Homosexuality Should Not Be Promoted - Uk Academies

[La_Dolce_Vita]

It all depends what you mean by 'promoted' ? I wouldn't want it promoted either...

It doesn't even make sense for it to be promote. You can't promote heterosexuality and you cannot promote heterosexuality.

So why is it there in the document? It's there because of the old homophobic thinking that it can be advocated. That children can be influenced or should be protection from knowing anything gay.

...but then again I don't think we should be promoting sexual orientation or lifestyle full stop. We should be teaching reproduction in schools and basic sexual health but that's a different thing.

Safe sex, absolutely. But what is it about reproduction that be taught on top of what is definitely taught in Biology? It's covered in in biology classes how an egg fertilises sperm. People find out quick enough what to put their cocks.

Do you think felatio, cunninlingus, and kissing are not relevant?

I have happy with equivalence. But you miss the point when you don't see the hypocrisy of the document.

 

Would you happy for the document to say that Heterosexuality and homosexuality must not be promoted and must be spoken of only in objective terms?

 

Sexuality should be a private thing, a free choice between individuals and consenting adults, free from persecution or discrimination. Freedom and privacy are a cornerstone of the true liberal society, not this carnival of difference.

You are mistaken. It isn't private at all. I've heard a colleague talking about her husband at work. Do you think that is going too far? She even spoke about her child, which I presume must mean the husband had intercourse with her. I even saw a couple holding hand in full daylight on a public road. All these things seem to me to be part of the heterosexual carnival of life. Nothing wrong with it in my mind. Why do you think so?

 

It's absolutely right that homosexuality was decriminalised, but absolutely wrong that it has subsequently become such a public bandwagon.

I don't know what that means.

[Lxxx]

 

 

It all depends what you mean by 'promoted' ? I wouldn't want it promoted either...

It doesn't even make sense for it to be promote. You can't promote heterosexuality and you cannot promote heterosexuality.

So why is it there in the document? It's there because of the old homophobic thinking that it can be. That children can be influenced or should be protection from knowing anything gay.

...but then again I don't think we should be promoting sexual orientation or lifestyle full stop. We should be teaching reproduction in schools and basic sexual health but that's a different thing.

Safe sex, absolutely. But what is it about reproduction that be taught on top of what is definitely taught in Biology? It's covered in in biology classes how an egg fertilises sperm. People find out quick enough what to put their cocks.

Do you think felatio, cunninlingus, and kissing are not relevant?

I have happy with equivalence. But you miss the point when you don't see the hypocrisy of the document.

 

Would you happy for the document to say that Heterosexuality and homosexuality must not be promoted and must be spoken of only in objective terms?

Sexuality should be a private thing, a free choice between individuals and consenting adults, free from persecution or discrimination. Freedom and privacy are a cornerstone of the true liberal society, not this carnival of difference.

You are mistaken. It isn't private at all. I've heard a colleague talking about her husband at work. Do you think that is going too far? She even spoke about her child, which I presume must mean the husband had intercourse with her. I even saw a couple holding hand in full daylight on a public road. All these things seem to me to be part of the heterosexual carnival of life. Nothing wrong with it in my mind. Why do you think so?

It's absolutely right that homosexuality was decriminalised, but absolutely wrong that it has subsequently become such a public bandwagon.

I don't know what that means.

Flip flop flip flop. Mr Contradiction returns. I'd watch your step otherwise you might step on that chip that's just fallen off your shoulder.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

A lazy post commenting about chips on shoulders when the matter of inequality is addressed.

[manxman1980]

 

I have to say that sometimes your own attitude would make me consider my own personal views, however, I know many other people who are in same sex relationships and when i think of them I remember that you are just incredibly opinionated.

I don't know what that is supposed to mean. Is being opinionated a problem, if so, since when? Maybe they have no interest in policits or maybe they are naive and think there are no problems or maybe they disagree with such matters as equality.

 

Holding and giving an opinion are fine, however, the way you present and argue your corner does you no favours. You are critcical and often fail to present your views in a cohesive matter and at times you contradict yourself. You accuse other people of not understanding your views as if they are thick when a lot of the time the problem lies in the way you set your views out.

 

Anyway back onto the subject of equality... I do think that there is some way to go to ensure equality, not just for the LGBT "community" but also for those of different races, ethnic origins and ability (disability). We are slowly eroding inequality and the majority of the younger generations are a good example of the shift in attitudes. There are pockets of people who are resistant to the idea of equality but given time they will fade. Look at the progress made on gender equality, although not perfect yet (as seen on some other threads) women and men are now by and large treated as equals. Time has been a major factor in this.

 

The other point to consider is the more you clamour for equality the more resistant certain groups become. I am often accused of being a member of the PC brigade when commenting online. Well actually I believe in treating everyone as an individual and giving them respect (unless they really get on my nerves!) but I will not resort to saying all gays are XYZ because of LDV! I may hold a certain view about you but I am not going to let that influence my views of anyone else.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Holding and giving an opinion are fine, however, the way you present and argue your corner does you no favours.

You are critcical and often fail to present your views in a cohesive matter and at times you contradict yourself. You accuse other people of not understanding your views as if they are thick when a lot of the time the problem lies in the way you set your views out.

I am not asking for any. I was making people aware of the issue surrounding this document. I have spelt the matter out quite clearly by remarking upon the matter of moral equivalence in how the document should have been set out. And you have yet to point out a contradiction. (I think you remarked upon a supposed contradiction because of what you mis-read in an earlier post. I recommend you re-read the post before pressing this point.)

 

It's quite a simple matter, but the posts in reply are banging on about how attitudes take a while to change (possibly with an implication that things should wait), that sex ed should be just about reproduction and safe sex (when sex ed is only about the latter and teaches reproduction incidental to safe sex and sex in general), and advocation of a 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' attitude. And you wonder why I seem conceited or sharp?

[Thomas Jefferson]

Mexican Congresswoman Rejects Gay Marriage, Says Spouses Must Have Sex While Facing Each Other

 

During a marriage equality forum in Pueblo earlier this month, Ana María Jiménez Ortiz of the National Action Party (PAN) gave a specific reason as to why gay couples could not marry: They don't face each other during sex.

 

"A marriage should only be considered amongst people that can look at each other in the eye while having sexual intercourse," Jiménez Ortiz said during the event, according to the Latin Times. "Something that does not happen in homosexual couples."

 

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/20/ana-maria-jimenez-ortiz-mexican-congresswoman-gay-marriage_n_3786699.html

 

And now for a quote from good old Gore Vidal:

 

At least when the Emperor Justinian, a sky-god man, decided to outlaw sodomy, he had to come up with a good practical reason, which he did. It is well known, Justinian declared, that buggery is a principal cause of earthquakes, and so must be prohibited. But our sky-godders, always eager to hate, still quote Leviticus, as if that looney text had anything useful to say about anything except, perhaps, the inadvisability of eating shellfish in the Jerusalem area.

[quilp]

''The important thing is not the object of love but the emotion itself''. (or something like that!)

 

Why is it that those who objectify homosexual love as an abomination are, as Domino is, so obsessed with the acts and not the fulfillment of love itself? The obvious riot of imagination and nuturing of hate must require some special effort.

 

I'll be buggered if i can work this out.

[Thomas Jefferson]

It's quite a simple matter, but the posts in reply are banging on about how attitudes take a while to change (possibly with an implication that things should wait), that sex ed should be just about reproduction and safe sex (when sex ed is only about the latter and teaches reproduction incidental to safe sex and sex in general), and advocation of a 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' attitude. And you wonder why I seem conceited or sharp?

 

The whole point of "sex education" classes in the mass education system is to characterise pregnancy as shameful and a burden; it's all about promoting abortion, contraception and transhumanism --- population control. LDV, gay people just aren't the target audience of this particular propaganda programme. However, given their aims, I think the promotion of homosexuality in sex education classes is an inevitable next step. I suppose they're waiting until their other agenda, the demonisation of religion and traditional values, is further down the road. You'll have your Brave New World, one small step at a time.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Anyway back onto the subject of equality... I do think that there is some way to go to ensure equality, not just for the LGBT "community" but also for those of different races, ethnic origins and ability (disability). We are slowly eroding inequality and the majority of the younger generations are a good example of the shift in attitudes.

This is disgressing, but what you are seeing is a tolerance, not an acceptance.

There are pockets of people who are resistant to the idea of equality but given time they will fade.

Those you refer to are those who are resistant to even tolerating homosexuality. But society is resistant to equality. Not legal equality (most people are fine with it), but social equality. It's not necessarily a conscious resistance, but a shared thinking that placed heterosexuality as a norm and the proper or baseline sexuality. This baseline idea or primary idea has to change for there to be acceptance. That will take a lot of time and effort on the part of gay people. And it doesn't just help gay people but helps everyone.

Look at the progress made on gender equality, although not perfect yet (as seen on some other threads) women and men are now by and large treated as equals. Time has been a major factor in this.

This is only legal equality. Woman still live in an very male dominated world, unfortunately. Similar to what I am discussing with homosexuality, the dominant thinking is of the primary and superiority of men.

But time hasn't been a major factor. The legal equality has come about from women campaigning for it, by women getting out there and demonstrating that they are not second-class citizens and can live a life without men and live a life outside of the home.

 

The other point to consider is the more you clamour for equality the more resistant certain groups become. I am often accused of being a member of the PC brigade when commenting online. Well actually I believe in treating everyone as an individual and giving them respect (unless they really get on my nerves!) but I will not resort to saying all gays are XYZ because of LDV! I may hold a certain view about you but I am not going to let that influence my views of anyone else.

Bear in my mind for the sake of your own confidence in dealing with other people that those who most often moan about political correctness and especially those who say 'PC Brigade' are almost always fucking wallies who don't even know what political correctness is, nevermind grasp why it exists.

 

Anything that challenges vested interests of groups will lead to resistance. That's just the way it is. Education can mitigate this to severity of the resistance, but it is inevitable.

 

I don't even know what you're talking about in the last two sentences.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

The whole point of "sex education" classes in the mass education system is to characterise pregnancy as shameful and a burden; it's all about promoting abortion, contraception and transhumanism --- population control. LDV, gay people just aren't the target audience of this particular propaganda programme. However, given their aims, I think the promotion of homosexuality in sex education classes is an inevitable next step. I suppose they're waiting until their other agenda, the demonisation of religion and traditional values, is further down the road. You'll have your Brave New World, one small step at a time.

Where are you getting this from?

[Max Power]

Gosh LDV, I swear you could cause a fight in an empty room. Even when I am basically agreeing with you, you can still find something to argue about.

[manxman1980]

To summarise my views LDV I believe in equality before the law. Beyond that I believe in diversity rather than equality. I value each person for their own personality, attitudes, and skills etc. Their race, sex, sexual orientation, age, hair colour or weight does not come into it for me. Each person offers something different based on their background, knowledge and experience and that is important.

 

I also believe that we need to consider the effect of the various pressure groups on the "straight white males" who may feel that they are continually under attack. In those circumstances the natural reaction is to fight back or run away so it is perhaps not surprising that change is slow.

 

I fit into the category of a straight white male and I am in a position to look at the equality legislation, and specifically the way in which it is worded, and know that it works both ways. If a woman is promoted ahead of me based purely on gender then I can make a claim for sexual discrimination - it does work both ways! A lot of people do not know this though.

 

So back to the topic of promoting homosexuality in schools... You are going to get resistance. It won't all be homophobic either. You will have other groups wanting to promote their messages as well to ensure they get equality and if we get into that situation where do we stop? Do we promote awareness of the issues faced by people with ginger hair or being fat?

 

 

Surely it is much better to give children a thorough education and let them make their own decisions based on fact? Maybe modern history could look at the struggle for equality for women, ethnic minorities, sexual orientation etc and ask the children to think critically about the subject and challenge their beliefs and attitudes.

 

The sex education I received was purely in terms of reproduction, plus I studied Biology (which by the way was far more focused on the cellular level than reproduction) but I seem to have come out of it with an open mind and able to accept LGBT's without a problem and include some among my close friends. I also know that there are some people in that group who I cannot stand but that is nothing to do with their sexuality,

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Gosh LDV, I swear you could cause a fight in an empty room. Even when I am basically agreeing with you, you can still find something to argue about.

If I thought you were agreeing then I wouldn't bang on about it so much. Not when I had TJ's posts to contend with too.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

To summarise my views LDV I believe in equality before the law.

Do you mean equality under the law. Or that there should be equality before legal changes are made?

Beyond that I believe in diversity rather than equality. I value each person for their own personality, attitudes, and skills etc. Their race, sex, sexual orientation, age, hair colour or weight does not come into it for me. Each person offers something different based on their background, knowledge and experience and that is important.

That's seems great. But the problem is that you and others may recognise diversity but still hold values and have ways of thought that are prejudiced or fundamentally unequal.

For instance, I may know that society is diverse, I may know that people of other colour or of the other sex deserve not to be discriminated and that they should be treated equal. But it doesn't mean that when I think, speak and act that I am not operating from a perspective and value-set that is fair and equal. All I have is awareness of what I should be like.

also believe that we need to consider the effect of the various pressure groups on the "straight white males" who may feel that they are continually under attack. In those circumstances the natural reaction is to fight back or run away so it is perhaps not surprising that change is slow.

 

This is complex. But yes, they are under attack. What is being attacked isn't so much straight, white males but their ability to keep that privileged position through their specific language and worldview in society. And sexism, heterosexual superiority and racial superiority are exist to help create a distorted view that maintains power.

 

So if gay people, women, and people of other coloured skin challenge these views then straight, white males naturally feel challenged.

 

But it isn't just men who feel challenged by it. These are still almost universal 'worldviews' that have been taught, defended and maintained by most of society for the betterment of the privileging straights, whites, and men. They're not just the values of straight, white men because everyone lives them, but they are values that only exist to maintain power in specific areas.

 

[La_Dolce_Vita]

So back to the topic of promoting homosexuality in schools... You are going to get resistance. It won't all be homophobic either. You will have other groups wanting to promote their messages as well to ensure they get equality and if we get into that situation where do we stop? Do we promote awareness of the issues faced by people with ginger hair or being fat?

I am about to leave this conversation now. After this discussion, are you implying that you think I want homosexuality promoted, after everything I have said that there shouldn't be mention of promotion in this document?