Homophobe Equalities Minister

[chem1st]

chem1st why are you so concerned about the "promotion" of homosexuality anyway?

 

Do you seriously think that boys who'd otherwise be heterosexual are going to stop finding girls sexually attractive just because homosexuality is treated in a non-judgemental manner in schools or something?

 

If not what are you so worried about?

 

'Who'd otherwise' - Surely you mean 'who are'?

 

Unless of course you believe schooling can be used to influence ones opinion, which it of course can.

I reckon there are groups of people, especially children in school, whom could be influenced, yes.

 

A whole host of factors will come into play, cultural, religious, social, economic and what is taught in schools. That's why I'm against the 'promotion'.

 

Covering it briefly and without bias, fair enough. But it needs not be made into an issue.

 

Somebody voting against the promotion of homosexuality, is not against equality. Which was my orignal point.

[EbonyBranch]

I reckon there are groups of people, especially children in school, whom could be influenced, yes.

.

 

I'm pretty sure that no amount of 'promotion' of homosexuality could have made me gay when I was a kid, and as far as I know I'm a fairly 'normal' hetero.

 

You, on the other hand, appear to be less sure of your sexuality; you seem to be convinced that a bit of prodding could have persuaded you to start listening to Village People, etc.

 

As far as I know the current scientific consensus is that there is no single gay gene, but sexual orientation does have a genetic element. Sexuality is a spectrum, rather than a 'yes/no' question; people are born with a pre-determined tendency towards either end of the spectrum, but no one is absolutely fixed to one point. Otherwise 'straight' people may experiment with gay sex, and may even enjoy it, without their primary 'straight' sexual orientation being affected. Predominantly gay people can enjoy hetero sex, even make babies, without losing their primarily gay sexuality.

 

There is also plenty of evidence that homosexuality is perfectly natural throughout the rest of the animal kingdom. A brief google will unearth reams of research to that effect. There are even hypotheses to the effect that having a small proportion of any group of social animals born gay offers an evolutionary boost: gay animals have been observed pairing with same-sex partners and caring for the group's offspring.

 

If that is the case, then homosexuality is just as natural as heterosexuality.

 

So: lighten up!

 

Kids will experiment as they grow up, and there is nothing schools can do to fix or alter pupils' sexuality. Promotion of gay rights in schools, and challenging anti-gay prejudice, may make life easier for some kids who are struggling to understand their sexuality, and may help to reduce some of the homophobic bullying.

[chem1st]

I'm pretty sure that no amount of 'promotion' of homosexuality could have made me gay when I was a kid, and as far as I know I'm a fairly 'normal' hetero.

Ditto.

 

You, on the other hand, appear to be less sure of your sexuality; you seem to be convinced that a bit of prodding could have persuaded you to start listening to Village People, etc. .

 

I'm sure of mine, however, I think it possible to influence others, especially people of a young age and I don't think schools are a place to promote homosexuality etc.

 

Voting against the promotion of homosexuality in schools is not a vote against equality. Voting against discussing it briefly and neutrally without bias, could be, depending on a persons religious beliefs.

 

No doubt in a few years time we will be able to compare different methods of teaching wrt homosexuality and if there is statistically significant results wrt the method of teaching and resulting % of homosexuals compared to teaching method and general population.

[flamingjimmy]

No doubt in a few years time we will be able to compare different methods of teaching wrt homosexuality and if there is statistically significant results wrt the method of teaching and resulting % of homosexuals compared to teaching method and general population.

 

wow, you actually do think teaching kids about gays will turn them gay. I really thought you weren't gonna say that, I'm truly shocked. I thought you were a lot more intelligent than that.

[NoddyHolder]

agreed bloomdido.

 

That world NH wants, only exists in films like "Mrs Miniver".

It does now ..it didnt used to,this country has been going downhill as far as communities are concerned for the past 30 years...you have a rough childhood ? that why you dont remember it ..or is the brainwashing working

[EbonyBranch]

Ditto.

 

 

 

I'm sure of mine, however, I think it possible to influence others, especially people of a young age and I don't think schools are a place to promote homosexuality etc.

 

Voting against the promotion of homosexuality in schools is not a vote against equality. Voting against discussing it briefly and neutrally without bias, could be, depending on a persons religious beliefs.

 

No doubt in a few years time we will be able to compare different methods of teaching wrt homosexuality and if there is statistically significant results wrt the method of teaching and resulting % of homosexuals compared to teaching method and general population.

If it's so easy to change peoples' sexual orientation, why have all the 'cures' for homosexuality used by churches in America (and elsewhere) been so staggeringly unsuccessful? These are programmes specifically designed to induce heterosexuality, or at the very least suppress homosexuality, and they don't work.

 

You seem to think that a few positive messages in schools will be more effective in turning people into the sexually 'abnormal', when the evidence suggests that dedicated programmes can't make people 'revert' to 'normal' sexuality.

 

And besides all that, your starting position seems to be that there is something wrong with homosexuality. Again, the evidence suggests that it is both perfectly natural and perfectly normal.

[plekhanov]

'Who'd otherwise' - Surely you mean 'who are'?

I know the threads going badly for you by trying to pick up on grammatical errors

 

And no I mean "Who'd otherwise" "who'd" being a pretty common contraction of "who" and "would", surprised you've never encountered it before.

 

Unless of course you believe schooling can be used to influence ones opinion, which it of course can.

I reckon there are groups of people, especially children in school, whom could be influenced, yes.

If as you claim sexuality is so easily influenced then why in all the societies both contemporary and historical where heterosexuality is aggressively promoted as the only acceptable form of sexuality and homosexuality is very strongly condemned do we still find cases of people being persecuted, tortured & even killed for being gay?

 

Doesn't the fact that people who are told their whole lives that heterosexuality is the only way to be and that homosexuality is immoral & unnatural and that furthermore anyone found to be homosexual will be tortured and killed still turn out to be homosexual really rather strongly suggest that sexuality is somewhat less easily influenced that you so tellingly fear?

 

A whole host of factors will come into play, cultural, religious, social, economic and what is taught in schools. That's why I'm against the 'promotion'.

 

Covering it briefly and without bias, fair enough. But it needs not be made into an issue.

 

Somebody voting against the promotion of homosexuality, is not against equality. Which was my orignal point.

However someone (say for example you) who specifically calls for homosexuality to be singled out as something which must not be promoted in schools clearly is against equality.

[plekhanov]

No doubt in a few years time we will be able to compare different methods of teaching wrt homosexuality and if there is statistically significant results wrt the method of teaching and resulting % of homosexuals compared to teaching method and general population.

Why wait a few years? Aren't there already a great many societies which actively attempt to shape children's sexuality by promoting heterosexuality? Why can't we just take a look at those societies to see how successful they are at having heterosexuality be the only sexuality there is?

 

Or do you think homosexuality is somehow so much more attractive than heterosexuality that we can't learn anything about how potentially successful "promoting homosexuality" could be from the continual failure of all those centuries of failed attempts to promote heterosexuality & repress homosexuality?

[chem1st]

However someone (say for example you) who specifically calls for homosexuality to be singled out as something which must not be promoted in schools clearly is against equality.

 

I've said cover it neutrally and briefly, I have said, do not promote it, I've also said don't promote heterosexuality, pages back. You keep ignoring this.

 

I'm sick of repeating myself.

 

Just because she voted against that bill, does not mean she is against equality.

 

If as you claim sexuality is so easily influenced then why in all the societies both contemporary and historical where heterosexuality is aggressively promoted as the only acceptable form of sexuality and homosexuality is very strongly condemned do we still find cases of people being persecuted, tortured & even killed for being gay?

 

I said some children could be influenced, and that it should not be PROMOTED, it should be covered neutrally and briefly.

 

People will be killed and tortured for many years to come, for being gay, black, white, being stood in the wrong place at the wrong time, wearing the wrong football shirt etc. etc. it's human nature.

 

Schools should be a place of learning, not social engineering.

 

It could be covered in an English lesson in about 5 minutes. Rather than having lessons dedicated to promoting it.

 

It would be nice if children sent to school could come out the other end being able to read, write and add up. Maybe even learn what 'promote' means.

[Mister M]

It might be in your human nature to kill and torture other people but it's not in mine!

 

Anyway schools already are places of social engineering. So much of what we take for granted is drummed into us at school - repect for authority, turning up on time, do as you're told etc, etc.

 

Schooling and education is about how we function together as individuals so that society doesn't completely fracture. Therefore encouraging and teaching kids to be tolerant of difference, of each another and to like themselves is vitally important.

 

So many kids leave school doubting themselves and not trusting others because of their experiences at school. And as homophobia is seen as the last acceptable prejudice it often rife and goes unchalleged in schools. Consequently many gay kids end up learning not to like or value themselves. Are you happy that they are learning that in school?

Kids are going to learn about homosexuality in the playground, why not let it be taught by a credible source?

 

I honestly can't see your problem.