Holly

Profile

Username:
mmmhollywould
Name:
Holly
Location:
Atlanta, GA
Birthday:
09/23
Status:
Not Interested

Stats

Post Reads:
48,548
Posts:
100
Last Online:
> 30 days ago
View All »

My Friends

11 days ago
23 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago

Subscribe

Hollywould Insider

Parenting & Family > School is Not the Place to Teach Social Morality
 

School is Not the Place to Teach Social Morality

Oh goodness! I am gonna get ripped no matter what I write here but I am still gonna state my opinion because you guys all think I have balls!

Man o’ man.

I am gonna get burned at the stake on mybloggers for my opinion here and have to run back to blogster where I am hated.

What’s a girl to do but jump right in.

Okay Vlad’s blog in response to Outkast’s blog.

First and foremost I want to say that what is “MORALLY” right or wrong concerning sexuality should NOT be taught in school. Sexuality should be taught in the most basic form in school.

If you are a Fill in religion or moral standing you have the right to teach your child that sex before marriage is wrong, blow jobs are wrong, using birth control is right or wrong, being homosexual is right or wrong, being a cross dresser is right or wrong and anal sex is right or wrong.

These are things that should be taught at home other than what they are and the dangers that come with them. For example:

Birth control is not okay because we do not believe in sex before marriage there for there is no need for birth control.

Birth control is okay if it is a condom but not anything else because devices such as the IUD while making the uterus a hostile environment for sperm is how it first and foremost works it can in the event of pregnancy cause the fertilized egg the inability to implant which we consider the same as abortion and we do not believe in that.

Anal sex is dangerous. Each time you do it your stretch your muscles and can cause them to not return to their normal tone. This is unhealthy. Do not do it.

Bow jobs degrade women.


For what ever reason a parent chooses to teach their child something I believe that should be respected by the schools.

I read the article that Outkast linked to where it said, “"First, [California] law allowed public schools to voluntarily promote homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality. Then, the law required public schools to accept homosexual, bisexual and transsexual teachers as role models for impressionable children.”

That is unacceptable no school should promote homosexuality. Period. I totally disagree. It is fine to educate to attempt to curb harassment of these boys and girls but I do into feel it should ever be promoted. This is not a choice one gets to make it is the way you are born and should not be presented as a sexuality choice. I do not personally care if my child’s teacher were gay or a lesbian but I do not want her or him wearing a queer nations shirt and if it happens to be a man a dress would be equally inappropriate.

If my son were to go to school and have a gay teacher as his role model that is fine but my son should never know who he is fucking in his bedroom, boy or girl. That is not something a child needs to know about a teacher. There fore he should NEVER know he was gay or straight for that matter.

School is not the place for social morality lessons it is for academics.

posted on Feb 20, 2008 6:45 PM ()

Comments:

There is confusion here about what is or is not a 'moral issue'. The things everyone is writing about are not moral issues, they are religious dogma issues. Sexuality, per se, is not a moral issue, it is natural behaviour. Morality is only concerned with human survival. Behaviour that promotes happy healthy humans is moral, activities that work against this are immoral, and all other activities such as who you sleep with, what sort of clothes you wear... are neither moral or immoral until they impinge on the happy survival of other humans.
Hollywould, why are you happy for women to wear trousers, but affronted if men wear dresses? isn't that sexist? As for men wearing dresses, 90% of all cross dressers [transvestites] are heterosexuals. It is very unusual for gay men to indulge in that sort of behaviour. Just as 90% or thereabouts of gay men do not like or enjoy watching drag queens. Most gays are indistinguishable from hets, unless they choose not to be.
I do agree that a teacher's private life is not a suitable topic for the classroom.
comment by clovis on Feb 26, 2008 2:39 AM ()
'
'Speaking of that why do some gay men like men who dress up as women? Isn’t the point then lost?' I have no idea--why do some women put themselves in a slave position?? Why are there drag kings?
Again, I"ll shout it from rooftops--I am a 'buddy' for over 20 years to kids in the street with AIDS--I have had too many die in my arms--and they come from all social and economic classes and what they DON'T know about sex floors me--and they didn't learn it from home--they certainly didn't learn morality being thrown out on the streets to prostitute themselves to survive.
Here in Florida if anything but celibacy is taught in schools they lose their funding.
comment by greatmartin on Feb 21, 2008 7:26 PM ()
This is an absolutely amazing post, and, as a parent, grandparent and retired teacher, I couldn't agree with you more!
The promotion of ANY personal bias whatsoever, in my opinion, should not take place in public schools!
What makes these people think that they can "teach morality"? First of all, who the hell decides what is moral and what is not? I may have certain feelings and beliefs on certain topics, but I never presume to force anybody else to live by them! What makes these people think they know what is "good for the masses?" What makes them think that their way is the only way? What makes them think that they are God?
Well, Holly, you got me going.
You've got guts, kid. That's why I enjoyed your blogster.com blog so much, and that why you're on my "friends list" here at greaser.
Keep it up!
I think I'll refrain from reading Outkast's blog for a while. My blood pressure couldn't take it.
EXCELLENT POST!!!
comment by hayduke on Feb 21, 2008 9:54 AM ()
Hate crimes are not "thought police" or "thought crimes." That's another discussion for another day. This bill is not about thought crimes. This bill is not as presented by Outkast or WND. This bill only "would prohibit instruction or activity or the use of any instructional materials in public schools that reflects adversely upon any persons because of their sexual orientation or actual or perceived gender."

Meaning that it would forbid bigots from coming into schools and teaching homosexuality is an abomination, etc. The "hate crimes" reference is ONLY to the definition of what abstinence-only activists can say or use. You say the classroom should be neutral, this bill makes it neutral.

"The bill also prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation or actual or perceived gender in any program or activity conducted by a school that receives state financial assistance." This isn't hate crimes legislation, this requires schools to teach and treat each child even-handedly.

You think this is overreaching? Take a look at the abstinence-based curricula some time and what some of it says about homosexuality. If it's addressed at all. Abstinence-only rarely addresses reality and it goes far beyond the bounds you set above about teaching morality.

Pertaining to another state but the goal of abstinence-only is very much the same across state lines: 'The guidelines governing abstinence-only-until-marriage programs explicitly state that students must be taught that abstinence from sex is the “expected standard of sexual activity” outside of a mutually monogamous relationship within the context of marriage. Throughout the curricula, marriage must be defined as a legal union between one man and one woman. Students must also be taught that sex outside of marriage may have harmful psychological and physical effects. Sadly, many abstinence-only-until-marriage programs also show a clear bias against homosexuality. For example, CLUE 2000 actually equates homosexuality with incest or pedophilia. These curricula presume an entirely heterosexual audience. Moreover, they reinforce negative assumptions about same sex relationships: that same sex relationships are less than heterosexual relationships because same sex couples are not permitted to marry; that same sex relationships either do not exist or should be invisible; that same sex relationships are akin to immoral or criminal behavior; that same sex relationships are harmful or damaging because they occur outside the bounds of marriage; and that same sex relationships can never be as enduring, loving or stable as heterosexual relationships.'
https://www.aac.org/site/PageServer?pagename=action_abonly#3

How is that neutral?

I think if you dig deeper you'll agree with me. My approach is a lot closer to what you're advocating that then bullshit put forward by Outkast.
comment by vladimir on Feb 21, 2008 3:02 AM ()
too unconfortable when sitting on barstools
comment by ekyprogressive on Feb 20, 2008 7:52 PM ()
'no school should promote homosexuality' and my life style shouldn't be thrown in a straight person's face, etc. Please, heterosexuality was promoted in schools from day one--"some day you will get married and have children of your own", going to weddings, hearing a teacher was going to have a child, etc. not to mention seeing only straight couples in movies--I'm talking about the 40s, 50s 60s
And is 'morality' to kill/bash/shun gay people only to be taught at home?? Where do they hear the other side of the story?? Come on parents don't even teach their kids about sex and you think they teach/show them morality??
They teach sex ed in school???? Tell me that as I watch kids dying of AIDS in my arms for the past 20 years and hear what they weren't taught at home or school IMHO
PS Gay marriage is only allowed in one state--not plural.
comment by greatmartin on Feb 20, 2008 7:45 PM ()
I call eky out for his hyperbole, I called Outkast out for the same crap from the other side. The website where he got his disinformation is hardly the epitome of unbiased journalism. They routinely sensationalize "cultural" and "values" issues to foment outrage among the extreme right -- such as when they caused a big circus about Terri Schiavo. This is one of the kook sites that carried an article shortly after 9/11 that said, "God (has) raised up Shiite Islam as a sword against America."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WorldNetDaily

As to their coverage of the bill in question, read it for yourself. It does NOT invoke special rights for anyone. It "would prohibit instruction or activity or the use of any instructional materials in public schools that reflects adversely upon any persons because of their sexual orientation or actual or perceived gender. The bill also prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation or actual or perceived gender in any program or activity conducted by a school that receives state financial assistance."
https://www.hrc.org/issues/parenting/5308.htm

But that's only part of it. "This bill would revise the list of prohibited bases of
discrimination and the kinds of prohibited instruction, activities,
and instructional materials and instead, would refer to disability,
gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation,
or any other characteristic contained in the definition of hate
crimes that is contained in the Penal Code. The bill would define
disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, and
sexual orientation for this purpose. "

The full text is available here:
https://leginfo.public.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_0751-0800/sb_777_bill_20070409_amended_sen_v98.html

Please at least skim through so you'll know it's not merely about sexual orientation as Outkast's deceitful source says. Look for this and tell me what's objectionable about it:
" 46192. Each clock hour of teaching time devoted to the individual
instruction of physically handicapped adults
with physical disabilities who are patients in a tuberculosis
ward or hospital maintained by one or more counties shall count as
one day of attendance but no such adult shall be credited with more
than one day of attendance in any calendar day."

Do they hate kids with TB as much as they hate homosexuals?

xoxo
comment by vladimir on Feb 20, 2008 7:38 PM ()
They "promote" heterosexuality. If you believe, as you state, that it is a born trait, then no amount of "promotion" will change someone anyway. Maybe cause a few to experiment, but not "change". But we need to consider, in states where civil unions or gay marriage are legal, or adoption by gay parents are allowed, then those family dynamics need and should be discussed to promote acceptance and prevent children of those families from experiencing shame or being seen as outcasts. IMO.

comment by ekyprogressive on Feb 20, 2008 6:52 PM ()

Comment on this article   


100 articles found   [ Previous Article ]  [ Next Article ]  [ First ]  [ Last ]