LGBTQ Issues: Will We Choose Love and Acceptance or Hate and Oppression?

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
55,964
38,524
362
crimsonaudio.net
If what you are doing doesn’t harm me or anyone else I don’t care what you do.
I think pretty much everyone in this thread feels this way.

But the thread started talking about the FL law, and that's where the discussion really is. I think Americans largely accept people who aren't like them, but questions arise when it comes to teaching primary-age kids about some of these things.
 

JDCrimson

All-American
Feb 12, 2006
3,841
2,048
187
49
Pray tell, where do you think disease and disability originate from?

Like BamainBham, I believe the original sin polluted procreation in all forms. The Bible says women will bear children in pain and men will work and toil for their survival, paraphrase. Likewise, the devil was given dominion over the earth for a time. He was not given dominion over our soul (inherent ability to know God) and free will which can look toward God and accept the judgement and atonement of our sins through Jesus Christ whereby we will be restored to our perfect God-intended image and condition.

If I follow this guidance through the New Testament, I firmly believe that being a Democrat more closely follows the teachings of Jesus Christ and his disciples. I cannot dictate the path to heaven for anyone but myself and the Bible tells me the way. Therefore, I should accept all people as on the same path as me.

The White Christian Nationalists wont acknowledge it but they are totally rejecting the life and salvation of Christ and relying on an Old Testament view of society where persecution and genocide was part of the order of society, a Sanhedrin.

And if you really think about, the Anti-Christ will have to be just that, someone who denies the existence of Christ, calling him a mere prophet. Yet, in order to rise to power the AC will have to do so from a society that resembles the minority governance of the Old Testament, projecting himself as someone who will take away their oppression. A true wolf in sheep's clothing, the WCNs (and the radical Islamists) will be his forebearers.

what? disease and disability are the products of sin? that is absurd
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
52,221
32,186
287
53
East Point, Ga, USA
I think pretty much everyone in this thread feels this way.

But the thread started talking about the FL law, and that's where the discussion really is. I think Americans largely accept people who aren't like them, but questions arise when it comes to teaching primary-age kids about some of these things.
what i cannot figure out is what is it that is being taught to primary age kids that is so off-putting. as was pointed out up thread this is very much being targeted against lgbtq families and kids and is largely hiding behind "morality for the young kids" to get broad support. florida/desantis has flowed effortlessly from crt panic to gay panic and it is working there and around the country.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
52,221
32,186
287
53
East Point, Ga, USA

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
80,171
30,072
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
I consider myself to be be a liberal Christian, as a faithful member of the UMC, lifelong, and I totally reject that theory of Christianity. Agree to disagree. The premise of the thread was not for statements of personal religious beliefs. As such, this thread has wandered too far off target. The issue is how LGBTQ people should be treated. If someone thinks they should be stoned to death, then I'd appreciate knowing that. Other than that, let's drop the page-long statements of personal religious beliefs. It's not the right place to witness and it actually sets barriers to honest discussion. I'm not stating this for discussion. I'm stating this for how it's going to be, going forward...
 

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
10,289
4,402
287
what i cannot figure out is what is it that is being taught to primary age kids that is so off-putting. as was pointed out up thread this is very much being targeted against lgbtq families and kids and is largely hiding behind "morality for the young kids" to get broad support. florida/desantis has flowed effortlessly from crt panic to gay panic and it is working there and around the country.
This seems so obvious. Just another bs way to attack gays while trying to wear the cloak of being oh so reasonable. Disguising prejudice behind concern for the children Is how I read it.

And then these same evangelicals who blessed us with President Trump wonder why church attendance has bottomed out.

Teaching kids to hide under desks is fine and dandy, just don’t recognize or mention that some come from same sex households.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
55,964
38,524
362
crimsonaudio.net
what i cannot figure out is what is it that is being taught to primary age kids that is so off-putting. as was pointed out up thread this is very much being targeted against lgbtq families and kids and is largely hiding behind "morality for the young kids" to get broad support. florida/desantis has flowed effortlessly from crt panic to gay panic and it is working there and around the country.
It's not difficult - there are quite a few recent examples of teachers talking to young kids about 'gender fluidity' and such, as well as books that discuss this, normalizing it. Most parents polled (both D and R) are against this - they want to the option to teach their kids about these issues at home, and most parents polled also don't think this is appropriate discussion for this age group.

Just because someone finds something age inappropriate doesn't mean hate, though that seems to be the way it's viewed now - if you don't agree 100% with something, it's due to some sort of 'phobia'.
 

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
10,289
4,402
287
If kids are tough enough to understand why they need drills in school to hide from gunmen on the rampage then I think they can handle more than some give them credit for.
I also think there are more rumors about inappropriate teaching examples than there are actual ones.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
55,964
38,524
362
crimsonaudio.net
If kids are tough enough to understand why they need drills in school to hide from gunmen on the rampage then I think they can handle more than some give them credit for.
I don't know if you're a parent or how long it's been since you had a five-year-old, but they're quite malleable.

Just because one ill exists doesn't mean we just throw our hands up and suggest anything goes.

I also think there are more rumors about inappropriate teaching examples than there are actual ones.
The videos - made by the teachers themselves - are all over. You can find them on Twitter, Tiktok, etc.

But ultimately, if parents feel this is not an age-appropriate discussion then it shouldn't be happening - and that's how most parents feel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TrueCrimson7

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
52,221
32,186
287
53
East Point, Ga, USA
well, many of the parents and folks who are being explicitly targeted by this don’t agree. but they don’t matter. they don’t have the ability to just “accept people” and live and let live and pretend these things are no big deal. they are literally being targeted by the government for who they are.

it’s not like sex ed is being taught in kindergarten.

there is an underlying assumption by many in our country that lgbtq folks are defined explicitly by their “sexuality” and therefore the mere acknowledgement of these folks is inherently “sexual” and therefore inappropriate.
 

Bodhisattva

Hall of Fame
Aug 22, 2001
20,839
1,036
287
Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida
I'm not sure why we are restricted to two choices (love/acceptance vs. hate/oppression). I'm non-binary. I choose love and oppression. That's how I roll. And if you don't accept it (nay, approve of it), you're a Nazi.
 

BamaFlum

Hall of Fame
Dec 11, 2002
6,849
958
137
51
S.A., TX, USA
Love doesn’t have to go with acceptance. As a Christ follower, I choose to show mercy and kindness to all people but refuse to compromise on basic biblical principles (according to my study of scripture). Jesus’s harshest responses were to the religious while he spoke truth in love to those who were not religious.
That’s how I approach the LGBT issue: biblical truth in love.
 

CrimsonNagus

Hall of Fame
Jun 6, 2007
6,968
3,690
212
43
Montgomery, Alabama, United States
there is an underlying assumption by many in our country that lgbtq folks are defined explicitly by their “sexuality” and therefore the mere acknowledgement of these folks is inherently “sexual” and therefore inappropriate.
I love this statement so much. Us heterosexual folks have never been defined by our sexuality but anything outside of our small box is considered taboo. Maybe we should start defining "straights" by their sexuality and see how we like it. Ewww, you like "big boned" folks, you disgusting pigs are not allowed here. You are 50 and only like to date people 20 years younger, you should be banned from using the bathroom.

When sexual predators face less scrutiny then the LGBTQ community, you know we have a screwed up view of sex in this country.
 

NationalTitles18

TideFans Legend
May 25, 2003
26,703
28,716
262
Mountainous Northern California
This is far from the first time that science and religion or societal needs and religion (or even societal norms at the time) have clashed in schools or other parts of society.

Some religions still teach the universe is 6,000 years old. It isn't and we have incontrovertible evidence supporting our understanding that it is likely about 13.8 billion years old. We have strong evidence the earth is roughly 4.6 billion years old. Contrary beliefs do not deserve equal regard.

The long history of conflict between science and religion (or some people's version of religion - especially those who have held or now hold power) did not begin there.

Heliocentrism was heresy and people were punished for spreading the idea because religion supposedly was right and religion's view superior. Religion was just wrong.

John Snopes was prosecuted in Tennessee for teaching evolution. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming - regardless of religion, God or no god.

The (non-avian) dinosaurs died some 65 million years ago and the evidence for that is, again, overwhelming; yet some want the alternative idea - based on nothing more than religious belief - that dinosaurs and humans lived side by side taught on equal footing in schools.

So the fight goes on with some thinking their religious beliefs deserve equal footing with scientific theory supported by overwhelming evidence.

That would be folly. Beliefs without evidence and scientific theory supported by evidence are not on equal footing for reasonable people.

Moving on to people's comfort levels: Slave owners in the South thought Black people inferior in every way and incapable of self rule and used religion to back up the claim.

That drove them to enslave Black people, keep them enslaved, shed the blood of many to keep it that way, and after losing a war they formed groups to terrorize and murder them and even overthrew at least one duly elected government after Blacks won the election (in NC).

They intimidated people to keep them from voting and then put laws in place to keep them from voting while claiming the laws were actually race neutral.

They intimidated people to keep them from voting and then put laws in place to keep them from voting while claiming the laws were actually race neutral.

They intimidated people to keep them from voting and then put laws in place to keep them from voting while claiming the laws were actually race neutral.

Oh yes, I repeated that line quite intentionally.

Of course, these recent laws are less covert than some of those laws.

Sex education in schools has always been a hot topic, and yet most have decided that children learning age appropriate information to prevent abuse, disease, and unwanted pregnancy is more important than our awkward feelings.

Some still believe that interracial marriage is sinful and goes against God's plan for us.

We don't give them equal time in schools, nor should we cater to their bigotry.

And in every situation noted above pseudoscience has often been used in support of religious beliefs to lend a veil of legitimacy that was not deserved.

History keeps repeating or echoing.

And to be clear, while the Florida law and the video in the first post were a jumping off point for discussion it was not my intent to suggest that the discussion should be limited to similar laws regarding schools any more than I intended it to be limited to the state of Florida.

Several states, despite overwhelming scientific evidence of a biologic basis for transgender existence, have interfered with parents' and children's right to seek appropriate evidence-based treatments and supports.

And despite that evidence that people are literally born this way and are destined to develop these traits many have decided to use the power of the state to discriminate against them.

Sometimes that takes the form of forcing them to use restrooms not conforming to their gender.

Sometimes it just means making them "invisible" by prohibiting discussion of them (against the 1A) in an age appropriate way.

We have placed some people's desire to avoid icky feelings over their rights and dignity.

We have relegated them to the status of "the other of which we shall not speak".

We have openly conflated acceptance with grooming for sexual gratification.

We defend fear and ignorance in the name of parental rights even as we ignore the rights of other parents and the transgendered - parents and children alike.

And in doing so we do society no favors because not talking about these people will not make them truly disappear into nothingness.

Trying to disappear them and taking away their ability to safely and privately access counselling, medical care, and other supports will not reduce their exorbitantly high suicide rates.

Interfering with their right to access medical care will not benefit society.

Interfering with their parents' right to decide medical care and interfering with the doctor-patient relationship will not change who they are even as it does violate their rights.

Distorting the arguments and laws to be "neutral" will not make them so.
 
Last edited:

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
55,964
38,524
362
crimsonaudio.net
The point isn't a religious one for most people - it's.a simple matter of age-appropriateness. This is why the law specifically targets primary ages but is less restrictive as kids age.

If it were just about oppression it would be banned at all ages.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
55,964
38,524
362
crimsonaudio.net
well, many of the parents and folks who are being explicitly targeted by this don’t agree. but they don’t matter. they don’t have the ability to just “accept people” and live and let live and pretend these things are no big deal. they are literally being targeted by the government for who they are.

it’s not like sex ed is being taught in kindergarten.

there is an underlying assumption by many in our country that lgbtq folks are defined explicitly by their “sexuality” and therefore the mere acknowledgement of these folks is inherently “sexual” and therefore inappropriate.
These parents are welcome to teach their kids whatever sex-education or gender ideas they wish to at home. Some folks do this at that young of an age. Most do not.

This has nothing to do with parents not being able.to teach their kids, it's about whether people want their kids being introduced to ideas they feel are inappropriate for their age. Again, read the law (it's short) - older kids can be taught about these things as they mature.
 

NationalTitles18

TideFans Legend
May 25, 2003
26,703
28,716
262
Mountainous Northern California
What is age-inappropriate about saying "Timmy has two dads" or "We thought your classmate Timmy was a boy, but we were wrong about that and we now call her Julie"?

The part of the law that prohibits all classroom discussion is the only portion that is limited to K-3 as I understand it, but I will gladly accept contrary evidence showing the rest of the law is also limited to that age group. (yes, I read the part about that particular portion being less restrictive as kids age but other parts of the law do not have that structure)

I'll also note that the language in the law is "classroom discussion" rather than "instruction", which places limits beyond only what teachers may instruct and also limits parents' and students' speech, by a plain reading.

IOW, by a plain reading of the law a child may not speak to the class to explain their own identity and why they appear differently this year than last year.

A parent could not introduce themselves as being married to little Timmy's other parent of the same sex (orientation) or why last year she presented as a man and this year as a woman (gender identity) on parent-child visit day. (even if age appropriately done)

"Targets" is a good description.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
52,221
32,186
287
53
East Point, Ga, USA
What is age-inappropriate about saying "Timmy has two dads" or "We thought your classmate Timmy was a boy, but we were wrong about that and we now call her Julie"?

The part of the law that prohibits all classroom discussion is the only portion that is limited to K-3 as I understand it, but I will gladly accept contrary evidence showing the rest of the law is also limited to that age group. (yes, I read the part about that particular portion being less restrictive as kids age but other parts of the law do not have that structure)

I'll also note that the language in the law is "classroom discussion" rather than "instruction", which places limits beyond only what teachers may instruct and also limits parents' and students' speech, by a plain reading.

IOW, by a plain reading of the law a child may not speak to the class to explain their own identity and why they appear differently this year than last year.

A parent could not introduce themselves as being married to little Timmy's other parent of the same sex (orientation) or why last year she presented as a man and this year as a woman (gender identity) on parent-child visit day. (even if age appropriately done)

"Targets" is a good description.
the folks pushing these laws have made it very clear what their intentions are.

the difference this time is they finally got beat to the punch on messaging.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Go Bama and Jon

Latest threads

Shop the TideFans.shop !


Your purchase through our TideFans.shop links helps support the site! Thanks!