Missouri teacher who displayed Pride Flag resigns after parent complains

[We Never Know]

That's like saying we shouldn't talk about MLK and the civil rights groups because they were entirely political movements. Hell there's still people against interracial marriage today, for the same stupid reasons people are against gay marriage. I don't care if their kook religion doesn't want human decency in schools. I don't feel very inclined to stay silent so they can maintain an 'impartial environment.'

Put them all up in the classrooms...
Religious, gay pride, straight pride, blm, etc.
Different students will identify to them all.

 

[Rival]

No, you're thinking of people who handwave and enable bullies.

No, I'm not. If a lesbian is beaten up, that's an offence. Being called names is life and you'd better learn to accept it.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

No, I'm not. If a lesbian is beaten up, that's an offence. Being called names is life and you'd better learn to accept it.

Yes, how dare anyone advocate for changes improving the lives of the marginalised. You might be interested to look into your local laws about harassment, hate speech, assault and bullying, too.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

translation: "Bullying victims should just suck it up. I survived and was fine, so everyone else should too, and no one should attempt to change anything for the better, because acknowledging there might be problems makes me uncomfortable".

Yeah, you couldn't be further from the truth about her. That's a rather nasty assumption about her, made worse that you didn't even bother to ask her to clarify it first before making such an outlandish and absurd claim.

3. Many gays and others usually associated with the LGBT movement do not support it and have walked away as they do not feel it supports them. The LGBT movement has basically been submerged into 'woke' culture. Many, many people do not agree with or like 'woke' culture, including the people it claims to support.

I'll add that I too don't really associate with it, partially for those reasons.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Put them all up in the classrooms...
Religious, gay pride, straight pride, blm, etc.
Different students will identify to them all.

I just said that I'm not for throwing every viewpoint out there for the sake of impartiality.
"Impartiality is overrated," -Karl Popper, probably.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yes, how dare anyone advocate for changes improving the lives of the marginalised.

Yes, how dare anyone try to understand someone before making **** remarks.

 

[Rival]

Yes, how dare anyone advocate for changes improving the lives of the marginalised. You might be interested to look into your local laws about harassment, hate speech, assault and bullying, too.

Life is cruel and you need a thick skin to deal with it. Being called names is something that's going to happen to you. It helps not to be thin-skinned and take everything personally.

 

[We Never Know]

I just said that I'm not for throwing every viewpoint out there for the sake of impartiality.
"Impartiality is overrated," -Karl Popper, probably.

As I said,,,, all or none. Either they all belong there or none of them do.

 

[Subduction Zone]

This isn't what I said though.

I said schools should be non-partisan and teach neither view. Children's sexuality should be no business of the school.

Teaching basic rights in school is non-partisan. Now I am not sure if marriage equality is a right in Britain or not. i know that it is legal, but I would have to do some more reading to find out if it is a right. In the US it is a right. The Supreme Court was the one that eventually made it a right by weighing in on the battle. So this was non-paritsan here. It might not be in Britain. I am not British and I do not know enough of your laws to make a definitive statement. But in the US the Supreme Court is the one that ultimately decides upon what a right is or not and they made interpreted the Constitution in a way that makes it a right. The teacher was not teaching anything partisan at all.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

As I said,,,, all or none. Either they all belong there or none if them do.

I disagree. But more importantly, so do most rational people. As we still talk about heroes of the civil rights movements even though there's still segregationists and antimiscegatinists out there. Their worldviews don't belong in a classroom. Not every worldview belongs.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm just saying that kids are under the care of their parents and they belong to their parents. Kids are not capable adults, obviously, and need to be taught properly. This is parents' jobs, not schools.

They are under the care of their parents and the parents have a very strong say in their upbringing. It is clear that they do not belong to the parents. I have no problem with parents have a strong say so in their children's upbringing. But unless they totally shut them off from society, and even that may not be legal everywhere, their are limits on what they say that the children can and cannot be taught elsewhere. They do not have the last word in this.

 

[Debater Slayer]

1. The LGBT movement is not just the movement of gays. It's a political position. I'm arguing it should not be allowed in schools based on its being a political position that teaches kids. It teaches kids acceptance of things that many people do not accept and is therefore imposing itself on those students.

And teaching that there's no difference between the various racial groups goes against what racial supremacists believe. As such, it "imposes" itself on the kids of racial supremacists as much as teaching LGBT acceptance imposes itself on kids of homophobes.

I think this view is deeply steeped in religious conservatism and is therefore inherently biased. Nothing wrong with that per se, but the moment anyone attempts to make it influence schools or other public venues--such as by arguing for banning teaching of LGBT acceptance on that basis--is the moment I believe any reasonable person should stand up to it and call it out as a violation of equality and freedom.

If conservatives want others to "keep their sexual orientation in the bedroom," they too should keep their religious beliefs in the church/mosque/temple/whatever. Fair is fair.

 

[Rival]

Teaching basic rights in school is non-partisan. Now I am not sure if marriage equality is a right in Britain or not. i know that it is legal, but I would have to do some more reading to find out if it is a right. In the US it is a right. The Supreme Court was the one that eventually made it a right by weighing in on the battle. So this was non-paritsan here. It might not be in Britain. I am not British and I do not know enough of your laws to make a definitive statement. But in the US the Supreme Court is the one that ultimately decides upon what a right is or not and they made interpreted the Constitution in a way that makes it a right. The teacher was not teaching anything partisan at all.

Many religious organisations believe that marriage should only be between a man and a woman, and the Act explicitly recognises this. The civil understanding of marriage has always been broader than that of many religious organisations. Marriage has evolved over the years, for example to enable Catholics, atheists, Baptists and many others to marry outside the Anglican Church, and to recognise married women as equal to married men before the law.

 

[Rival]

If conservatives want others to "keep their sexual orientation in the bedroom," they too should keep their religious beliefs in the church/mosque/temple/whatever. Fair is fair.

This is exactly what I'm arguing but people seem to be bent on not seeing that.

But they're also treating it as though the pro-LGBT is the neutral view when it's not.

The neutral view is no view.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I disagree. But more importantly, so do most rational people. As we still talk about heroes of the civil rights movements even though there's still segregationists and antimiscegatinists out there. Their worldviews don't belong in a classroom. Not every worldview belongs.

It does if we're having a debate about things and it comes up. Didn't you ever debate things in class? We were discussing immigration and I said we should build something like the Berlin Wall at the southern border, and it was my right to voice it. If a student believes in segregation (which many leftists do, in various ways) or that different groups shouldn't mix, if it comes up in a class discussion where people are sharing their views, they have the right to express theirs and discuss. A talented teacher would know how to keep such discussions civil.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Yes, I'm sure African, Middle Eastern, Latin American and Asian Christians are totally all cool with Anglo LGBT stuff. Even Eastern Europeans aren't.

The largest population of Christians in the world is in the US and even with the deplorable lack of education here (which usually goes hand in hand with a more conservative population) same sex marriage was decided in most states by popular vote even before the striking down of DOMA. The vast majority of the Americas (North and South) have legal gay marriage in some form. As does Australia, New Zealand and most of Europe, also by vote. My statement stands. More Christians are unopposed to gay marriage than those who are.

 

[Rival]

It does if we're having a debate about things and it comes up. Didn't you ever debate things in class? We were discussing immigration and I said we should build something like the Berlin Wall at the southern border, and it was my right to voice it. If a student believes in segregation (which many leftists do, in various ways) or that different groups shouldn't mix, if it comes up in a class discussion where people are sharing their views, they have the right to express theirs and discuss. A talented teacher would know how to keep such discussions civil.

Like British Parliament. Lmao.

 

[Debater Slayer]

This is exactly what I'm arguing but people seem to be bent on not seeing that.

But they're also treating it as though the pro-LGBT is the neutral view when it's not.

The neutral view is no view.

I don't think the neutral view is no view, since the overwhelmingly prevalent view in almost all societies worldwide is that heterosexuality is accepted and that straight people have the right to marriage, adoption, etc. The same can't be said for LGBT people even though we now know, based on clear-cut scientific evidence, that homosexuality, bisexuality, and other orientations involving consenting adults are just as natural and healthy as heterosexuality is.

The only reason to treat being pro-LGBT differently from being pro-straight--which, as I said, is a globally prevalent stance--is either homophobic religious tradition or secular homophobia (whatever the reason for that may be). Otherwise both heterosexuality and other sexual orientations are fundamentally the same.

 

[F1fan]

So it's 3 am I'm sick of being misunderstood here.

1. The LGBT movement is not just the movement of gays. It's a political position. I'm arguing it should not be allowed in schools based on its being a political position that teaches kids. It teaches kids acceptance of things that many people do not accept and is therefore imposing itself on those students.

2. I don't advance that my views should be taught in schools either. I submit that schools should be non-partisan and that students' sexualities are no business of the school.

3. Many gays and others usually associated with the LGBT movement do not support it and have walked away as they do not feel it supports them. The LGBT movement has basically been submerged into 'woke' culture. Many, many people do not agree with or like 'woke' culture, including the people it claims to support.

4. Religious people and non-religious people have a right to say what they think.

The gay pride flag can mean many things. So since the flag COULD mean something that is political it should be banned? Should similar things be banned from schools, like a Chick-fil-a sandwich because this company has a history of being anti-gay and funding politicians that agree. Do you ban maps of North Korea because students might be sympathetic to that nation?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The largest population of Christians in the world is in the US and even with the deplorable lack of education here (which usually goes hand in hand with a more conservative population) same sex marriage was decided in most states by popular vote even before the striking down of DOMA. The vast majority of the Americas (North and South) have legal gay marriage in some form. As does Australia, New Zealand and most of Europe, also by vote. My statement stands. More Christians are unopposed to gay marriage than those who are.

Western Europe, Canada, Australia and now the US are basically apostate nations whose Christian population rarely attends church and tends to view Christianity as a cultural identity more than anything else. Most Brits basically have nothing to do with the CoE now, in terms of practice, for example. Their populations are aging and dwindling. African and Asian Christians are the future of Christendom.