Skip to comments.PARENT GROUPS ASK MARYLAND TO STOP NEW SEX ED LESSONS
Posted on 02/23/2007 12:38:55 PM PST by dcnd9
PARENT GROUPS ASK MARYLAND TO STOP NEW SEX ED LESSONS Neutral Unisex Bathroom Created for Cross-dressing Student
Montgomery County, Maryland Three parent organizations are asking the Maryland State Board of Education to halt the new sex ed curriculum approved by the Montgomery County, Maryland Board of Education (BOE). Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX), Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum (CRC), and Family Leader Network have filed an appeal requesting Maryland to stay Montgomery County Public Schools sex ed plans.
The newly approved curriculum, entitled "Respect for Differences in Human Sexuality," promotes cross-dressers, homosexuals, transgenders, bisexuals, the intersexed, and other non-heterosexuals. It teaches children about coming out as gay, gender identity for men who think theyre women and vice-versa, and homophobia as a label for anyone who disagrees.
In one lesson, a boy begins to wear dresses to school, calls himself Portia, and wants to be known as a girl. The principal gives him a key to a private restroom and a new student ID identifying him as a girl. Although transgenderism is considered a gender identity disorder by the American Psychiatric Association, the lesson plan fails to recommend counseling for students with gender confusion, said Regina Griggs, PFOX Executive Director. Instead, it implies that schools should create new unisex bathrooms for cross-dressing students.
The lesson also refers to Portia as a she when the law and biology classify her as a he. This gender bending forces students to acknowledge Portia as a female when he is not and creates gender confusion for children, said Griggs. This flawed educational policy is not based on medical or scientific facts.
Despite repeated appearances by former homosexuals and a former transgender before the BOE, the Board voted to exclude ex-gays from the lesson plans although gays, transgenders, and the intersexed are included and taught to students. Why do the lesson plans censor ex-gays when every other sexual orientation is discussed and supported? asked Griggs. The BOE violates its own sexual orientation non-discrimination policy by choosing which sexual orientations it favors based on politics and not science. Its discriminatory actions contribute to the intolerance and open hostility faced by the ex-gay community.
PFOX was a member of the curriculum committee representing the ex-gay community, yet the BOE voted to teach students that it is normal to change your sex (transgender) but not normal to change your unwanted same-sex attractions (former homosexual). The lesson plans instruct students that homosexual orientation is innate and inborn, despite testimony by former homosexuals before the BOE and all contrary scientific research, explained Griggs.
The lesson plans are entitled Respect for Differences in Human Sexuality, yet the ex-gay community receives no respect and is deliberately left out of the curriculum, Griggs said. The actions of the Montgomery County Board of Education are discriminatory, endanger children, and are politically motivated.
What happens in Montgomery County will happen to the rest of Maryland, so it is imperative to stop this sex ed program now before it is fully implemented, said Griggs. Concerned Maryland residents can take action at http://www.mcpscurriculum.org/take_action.shtml
A copy of this news advisory is available online at: http://pfox.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=155#155
Monkey County is a dreadful place. I think it's a colony of Massachusetts.
Why do the lesson plans censor ex-gays when every other sexual orientation is discussed and supported?
Ummm, wouldn't an ex-gay be heterosexual? I believe heterosexuality is discussed.
OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA.....CONTINUES!!
WE ARE ALL HETERO AT BIRTH..... HOMO BY DESIRE.
They can become ex gays.
They simply dont want kids to realize its a CHOICE and that you are not "born that way"
If its a choice, a lifestyle, theres no need to teach it to kids.
I have Ethnic Identity Disorder and demand to go to school in Black Face, change my name to SleepandEat and use the Colored Only Bath Room. I'll have to come up with a word to condemn those who would be against it.
Leftists just hate the vicious inflexibility of facts. Hence, they typically don't spend much time in the same room with them.
And what do you have, except for their "word for it", to prove they ever were "gay"?
The teachers are just softening up the kids so they can have sex with them.
"promotes cross-dressers, homosexuals, transgenders, bisexuals, the intersexed, and other non-heterosexuals."
I think the standard pc list of deviants gets longer every month.
It used to just be Gay, then Gay/Lesbian, then LGBT (or whatever).
What are we up to now lets see LGBTCnHi
It must suck to be a PC reporter to try and keep up with new deviancys.
Well I do have an ex homosexual in my family so I do know a little more than the average joe.
The program they went thru had a 98% success rate.
Now if you are born that way, you cant change it, no more than i could change the color of my skin.
Another thing that the family discoverd thru the program (and true of this family member)is that most homosexuals have sexual abuse in thier past, which distorts thier view of normal sexual relationships.
I also have a sister, whose majority of friend are gay men. some will tell you they thought they were gay from very early on, but most will say that it was curiousity and that from the first time they were hooked.
My biggest issue is that If we accept that they are born that way it becomes a very slippery slope (which is part of the homosexual agenda) btw.
Pedophiles claim they are attracted to children. you can give them drugs, punish them with jail time, castorate them etc and STILL they offend. do we want to say they are born that way too? that they cant help it?
Granted what gays do in the privacy of thier bedrooms isnt comparable to molesting children, but you cannot take one and say its normal and not the other-the argument will be (and is) the same.
Think im being silly. read up on on the issue. there are several psychologists already arguing that pediophilia isnt a disorder. that the only thing that causes damage to the children is us, as a society telling them what happened to them is bad.
I for one dont care what ppl do in thier bedrooms. but DO NOT bring it into my schools etc and tell me they are born that way and therefore should be considered normal.
Once we all drink that koolade the slippery slope will be so icy we will never beable to crawl back up.
Well in my opinion they are just creating so many disorders that itll be impossible to claim you were "born that way" so lets let them run amok with the pc talk.
Honestly MAYBE you could get by with same sex attraction, but how can you be BORN as a crossdresser or transgendered person or intersexed (whatever that is).
The crazier they get, the more obvious they become.
Students graduating from montgomery Copunty High Schools cannot fill out an Income tax form, They havent received an education on the various Insurances they may need during their lifetime, They know nothing of how to choose a physician,or how to invst wisely,but thanks to homosexuals and fruits they know all about queers.
IMO there are a lot of things that need to be taught in schools. How to react to students who are perverts isnt needed.
Well Its obvious I wont change your mind.
I can tell you that I am very close to this family member and I can tell you that its not simply "behavior modification".
I wish I could remember the poster several years ago on FR (if someone remembers thatd be great) who was a heterosexual and had a homosexual experience on a business trip.
He said the experience was so mind blowing it became like a drug. I can tell you that the program my family member went thru treats homosexuality, in part, as an addiction.
Ive seen more evidence of that, then that they are born that way.
I did NOT say they were comparable.
like i said READ. psychologist are already arguing the exact SAME arguement for pedophiles.
Yes they are different. no comparison at all. again its the ARGUMENT that is the same.
dont take issue with me, take it up with the so called professionals that believe a child can concent and therefore it is not rape. that it is society that creates the harm to the child by saying its bad.
You do know at one point that being homosexual was considered a disorder, just like pediophilea. just because more and more folks came out as being gay, doesnt mean we should normalize it.
like i said slippery slope!
OK, so your standard for "proof" concerning an issue entirely affecting another person is your logic.
If you had thought about this question...
Nice ad-hominem dig there. Why the veiled insults?
...you would have figured out the answer. Let's look at the question: you're asking how we know that homosexuals are actually romantically attracted to members of the same-sex.
No, that wasn't my question. You'd like it to be my question, since that's the one you want to answer.
My question was: "...what do you have, except for their "word for it", to prove they ever were 'gay'?"
This question was in direct relation to your assertion that we have nothing but the guy's "word for it" that he has overcome his homosexuality. The question was meant to bring you face-to-face with your own standard.
Put another way: If his word isn't enough to "prove" his change, why is it enough to prove his homosexuality?
Well, what reason would they have to form relations with members of the same sex, except for the fact that they're attracted to them?
Thus, I conclude that they probably are what they claim to be.
This is what passes for logic in your mind? Have you ever had formal logic training?
Your standard for "proof" boils down to: I can't think of any other reason for it, so I must be right.
On the other hand, if you look at the people who say they are formerly queer. What reason could they have for forming relations with members of the opposite sex? Why did they 'change'?
More of what you call "logic." You formulate a theory of your own to explain the motives of another person, assign that theory to the guy who isn't there to disagree, then pat yourself on the back for reaching a consensus with yourself.
Yes, you do. Quite a lot about a great many things, actually.
...that religious and societal concerns matter greatly, since religion plays a very large role in most of these 'conversion therapies'.
LOL! Your "logic" reads like a case study of logical fallacies instead.
Now, even beyond presuming to assign a motive to an unknown person in his most personal of choices and behaviors, you'll go the further step to presume to know what the motives of "most of these 'conversion therapies'" are!
It appears your hubris knows no bounds.
Thus, I conclude that their attractions probably haven't changed at all, but that their behavior has.
Of course you do! That's the only conclusion you could come to, given the self-serving echo chamber of a mind you're using.
I wouldn't want my daughter to marry one of those people, people who imagine her to be a man. Not in one hundred years.
No, I imagine not. But I'm sure you'd know precisely why she'd want to, even before she knew it herself!
All hail the Commisars of the Soviet Socialist Republic of Montgomery County! I am glad to see that those tax dollars you've taken from me are now going for the greater good, Comrades, as well as my property taxes. I gotta move...
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
This is pure evil.
So now I dont know my own family member?
I can assure you If this person was STILL having homosexual feelings, they wouldnt bat an eye to tell me.
Go ahead believe they are born that way. there is obviously no point in reasoning with you. We will agree to disagree.
Most certainly look into it. youll see the same argument.
Dont think itll happen? go back and see the intital arguments and the fight that went into normalizing homosexuals (and is still being fought).
I have an xgay family member and a lefitist feminazi sister with a circle of gay men as friends. I think if there was even a HINT that they are born that way-i wouldve heard it.
since we didnt touch on this issue i can tell you that my family member was not motivated by religious reasons.
:-D Nice of you to break it down for the new FReeper.
Instead of spending all the tax payers money to put in special pottys for crossdresser or whatever, why dont we just go back to uniforms?
Since some crossdressers will want to wear skirts, make it all the same. crisp white shirt, sweater or vest and slacks. end of problem and the wasting of tax payer money.
I really worry about the future of my grandkids (once i have some) How far weve come since I was a kid.
I had a crush on elton john in the 6th grade. someone told me "dont you know hes gay?" and i had NO idea what that meant.
Now look at us, gay seems almost "normal" to the rest on that list. thats down right SCARY!
And you know this, how? ...exactly?
The problem is that I was not utilizing formal logic, but informal logic.
Umm... There's no such thing. There's logic and there's illogic. What you call "informal logic" is a collection of unsubstantiated generalizations and personal assertions.
That's not logic, informal or otherwise.
I do know. They're almost exclusively Christian, usually fundamentalist.
Wow. Would you kindly point me to your exhaustive study or survey by which you came to this conclusion? Only by talking to all of them could you reasonably conclude that "They're almost exclusively Christian." You must have spent a number of years interviewing reformed homosexuals. I'd love to read up on your research.
...or are you making assumptions again?
The rest of your post is one big ad hominem (a mild version of which sparked your outrage), probably showing something about yourself. I hate to say it, but you argue like a liberal.
No, not really. I don't know you personally. You may be a reasonably nice guy, for all I know. I'm simply pointing out the gaping holes in your reasoning. I honestly hope to persuade you to think about the subject more thoroughly, since you clearly haven't done so.
I happen to believe those who say they've overcome their homosexuality and changed. My reason for believing that is that I have personally witnessed similar, to-the-core changes in the character and personality of people I personally know. I don't question their motives, nor does it even matter. I have witnessed it with my own eyes and ears, and it's very much real.
I know a man who has changed from a chain-smoking, belligerant, MEAN jerk into a kind, wise, caring and happy person who is a pleasure to be around. I have watched filthy, stoned, single-minded addicts become intelligent, hard-working, responsible people. There are too many examples of such changes in my memory to ever list, or to ever deny.
So, when a man with nothing to sell me is telling me he has overcome his homosexuality, I tend to believe him. At the very least, I know it's possible.
That would depend on your definition of force. Children in government schools are forced to learn homosexuality is normal. And what some school officials tell us, there's nothing we can do about it.
The facts are there is no gay gene and no credible science claims a gay gene exists. No credible scientist claims gays are born that way. As TChris has already told you, the only evidence somebody has to prove they're gay is their word, which is the exact same evidence an ex-gay has.
Children are encouraged to try homosexuality. Some previous questionaires have asked children if they haven't tried homosexuality, how do they know they wouldn't like it.
The following links provide plenty of evidence of the gay agenda targeting children:
Targeting Children, Part 1: How the gay movement intends to capture the next generation
Targeting Children, Part 2: How the homosexual movement uses public schools as instruments of change
Targeting Children, Part 3: Activists encouraging experimentation
Targeting Children, Part 4: Access to children: homosexuality and molestation
I highly recommend you read this: How Might Homosexuality Develop? Putting the Pieces Together. The good news is the APA Has No Disagreement With the Treatment of Unwanted Homosexual Attraction.
I have a copy of that as well. It's by far the most compelling explanation of the subject I have ever read.
I concur. My profile has a number of links on the subject as well.
Hey, How's the Math, Reading, History and Science going?? Looks like there's plenty of time for indoctrination.
My kids would NEVER go to a Maryland public school.
Well, of course! While you're making up the rest of it, why not invent your own definition of the word "logic?" That makes the whole discussion much simpler, no?
Well I cant point you to any specific places.
Some of it was here on FR. Some of it I learned from a friend who is a forensic phsycologist and works with sexually abused children and their preditors.
The next time I run into him, Ill ask for some conclusive evidence for you. Its a real concern for him that those in the profession would even conceive of such ideas.
The family member is a she, not a he AND we are very close. its been 15 years since she recovered.
she has also had battles with alchohol and while she would never tell anyone else in the family that she still drinks and LIKES to drink, she tells me.
I know if she still wishes or was still engaged in the homosexual life style she would tell me. you are making assumptions, based on what?
She has nothing to hide from me, no reason to keep secrets. We have talked many times about her past, and nothing indicates that she did it for religious reasons or family pressure.
I dont know what more I can tell you. You can believe what you wish, but I wont participate in a belief that will lead us to even more perversion and the acceptance of abnormal as normal.
Any parent who allows his child in the doors of these pits is guilty of child abuse. Home Schooling is the only solution.
What?? Where the heck did you get that?
I Hope you enjoy the future. You think now is bad with seperate bathrooms?
just wait.... your grandkids will have to share a bathroom with these cross dressing, transexual, bi sexual, and whatever comes up between now and then.
theyll claim later that to do so is segregation
(1. the practice of keeping ethnic, racial, religious, or gender groups separate especially by enforcing the use of separate schools, transportation, housing, and other facilities, and usually discriminating against a minority group)
I can already hear the screeching and law suits now!
But hey keep drinking that nice koolaid:-)
BTW, This isnt soley in my head. I gave you countless examples. Which you chose not to acknowledge.
Your post to me, is nothing more then leftist drivel meant to end the discussion.
On that I say Good Day!
Says the uneducated LtdGovt. You let me know when you want to discuss facts.
You have a legitimate concern. If you really believe that it is going to happen, then I think you should enter into a bet with me. I'm willing to bet on the following predictions about 2030, 2040, 2050, any year that you would choose (depending on your age):
1. Bathrooms will still be seperate, with at least 60% so
2. Pedophiles will face harsher punishment than they do today.
What do you say?
Okay Ill take that bet....
By or before 2030 there will be no seperate bathrooms.
before 2020 (or within the next 10 years)you will see atleast one law suit arguing that seperate bathrooms are a form of segregation (im betting before)
As for pedophiles. I think thats a longer haul. It has taken atleast 20-30 years for us to get this far with homosexuals. so i say by 2050, the laws will be more favorable to pediophiles.
Of course I am hoping i am wrong on all accounts so even if I lose, i win :-)
Are we on?
You're talking to somebody who's spent years studying this issue who also just so happens to have one of the largest databases in the world on this subject. Obviously you're the uneducated fragile one in this discussion, but throw out some more obfuscation!
Says a person who doesn't even know that multiple genes govern a single outcome?
Psst. That's the homosexual agenda talking point, not mine. Whoops.
And your reference to Wal-Mart is misdirection. Again, get back to me when you're interested in discussing facts.