Threats 2 Kill.. Nice Peeps Strike Again..

[darkeyes]

As summa ya kno..me presently am trainin 2 achieve a long held ambition 2 teach.. every week me gets the TES 2 look at jobs an as parta keep up wiv wots goin on in teachin in the UK.. this weeks TES has this luffly lil article wich ya shud all read..teacher or no.. cos it affects us..or kids..an our society a large..an bastards who don hav the rite 2 consida themsels human beins..

http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6003844&navcode=94

[CuddlyKate]

When Frances showed me this article this morning I was horrified. For too long the intolerance of our society has prevented any proper consideration being given to homosexual issues. When I was at school it was quite simply never discussed at all. This has ensured that there remains within our society misunderstandings and myth about what being gay or lesbian, or bisexual for that matter really involves. What it truly is and what it means to men and women who are gay.

This is especially true of our children who are our future and how their attitudes evolve influence the kind of society we will see in years to come. My first lesbian relationship began when I was a schoolgirl but it was not something I could ever become open about because teachers did not want to know and my schoolmates would never have understood. It was not the norm of a society just coming to the end of the Thatcher years and Section 28 which specifically prevented gay issues even being discussed in school.

Although we now live in a more tolerant age, it would appear that there still exists within our society a vocal and evil minority who continue to spread lies and myth about what we are about. My father removed my younger sister from a Day Nursery when she was 3 because of anti Catholic and anti gay attitudes of the person who owned an ran it. I could and would do no less.

Threatening the lives of others because we do not approve of their lifestyle or opinions is neither democratic or morally acceptable. It is however, as we are all too aware, commonplace in our society. It is to be hoped that such experiments in schools do not disappear and that in time we can truly say that our children receive a proper education where intolerance of any kind is unacceptable, except as Frances would say, of the intolerant, and that they can leave school and go through their lives accepting and understanding of the differences of all.

The BNP and other far right groups in this and other countries should be held to account for the hatred they espouse and the lies they tell. The media has a particular responsibility to tell truth, but we all know that it often tells its own truth. Often, as in the case of the Daily Mail and other media groups, it quite simply does not tell its own truth, but deliberately spreads untruths which mislead and can cost lives. It is the responsibility of government to ensure that such unnaceptable behaviour on the part of political parties or media groups does not continue. My fear is however, that we may get condemnation but not action.

[frikidiki]

The Chinese have/had a tradition I read a little bit about once. Women pass down from one generation to the next something called a pillow book. Basically, as I understand it, this was something akin to the Kama Sutra. In the spirit of this, I found a book called Guide To Getting It On, that I intend to pass down or purchase the latest edition of whenever it's time to have the talk with my human kids, who, unlike my feline kids, do not exist yet.

This book features all kinds of sex, with illustrations, scientific information, references to further reading, anecdotes from real people, and LOTS of humor to diffuse the nervousness and keep it from being too clinical. It is very readily available. I will give my kids the choice to read it on their own at first, but will eventually review it with them. They will get my underlying philosophy and moral instruction (Golden Rule, mind you, not the fire-&-brimstone kind) as it applies to sexuality. I believe they will be empowered to live and love with wisdom, maturity and grace, without excessive fear or shame.

The reason for this is simple and relevant to the article this thread is based on. I cannot trust nor expect schools, religious institutions, the movies, magazines like Cosmopolitan or Maxim, and other such elements of our so-called modern society, to take responsibility for properly instructing my kids on the various issues facing them on this subject. Only I can do that, setting aside of course professional advice such as presented in the book I mentioned above. It's just too important a subject for a parent to leave alone.

I learned much about the birds & bees from my mother, and the rest on my own; by the time my school got around to me, I already knew what they were trying to teach. I stayed out of trouble because I knew (and feared) the dangers and consequences of sex without discretion. I owe this in part to my mother, and I owe it to her to make the same effort for the well-being of my kids, and to encourage the same for my descendants.

Such is my advocacy for a moderate, sensible approach.

Apparently, there is a coming onslaught of ravenous perverts who will acquire their satanically lascivious appetites from the godless, immoral, secular elements of Our Great Enterprise (TM and © Satan, Antichrist, 666, et al., all rights reserved), but I say that they'll come from the ranks of the ignorant mental slaves to the agendas of the fearmongers who have no love in their hearts for the gifts we are given by God himself for the one short life we can arguably say we exist in. You can only keep a volcano dormant for so long, and then, BOOM!

[12voltman59]

Wow--I thought that radical right wing stupidity and intolerance was primarily a US phenomenon!!!! LOL

It is almost heartening that human nature is the same everywhere and we Amuricuns aren't the only ones to have troglodites!!! :bigrin::bigrin:

[Sarasvati]

Threatening the lives of others because we do not approve of their lifestyle or opinions is neither democratic or morally acceptable. It is however, as we are all too aware, commonplace in our society. It is to be hoped that such experiments in schools do not disappear and that in time we can truly say that our children receive a proper education where intolerance of any kind is unacceptable, except as Frances would say, of the intolerant, and that they can leave school and go through their lives accepting and understanding of the differences of all.

The BNP and other far right groups in this and other countries should be held to account for the hatred they espouse and the lies they tell. The media has a particular responsibility to tell truth, but we all know that it often tells its own truth. Often, as in the case of the Daily Mail and other media groups, it quite simply does not tell its own truth, but deliberately spreads untruths which mislead and can cost lives. It is the responsibility of government to ensure that such unnaceptable behaviour on the part of political parties or media groups does not continue. My fear is however, that we may get condemnation but not action.

The first paragraph quoted here expresses an intolerant position. I feel it is necessary to point this out. You are really saying we should tolerate what you agree with but not what you don't. Roughly I agree with your comment but think it is important to recognise that you are countering one dogmatism with another and not propounding the cause of toleration.

Britain (like America and elsewhere) is steeped in traditional outlooks on relationships. The printed press simply reflects that majority view. The BNP would no doubt detest the media for mistruths just as much as the passage above does. But the BNP does not require the reports of the media to provide ammunition for its odious propaganda.

In recent years the British Government has forced conformity with regard to gay issues on the populace whether that is in schools, in hotels or in society generally.

It is not surprising that religious groups and the far right have become reactionary as a result. They feel the government is allowing practices and beliefs they believe abhorrent to be foisted on them regardless of their objections.

In the interests of toleration it is vital that the advocate of gay issues and the opponent both have freedom of expression. It is the obstruction of the free expression of those opponents that feeds the nasty methods of the BNP and religious groups.

But the Christian or Muslim who insists that his/her holy book specifically forbids homosexual relations must be entitled to express that view and live according to it. And the homosexual advocate is equally entitled to disagree and express his/her view and practice to his/her taste.

But the aggressive, politically motivated gay lobby is in danger of stirring up countercultural reprisals from the religious right wing.

In my view, I think the subject of sex/sexuality should be kept away from children until they are in there teens. I dislike adults using primary school children as a battleground for their beliefs on sexuality.

Fortunately children are more honest than adults and they can happily identify behavioural differences that adults pretend to hide. And you will create a strong opposition to toleration with regard to sexuality issues if children feel too browbeaten about them.

Homosexual relationships should be discussed fairly in secondary schools but not promoted.

I believe that schools should promote relationships in terms of the nurturing of children. They are not there to teach you how to perform a blow job. The nurturing of children requires stabilty of parental relationships and does also require both a male and a female role model.

A child that lacks either is unfairly disadvantaged.

I have misgivings about issuing a post about toleration on a site which repeatedly violates that condition.

[darkeyes]

S hun...Course she expressin an intolerant attitude ya daft sod.. ne 1 who shows emselves 2 b intolerant 2 othas based on ther nature an who talks bout killin peeps for conductin experiments in schools 2 improve the undastandin of school kids bout the likes of us, an cut out the prejudice loathin an h8red they feel for us don deserve tolerance... Kate an me agree entirely on that.. seems u turnin ya nose up at that idea an thats ur rite.. but if we all do that then we bak 2 square 1 an will neva get ne wer..an in years 2 cum we will b bak 2 hidin in the closet..


Religious an rite wing groups r reactionary by ther very nature.. but at least in the case a sum relgious groups..they mite move wiv the times very slowly but they do move .. the far rite...an thats who we talkin bout reely r consistent..2 them we r pervs..paedophiles an worse.. we shud b exterminated.. r we xpected 2 sit bak an do nowt an let em spread ther h8? ..an let em get away wiv (literally) murder??.. not on ur Nellie.. shud our society take threats gainst its citizens lyin down?? Don b bloody soft... sumtimes me despairs bout u hun.. it is 1 thing 2 argue gainst summat on groundsa morality... an even the worda God (woteva that is).. quite anotha 2 simply shreik at top a ya voice this is rong..kill em.. THAT is wot we talkin bout ere..they wud not give us a moments thot fore blowin our heads off.. wudn blow ther heads off but certainly don hav a moments doubt that stoppin em sayin ne thin based on ther vile bile shud b a very high priority.. censor em?? 2 bloody rite...ban em?? ne who argue killin peeps...an stir such loathin... gainst peeps cos they gay, bi, asian, black white..woteva..yes.. def..wivout compunction.. it is 1 thing 2 argue coherently an logically..quite anotha 2 scream hysterically for no reason than how sum 1s nature is..or wetha they catholic, islamic... or wer they cum from... an threaten em wiv ther life...

How sex is taught in schools me has sum sympathy wiv wotyas sayin... children r very impressionable at primary ages.. an tho me disagrees that we shud not b givin em at least a groundin in relationships tween human beins, the jury is out wetha ther shud b ne sexual element involved.. 2 sum degree me thinks this is unavoidable cos at the ages of primary school kids it is ther that they r mos impressionable an in lata lives it is the prejudices an opinions formed then that r hardest 2 break.. secondary school sex education shud b compulsory an of course we shud b carefu how we teach an wot is taught... but ya argument thaat we shud not promote homosexuality is a non starter.. we promote heterosexuality by sayin it is acceptable to grow up an fall in luff an marry a person a the opposite sex... if we allow even that simple statement..or even if we tell kids bein gay is not illegal .. these simple statements r..wivout doubt..a form of advocatin sexuality of sum form... so if we r 2 hav ne discussion a sex in schools...howeva we teach it..an woteva we teach..all sexualities shud b treated as equals.an kids taught accordingly...

In part how kids r taught sex in school will by definition b contrary 2 wot is taught at home.. for they will b, or shud b taught the reality an compassionately.. 1a the reasons kids r taken outa sex education in this country is cos many parents wonna perpetuate ther own often outdated opinions an prejudices...an not allow ne otha morality than ther own instilled in ther children.. that is wy we r wer we r in our society..that is wy rite wing bigots shud not b allowed 2 ruin sensible social experiments in schools wich r aimed at improvin tolerance, undastandin an compassion in our society.. in mattas sexual...thats wy we shud hav a fair an balanced sex education policy..an wy sex education shud b compulsory..

In fact Kate is prob as close 2 ur position as she is 2 mine... me own views on this r much more aggresive an prob intolerant.. but 2 stamp out intolerance.. ya jus cant tolerance it... an me don...an won...

Stop soundin so wishy washy S... we eitha fuk intolerance or we let it fuk us..whose side u on?? Kno mine tyvm..

[FalconAngel]

There is only so much tolerance that you can give to an intolerant enemy. When you run out of cheeks to turn, you are either a slave, a whipping post or dead; unless you fight back. It comes down to survival. The flight or fight instinct is in our nature and I am too old to run, so I will fight.

Or, as Heinlein put it, "some say that it is better to be a live sheep than a dead lion. I would rather be a live lion."

I'm with Heinlein on that one.

[Nick_C]

I've long believed that tolerance ends where intolerance begins. The older I get, the more I live by it. :)

Teaching kids about same sex relationships is not the same as teaching them about sex. Of course sex is part of most relationships, but it's surely not the defining aspect, and it certainly isn't the most one young would be aware of. Teaching them that loving relationships are not always defined by gender sounds like a worthy cause to me.

Then again, I'm probably biased. ;)

[Falke]

There is only so much tolerance that you can give to an intolerant enemy. When you run out of cheeks to turn, you are either a slave, a whipping post or dead; unless you fight back. It comes down to survival. The flight or fight instinct is in our nature and I am too old to run, so I will fight.

Or, as Heinlein put it, "some say that it is better to be a live sheep than a dead lion. I would rather be a live lion."

I'm with Heinlein on that one.

Very well said Falcon! It's all about when the line between free speech/actually impeding others civil rights is crossed. When that happens, you had better act or else you are screwed.

*Sidenote: I always get a smile when I recieve a death threat...a evil one but a smile none the less! :bigrin: *

[hudson9]

The first paragraph quoted here expresses an intolerant position. I feel it is necessary to point this out. You are really saying we should tolerate what you agree with but not what you don't. Roughly I agree with your comment but think it is important to recognise that you are countering one dogmatism with another and not propounding the cause of toleration.

I understand the argument you are making, and I tend to think we should err on the side of freedom of speech rather than restricing speech (as opposed to actions...)

However, it is also true that speech can incite action -- and for this that speech must be held accountable. Also...


It is not surprising that religious groups and the far right have become reactionary as a result. They feel the government is allowing practices and beliefs they believe abhorrent to be foisted on them regardless of their objections.

The problem with this position, is that no one is FORCING anyone to be gay, commit gay acts, nor even associate in private with gay people. No one is being told that they can't tell their own parishioners, kids, etc. whether they believe gay acts are acceptable. However, GLBT people have the same rights to privacy, freedom from harassment, and human and civil rights as anyone else.

We live in a diverse world. "Others" will exist whether the intolerant among us like it or not. We do not neglect to teach our kids that Muslims or Jews exist. We do not neglect to teach them that the French or South Africans or Chinese or Mormons exist if we don't like something they do.

Some of these people have gone well beyond expressing their opposition to the program:

"...with one blogger calling for 'capital punishment for the paedo-intellectuals', alongside a list of researchers’ names and contact details."

This is incitement to violence, not the free exchange of ideas.

On another note - I've always found it curious that people of this type seem to have such a lack of faith in the strength their moral arguments, that they feel they have to resort to political pressure, or outright violence, in order to convince others of the "rightness" of their position.
:2cents: