California’s indoctrination of children reaches new lows

This has very little to do with making the world a 'fairer' place for gays, just the usual hard left stalking horse agenda for marxist style cultural subversion, as usual the clueless progressive liberals have been roped in to pursue the agenda. They are such clueless dupes that the left in the same breath then puts them up to championing the causes of ultraconservative, ultra fundamentalist, gay hanging, women stoning, religious biggotts aka muslims.

Originally posted by kozmo
oI am not against legal gay unions and affording gay couples all of the same benfits and protections afforded by the law to married couples. In fact, I believe the Constitution guarantees it. But, here is where the gay people make a wrong turn in "Advocating" for their rights. First, they demand the right to marry. Marriage is an instution that has stood the test of time for thousands of years and is between a man and a woman and should remain such.

Have you ever bothered to research the history of marriage?

Women were property - they had no rights. They were sold/bartered - - used to strengthen political alliances etc.

Pretty much what we are seeing from parts of the Middle East today - - that most Americans are horrified by.

The "Sanctity of Marriage" is a ridiculous crap invention by Christians - - - who have a 52% divorce rate BTW.

Legal Marriage is a government contract (no god or sanctity of marriage involved). The legal contract is to protect the rights/property of individuals joining together as a single unit/family. It affords certain privileges and tax breaks not afforded by any other means.

Civil unions? Ha! Separate but equal is NEVER acceptable.

So if you are Anglo - - and only Asian people/culture was allowed to be on TV - - I'm sure you'd feel Asians were being shoved down your throat.

Well guess what is mostly on TV - - heteros. Heteros are being shoved down homosexuals throats almost every second of every day.

Get over yourself.

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
This has very little to do with making the world a 'fairer' place for gays, just the usual hard left stalking horse agenda for marxist style cultural subversion, as usual the clueless progressive liberals have been roped in to pursue the agenda. They are such clueless dupes that the left in the same breath then puts them up to championing the causes of ultraconservative, ultra fundamentalist, gay hanging, women stoning, religious biggotts aka muslims.

You've been reading too many conspiracy comics.

Its about Equal Rights for all humans. Nothing more.

reply to post by Annee


I do have a question regarding homosexuals and I'm interested in your viewpoint.

If homosexuals discovered that their sexual preference was because of certain chemical contaminents in the environment, do you think they'd be upset knowing that they might have been heterosexual if said chemicals had never been utilized for "necessary" instances? Do you think they'd be angry that their make up was altered? Do you think they'd want to sue the government for concealing such information?

I'm just wondering because many birth defects are caused by pesticides and chemicals and I'm sure that these people are pretty pissed off that they have had to deal with a more complicated life due to the irresponsibility and greed that led to their physical problems.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
This has very little to do with making the world a 'fairer' place for gays, just the usual hard left stalking horse agenda for marxist style cultural subversion, as usual the clueless progressive liberals have been roped in to pursue the agenda. They are such clueless dupes that the left in the same breath then puts them up to championing the causes of ultraconservative, ultra fundamentalist, gay hanging, women stoning, religious biggotts aka muslims.

You've been reading too many conspiracy comics.

Its about Equal Rights for all humans. Nothing more.

Please name the inventor named in a text book with the descriptor, "Heterosexual inventor Dr.Ho....."

This is ridiculous.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Annee

 

I do have a question regarding homosexuals and I'm interested in your viewpoint.

If homosexuals discovered that their sexual preference was because of certain chemical contaminents in the environment,

I do not in anyway support that theory.

Fair honest question. Just want to first say - - I began my interest/research in homosexuality more then 20 years ago because of a place I worked. I was the minority being a straight female. They are just people. People are People - period. They are completely diverse in everything - - except one thing - - attraction to same gender. There is no such think as a "group gay think". The flamboyant gay is a stereotype.

Humans have genetic differences - - such as red hair - curly hair - height - skin color etc. Homosexuals are completely and naturally normal. There is nothing wrong with them - - that needs to be fixed.

However - - - some researchers suggest - - in the future - - it might be possible that brain chemical therapy might affect gender attraction. (Insert Josef Rudolf Mengele here). Do you fix what is not broke?

Can you see religious parents who fear a feminine behaving son is gay - - and dragging them to a doctor for brain chemical therapy? Today they drag them in for reparative therapy. You know "Pray the Gay Away".

If the brain chemical therapy does become available - - - they would need the strictest of laws/rules - - - as there are for gender reassignment.

reply to post by Annee


I appreciate you addressing my post, but you skirted my question.

So, I'll ask it again. If homosexuals knew that governments and government run programs were contaminating the environment with chemicals that they knew were causing babies to be born homosexual, do you think there would be anger in the community?

My opinion: yes, and they would have every right to be. We've got some sick people controlling things right now and they don't care if it's messing up humans' physical appearances or sexual preferences. These things are not part of their conscience and it's not lining their pockets.

So, seeing as secrecy is the name of the game. Isn't it easier acting like everything is normal than admitting that Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde have screwed up humanity?

Check out these two threads and let me know if your opinion remains the same.
Mercury pollution and homosexuality
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Pesticides and related birth defects
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Afterthought
If homosexuals knew that governments and government run programs were contaminating the environment with chemicals that they knew were causing babies to be born homosexual, do you think there would be anger in the community?

I do not support that in any way - - so I have no direct response. I gave the best response I could.

I do not accept or buy into any of the conspiracies related to homosexuality.

Homosexuality is a naturally occurring difference. It has been around probably since the beginning of humans.

reply to post by Annee


That's OK if you're not familiar with the circumstances, but I strongly encourage you to educate yourself as everyone should. There are studies right now that corporations would rather bury where it indicates that flexible plastics are causing boys to become more feminine as is Mercury.

Pesticides are causing babies to be born with several severe birth defects. Some which cause death.

After studying these chemicals and the studies surrounding them, I've come to the conclusion that our government knows that these chemicals are causing physical problems as well as messing with the brain's sexual orientation.

I believe that a miniscule percentage of people are naturally born homosexual, but the mass amounts we're seeing today is not and this is cause for alarm. Any species in the wild that has the amount of homosexuals we see in humanity would be going in the direction of extinction. People need to wake up and see what's going on. Especially pregnant women because most of the studies indicate that the fetus being exposed to these chemicals is the main problem.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Annee

 

That's OK if you're not familiar with the circumstances, . . .

As I said - - I've been following homosexuality for 20 years.

I am familiar with probably more conspiracies then you are.

I do not support any of them.

Homosexuality is a normal/natural occurrence.

Well, when 65% of people under 40 aren't staying in long term relationships, not marrying and don't have the usual things linking them into their culture there has to some way of moderating their hormone systems so they don't get out hand.

Usually being a relationship and being a father would perform some of that function.

Through-out all of history, men who live in this state are doing so because they are warriors and hunters. Indeed, tribes utilize the removal of males from families as a way to harness this effect.

So I guess if guys aren't in relationships, but don't have any local battles to fight, there has to be some way to moderate their hormonal systems to keep them from turning into warrior/hunters.

Chemicals moderating that function might fill the bill.

I'm just snow-balling here.

reply to post by Annee


Well, you can remain on your high horse, but I'm simply trying to inform you of what I've learned.

One of the threads I linked you to involves Ibises in southern Florida. Scientists noticed that their numbers were dropping. So, they started observing them and discovered that males were nesting with males. The lake was near a medical dumping ground and there were high levels of Mercury in the water. Once the Mercury was cleaned up, the males started nesting with females again and their numbers improved dramatically.
This is just one instance.

As I see it, it's easier for the government to push people into accepting a large population of homosexuals as normal rather than admit that they've been aware of certain chemical pollutants causing changes in the brains of life forms. They'd much rather spend a smaller amount of money paying for "acceptance programs" than the huge chunk of money they'd have to pay out in law suits.

As I already stated above, I believe that nature allows for a small percentage of homosexual births, but what we're seeing now is beyond what nature would allow.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Annee

 

Well, you can remain on your high horse, but I'm simply trying to inform you of what I've learned.

High horse? Because I don't agree with you.

How childish can you be?

Originally posted by Annee


I find your point of argument silly.

There are many already in history that were homosexual (an omitted fact - not a distortion).

There are probably more people that should be included in history to make it more accurate. Histories that have been omitted from history books.

Native American code talkers.
Negro Calvary
WWII All-Black Air Squadron
George Washington Carver
Susan B. Anthony
Amelia Jenks Bloomer
Belle Boyd.

edit on 5-1-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)

So if you can give me very good examples of history NOT being taught,why should HOMOSEXUALITY be at the forefront? Because like minded individuals,as yourself want it there? PRIORITY NUMBER 1?


As OP's link states..........

We used to criticize other countries for doing this sort of thing -- Japan for downplaying the Rape of Nanking, Turkey for denying the Armenian genocide, textbooks in the Arab world for their portrayal of Israel -- yet here we are, doing it in the U.S.

The Problem is this,Teachers,especially in California,are not teaching kids anything,but Liberal Agenda.

They get a A+ for their efforts.

We are failing on the rock-bottom basics. California students' ability to read is ranked 49th in the country by the U.S. Department of Education. Our kids' ability to do math is ranked 47th and we are second to worst in science. Compared globally, the situation darkens further. Of the top 35 nations, the United States is ranked 29th in science and 35th in math. Your neighborhood school might be good by California standards, but that is a very low bar indeed. Our education crisis is a human tragedy and a looming economic disaster.

Demonize data on teaching at our state's peril

So heres the bottom line for California.

They fail as a State in teaching children the basics. Facts dont lie.

But keep pushing that teaching HOMOSEXUALITY,ranks up there to basic skills.

reply to post by Annee

As I said - - I've been following homosexuality for 20 years.

I am familiar with probably more conspiracies then you are.

Yeah, you're right. No high horse here.
Sorry. I don't know what I was thinking.

Have a wonderful night.

Mentioning LGBT in history classes could be covered for Matthew Shepherd, that was the 80s wasn't it? But when I graduated in 2010 history was taught up until the year 1995. The unfortunate thing is that this is being written on a political front, so the gays join the Democrats plantation of... gays. It has nothing to do with teaching that its wrong to beat a gay kid to death. It is programming.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Annee

 

As I said - - I've been following homosexuality for 20 years.

I am familiar with probably more conspiracies then you are.

Yeah, you're right. No high horse here.
Sorry. I don't know what I was thinking.

Have a wonderful night.

Do you have 20 years of following Homosexuality? That would include pretty much everything that's been said/posted on the net and in forums - - including conspiracy stuff.

I stated a fact.

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Annee


I find your point of argument silly.

There are many already in history that were homosexual (an omitted fact - not a distortion).

There are probably more people that should be included in history to make it more accurate. Histories that have been omitted from history books.

Native American code talkers.
Negro Calvary
WWII All-Black Air Squadron
George Washington Carver
Susan B. Anthony
Amelia Jenks Bloomer
Belle Boyd.

So if you can give me very good examples of history NOT being taught,why should HOMOSEXUALITY be at the forefront? Because like minded individuals,as yourself want it there? PRIORITY NUMBER 1?

How you twist things - blows my mind.

reply to post by seabag


I'm not going to even read this thread, because I'm sure it will send me into a blind rage, so if this was already addressed I apologize.

e-lobbyist.com...

Here's the text of the bill.

It says that existing law already prohibits teaching using materials that paint certain groups in a disparaging light....wait for it....BECAUSE THEY BELONG TO THAT GROUP. Let me spell this out for those who want to fill up with self-righteous anger about their kids catching "the gay" from the evil heathens.

You can teach that it was muslims who perpetrated 9/11, and that they were evil because of their terrorist acts. You cannot teach that they are evil because they follow Islam. Simple.

Therefore, you cannot omit historical figures relevant to the topic because they are gay. You also cannot teach that they are bad because they are gay. If a gay person did something awful, you CAN teach that they were gay, and what they did was awful. You just can't teach that they're awful 'cause they're gay alone.

This is to prevent people from saying "look at this gay man, he killed someone. Aren't gay people awful?" in the classroom. It is also to prevent the omission of important figures, such as Alexander the Great, Socrates, John Keynes (that's for all you job creator types) and others simply because they played for the wrong team.

It's really very simple, and the people who use this to refuel the anger against gays and other minority groups are nothing but thinly veiled bigots.

This is not indoctrination. This is accepting that gays and other minority groups played major roles in the history of our country. Period.

I wish we could just rename the threads like this "I hate people who are not like me, and you should too." so we know what we're getting before we click on it.

reply to post by Annee

Women were property - they had no rights. They were sold/bartered - - used to strengthen political alliances etc. Legal Marriage is a government contract (no god or sanctity of marriage involved). The legal contract is to protect the rights/property of individuals joining together as a single unit/family. It affords certain privileges and tax breaks not afforded by any other means.

As the Bible states, you(husband), are to treat and respect your wife as you do the Bible,church, Jesus. A pretty simple quote as to how to hold your wife up to the same respect as God. Go look it up, It is not verbatim from me, but gives you the basis.
Yes, it also states a woman should submit to her husband, but when looking at the entire text from that section, a man must do the same as a give and take on both parties.

As for the legal contract....screw the lawyers and the government. I was married by neither, I was married in front of our Lord and committed myself to him, not any POS lawyer or Government entity.

I payed a tax to the state of Pa. for their useless piece of paper.