Targeting children is a bullshit agenda. Sorry I didnt make it more clear.acceptance and equality is an agenda now?
i thought that was just basic human dignity.
amazing what you bigots do to the language, hoping everyone else is as dumb as you are and won't notice.
every time you open your dumb racist cunt of a mouth, it is an insult to the intelligence of everyone here.
So you want to make up a hypothetical situation to counter the real-life observation that you pretended expertise at motherhood after you gave your children to your ex-husband to raise?you're driving home from work, as you turn the block you notice smoke and flames coming from the house you share with your sister..do you stop to save her or drive right on by and collect?
i have you on ignore.So you want to make up a hypothetical situation to counter the real-life observation that you pretended expertise at motherhood after you gave your children to your ex-husband to raise?
Sure you do..........i have you on ignore.
i do.Sure you do..........
I can see that.i do.
ya mean, explaining to children the facts of life? that's an agenda now?Targeting children is a bullshit agenda.
This is a very poorly thought out response, imo. Consider what you're actually saying and carry that over to sex ed, couldn't some fundamentalist use the exact same argument against sex education? "Wait till they're older, that'll be time enough" leads to higher teen pregnancy rates and higher STD rates. So if that's the case, that teaching the right kind of information in a mature and responsible manner leads to the kinds of results we're looking for, I don't see how including information about LGBT people and tolerance of them would change any of thatTargeting children is a bullshit agenda. Sorry I didnt make it more clear.
When they reach the age that they become curious about such things, then will be time enough.
Targeting children who dont even understand is bullshit.
You are back on ignore, the ignorance is baffling.ya mean, explaining to children the facts of life? that's an agenda now?
again, nice attempt at manipulating language to accommodate your hatred and bigotry, but it's still transparent as fuck to people who do not share you hatred and bigotry.
you are wrong on so many levels. so many.11-13 age range is when sexual discussion should begin.... consider it to be sick and twisted to be discussing sexual relations with a 5 year old. And anyone who disagrees with that I would consider sick and twisted as well.
You are back on ignore, the ignorance is baffling.
The man who is completed isolated from minorities, has nothing to do with any minority, yet always calling others racists.
IGNORED because your commentary is completely worthless.
The problem with that is that kids below the ages you suggest it best to teach them about it still have sex, so would you rather them have a little bit of info about what they're doing or go in blind about the risks?Well let's see. I am against 5-10 years old having hetero sex pushed on them as well....
And Pad lets not dramatize it. I also am not saying wait until they are pregnant with STD's either.
Around the time children are hitting puberty and becoming young adults is plenty time enough. 11-13 age range is when sexual discussion should begin. If you disagree with me, fine, but I dont care. That is why my daughter is living a good life graduating college this semester and walking the stage next month.
I consider it to be sick and twisted to be discussing sexual relations with a 5 year old. And anyone who disagrees with that I would consider sick and twisted as well.
I doubt theres many 10 year olds having sex Padawan...The problem with that is that kids below the ages you suggest it best to teach them about it still have sex, so would you rather them have a little bit of info about what they're doing or go in blind about the risks?
"As of 2012, people are distributed by age as follows (US):I doubt theres many 10 year olds having sex Padawan...
Yeah, that sounds reasonable, tooIn relation to the OP... I dont think teaching "LGBT Tolerance" to kids is really necessary if you teach a general message of "everyone is different, who cares as long as noone gets hurt?" from a young age.
That's fucked..."As of 2012, people are distributed by age as follows (US):
0–14 years: 19.8% (male 31,639,127/female 30,305,704)"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#Ages
Ages 5-10 makeup ~ 20,441,794 kids
"•Fewer than 2% of adolescents have had sex by the time they reach their 12th birthday. But adolescence is a time of rapid change. Only 16% of teens have had sex by age 15, compared with one-third of those aged 16, nearly half (48%) of those aged 17, 61% of 18-year-olds and 71% of 19-year-olds. There is little difference by gender in the timing of first sex."
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-ATSRH.html
= around 408,835 kids age 5-10 having sex in the US (the size of Oakland)
Yeah, that sounds reasonable, too
you are wrong on so many levels. so many.
not only that, but your puritanical, repressed view on this issue leaves children open to being sexually abused and not even aware enough to report the crime.
i am glad that we don't let sexually repressed righties like you be in charge of things like this.