Gear: I was shocked to read our Prime Minister's reported view that he does not support the Citipointe Christian College's promotion of the ethics of biblical Christianity.

He has to say that. Any Political Leader would. Just a wise move in the Political World. Ay.

Rhian

Children have a very practical right to be vulnerable and naive. It’s the job of parents to protect them from the consequences of those childish traits.

When Children are bombarded with messages in a school environment, with such totally unethical diatribe applicable to gay rights and their promotion of homosexuality, we as a society have a serious problem with “ethics”.

Religious schools on the other hand, have a duty to their belief that “morality” actually has a higher meaning to them than secular ethics.
You may not wish that to be true, but it is true.

If secular ethics is so important to the irreligious secularist, then let them take their children to line the streets of Kings Cross and observe the procession of homosexuality in all its anti social and debauched splendours.
Is that your idea of an alternative to normalcy and freely available to children as a choice?

You seem to me to be hinting at it?

Dan

Dan

Choosing your own affiliations is a good way of accommodating the diverse needs and views of different groups of people. “Irreligious secularists” are unlikely to send their children to conservative religious schools. But there are cases where that won’t work. Should a religious school tell a gay child that homosexuals are sinners destined for hell? And to use the example debated in parliament – should a school be allowed to expel a student because they are transsexual? In both cases the exercise of religious freedom could result in significant harm to a child. To me, that pushes religious freedom too far.

Rhian

Well, if you couch the debate in emotive language as you do with you last post, it looks supportive of a view that homosexuals are picked-off by society, when actually they are not and we’re not in the past either.

When their anti-social behaviour comes to the public fore, as with any unsocial behaviour, it will be resisted.

But the reality is really not as you assume. The evidence which reinforces the opposite view is the tolerance afforded the gays and their assorted supporters with public tolerance of the Gay Mardi Gras.
Every year bigger and better than ever, and in 2023 will return to Oxford Street as the first gay parade in Southern Hemisphere branded as “World Pride”. And you don’t see a problem here?

You are perfectly at ease with the concept of sexual perversion taking a front seat on the public stage apparently: Many people aren’t.

You also appear to be happy when this horror of moral looseness seeps into the schools and bedrooms of Children. Well again, many aren’t.

When those that aren’t happy with the running sore of public displays of homosexuality and infiltration into their personal lives, and lives of their families, are confronted by prevaricating Politicians who take it upon themselves to force the issue onto them through curriculum forced down the throats of their children at school.

Give us a break mate. If you have a homosexual child, send them to a Government School where tolerance of their mental deficiency is mandated.

Dan

Dan

I regard homosexuality as just one example of human diversity that is intrinsic to some people and has existed in every age and culture, like my left-handedness. My left-handed grandmother was beaten as a child when she tried to write with her left hand. Nowadays thankfully that no longer happens to us left-handers, just as most people no longer consider homosexuals to be “perverts” (I’m not the only one using emotive language!).

I’m glad that both changes have happened. But while you’re right that gay people face less prejudice than they used to, they still face it. And that can be particularly hard for children and adolescents coming to terms with their sexuality.

If I had a gay child, I would probably send them to a government school (actually I’d do that for a straight child too). But if I was a religious fundamentalist I might not, and they are the parents whose children might most need protection.

It comes down to the line between freedom of thought, speech and belief, and freedom of action. It’s a difficult area, but as I indicated above, I think the line is drawn when one person’s freedom of action genuinely harms another. You are perfectly entitled to believe that wife-beating is acceptable, and post articles online arguing that it is beneficial, and form a society of like-minded aspiring wife-beaters, and lobby your MP for a change in the law to permit wife-beating. But you can’t actually beat your wife (and no, I’m not suggesting you would).

Rhian

I consider your wrong on every level of your argument.
Most importantly, it’s actually gays that are picking off the vulnerable members of society isn’t it.
It’s gays who are bullying Christians.
What you seem unable to grasp, is the revolutionary process of gay rights.

Any group that subverts a society and causes it harm is a terrorist organisation.
But yet you fall over to it in your hollow supportive arguments.
You have been subverted psychologically by their brainwashing lies, the most fundamental of them being their fake persecution complex.

Gays are not persecuted mate, gays are the rulers! This fact is their big advantage over all below them, but actually it is also their weakest point of continuence.

It’s inevitable people will wake up to the subversive propaganda prefixed on fake persecution, and turn their new enlightenment into something actually positive; resistance to it!

Intelligent people think through their lies and resist their negative and socially destabilising efforts to dehumanise society.

Dan