Oh dear

2

Comments

  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    nickice wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    nickice wrote:
    Veronese68 wrote:
    nickice wrote:
    I think the fact that it's a non-religious state school might be the reason it's making headlines.
    I think the fact that it suits certain agendas has more to do with it.


    The Guardian reported a poll a few years ago in which 100% of Muslim respondents said homosexuality was morally unacceptable and just over 50% thought it should be illegal. Maybe it's time that we join the dots and realise beliefs have consequences.
    Depends on the validity of the poll - statistics can be used to push an agenda - 100% of respondents confirm that (both of them).


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/may ... osexuality

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... sharia-law

    Nobody ever questions poll validity on here unless it involves confronting uncomfortable truths.


    This sentence stood out-Almost half (47%) said they did not agree that it was acceptable for a gay person to become a teacher, compared with 14% of the general population.



    I'd suggest these events do nothing to discount the validity of these polls. Quite frankly, I don't care what people believe as long as they don't interfere with others' rights.

    Looking at the first poll
    3 million muslims in Britain - they poll 500 of them ... ie less than 0.02% - did they bother going across country or did they stick in one area? doesn't sound very representative to me - oh - and it is from 10 years ago.

    So then look at the second poll - it's from 2016 - so 7 years after the first - 1/2 now say it's ok to be gay - that's a heck of a shift in 7 years - give it a few years and perhaps they'll become a bit more liberal and accepting of others ways.

    Now tell me that Islam isn't shifting in it's ideas ...
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    It isn't the same thing - think something is morally acceptable is one thing but to say it should be illegal is another.

    Is tax avoidance morally acceptable? probably not but should it be illegal? no (how many here have used the cycle to work scheme or have a pension etc)

    it isn't comparing similar data.

    edit - sorry - i'm not islam bashing here, but as an analyst i dislike misuse of data and statistics! :D
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • Alejandrosdog
    Alejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    I object to my young children have sex education aged 5.

    what do you think they actually teach them at that age? and why do you object?

    I object because my belief as a parent is that it’s unnecessary and that they don’t have the maturity to deal with complex issues like it’s ok to be gay. Which it may well be the case but like many things it’s more complex.

    I object to people promoting this type of thing to vulnerable children. And of course children at primary school are vulnerable and impressionable.

    What is wrong with telling children that gay people exist? that is about all they are doing. there will be more and more children going to school who have been adopted by same sex couples so are you going to ban your children from seeing them until they are old enough? when exactly do you think children will be old enough to learn that some people are gay?

    what is complex about saying it is ok if you are gay?

    Well im glad the world you live in is so simple. Do you object to parents protecting their children from exposure to dogma? to being part of a captive audience for indoctrination? a teacher that expresses intentionally or otherwise support for any position influences children.

    There is a time and a place. 5 years old is not the time.

    but then i respect and love my children
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Well im glad the world you live in is so simple. Do you object to parents protecting their children from exposure to dogma? to being part of a captive audience for indoctrination? a teacher that expresses intentionally or otherwise support for any position influences children.

    There is a time and a place. 5 years old is not the time.

    but then i respect and love my children

    what dogma are they being exposed to?
    what are they being indoctrinated in to?

    I don't have any children but there is a reason that LGBT youths attempt suicide at 5 times the rate of heterosexual youths and it is because people, for whatever reason, think it is wrong which leads to bullying, them questioning themselves and if you are religious maybe thinking they will be tortured for eternity!

    No one is promoting same sex relationships just letting them know they exist and that it is ok.
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • nickice
    nickice Posts: 2,439
    Slowbike wrote:
    nickice wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    nickice wrote:
    Veronese68 wrote:
    nickice wrote:
    I think the fact that it's a non-religious state school might be the reason it's making headlines.
    I think the fact that it suits certain agendas has more to do with it.


    The Guardian reported a poll a few years ago in which 100% of Muslim respondents said homosexuality was morally unacceptable and just over 50% thought it should be illegal. Maybe it's time that we join the dots and realise beliefs have consequences.
    Depends on the validity of the poll - statistics can be used to push an agenda - 100% of respondents confirm that (both of them).


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/may ... osexuality

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... sharia-law

    Nobody ever questions poll validity on here unless it involves confronting uncomfortable truths.


    This sentence stood out-Almost half (47%) said they did not agree that it was acceptable for a gay person to become a teacher, compared with 14% of the general population.



    I'd suggest these events do nothing to discount the validity of these polls. Quite frankly, I don't care what people believe as long as they don't interfere with others' rights.

    Looking at the first poll
    3 million muslims in Britain - they poll 500 of them ... ie less than 0.02% - did they bother going across country or did they stick in one area? doesn't sound very representative to me - oh - and it is from 10 years ago.

    So then look at the second poll - it's from 2016 - so 7 years after the first - 1/2 now say it's ok to be gay - that's a heck of a shift in 7 years - give it a few years and perhaps they'll become a bit more liberal and accepting of others ways.

    Now tell me that Islam isn't shifting in it's ideas ...

    That's how polls work. You take a representative sample. Did you expect it to be a poll of all British Muslims? If you're going to question their methods then you should also question all polls as they use similar techniques. It's quite telling that you're trying so hard to discredit the results.

    And the second set of stats you're referring to is about whether homosexuality should be legal not whether it's immoral. You're comparing two different questions.
  • nickice
    nickice Posts: 2,439
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Well im glad the world you live in is so simple. Do you object to parents protecting their children from exposure to dogma? to being part of a captive audience for indoctrination? a teacher that expresses intentionally or otherwise support for any position influences children.

    There is a time and a place. 5 years old is not the time.

    but then i respect and love my children

    what dogma are they being exposed to?
    what are they being indoctrinated in to?

    I don't have any children but there is a reason that LGBT youths attempt suicide at 5 times the rate of heterosexual youths and it is because people, for whatever reason, think it is wrong which leads to bullying, them questioning themselves and if you are religious maybe thinking they will be tortured for eternity!

    No one is promoting same sex relationships just letting them know they exist and that it is ok.


    Is that the reason or at least the only reason as I feel you could be jumping to conclusions. I've heard of those stats for transgender people in particular but I don't think it's right to put gay and transgender in the same category. I wonder if it isn't also because transgender people might have some other issues or whether hormone treatment has this effect.
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Alejandrosdog wrote:

    Well im glad the world you live in is so simple. Do you object to parents protecting their children from exposure to dogma? to being part of a captive audience for indoctrination? a teacher that expresses intentionally or otherwise support for any position influences children.

    There is a time and a place. 5 years old is not the time.

    but then i respect and love my children

    at 5 years old they have no concept of sexuality - nor do they need to - all they should know is that it doesn't matter what their friends parents are - it's normal. Unfortunately, very often it's parents that will teach their children (intentionally or not) that having 2 dads or 2 mums isn't normal....
    pretty much any childrens story book with parents in will be mum and dad ... so setting the scene for "normal".

    It's no different to introducing anything else into a child's life so it's "normal" - like my son thinks it's normal to ride a bike or say please when asking for something or thank you when receiving it - it becomes normal. Many kids his age don't ride bikes or say please and thank you - so it's not normal for them. All the school seemed to be doing is normalising what is becoming a more normal situation in this country - and quite frankly, if anyone is intolerant about it, that's their issue and not the country's problem - regardless of their faith.
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    nickice wrote:

    That's how polls work. You take a representative sample. Did you expect it to be a poll of all British Muslims?
    It was - and is 500 representative?
    nickice wrote:
    If you're going to question their methods then you should also question all polls as they use similar techniques. It's quite telling that you're trying so hard to discredit the results.
    I've skimmed through a liberal papers report on a poll - I'm not taking anything at face value
    nickice wrote:
    And the second set of stats you're referring to is about whether homosexuality should be legal not whether it's immoral. You're comparing two different questions.
    2 questions on the same subject - first one asking about tolerance of homosexual acts and the second asking if it should be legal in the UK - without seeing how the question(s) was/were phrased it's difficult to separate the issues. But a 0% tolerance towards acts and then only 50% think it should be illegal would suggest a softening of hard-liners.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,752
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    I object to my young children have sex education aged 5.

    what do you think they actually teach them at that age? and why do you object?

    I object because my belief as a parent is that it’s unnecessary and that they don’t have the maturity to deal with complex issues like it’s ok to be gay. Which it may well be the case but like many things it’s more complex.

    I object to people promoting this type of thing to vulnerable children. And of course children at primary school are vulnerable and impressionable.

    What is wrong with telling children that gay people exist? that is about all they are doing. there will be more and more children going to school who have been adopted by same sex couples so are you going to ban your children from seeing them until they are old enough? when exactly do you think children will be old enough to learn that some people are gay?

    what is complex about saying it is ok if you are gay?

    Well im glad the world you live in is so simple. Do you object to parents protecting their children from exposure to dogma? to being part of a captive audience for indoctrination? a teacher that expresses intentionally or otherwise support for any position influences children.

    There is a time and a place. 5 years old is not the time.

    but then i respect and love my children

    Just to clarify, which dogma are we talking about here? I mean, you seem to have some pretty rigid conservative ideas on a range of subjects.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • nickice
    nickice Posts: 2,439
    Slowbike wrote:
    nickice wrote:

    That's how polls work. You take a representative sample. Did you expect it to be a poll of all British Muslims?
    It was - and is 500 representative?
    nickice wrote:
    If you're going to question their methods then you should also question all polls as they use similar techniques. It's quite telling that you're trying so hard to discredit the results.
    I've skimmed through a liberal papers report on a poll - I'm not taking anything at face value
    nickice wrote:
    And the second set of stats you're referring to is about whether homosexuality should be legal not whether it's immoral. You're comparing two different questions.
    2 questions on the same subject - first one asking about tolerance of homosexual acts and the second asking if it should be legal in the UK - without seeing how the question(s) was/were phrased it's difficult to separate the issues. But a 0% tolerance towards acts and then only 50% think it should be illegal would suggest a softening of hard-liners.

    Yes it is a representative sample (though there is always a small margin of error.

    You can find the orginal polling data (and the Guardian is hardly Islamophobic)

    It's very easy to separate illegal and immoral. There are plenty of immoral things that shouldn't be illegal (cheating on your spouse for example).
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    nickice wrote:
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Well im glad the world you live in is so simple. Do you object to parents protecting their children from exposure to dogma? to being part of a captive audience for indoctrination? a teacher that expresses intentionally or otherwise support for any position influences children.

    There is a time and a place. 5 years old is not the time.

    but then i respect and love my children

    what dogma are they being exposed to?
    what are they being indoctrinated in to?

    I don't have any children but there is a reason that LGBT youths attempt suicide at 5 times the rate of heterosexual youths and it is because people, for whatever reason, think it is wrong which leads to bullying, them questioning themselves and if you are religious maybe thinking they will be tortured for eternity!

    No one is promoting same sex relationships just letting them know they exist and that it is ok.


    Is that the reason or at least the only reason as I feel you could be jumping to conclusions. I've heard of those stats for transgender people in particular but I don't think it's right to put gay and transgender in the same category. I wonder if it isn't also because transgender people might have some other issues or whether hormone treatment has this effect.

    it is only in people up to the age of 24 so very few of them will actually be on hormone therapy by that stage.

    I could only find stats for America but
    "Lesbian, gay, and bisexual kids are 3x more likely than straight kids to attempt suicide at some point in their lives."
    and
    "Lesbian, gay, and bisexual young people who come from families that reject or do not accept them are over 8x more likely to attempt suicide than those whose families accept them."

    I'm not saying it is the only reason - there is obviously many reasons why someone would attempt suicide - but it must be considered as a factor
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    nickice wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    nickice wrote:

    That's how polls work. You take a representative sample. Did you expect it to be a poll of all British Muslims?
    It was - and is 500 representative?
    nickice wrote:
    If you're going to question their methods then you should also question all polls as they use similar techniques. It's quite telling that you're trying so hard to discredit the results.
    I've skimmed through a liberal papers report on a poll - I'm not taking anything at face value
    nickice wrote:
    And the second set of stats you're referring to is about whether homosexuality should be legal not whether it's immoral. You're comparing two different questions.
    2 questions on the same subject - first one asking about tolerance of homosexual acts and the second asking if it should be legal in the UK - without seeing how the question(s) was/were phrased it's difficult to separate the issues. But a 0% tolerance towards acts and then only 50% think it should be illegal would suggest a softening of hard-liners.

    Yes it is a representative sample (though there is always a small margin of error.
    You state that as fact - where it can only be opinion - because the only way to make it fact would be a 100% poll to check that the sample is representative. Obviously the way statistics and confidence levels works is beyond you.
    nickice wrote:
    You can find the orginal polling data (and the Guardian is hardly Islamophobic)
    Probably and if you say so - quite honestly I haven't the time nor inclination to bother with it.
    nickice wrote:
    It's very easy to separate illegal and immoral. There are plenty of immoral things that shouldn't be illegal (cheating on your spouse for example).
    Indeed - but usually there is some correlation between the two - that being so, a 100% response on something being immoral and some years later a 50% think it should be illegal shows there is a change.
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    Slowbike wrote:
    You state that as fact - where it can only be opinion
    Slowbike wrote:
    Indeed - but usually there is some correlation between the two - that being so, a 100% response on something being immoral and some years later a 50% think it should be illegal shows there is a change.

    I think you are falling for your own trap - the only way to know would have been to ask both questions each time.

    If you had asked them their views on alcohol it would probably have been similar - that is just my opinion btw :wink:
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    You state that as fact - where it can only be opinion
    Slowbike wrote:
    Indeed - but usually there is some correlation between the two - that being so, a 100% response on something being immoral and some years later a 50% think it should be illegal shows there is a change.

    I think you are falling for your own trap - the only way to know would have been to ask both questions each time.

    If you had asked them their views on alcohol it would probably have been similar - that is just my opinion btw :wink:
    ok - perhaps it "suggests there may be" a change ...

    Muslims - alcohol ... ever been to Abu Dhabi or Dubai ? it's amazing how many are "slightly hypocritical" ... do as we say - not as we do ... :p

    But anyway - I was only posting on here to try and stop the Muslim bashing, but 100% of me knows that it's a waste of time ...
  • nickice
    nickice Posts: 2,439
    Slowbike wrote:
    nickice wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    nickice wrote:

    That's how polls work. You take a representative sample. Did you expect it to be a poll of all British Muslims?
    It was - and is 500 representative?
    nickice wrote:
    If you're going to question their methods then you should also question all polls as they use similar techniques. It's quite telling that you're trying so hard to discredit the results.
    I've skimmed through a liberal papers report on a poll - I'm not taking anything at face value
    nickice wrote:
    And the second set of stats you're referring to is about whether homosexuality should be legal not whether it's immoral. You're comparing two different questions.
    2 questions on the same subject - first one asking about tolerance of homosexual acts and the second asking if it should be legal in the UK - without seeing how the question(s) was/were phrased it's difficult to separate the issues. But a 0% tolerance towards acts and then only 50% think it should be illegal would suggest a softening of hard-liners.

    Yes it is a representative sample (though there is always a small margin of error.
    You state that as fact - where it can only be opinion - because the only way to make it fact would be a 100% poll to check that the sample is representative. Obviously the way statistics and confidence levels works is beyond you.
    nickice wrote:
    You can find the orginal polling data (and the Guardian is hardly Islamophobic)
    Probably and if you say so - quite honestly I haven't the time nor inclination to bother with it.
    nickice wrote:
    It's very easy to separate illegal and immoral. There are plenty of immoral things that shouldn't be illegal (cheating on your spouse for example).
    Indeed - but usually there is some correlation between the two - that being so, a 100% response on something being immoral and some years later a 50% think it should be illegal shows there is a change.

    What am I stating as fact exactly? Polling companies would agree with me. I have my doubts that you understand how statistics work given that you don't believe it can be a representative sample. But well done on the petty insult.

    If you haven't got the time or inclination to bother with it, why are you doubting its validity?

    The only way to show a true change would be to ask the same question twice. They didn't do that so there is no change shown at all.
  • nickice
    nickice Posts: 2,439
    Slowbike wrote:
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    You state that as fact - where it can only be opinion
    Slowbike wrote:
    Indeed - but usually there is some correlation between the two - that being so, a 100% response on something being immoral and some years later a 50% think it should be illegal shows there is a change.

    I think you are falling for your own trap - the only way to know would have been to ask both questions each time.

    If you had asked them their views on alcohol it would probably have been similar - that is just my opinion btw :wink:
    ok - perhaps it "suggests there may be" a change ...

    Muslims - alcohol ... ever been to Abu Dhabi or Dubai ? it's amazing how many are "slightly hypocritical" ... do as we say - not as we do ... :p

    But anyway - I was only posting on here to try and stop the Muslim bashing, but 100% of me knows that it's a waste of time ...

    How noble of you. Where's the Muslim bashing?
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,688
    Is there some sort of keyword alert you can set up on this forum? Just asking as it feels like whenever someone types the word Muslim on this forum Nickice appears like the shop keeper in Mr Benn! Very rarely seems to post in other threads though.
  • nickice
    nickice Posts: 2,439
    Pross wrote:
    Is there some sort of keyword alert you can set up on this forum? Just asking as it feels like whenever someone types the word Muslim on this forum Nickice appears like the shop keeper in Mr Benn! Very rarely seems to post in other threads though.


    I post in threads that interest me. Maybe I should start posting in other threads just to balance it out and avoid the 'you must be a bigot because you posts in threads about Islam'.
  • Alejandrosdog
    Alejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    I object to my young children have sex education aged 5.

    what do you think they actually teach them at that age? and why do you object?

    I object because my belief as a parent is that it’s unnecessary and that they don’t have the maturity to deal with complex issues like it’s ok to be gay. Which it may well be the case but like many things it’s more complex.

    I object to people promoting this type of thing to vulnerable children. And of course children at primary school are vulnerable and impressionable.

    What is wrong with telling children that gay people exist? that is about all they are doing. there will be more and more children going to school who have been adopted by same sex couples so are you going to ban your children from seeing them until they are old enough? when exactly do you think children will be old enough to learn that some people are gay?

    what is complex about saying it is ok if you are gay?

    Ah I see it’s dead straight forward. I can’t be bothered explaining it if you can’t see why it might be an issue that a parent of young children has to contend with a third party preaching the way they should think.

    Look at the centre that deals with trans children for a topical example about just how destructive pc dogmas can be. Lives ruined.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,866
    Worryingly I find myself on the side of the loons, bigots and trolls.

    I have gone away and had a good think about why I don’t agree with teaching this stuff to 5 year olds.

    It is because it is unnecessary- kids of that age are very accepting. They do not need to be taught that some people are different as they can see it for themselves.
  • Alejandrosdog
    Alejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Worryingly I find myself on the side of the loons, bigots and trolls.

    I have gone away and had a good think about why I don’t agree with teaching this stuff to 5 year olds.

    It is because it is unnecessary- kids of that age are very accepting. They do not need to be taught that some people are different as they can see it for themselves.

    This is true but no need to be worried, I’m neither a loon or a troll, I just have thought through opinions rather than spouting received wisdom.

    The cause of your worry is that you have also thought about things and now see what’s true.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,866
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Worryingly I find myself on the side of the loons, bigots and trolls.

    I have gone away and had a good think about why I don’t agree with teaching this stuff to 5 year olds.

    It is because it is unnecessary- kids of that age are very accepting. They do not need to be taught that some people are different as they can see it for themselves.

    This is true but no need to be worried, I’m neither a loon or a troll, I just have thought through opinions rather than spouting received wisdom.

    The cause of your worry is that you have also thought about things and now see what’s true.

    I would rather you did not place me in a category with you.
  • Alejandrosdog
    Alejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Worryingly I find myself on the side of the loons, bigots and trolls.

    I have gone away and had a good think about why I don’t agree with teaching this stuff to 5 year olds.

    It is because it is unnecessary- kids of that age are very accepting. They do not need to be taught that some people are different as they can see it for themselves.

    This is true but no need to be worried, I’m neither a loon or a troll, I just have thought through opinions rather than spouting received wisdom.

    The cause of your worry is that you have also thought about things and now see what’s true.

    I would rather you did not place me in a category with you.[/quote

    Try not to be offensive sunshine.
  • DeVlaeminck
    DeVlaeminck Posts: 8,746
    My kids are no longer kids and I'm not a Primary school teacher so I don'tknow exactly how this is being taught/introduced. I certainly do think that gay relationships should feature in books etc that children use in school. That may then lead to questions which have to be addressed so yes maybe talking about why 2 men or 2 women can live together as a couple is something that should happen in Infant school. The mechanics of sex gay and other can wait til they get internet access. It did cross my mind though that perhaps these Birmingham parents were objecting because the school omitted teaching that daddies could have more than one wife ?
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    Just to point out I'm not Muslim bashing, there is a big difference between disliking the teachings of certain things and disliking the people who follow those things.

    I dislike anything that judges people and adversely affect people's lives for things they do not choose and have no control over.
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,688
    DeVlaeminck wrote:
    My kids are no longer kids and I'm not a Primary school teacher so I don'tknow exactly how this is being taught/introduced. I certainly do think that gay relationships should feature in books etc that children use in school. That may then lead to questions which have to be addressed so yes maybe talking about why 2 men or 2 women can live together as a couple is something that should happen in Infant school. The mechanics of sex gay and other can wait til they get internet access. It did cross my mind though that perhaps these Birmingham parents were objecting because the school omitted teaching that daddies could have more than one wife ?

    This is going to blow your mind but I agree so presumably that means you are wrong.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,752
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    It is because it is unnecessary- kids of that age are very accepting. They do not need to be taught that some people are different as they can see it for themselves.

    They are accepting; they also see and hear everything, particularly their parents' ideas and behaviour. If junior hears someone he trusts making some derogatory comment about a gay couple, guess what he'll be parroting to the next two male classmates he sees playing with the 'girls' toys. Both he and they will probably not understand what the words mean, but they'll pick up that being different is bad. I think that's worth challenging from the start, rather than waiting for the ideas to set in before tackling them.

    The whole sex education thing is a red herring as the 'No Outsiders' project (Sub-title "Teaching the Equality Act in Primary School") clearly isn't anything to do with sex.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Alejandrosdog
    Alejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    Slowbike wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:

    Well im glad the world you live in is so simple. Do you object to parents protecting their children from exposure to dogma? to being part of a captive audience for indoctrination? a teacher that expresses intentionally or otherwise support for any position influences children.

    There is a time and a place. 5 years old is not the time.

    but then i respect and love my children

    at 5 years old they have no concept of sexuality - nor do they need to - all they should know is that it doesn't matter what their friends parents are - it's normal. Unfortunately, very often it's parents that will teach their children (intentionally or not) that having 2 dads or 2 mums isn't normal....
    pretty much any childrens story book with parents in will be mum and dad ... so setting the scene for "normal".

    It's no different to introducing anything else into a child's life so it's "normal" - like my son thinks it's normal to ride a bike or say please when asking for something or thank you when receiving it - it becomes normal. Many kids his age don't ride bikes or say please and thank you - so it's not normal for them. All the school seemed to be doing is normalising what is becoming a more normal situation in this country - and quite frankly, if anyone is intolerant about it, that's their issue and not the country's problem - regardless of their faith.

    So what you’re saying is the state is normalising the abnormal?
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    what is wrong with that? abnormal doesn't mean bad.

    should they only have examples of couples of the same nationality, race etc etc because that is "normal"?

    "but, teacher, i only have a mum", "shhhh now, we aren't allowed to talk about you"
    " my dad is white but my mum is black", "pipe down you, we only talk about normal families here"
    "I have two mums", "GET OUT!!!!!"
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    rjsterry wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    It is because it is unnecessary- kids of that age are very accepting. They do not need to be taught that some people are different as they can see it for themselves.

    They are accepting; they also see and hear everything, particularly their parents' ideas and behaviour. If junior hears someone he trusts making some derogatory comment about a gay couple, guess what he'll be parroting to the next two male classmates he sees playing with the 'girls' toys. Both he and they will probably not understand what the words mean, but they'll pick up that being different is bad. I think that's worth challenging from the start, rather than waiting for the ideas to set in before tackling them.

    The whole sex education thing is a red herring as the 'No Outsiders' project (Sub-title "Teaching the Equality Act in Primary School") clearly isn't anything to do with sex.

    Exactly ... we were waiting for the car in front to pull out of the junction and Little Slowbike pipes up ... "come on ... today!" .... because it's exactly what I've said when I get exasperated with the vehicle in front dithering at a junction ... he's learnt that taking a long time at the junction isn't a good thing ...

Categories