Poll: Parental opinion

[returnn23]

What is the whole situation? How should the kids be properly applying "love one another" or "love your neighbor as yourself" to gay people?

I have no problem with gay people. Real love involves sacrifice. In the present, love usually means sex. Leave the kids alone. It is wrong to "educate" them this way.

 

[returnn23]

And yet you expect people to accept your delusions about God, and will readily condemn those who don't. Seems a little hypocritical wouldn't you say?

Your statement is exactly why the world is the way it is, because you look at them and see a delusional, perverted, and evil person... and they look at you and see the exact same thing. And rather than loving thy neighbor you each believe that the only way to live in harmony with one another is for one of you to completely eradicate the other. And you see honor in that. Somehow the message of loving thy neighbor just simply hasn't gotten through to you, and the only thing that Christ's life boils down to is for you to vehemently condemn those who disagree with you.

You just don't seem to realize that your attitude isn't the solution to evil... it's the cause.

If you can learn to forgive and accept them, then they will almost certainly learn to forgive and accept you, and you'll probably find that they'll be just as willing to compromise as you are. They're not radical because they want to be, they're radical because you force them to be.

Unfortunately forgiveness is easier said than done, and will... if Christ has shown us anything, require that we be willing to sacrifice ourselves even for those with whom we disagree. If you want acceptance and understanding from others, first show it unto them.

And with that I'll step down from my pulpit and slink back into the shadows where I belong.

Sad that you should call people names and assign to them words they did not use.

"... eradicate the other." Seriously?

 

[Neutral Observer]

Leave the kids alone. It is wrong to "educate" them this way.

I'm curious, do believe that it's acceptable for schools to teach abstinence? If yes, then why?

 

[returnn23]

I'm curious, do believe that it's acceptable for schools to teach abstinence? If yes, then why?

Abstinence is a simple concept. Don't engage in any sexual activity until you can get married. I was taught this.

 

[Neutral Observer]

Abstinence is a simple concept. Don't engage in any sexual activity until you can get married. I was taught this

So you believe that that should be the full extent to which gender/sexual issues of any kind should be addressed in an educational setting? Seems like today's generation is gonna be exposed to a LOT more than that whether you like it or not. So wouldn't you want it to be addressed in a less confrontational and more open environment?

Or do you believe that we should just pretend that we're still living in the 1950's?

 

[Hvizsgyak]

What is the whole situation? How should the kids be properly applying "love one another" or "love your neighbor as yourself" to gay people?

The whole situation is that God created you the way He wanted you and He structured the world to function the way He planned it. Anything else is a deviation and could cause problems in one way or another to society. By allowing people to change their genders will cause larger problems that the LGBTQ+... neither understands nor cares to understand. They only want their gender changed and for people to accept them. Here we are though now with people arguing for both sides of the situation. It's not just a handful of unruly, uneducated people who are against the requests of the LGBTQ+ people. Of course the media will try to paint it like that but they are wrong. A lot of people will always see LGBTQ+ people as mentally ill and at the most pity them and help them to the extent they best can but not surrendering there own moral view. And the same will happen for gay/lesbian people, society will accommodate the best they can but society will not cross their moral line.

People who try to work with the LGBTQ+ people but will not give up their moral views are usually wondering how did our society get to this nonsensical stage in life where our government thinks it's ok to teach LGBTQ+... lifestyle to 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th graders.

It is very simple to "love your neighbor as yourself" for everyone even thieves, rapists, murderers, perverts, gossipers, atheist, satanist and on and on. You care for them when they are sick, you feed them when they are hungry, you clothe them when they are naked... but what you don't do is give in to their sin and say it's ok. It's as simple as that.

 

[returnn23]

So you believe that that should be the full extent to which gender/sexual issues of any kind should be addressed in an educational setting? Seems like today's generation is gonna be exposed to a LOT more than that whether you like it or not. So wouldn't you want it to be addressed in a less confrontational and more open environment?

Or do you believe that we should just pretend that we're still living in the 1950's?

First of all, the real pretenders said parents in the 1950s were just "too embarrassed" to teach their kids about sex. School was about reading, history, learning how to write and math. Sex education could stay at home with parents. But enough pressure was put on school boards so that those whose responsibility was to raise their children could be overruled by Total Strangers, like today.

A 15 year old girl told a family member in the 1960s: "My parents are very strict. I can't start dating until I'm 16." Could it be that her parents were both 16 once? There was a reason that dad gave strict instructions to boys taking her out. To bring her home on time. He had no illusions about what could happen. The same with mom. And there was, "I'm not letting you out of the house dressed like that!"

Total strangers were out to 'social engineer' society just like today's non-social media. The first miniskirt appeared in 1966. And wearing one was not encouraged. The so-called Sexual Revolution at the end of the 1960s was engineered. The so-called "social changes:" were external, and marketed by Total Strangers. I was there. We knew it was fiction.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

And yet you expect people to accept your delusions about God, and will readily condemn those who don't. Seems a little hypocritical wouldn't you say?

Your statement is exactly why the world is the way it is, because you look at them and see a delusional, perverted, and evil person... and they look at you and see the exact same thing. And rather than loving thy neighbor you each believe that the only way to live in harmony with one another is for one of you to completely eradicate the other. And you see honor in that. Somehow the message of loving thy neighbor just simply hasn't gotten through to you, and the only thing that Christ's life boils down to is for you to vehemently condemn those who disagree with you.

You just don't seem to realize that your attitude isn't the solution to evil... it's the cause.

If you can learn to forgive and accept them, then they will almost certainly learn to forgive and accept you, and you'll probably find that they'll be just as willing to compromise as you are. They're not radical because they want to be, they're radical because you force them to be.

Unfortunately forgiveness is easier said than done, and will... if Christ has shown us anything, require that we be willing to sacrifice ourselves even for those with whom we disagree. If you want acceptance and understanding from others, first show it unto them.

And with that I'll step down from my pulpit and slink back into the shadows where I belong.

In all the amazing natural beauty found in this world and all the intricately complex designs to marvel over, Our God is revealed to man. Know the God of The Bible, He is real and worth being "delusional" about. But show me where I am perverted in what I said above and show me where I am evil in what I said above. Am I evil because I will not accept a transgenders version that he is a she and she is a he? Where is that commandment in any of the religions of the world?

I, along with most of my fellow Christians, will never harm a fellow human being for disagreeing with us. In fact, I go out of my way to not offend others but I will follow God's commandments to the best of my ability. That is how I show God that I love Him.

A lot of people say about Jesus forgiving many people in the Bible and Christians need to be more forgiving. Those original people who say that usually don't read any further in the Bible passed the forgiving part. The last words that usually come from Jesus after He has forgiven someone are, "Go and sin no more". How come these people never remember that part.

Look, as I said in another post, I will love, I will care, I will help everyone but I won't disobey my God and His commandments. I will probably be despised by many but I accept that.

 

[essentialsaltes]

It is very simple to "love your neighbor as yourself" for everyone even ... atheist, satanist and on and on. ... but what you don't do is give in to their sin and say it's ok. It's as simple as that.

But in a secular country like the US, in our secular schools, we do indeed say that everyone has religious freedom. Jews and Muslims, Buddhists and pagans. Likewise both straight and queer people have the freedom to pursue happiness in the United States, and there's no reason the schools should refrain from saying so, when appropriate.

 

[DragonFox91]

I’d say 18 with an option for 16 based on the child in question. That’s how the law works in the UK and I’m happy with that.

I'd be curious as to how this law compares to that. From what it sounds like, our law doesn't clarify age & just uses the vague term minor.

And yet you expect people to accept your delusions about God, and will readily condemn those who don't. Seems a little hypocritical wouldn't you say?

Your statement is exactly why the world is the way it is, because you look at them and see a delusional, perverted, and evil person... and they look at you and see the exact same thing. And rather than loving thy neighbor you each believe that the only way to live in harmony with one another is for one of you to completely eradicate the other. And you see honor in that. Somehow the message of loving thy neighbor just simply hasn't gotten through to you, and the only thing that Christ's life boils down to is for you to vehemently condemn those who disagree with you.

You just don't seem to realize that your attitude isn't the solution to evil... it's the cause.

If you can learn to forgive and accept them, then they will almost certainly learn to forgive and accept you, and you'll probably find that they'll be just as willing to compromise as you are. They're not radical because they want to be, they're radical because you force them to be.

Unfortunately forgiveness is easier said than done, and will... if Christ has shown us anything, require that we be willing to sacrifice ourselves even for those with whom we disagree. If you want acceptance and understanding from others, first show it unto them.

And with that I'll step down from my pulpit and slink back into the shadows where I belong.

We do accept them. The Laws are even for them. If they view it as churches don't accept their viewpoint, well, churches tend not to accept Muslim or Hindu theology either. Do you want churches to be more accepting of teaching Muslim or Hindu theology?

So you believe that that should be the full extent to which gender/sexual issues of any kind should be addressed in an educational setting? Seems like today's generation is gonna be exposed to a LOT more than that whether you like it or not. So wouldn't you want it to be addressed in a less confrontational and more open environment?

Or do you believe that we should just pretend that we're still living in the 1950's?

I'm tired of abstinence only as an argument every time this issue gets brought up. This is a strawman / red herring. Most states (all?) teach WAY MORE than that so it's a dead & buried issue. Notice how you have to call it 1950's. That's how long the issue's been dead. You're trying to resurrect an argument that's been dead 70 years to support your case.

I am FINE teaching 10 minutes of LGBTQIA+ theology in high school sex ed classes just to expose kids to the issue. But teachers are incorporating it into studies far younger & far more frequent.

 

[Larniavc]

Do you want churches to be more accepting of teaching Muslim or Hindu theology?

They are religions. It’s not the same thing.

 

[Larniavc]

LGBTQIA+ theology

It’s not a religion. Don’t be silly.

 

[DragonFox91]

It’s not a religion. Don’t be silly.

They shouldn't be concerned w/ what a church is teaching then.

 

[Larniavc]

They shouldn't be concerned w/ what a church is teaching then.

Of course they should. If a church is trying to push their agenda that (for example) drag queens are paedophiles there should be significant concern.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

But in a secular country like the US, in our secular schools, we do indeed say that everyone has religious freedom. Jews and Muslims, Buddhists and pagans. Likewise both straight and queer people have the freedom to pursue happiness in the United States, and there's no reason the schools should refrain from saying so, when appropriate.

And most of the religions of the world don't even address the LGBTQ+... views or if the do address them, they are against them so that leaves pagans. Hooray for the person who has the foresight to see the problems that will spring up from allow LGBTQ+... ideology in the classroom. All LGBTQ+... people see is "I get to be myself". Those against teaching that ideology see a whole lot of bad things occurring from if it is taught. Have common sense and stop it before it grows into a cancer.

Do rapist, child molesters, or incestors (sp) have the freedom to pursue their happiness. A line needs to be drawn before our society collapses into utter depravity. As our good friend Mr. Spock says, "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." Yeh, that probably wasn't a good quote since Spock's people had no feelings. We do have feelings and we want real happiness to come about not material happiness. And we truly want what's best for the children of this world.

 

[stevevw]

Nonsense. Doctors are not going to treat an unemancipated child without parental consent.

If there is a situation where a minor wants to proceed with medical transitioning and the parents disagree then the Gender specialists can assess that the minor is mature enough to give informed consent and the treatment can go ahead despite parental consent. This seems strange considering for most other similar consent issues we don't allow minors to make the choice but rather parents.

The idea goes that denying Affirmation and Transitional treatment to Trans youth runs the risk of causing great distress even suicide. So anyone disagreeing is seen as abusing the child. So its more or less presented to the parents as a life and death situation which makes it hard for most to deny treatment. Almost emotional blackmail I think because it misrepresents the facts of Trans suicide. In fact some stuedies show an increased suicidality after medical transition.

This is part of the narrative created with Trans ideology over recent years that anyone disagreeing is Transphobic and hateful which creates a situation where everyone is too scared to mention any counter possibilities and the only alternative is Trans Affirmation ande thus Transition.

Its a difficult situation made worse by Trans ideology I believe. The problem is the Affirmation and Transition model is pushed over all other approaches when its is a belief and has no basis in science or reality. Children are automatically assumed Trans and affirmed if they show signs of gender dysphoria (gender non conforming) and encouraged to transition socially.

So already the process has begun to assume GD kids are Trans and not a number of other reasons such as autism, other body dysmorphism, trauma or even that they may be gay or lesbian as many in this group display GD when young and most grow out of their GD and become gay or lesbians after puberty. So many gays and lesbians are at risk of misdiagnosis and permanate harm.

If the young person wants to keep their social transition at school secret then they are supported by the school to transition without their parents knowing. That determination is usually done by a gender counsellor and not a Specialist Psychologist or Pediatrition. So by the time the parents may find out the process is well established and too late. Their child has more or less been indoctrinated into being Trans and GD by the school and research shows its near impossible for a young person to stop the transition process once socially transitioned. Many go on to Puberty blockers and Cross sex hormones.

 

[essentialsaltes]

If there is a situation where a minor wants to proceed with medical transitioning and the parents disagree then the Gender specialists can assess that the minor is mature enough to give informed consent and the treatment can go ahead despite parental consent.

Not in California, which I imagine is about as 'trans-friendly' a place as can be.

In most cases, youth under the age of 18 in California must obtain the permission of their parents or guardian to access any medical treatment, including treatment for gender transition, according to the Transgender Law Center. There are a few exceptions to this rule, but none are related to gender-affirming care.

 

[Wings like Eagles]

"person who produces sperm" and "person who produces eggs."

Vermont School District To Remove Terms "Male" And "Female" From Sex Ed Curriculum | ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

 

[stevevw]

Not in California, which I imagine is about as 'trans-friendly' a place as can be.

In most cases, youth under the age of 18 in California must obtain the permission of their parents or guardian to access any medical treatment, including treatment for gender transition, according to the Transgender Law Center. There are a few exceptions to this rule, but none are related to gender-affirming care.

But we are talking about a situation where the Trans youth wants to Transition medically and the parents disagree. Whose rights trump in this situation. Even if that were true which I don't think it is because the logic contradicts the narrative of Trans ideology itself aned would not be acceptable to Trans supporters and activists.

The Trans narrative promoted says that Trans Affirmation and the right to Transition is a Human Right and a matter of life and death for the Trans child. The so called fact that Trans youth have a high rates of suicide if denied is used to support this claim.

So the logic supports what I am saying. If there is a situation where parents disagree that their minor should transition medically then that leaves the school and professionals with an ethical dilemma and a contradiction to their own iedeology which would undermine it and render it meaningless.

If parents diagree and this disagreement is upheld over the Trans persons rights and the recommendations from professionals then isn't that breaching Trans rights and thus eqated as descrimination and abuse by the parents. If thats the case then the school and Professionals are also guilty of breaching the Trans childs rights and abuse.

The Trans ideology prevents schools and professionals from siding with the parents if there's a disagreement by parents that prevents a Trans youth from seeking medeical transitioning to save their life. The ideology actually forces everyone to support the Trans person despite what the parents want for their child. Thats because that is how Trans ideology frames things.

 

[essentialsaltes]

But we are talking about a situation where the Trans youth wants to Transition medically and the parents disagree. Whose rights trump in this situation.

The law (which adjudicates rights) is clear. The parents rights win, except in certain situations, none of which is specific to gender transition.

Even if that were true which I don't think it is because the logic contradicts the narrative of Trans ideology

I don't know what the 'narrative of Trans ideology' says, but I know what the law says. It is just not true that "treatment can go ahead despite parental consent." as you previously stated.