math or science?

Because bigots like you previously suppressed queer education. Now as you say you're old and weak and we can finally strike the death blow to your backwards ignorance.

 

[alang1216]

The more you justify it, the more perverted you look.

Them more folks ignore my issues with this and just keep repeating 'porn!' the more sheepish, shallow, ideological, and ignorant they look.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Why when you haven't even proven it is pornography?

You ABSOLUTELY ARE the word we are not allowed to use here.

Is there ANYTHING good in a Democrats soul.
.it would be better for you if you and your vile ilk were silent in these threads. You've exposed yourself

Not surprised with your fag power avatar

 

[j-mac]

Because bigots like you previously suppressed queer education. Now as you say you're old and weak and we can finally strike the death blow to your backwards ignorance.

No, I didn’t say I was weak, that’s you lying….

So, to you it’s more important to push agenda on our kids, than to actually teach the subjects I mentioned….sad really.

 

[Curried Goats]

You ABSOLUTELY ARE the word we are not allowed to use here.

Pussy.

Is there ANYTHING good in a Democrats soul.
.it would be better for you if you and your vile ilk were silent in these threads. You've exposed yourself

You only expose your own ignorance. One only has to read the book to know how full of shit you are. Do you hope the entire country is illiterate?

 

[Curried Goats]

No, I didn’t say I was weak, that’s you lying….

So, to you it’s more important to push agenda on our kids, than to actually teach the subjects I mentioned….sad really.

Yes you are weak. The agenda is queer sex education right along heterosexual education because that improves outcomes for teenagers you ignorant moron.

 

[j-mac]

Pussy.

You only expose your own ignorance. One only has to read the book to know how full of shit you are. Do you hope the entire country is illiterate?

So, now you’re making the context argument. What context would a father of a 15 year old girl, think it’s ok to teach his daughter how to undertake anal sex…?

And, are you really arguing that the only way to improve literacy in the schools is to use this filth to do it?

 

[HeyNorm]

Them more folks ignore my issues with this and just keep repeating 'porn!' the more sheepish, shallow, ideological, and ignorant they look.

And again, looking like a pervert.

Your choice. Not mine.

 

[j-mac]

Yes you are weak. The agenda is queer sex education right along heterosexual education because that improves outcomes for teenagers you ignorant moron.

How so? Explain.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Them more folks ignore my issues with this and just keep repeating 'porn!' the more sheepish, shallow, ideological, and ignorant they look.

I'll address it.

It certainly was cringe worthy but many things are cringe worthy but there may be children that need to here it.

What factors make it a need for a child to hear:

"I pulled out of him and kissed him while he masturbated . . . he pushed inside me and it was the worst pain I ever felt. But gradually pleasure mixed in with he pain."

When does the need for a child to hear this arise?

If a child asks about the subject what should our reaction be?

"our" reaction is not what is needed. The child's parents are responsible for answering questions like that, based on their own values and understanding of the topic.

When my children asked about "boys who like boys," I explained that the majority of people are attracted to members of the opposite sex, and that we are designed that way so that we can reproduce, but that there's always a ten-percent contrarian factor (a phrase I used a lot with them), and that some people are attracted to people of the same sex.

They never asked "what do they do with each other?" If they had, I would have explained it the same way I did when explaining heterosexual sex, giving them as much detail as they needed, but not dwelling on it.

You likely explained it much differently to your kids, and I am fine with that. That's what I don't get. Why the need to control how I talk to my kids, or to use the public schools to re-educate them from my own teaching?

It sure looks like being controlling out of lack of confidence in your own values.

There is movement by the Right to limit what children can read about slavery. That period was cringe worthy but that knowledge is valuable. The Holocaust was cringe worthy but that knowledge too is valuable. Where is the line? Violence is OK but sex is not?

What are those people trying to limit about slavery and the holocaust? Do you have video of a Senator reading passages about slavery or the Holocaust that he objects to?

 

[Curried Goats]

So, now you’re making the context argument. What context would a father of a 15 year old girl, think it’s ok to teach his daughter how to undertake anal sex…?

Who gives a shit? A child's education shouldn't be limited to what their Bingo parents are comfortable with.

And, are you really arguing that the only way to improve literacy in the schools is to use this filth to do it?

No you dumb Bingo. I'm arguing that comprehensive sex education improves the odds of teenagers actually practicing safe sex. And not just in terms of condoms and birth control but also in regards to consent and agency.

 

[JoeB131]

That’s a bs argument. Maybe YOU didn’t give a shit what your kids were exposed to, others do. What makes you think YOU can make the choices for them?

I think you have it the exact opposite. Why should I limit my kids' learning opportunities because YOU might be offended by something?