Chicago to Require Sx Ed for Kindergartners

Posted in the Columbus Forum

Comments (Page 4)

Showing posts 61 - 80 of186
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
They will not!
Why else do they enlist the government for?
This is what we need to do guys:
Since they will force and make mandatory sexual indoctrination them we will ask our kids EVERY DAY, what was learned at school! If we find out that the word "lesbian", "gay", or anything to that effect was used then we sue the federal government to bring to light the Liberal agenda.
Of course, the lawsuit will get no coverage from the Liberal media but at least Fox will cover it and the American people will see the Liberals demented, sick, disgusting agenda.
I, for one, am incredibly interested in hearing more about this legal suit. On which grounds do you see yourselves bringing these suits? Walk me through how you think the process would work.

Since: Nov 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63
Mar 11, 2013
 
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>Giggling over the notion of "sexual indoctrination."

One of the strongest and most self-explanatory features of God's good creation. Hardly needs "indoctrination."

On the other hand, in a setting in which socialization takes place (such as when children move from the family to school), the explanation of norms is requisite. At home one may take a bath with one's sibling, or share a bed. Various stages of dress or undress are also usual. At school the rules are different. Clothing must always cover certain key portions of the body. Touching hands, feet, faces and so forth may be acceptable at various times--but not always. And certain body parts are never to be touched.

Basic information necessary for being together in a group.

And yes, this requires a vocabulary. Many children have family names for their peter, pecker, weenie, wee-wee, peenie, vajayjay, crotch, fanny, hoo-hoo, privacy, pee-pee place etc. School is a time to corral these into some more understandable and commonly acceptable language. You balk at the word "lesbian." Do you have a preferred vocabulary, should the topic come up? And it will come up. Or do you advocate the approach of "shush, we don't talk about things like that"?
Kids in home-schooling are out of the reach of liberal perverts at school! No wonder Liberals hate home-Schooling so much!

However, they growth normally and do not get pregnant at 15 years old.

You can talk about sex to my kids as long as you get MY permission and I see the curriculum. Something the Liberals will never do! To show the sexual curriculum to parents is the unmask of the Liberal agenda!

Your logic is faulty, erroneous and childish! Here is my proof: you claim to clear confusion on kids by formalizing sexual understanding in kids at school. What you fail to grasp is that the school can only confuse the kids more by failing to synchronize with the parents teachings. You think that a sexually confused child is a better sexual knowledgeable child and that is childish!

How can the school be in synch with the parent's sexual teachings if parents are forbiden by Liberals from knowing the sexual curriculum (indoctrination) they will be subject to?

Do you really believe that Liberals care about kids? If so, why they abort a million kids every year?

Liberals do not care about kids, they only care about forcing the Boyscouts to accept gays even not the parents of the Boyscouts already told them to keep their sexual orientation crap away for their kids.

Boyscouts, public schools, no matter where or when, Liberals need to force their agenda and they will enlist the full power of the federal government for that!

No wonder Liberals love big government so much!

Since: Nov 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#64
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>Got kids?

When you send your daughter to school are you willing to rely on all of the other parents having taught their kids about good and bad touching? When some little boy takes it into his head to proudly show your daughter what he has between his legs and asks her if she wants to touch it, are you going to walk away and shake your head about his poor parenting, or would it make more sense to reinforce that there are rules for school that include not displaying and touching one's genitals?
Schools ALREADY have rules! It is common sense!

You are assuming all public ghetto schools are like the descent ones!

See? In Liberal schools many black and minorities from broken families and lazy ghetto Liberals like you have no morals!

But in suburban, high class, descent tac payer working Conservative neighborhoods from Christian descent families that is no a major problem as compared to the roaches from the ghetto!

But why penalize all for a few irresponsible Liberal?

Can the government help parents to meet and let the parents together decide what to teach their kids about sexual information?

I will continue to teach my kids that homosexuality is abnormal sexual aberration same as sex with animals!

Now... About the government helping...

They have the name and addresses of all the parents that have kids in the school and will not release that "private" information! I want to know the kids and parents around my kids!

Since: Nov 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>Jose--whether you are comfortable with the reality or not, the world includes people who are gay and/or lesbian, as well as a few other nuances and shades.

And it should not be the function of the school to lie to your children by pretending that this is not the case.
It is not the function of the school to teach my kids that sex with animals is perfectly ok. Nor with tables, dolls, toys or species of the same gender!

It is NOT natural for to men or two women to marry and have kids!

It is an aberration of nature!

For Christians, it is a sin!

Do you agree with school teaching that the name of God is Allah and that Jesus was just a good prophet and not the son of God?

Same with sex!

I teach my kids that body piercing, tattoos and drinking blood are bad things! You wan them to believe that sex with same sex is perfectly fine and that they should try it cause who know they may be gay and not know it!

Your suggestion confirms my suspicion, it is NOT about good or bad touching but about gay indoctrination!

Since: Nov 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#66
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>You haven't been paying close attention.

Americans have also been travelling to other countries for health care. Senior citizens take buses to Canada to get prescriptions filled at lower cost for the same meds. The notion of tourist surgeries has also taken off due to lower cost and more attractive recovery options in a number of countries.
But why?

Why are safe surgeries cheaper in other countries?

Because Liberals had slowly taking over the Health care industry!

Do tort reform, stop abusive malpractices, and you will see how cheaper and SAFER the surgeries will get!

See? Socialism is the root of all evils!

About drugs companies...

Why are medications so expensive? In part due to social free money from taxpayers to pay for medicare drug benefits!

But that is not all... Also the drug companies attempts for monopoly which is against Conservative values!

Conservatives believe in free market no Monopoly markets!

Monopoly markets are NO free markets!

Since: Nov 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>I, for one, am incredibly interested in hearing more about this legal suit. On which grounds do you see yourselves bringing these suits? Walk me through how you think the process would work.
Is no the legal standing but the Media attention what we are after as I mentioned!

Did you read the post?

I know the Liberal judges had taken all responsibility from our kids at school!

I am very well aware that the Liberals had successfully created a big government system where parents had lost all say so on their kids education.

I know that Liberals had created an educational system where parents have no voice on what sickness is introduced into our kids' minds!

I know that parents who drop kids into the public school everyday had surrendered their right to their kids and the school owns the kids during the school time. They can legally kill them and parents have no resource!

Why do you think Conservatives keep creating more and more "home-schools"?

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
Is no the legal standing but the Media attention what we are after as I mentioned!
Did you read the post?
I know the Liberal judges had taken all responsibility from our kids at school!
I am very well aware that the Liberals had successfully created a big government system where parents had lost all say so on their kids education.
I know that Liberals had created an educational system where parents have no voice on what sickness is introduced into our kids' minds!
I know that parents who drop kids into the public school everyday had surrendered their right to their kids and the school owns the kids during the school time. They can legally kill them and parents have no resource!
Why do you think Conservatives keep creating more and more "home-schools"?
Yes, while I understand that the aim of the suit is to attract media attention, I remain interested on what grounds on which you would be able to bring such a suit in the first place. I'm not really familiar with the type of suit which would cover this and am quite interested to hear more about your approach.
Big Johnson

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#69
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
Is no the legal standing but the Media attention what we are after as I mentioned!
Do you mean the liberal media I keep reading about on the Topix forum, or are you hoping they won't notice but a different media will?
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#70
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
I know that parents who drop kids into the public school everyday had surrendered their right to their kids and the school owns the kids during the school time. They can legally kill them and parents have no resource!
Now my curiousity has been piqued. Tell us some more about this.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Boy this sure is interesting. Kids at risk of being killed by publicly employed educators and parents with no "resource" huh?

Shocking!!!

woof
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#72
Mar 11, 2013
 
I had better drop what I am doing and get over to my son's elementary school immediately!!!

woof

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
Kids in home-schooling are out of the reach of liberal perverts at school! No wonder Liberals hate home-Schooling so much!
However, they growth normally and do not get pregnant at 15 years old.
You can talk about sex to my kids as long as you get MY permission and I see the curriculum. Something the Liberals will never do! To show the sexual curriculum to parents is the unmask of the Liberal agenda!
Your logic is faulty, erroneous and childish! Here is my proof: you claim to clear confusion on kids by formalizing sexual understanding in kids at school. What you fail to grasp is that the school can only confuse the kids more by failing to synchronize with the parents teachings. You think that a sexually confused child is a better sexual knowledgeable child and that is childish!
How can the school be in synch with the parent's sexual teachings if parents are forbiden by Liberals from knowing the sexual curriculum (indoctrination) they will be subject to?
Do you really believe that Liberals care about kids? If so, why they abort a million kids every year?
Liberals do not care about kids, they only care about forcing the Boyscouts to accept gays even not the parents of the Boyscouts already told them to keep their sexual orientation crap away for their kids.
Boyscouts, public schools, no matter where or when, Liberals need to force their agenda and they will enlist the full power of the federal government for that!
No wonder Liberals love big government so much!
Most districts allow parents to review curricula. And most districts allow some kind of opt-out for sex ed. I cannot speak regarding the specifics in Chicago, but that is generally the case.

Now, when it comes down to practicalities and some of the demands made by the anti-sex folks (eliminating books from the library or classroom, pretending that gay people don't exist and the like), the reality may be that you don't get to control the whole school and the curriculum. And this makes some folks unhappy.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#74
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
Schools ALREADY have rules! It is common sense!
You are assuming all public ghetto schools are like the descent ones!
See? In Liberal schools many black and minorities from broken families and lazy ghetto Liberals like you have no morals!
But in suburban, high class, descent tac payer working Conservative neighborhoods from Christian descent families that is no a major problem as compared to the roaches from the ghetto!
But why penalize all for a few irresponsible Liberal?
Can the government help parents to meet and let the parents together decide what to teach their kids about sexual information?
I will continue to teach my kids that homosexuality is abnormal sexual aberration same as sex with animals!
Now... About the government helping...
They have the name and addresses of all the parents that have kids in the school and will not release that "private" information! I want to know the kids and parents around my kids!
Impossible to have rules (even based on "common sense") that nobody ever talks about.

You are free to try to teach your kids a good many things, including that the earth is flat and that the moon is made of green cheese. But don't expect to be able to make the public schools teach the same thing. When schools teach science and health (which are pretty much the two subjects where human sexuality comes up), they have to reject mythology--even if it is preferred by a preponderance of local parents--and still to the facts as agreed to be the scientific/medical experts.

Like I said, most districts will allow some kind of "opt-out" for parents who prefer that their children NOT be taught these things. But, don't expect them to shelter your kids from realities (such as the reality that gay people exist, some of them are parents, some may be teachers, and as your children grow older, they will come to know that some of them are also students in their classes). And further, if your home-teaching leads your kids into some of the predicatbly ignorant behaviors regarding these folks (name-calling, slamming into lockers, social ostracization and so forth), don't expect them to be excused because of some religious belief.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#75
Mar 11, 2013
 
martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not the function of the school to teach my kids that sex with animals is perfectly ok. Nor with tables, dolls, toys or species of the same gender!
Hmmmm, I would love to see some examples of the things that you believe schools might be teaching about animals, tables, dolls or toys.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#76
Mar 11, 2013
 
martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
You wan them to believe that sex with same sex is perfectly fine and that they should try it cause who know they may be gay and not know it!
Again--love to see an example of someone teaching this.

BTW--I don't think this is so much the reality anymore, but years ago it sometimes happened that if lesbians were arrested for any reason (traffic infraction, whatever), they had to be wary of cops who believed that lesbians just needed an experience with the right man, to turn around. As a result, there were lesbians raped by cops in order to fix them.

Since: Nov 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#77
Mar 11, 2013
 
tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, while I understand that the aim of the suit is to attract media attention, I remain interested on what grounds on which you would be able to bring such a suit in the first place. I'm not really familiar with the type of suit which would cover this and am quite interested to hear more about your approach.
Like Obama said that Obamacare was not a tax but they argue in court it was a tax!

Like Zimmeman's was self-defense but Liberals still manipulating the evidence!

See? The incompetent community organizer president had shown that you do not need legal basis for anything just a bunch of Liberal judges with political agendas!

My legal standing is on political agenda no legal basis!

Like when Obama sue Churches to decide who is a pastor and who is not!

Like Obama sue Arizona for implementing his own federal laws! You do not need legal basis just political show!

Like when Obama sues gallop poll for no following his agenda! No legal basis just intimidation and political maneuver.

Like when Obama sues non-unionized Toyota without legal basis but to intimidate into slowing unions.

Like Obama sue Boeing for moving to non-union state. He had no legal basis just intimidation and political message.

Under those precedence we can sue the school distribution that impose sexual orientation indoctrination on our kids!

If it works for Obama it should also work for us!

PASI - Parents Against Sexual indoctrination!

Maybe PAOSIAS - Parents Against Obama's Sexual Indoctrination At school!

I just created a new movement!

Since: Nov 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#78
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Big Johnson wrote:
<quoted text>Do you mean the liberal media I keep reading about on the Topix forum, or are you hoping they won't notice but a different media will?
What?

Since: Nov 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#79
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Duke for Mayor wrote:
Boy this sure is interesting. Kids at risk of being killed by publicly employed educators and parents with no "resource" huh?

Shocking!!!

woof
If you are ignorant is because you are a Liberal who only watches MSNBC!

Most parents of public school students probably assume they have certain rights, even if those rights are not always honored. They may not realize that the courts have addressed this issue a number of times and have concluded that once parents deliver their children to the front door of a public school, the parents and the children both forfeit many rights they'd normally have.

Consider this excerpt from the Nov. 2, 2005 opinion of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (and note that it confirms the opinion of another court). The Ninth Circuit case was specifically addressing interviews conducted with children in a California school in which first, third, and fifth graders were asked explicit sexual questions as well as other disturbing and intrusive questions. The parents who sued lost their case.

Excerpt:[O]nce parents make the choice as to which school their children will attend,...their fundamental right to control the education of their children is, at the least, substantially diminished. The constitution does not vest parents with the authority to interfere with a public school's decision as to how it will provide information to its students or what information it will provide, in its classrooms or otherwise. See Yoder, 406 U.S. at 205. Perhaps the Sixth Circuit said it best when it explained,

While parents may have a fundamental right to decide whether to send their child to a public school, they do not have a fundamental right generally to direct how a public school teaches their child. Whether it is the school curriculum, the hours of the school day, school discipline, the timing and content of examinations, the individuals hired to teach at the school, the extracurricular activities offered at the school or, as here, a dress code, these issues of public education are generally "committed to the control of state and local authorities".

http://www.schoolandstate.org/circuitcourt.ht...

Liberal

Since: Nov 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80
Mar 11, 2013
 
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>Now my curiousity has been piqued. Tell us some more about this.
You are ignorant cause you are a Liberal who only watches MSNBC!

Did you know that if a kid is poisoned with school lunch the school is NOT liable?

http://www.schoolandstate.org/circuitcourt.ht...

Most parents of public school students probably assume they have certain rights, even if those rights are not always honored. They may not realize that the courts have addressed this issue a number of times and have concluded that once parents deliver their children to the front door of a public school, the parents and the children both forfeit many rights they'd normally have.

Consider this excerpt from the Nov. 2, 2005 opinion of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (and note that it confirms the opinion of another court). The Ninth Circuit case was specifically addressing interviews conducted with children in a California school in which first, third, and fifth graders were asked explicit sexual questions as well as other disturbing and intrusive questions. The parents who sued lost their case.

Excerpt:[O]nce parents make the choice as to which school their children will attend,...their fundamental right to control the education of their children is, at the least, substantially diminished. The constitution does not vest parents with the authority to interfere with a public school's decision as to how it will provide information to its students or what information it will provide, in its classrooms or otherwise. See Yoder, 406 U.S. at 205. Perhaps the Sixth Circuit said it best when it explained,

While parents may have a fundamental right to decide whether to send their child to a public school, they do not have a fundamental right generally to direct how a public school teaches their child. Whether it is the school curriculum, the hours of the school day, school discipline, the timing and content of examinations, the individuals hired to teach at the school, the extracurricular activities offered at the school or, as here, a dress code, these issues of public education are generally committed to the control of state and local authorities.

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
Like Obama said that Obamacare was not a tax but they argue in court it was a tax!
Like Zimmeman's was self-defense but Liberals still manipulating the evidence!
See? The incompetent community organizer president had shown that you do not need legal basis for anything just a bunch of Liberal judges with political agendas!
My legal standing is on political agenda no legal basis!
Like when Obama sue Churches to decide who is a pastor and who is not!
Like Obama sue Arizona for implementing his own federal laws! You do not need legal basis just political show!
Like when Obama sues gallop poll for no following his agenda! No legal basis just intimidation and political maneuver.
Like when Obama sues non-unionized Toyota without legal basis but to intimidate into slowing unions.
Like Obama sue Boeing for moving to non-union state. He had no legal basis just intimidation and political message.
Under those precedence we can sue the school distribution that impose sexual orientation indoctrination on our kids!
If it works for Obama it should also work for us!
PASI - Parents Against Sexual indoctrination!
Maybe PAOSIAS - Parents Against Obama's Sexual Indoctrination At school!
I just created a new movement!
You're intended to construct a suit, the basis of which is that the suit is baseless?

I'm not entirely sure that this is going to be easy but wish you the best of luck. Do keep us in the loop. I imagine you're already looking for a lawyer or firm able to meet the needs of this rather unique case. Let us know when you've met with some of them. Dying to know what wonders a professional can do with your rather interesting word salad of ideas.

Also, when you say precedence, I assume you mean precedent?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 61 - 80 of186
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

40 Users are viewing the Columbus Forum right now

Search the Columbus Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Is Nevada rancher a freeloader? 5 min Pope Che Reagan Christ I 200
"female" From Chillecothe is (Oct '12) 15 min Leaf 31
?Defendants on Trial, Who's Worse? 20 min Leaf 2
what is your favorite cell phone brand? 21 min Leaf 7
I like polls 22 min Leaf 1
Who downed MH 370? 24 min Leaf 6
Obama Lied Again 25 min Leaf 22
Bennett Smith gate stories from the victims poi... (May '13) 9 hr Agree 1,986
•••
•••
•••
Columbus Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Columbus Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••