LGBTQ Pride Storybooks in Maryland Public Schools - the battle of national interest

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: ABlackCat

Again you know my point and you know that's not what is happening here.

No need to further respond to me expecting any responses.

So you disagree with that the entire world has a pedophile problem?

a reply to: Halfswede

I know. Its sad. Among other things...

Still just wanted to leave the door open to be proven wrong.

...But alas.

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: Halfswede

There are two sides to this thread. Those that don't want sexual ideology pushed on children -- they are literally just little kids, and those that are apparently taking the opposite stance.

There is no other side to this argument. There is nothing more to see. Literally everyone should be against this.

That is false. Everyone on this thread does not want to push sexuaitity on children. That is where the lie got you confused.

Correct.

They just want to twist it to mean that.

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: Halfswede

I know. Its sad. Among other things...

Still just wanted to leave the door open to be proven wrong.

...But alas.

You still have not proven us wrong.

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: Halfswede

I know. Its sad. Among other things...

Still just wanted to leave the door open to be proven wrong.

...But alas.

You still have not proven us wrong.

You guys have to first acknowledge a counter argument before accepting it to be proven wrong.

For those looking on, it's not such an impossible task.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: Halfswede

There are two sides to this thread. Those that don't want sexual ideology pushed on children -- they are literally just little kids, and those that are apparently taking the opposite stance.

There is no other side to this argument. There is nothing more to see. Literally everyone should be against this.

That is false. Everyone on this thread does not want to push sexuaitity on children. That is where the lie got you confused.

Correct.

They just want to twist it to mean that.

So people should not trust their lying eyes to say, what a modern "Pride" festival and parade have become?

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: Halfswede

I know. Its sad. Among other things...

Still just wanted to leave the door open to be proven wrong.

...But alas.

You still have not proven us wrong.

You guys have to first acknowledge a counter argument before accepting it to be proven wrong.

For those looking on, it's not such an impossible task.

What's the counter argument?

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: Halfswede

I know. Its sad. Among other things...

Still just wanted to leave the door open to be proven wrong.

...But alas.

You still have not proven us wrong.

You guys have to first acknowledge a counter argument before accepting it to be proven wrong.

For those looking on, it's not such an impossible task.

What's the counter argument?

19 pages in, pick one.

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: Halfswede

There are two sides to this thread. Those that don't want sexual ideology pushed on children -- they are literally just little kids, and those that are apparently taking the opposite stance.

There is no other side to this argument. There is nothing more to see. Literally everyone should be against this.

That is false. Everyone on this thread does not want to push sexuaitity on children. That is where the lie got you confused.

Correct.

They just want to twist it to mean that.

So people should not trust their lying eyes to say, what a modern "Pride" festival and parade have become?

I thought this is about the LGBT books in K-6 schools?

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: Halfswede

I know. Its sad. Among other things...

Still just wanted to leave the door open to be proven wrong.

...But alas.

You still have not proven us wrong.

You guys have to first acknowledge a counter argument before accepting it to be proven wrong.

For those looking on, it's not such an impossible task.

What's the counter argument?

19 pages in, pick one.

You said it isn't an impossible task. Seems like it's impossible for you. *shrugs*

a reply to: FlyersFan2

Last fall, a group of Montgomery County elementary school principals sent a letter to school district leaders with concerns that books new to the language arts curriculum that included LGBTQ characters were teaching young students about sexual orientation and gender identity even though district leaders said they weren’t, according to emails reviewed by The Washington Post.

“It has been communicated that MCPS is not teaching about sexual orientation and gender identity as stand alone concepts in elementary school,” some of the principals wrote in a document sent in November. “However, several of the books and supporting documents seemingly contradict this message.”

Quite a few opinions suggest that MCPS materials do not teach about sexual orientation as well as a researcher on sex education.

Eva Goldfarb, a professor of public health at Montclair State University and researcher on sex education, reviewed the principals’ document and read four of the books — “Born Ready,” “Love Violet,” “Pride Puppy,” and “My Rainbow,” all of which she found to be developmentally appropriate.

“It is about understanding people who students may not know or who may be different from them,” she said, noting that inclusion and acceptance were “exactly the point” of all the books she read.

www.washingtonpost.com...

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: Halfswede

There are two sides to this thread. Those that don't want sexual ideology pushed on children -- they are literally just little kids, and those that are apparently taking the opposite stance.

There is no other side to this argument. There is nothing more to see. Literally everyone should be against this.

That is false. Everyone on this thread does not want to push sexuaitity on children. That is where the lie got you confused.

Correct.

They just want to twist it to mean that.

So people should not trust their lying eyes to say, what a modern "Pride" festival and parade have become?

I thought this is about the LGBT books in K-6 schools?

Also you regarding pedophiles and religion:

It's on topic sorry. If it makes you uncomfortable, then, as you would say, * those feelz.

Try consistency, just once while you're here.

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ABlackCat

originally posted by: Halfswede

There are two sides to this thread. Those that don't want sexual ideology pushed on children -- they are literally just little kids, and those that are apparently taking the opposite stance.

There is no other side to this argument. There is nothing more to see. Literally everyone should be against this.

That is false. Everyone on this thread does not want to push sexuaitity on children. That is where the lie got you confused.

Correct.

They just want to twist it to mean that.

So people should not trust their lying eyes to say, what a modern "Pride" festival and parade have become?

I thought this is about the LGBT books in K-6 schools?

Also you regarding pedophiles and religion:

It's on topic sorry. If it makes you uncomfortable, then, as you would say, * those feelz.

Try consistency, just once while you're here.

Ask DBCowboy to be consistent and I'll be consistent.

So what counter argument? I waiting.

a reply to: ABlackCat

Topic or argument/counter argument?

So your consistency is hinged upon another user?

A question I have been itching to ask... how in the world is leather sexual?

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: Halfswede

I know. Its sad. Among other things...

Still just wanted to leave the door open to be proven wrong.

...But alas.

They don't see introducing drag queens, LGBTQ+ to children as sexualizing children.

Which baffles me.

Or they actually DO see it as sexualizing children and just don't want to admit it.

Are they obtuse or predatory?

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: ABlackCat

Topic or argument/counter argument?

So your consistency is hinged upon another user?

Here comes the mod deleting our posts.

Carry on.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: Halfswede

I know. Its sad. Among other things...

Still just wanted to leave the door open to be proven wrong.

...But alas.

They don't see introducing drag queens, LGBTQ+ to children as sexualizing children.

Which baffles me.

Or they actually DO see it as sexualizing children and just don't want to admit it.

Are they obtuse or predatory?

How is "introducing" drag queens "sexualizing" children? I might as well claim that clowns with long balloons are obviously sexuailzing children.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Being completely honest, the inability to address real issues involving the children, despite us repeatedly saying we have no problem with teaching tolerance and offering support to them within reason, can only lead me to one conclusion.

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: DBCowboy

Being completely honest, the inability to address real issues involving the children, despite us repeatedly saying we have no problem with teaching tolerance and offering support to them within reason, can only lead me to one conclusion.

On this we agree.

Like I stated repeatedly, no one would care if an adult is; trans, LGBTQ+, Furry, or if you like disco attire.

Just leave the kids alone.