Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Typical left-wing spin on the narrative.You brought it up.
Is it only “ the woke crowd” that benefits from contraception? IUDs are also used by many women for medical reasons and not as strictly a form of birth control. If you only think sex when discussing birth control, that’s on you.Typical left-wing spin on the narrative.
@Chrystal-J didn't "bring up" a 20' IUD ballon at Union Station... just posted it here for our awareness.
It was the woke crowd that brought it up.
That's a bogus claim.
There is no such thing as a "medically necessary abortion".
Are you saying that it is a bad thing for women to become infertile?
Why push for transgenderism then?
I would protect the lives of women and children - while preserving their rights to life and self-defense.
Just so you know it's against the forum rules to goad people with emojis such as smiling or laughing when it's obvious they are serious, as are comments like "typical left wing spin"/"fake news" and similar non-productive comments.Typical left-wing spin on the narrative.
@Chrystal-J didn't "bring up" a 20' IUD ballon at Union Station... just posted it here for our awareness.
It was the woke crowd that brought it up.
Exactly. Catholicism is an easy target. I don't see anyone advocating a Muslim to go against their faith. Catholic hospitals should not have to have anything to do with birth control.Would you expect pork at a Jewish deli?
I don't think so and I feel that the other things you have said since then make me feel as though you are more open to the idea then I initially thought.None of that should have given you any idea about what I age I think it appropriate. What an odd conclusion you have drawn.
Then I stand corrected.You are indeed corrected.
That's a big part of it and I don't understand why you believe I wouldn't want children to be informed.You can protect you children by giving them the information they need to make their way in the world.
As long as possible. Let children be children. No need to bring sexuality and politics into the classroom.Or you can keep them from the world.
It didn't used to be. But adults keep trying to indoctrinate children earlier and earlier.I don't really recommend this as an either/or. As any parent knows, it is a delicate balance.
This is an odd conclusion, and it has no relevance to the topic of LGBT and gender ideology in the classroom.Sir, sir? What's 'sex'? What is it I shouldn't be doing? What are these boys going to try to get me to do which I should refuse? How should I refuse? Please, give me some information about what might happen to me.
Good. That is the literally the biggest deal. Many gender activists don't agree with us though.I'll agree with that.
Both are true. We need to protect our children from certain places and situations as well as dangerous actions.Don't be silly. You aren't saying 'Don't go there because it's dangerous'. It's 'don't do this because it's dangerous'.
It is what many gender activists are pushing for.We both agree it shouldn't. It's nonsensical to use such an obviously illegal act to promote an argument.
The first case is about an adult - not a child - and the other link is still being debated.'School staff members have legal obligations to protect students’ privacy. According to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, “It is difficult to imagine a more private matter than one’s sexuality and a less likely probability that the government would have a legitimate interest in disclosure of sexual identity.” Rights of transgender students and their parents are a challenge for schools, courts
What happens to those numbers after you remove the adults (18-19 year olds) and suicides/accidents?We found some elements of the assertion true, though some clarifications are needed. Within certain parameters — such as ages 1-18 and 1-19, in the years 2020 and 2021 — gun-related incidents were, in fact, the leading cause of death in children and teens. Are Guns the Leading Cause of Death for Children in the US?
Not at all. I cannot think of a single instance when it would be necessary.A ridiculous comment.
The title change is because of the legal contract - it does not describe their sexuality or sexual preferences.They do this already any time they use the prefix Mrs. instead of Miss or mentioning they have a spouse.
No one should be allowed to sexualize children. Playing the victim card does not change that.It's only become a talking point now that the wrong type of minorities are also allowed to do the same.
Well said.Exactly. Catholicism is an easy target. I don't see anyone advocating a Muslim to go against their faith. Catholic hospitals should not have to have anything to do with birth control.
How many Muslim hospitals are there in this country?Exactly. Catholicism is an easy target. I don't see anyone advocating a Muslim to go against their faith. Catholic hospitals should not have to have anything to do with birth control.
I'm not sure what that means. Children mature sexually just as they do in every other way. It happens gradually over a period of fifteen or so years and there is nothing we can do to stop it. Except maybe by giving puberty blockers, which I don't approve of either. But they do it themselves. All we can do is give (hopefully) useful guidance.The title change is because of the legal contract - it does not describe their sexuality or sexual preferences.
No one should be allowed to sexualize children. Playing the victim card does not change that.
Not the issue of my post...Is it only “ the woke crowd” that benefits from contraception? IUDs are also used by many women for medical reasons and not as strictly a form of birth control. If you only think sex when discussing birth control, that’s on you.
I appreciate you helping with the regular moderators and will try to conduct myself better.Just so you know it's against the forum rules to goad people with emojis such as smiling or laughing when it's obvious they are serious, as are comments like "typical left wing spin"/"fake news" and similar non-productive comments.
I don’t think a teacher sharing what their sexuality is is a big deal, especially in the context of sex ed.I never said that it was.
Notice I said "their sexuality" - not sexuality in general.
I think that is unrealistic and discriminatory. Deciding that the answer is pretending none of these things exist is willful ignorance and sets everybody up for failure.I don't believe that either the teachers or students should be talking about their individual sexualities.
Christianity doesn’t need to be taught in a public school, actually, but I have no issue with a teacher identifying as a Christian.Just like you can teach what Christianity is without anyone talking about how or why they themselves are Christian or "witnessing" about what they believe.
What on earth are you talking about? If you think that’s what’s going on in schools or in sex ed, you are grossly misinformed.A heterosexual teacher can explain heterosexuality without describing himself as such or what sexual acts he likes to participate in or ask students what they like sexually.
First off, that’s not what you asked.This is completely inappropriate.
No adult has the right to share a secret with my child that I do not know about.
It’s not, actually.And these adults that we entrust with our children are obligated to share everything with the parents.
I think your responses are something that controlling and abusive person would say when the threat to their iron grip on their victims is threatened.I am not accusing you of anything - but your response is something a predator would say.
I think people who can’t get abortions because they don’t have uteruses can’t weigh in on abortions. I think people confuse parenting a child with owning a child and forget that the child’s needs are more important than the wants of their parents. I think people who aren’t dealing with the issues related to gender ideology and their own children have no business telling me what I need to do.If children cannot consent to tattoos - they cannot consent to any of this gender ideology nonsense.
Yes, I saw that this was a general catch-all of all the topics that get a certain demographic all wound up, but the OP seemed like it was narrowing down the generalized outrage over all the things to specific outrage for just the birth control thing.Gender affirming 'care' for children was mentioned in the article.
If they collect pubic funds with the expressed purpose of delivering universally accepted standard of care, yes, I would.Would you expect pork at a Jewish deli?
LoL, she didn’t bring it up, she brought it to our awareness and introduced the topic for discussion, which is very different from bringing it up, apparently. LoLTypical left-wing spin on the narrative.
@Chrystal-J didn't "bring up" a 20' IUD ballon at Union Station... just posted it here for our awareness.
It was the woke crowd that brought it up.
It’s their institution, and it’s their right to run their hospital as they see fit.If they collect pubic funds with the expressed purpose of delivering universally accepted standard of care, yes, I would.
LoL, that’s not how that works.It’s their institution, and it’s their right to run their hospital as they see fit.
Sorry, I’m not interested in your views or have this pro-abortion propaganda forced on me.LoL, that’s not how that works.
Children should be taught about life in an age appropriate manner. It really is as simple as thatDo you think they need to know all this gender ideology nonsense in order to be informed?
As long as possible. Let children be children. No need to bring sexuality and politics into the classroom.
Maybe if you cut out using words like 'indoctrinate' you might get people paying more attention to any genuine grievances that you have.It didn't used to be. But adults keep trying to indoctrinate children earlier and earlier.
If it needs to be explained, in an age appropriate and manner, then it's not a problem. My 10 year old grandson is aware of gender differences because we have a family member who transgendered. There was some initial surprise then an easy acceptance. It really was no big deal.You think a child would have no sense of personal well-being without an adult authority figure telling them they can be a member of the opposite sex if they wanted to be?
I really think you should stop jumping to conclusions.This push for adults to be able to keep sexual secrets from parents makes me feel like you may be comfortable with children being sexualized.
You've been given a lot of information. Maybe it came as a surprise to you. It might be a good idea to deal with it rather than looking for escape clauses.What happens to those numbers after you remove the adults (18-19 year olds) and suicides/accidents?
You do realise that even in places like Texas abortions are allowed when it's absolutely necessary?Not at all. I cannot think of a single instance when it would be necessary.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?