• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A gay Texas teacher is on leave after she showed students a photo of her wife

Jredbaron96 said:
No, what's supreme is what's in the best interest of the child. That's not really the point here though, since what needs to be understood is that just because you're a parent doesn't mean you're free to do whatever you want to your child. They're not property, they're still human beings, and as citizens of this country it's the duty of the state to safeguard their rights.
Click to expand...

Are you equating shielding my children from sodomy and doing physical harm?
 
ashurbanipal said:
The bolded part seems pretty easy to counterexample. Some parents have chained their children to their beds for years to "protect them." Some parents have actually drowned, burned, or beat their children to death to protect them from "demons." Is it your right to do those things to your children? It seems to me that such is obviously not the case.
Click to expand...

No one is defending any "right" of parents to do physical harm to their children.
 
phattonez said:
Do you disagree? Do you think that parents should not get consent over what their children are exposed to? Is that really a road you want to go down?
Click to expand...
We've already been down your road. It lead to segregation, and discrimination against Jews, Catholics, interracial couples, Asian-Americans and women in positions of authority. Keep your kid in your home and let her out when she hits 18.
 
phattonez said:
You can turn off your television. The law says I must educate my children. I can't just keep them from schools, and forcing me to homeschool is putting a unique, undue burden on me. Your analogies just don't compare.
Click to expand...

Sounds like this country is terrible. We'll all miss you when you take your children someplace safe from being exposed to things that are legal.

No, in schools they teach what the President does and says and what the Vice President does and says. Thanks for the reminder. I think I'll try to demand that my kids' school doesn't teach about them any more.
 
phattonez said:
Are you equating shielding my children from sodomy and doing physical harm?
Click to expand...

Showing a picture of a homosexual couple isn't sodomy, and either way no they're not the same.
 
btthegreat said:
We've already been down your road. It lead to segregation, and discrimination against Jews, Catholics, interracial couples, Asian-Americans and women in positions of authority. Keep your kid in your home and let her out when she hits 18.
Click to expand...

That was institutionalized at the state level. I'm arguing that parents should have the right to control what their children are exposed to. It's not a crime to be racist, "homophobic", bigoted, or anything.
 
tres borrachos said:
Sounds like this country is terrible. We'll all miss you when you take your children someplace safe from being exposed to things that are legal.

No, in schools they teach what the President does and says and what the Vice President does and says. Thanks for the reminder. I think I'll try to demand that my kids' school doesn't teach about them any more.
Click to expand...

If you don't want them exposed to personal scandals, you have my full sympathy.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
Showing a picture of a homosexual couple isn't sodomy,
Click to expand...

The implication being that they live as siblings? Get real.

and either way no they're not the same.
Click to expand...

That's exactly my point. Articulate your argument better.
 
HowardBThiname said:
That's not right. Same-sex marriage is legal, and if the school allows any employee to show students a photo of their heterosexual spouse, they must also allow a gay person to show a photo of her same-sex spouse.
Click to expand...

If parents object, for whatever reason, then they have every right to keep their children from being exposed to it. Parents shouldn't even need to state the reason.
 
phattonez said:
The implication being that they live as siblings? Get real.
Click to expand...

Sodomy is a sexual act. Maybe you should learn the definitions of words before you go about throwing them around.


That's exactly my point. Articulate your argument better.
Click to expand...

You began your whole point from the implication of the rights of the parents trumping all else. This is demonstrably false.
 
Lutherf said:
This came out earlier in the month and the school district is claiming her actions in the classroom, not her sexuality, prompted the change. According to the school she was using the classroom to promote certain political or sectarian agendas.



https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/teacher-suspended-after-showing-photo-future-wife-suing-school-district-n872686

If all she did was show a picture of her fiancee then no problem. If she was proselytizing then that's another matter. Seems like the courts will sort that all out.
Click to expand...

Proselytizing for what? Gays? Either you are or you aren't.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
Sodomy is a sexual act. Maybe you should learn the definitions of words before you go about throwing them around.
Click to expand...

Since when do married couples not have sex?

You began your whole point from the implication of the rights of the parents trumping all else. This is demonstrably false.
Click to expand...

Since when does anyone have a right to cause harm to others? Isn't this something that is essentially universally agreed upon?
 
phattonez said:
What do you think goes on with a "married" homosexual couple? They just drink tea and gossip all day?
Click to expand...

Your post is so idiotic on so many levels.

This thread is about two women. And you are really in trouble if you think sodomy is limited to homosexual men.

I suggest you not expose your children to anyone. Because your next door neighbors may be engaging in anal sex as I type this. Your heterosexual next door neighbors.
 
phattonez said:
Since when do married couples not have sex?
Click to expand...

pexels-photo-254069.jpeg


So you're telling me this picture is inappropriate because of the implication that as a couple they have sex sometimes?

Get real.



Since when does anyone have a right to cause harm to others? Isn't this something that is essentially universally agreed upon?
Click to expand...

One would think, but given that you've implied ownership over your family before, one has to ask.
 
tres borrachos said:
Your post is so idiotic on so many levels.

This thread is about two women. And you are really in trouble if you think sodomy is limited to homosexual men.

I suggest you not expose your children to anyone. Because your next door neighbors may be engaging in anal sex as I type this. Your heterosexual next door neighbors.
Click to expand...

Sodomy is more than just anal sex. Lesbians engage in sodomy just like homosexual men.
 
rocket88 said:
Proselytizing for what? Gays? Either you are or you aren't.
Click to expand...

If she was engaging in discussion of matters that were not part of her specific curriculum and/or were intended to promote a specific political or sectarian agenda then she wasn't teaching, she was proselytizing. If that's what she was doing then she was shirking her duties and it was proper for the school to discipline her.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
pexels-photo-254069.jpeg


So you're telling me this picture is inappropriate because of the implication that as a couple they have sex sometimes?

Get real.
Click to expand...

I have nothing against heterosexual sex.

One would think, but given that you've implied ownership over your family before, one has to ask.
Click to expand...

So what harm am I causing to my children by preventing them to be exposed to deviant lifestyles?
 
phattonez said:
If parents object, for whatever reason, then they have every right to keep their children from being exposed to it. Parents shouldn't even need to state the reason.
Click to expand...

Like a parent saying we don't want our kid being taught by that christian who wears a cross
 
Jredbaron96 said:
pexels-photo-254069.jpeg


So you're telling me this picture is inappropriate because of the implication that as a couple they have sex sometimes?

Get real.





One would think, but given that you've implied ownership over your family before, one has to ask.
Click to expand...

You mean two people in a relationship might have sex? I'm scandalized!
 
Lutherf said:
If she was engaging in discussion of matters that were not part of her specific curriculum and/or were intended to promote a specific political or sectarian agenda then she wasn't teaching, she was proselytizing. If that's what she was doing then she was shirking her duties and it was proper for the school to discipline her.
Click to expand...

So if I show someone a picture of my spouse, I'm proselytizing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom