PARENT GROUPS ASK MARYLAND TO STOP NEW SEX ED LESSONS

Parents and Friends of ExGays and Gays ^ | 2/23/07 | PFOX

[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 School’s 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 they’re 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

[LtdGovt]

I'm glad you realize you're continuing to talk about a subject in which you have zero interest nor any interest in the subject.

As I said, my interest is showing people to that they don't know what they're talking about. Since your post contains nothing more than allegations against me and defensiveness, I assume you have realized that a substantive response (and no, I'm not talking about links to biased articles) would swiftly be proven wrong.

[scripter]

*You* were attacking a straw man, namely that my statement that it is partly 'genetic' means that a single gene is responsible for this condititoon, and that no credible evidence can be found about a single gene.

I'd ask you to provide a post number to support the above statement but you cannot.

The statement to which you refer was made as a general comment in post 32. And from there you've been pushing obfuscation.

[scripter]

Apparently you're more interested in pushing obfuscation and not talking about anything specific.

[scripter]

Please don't freepmail me. If you have questions then ask them here.

[dcnd9]

Have you read this?

OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA.....CONTINUES!!
http://www.parentsrightsusa.com/Overhauling%20of%20Straight%20America.htm

What 2 people do in private is private and should be kept private. However when they force that belief in what they are doing in private on me, society, school children etc. and say it should be accepted as normal.... it is not!

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Ummm, wouldn't an ex-gay be heterosexual? I believe heterosexuality is discussed.

Have you just heard, or never until now heard, about the homosexual agenda? How they claim that it is genetic - therefore one CAN NOT change what they want to have sex with (aside - it would surely also also apply to wanting to have sex with farm animals and inanimate objects if it's genetic - what one wants to have sex with that is). Since there are many, many, people who have lead lives as practicing homosexuals yet are now completely heterosexual, it shows that the "it's genetic" argument is a lie (it's never been proved scientifically anyway). This is why government run school systems won't allow ex-gays to be mentioned. They are homosexual activists and don't particularly care about giving children an accurate education.

It's stunning that you didn't understand this yet are a member of FR.

[LtdGovt]

I'd ask you to provide a post number to support the above statement but you cannot. The statement to which you refer was made as a general comment in post 32.

You were responding to one of the comments I have made, in which I stated that I believe that it is partly genetic and partly environmental. Therefore, you were attacking a strawman.

And from there you've been pushing obfuscation.

And you have been pushing the word 'obfuscation'.

Apparently you're more interested in pushing obfuscation and not talking about anything specific.

If you do come forward with something specific, I'll respond to it. Interested in becoming a part of my bet with the gentlewoman on this thread?

Please don't freepmail me. If you have questions then ask them here.

My, my, you really dislike me, don't you? My question was what 'agenda' I'm supposedly pushing. You really believe that, or are you merely using it as a means to discredit people who don't agree with you?

[LtdGovt]

I'm not reading propaganda pieces, not those of your side and not those of the queer side, but I agree that it should be kept out of the schools.

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

And what do you have, except for their "word for it", to prove they ever were "gay"?

It's called logic.

Even stronger than that - you have the homosexuals with whom they used to have sex with. So if they say that they used to have homosexual sex and others say, yes, this person used to have homosexual sex with them - that's pretty strong evidence.

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Personal experience is not an adequate substitute for scientific knowledge.

The problem is that you can't look inside a person's head.

Funny how your two statements contradict each other. You can't do it scientifically (look into someone's head) but scientifically is the answer.

[wintertime]

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 they’re women and vice-versa, and “homophobia” as a label for anyone who disagrees.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

If all K-12 schooling in this nation were privately funded and privately delivered, there would be no bitter controversy. Parents, teachers, and principals would privately decide how to introduce sexuality to the school's students.

Teaching children about sexuality has profoundly religious consequences and content. It is impossible to separate religion from human sexuality.

Therefore,,,,, when the government owns and runs schools, the government will establish (and stamp with its imprimatur) the religious worldview of some, and then actively work to destroy the religious beliefs of others.

Government schools are an abomination! The violate freedom of conscience, and our human rights as outlined in the First Amendment.

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Same sex attraction is an unwanted unasked for condition,

Only your opinion. Unless you forgot to include links to the proof. If so please provide them. I'll read up some more.

The same argument is made for bestiality. Can you believe that bestiality is **illegal** in some states?!? Those bigoted law makers... (barf)

[scripter]

You were responding to one of the comments I have made, in which I stated that I believe that it is partly genetic and partly environmental.

Yes, I was responding to one of your comments, that much is true. What isn't true and is obvious for all to see is that I wasn't responding to the comment you reference above. And all anybody has to do is read post 32 and the post to which I replied to see your obfuscation for what it is.

Your continued failure to reference specific flaws in anything I've posted is quite telling.

[LtdGovt]

Funny how your two statements contradict each other. You can't do it scientifically (look into someone's head) but scientifically is the answer.

Actually, with brain scans and scientific testing, you can make a pretty accurate representation of what's going on in someone's head. The 'you' in the second part was referring to a private person who had done no such experiment.

[LtdGovt]

Government schools are an abomination! The violate freedom of conscience, and our human rights as outlined in the First Amendment.

Also: public schools violate the rights of children by giving them a poor education.

[LtdGovt]

The same argument is made for bestiality. Can you believe that bestiality is **illegal** in some states?!? Those bigoted law makers... (barf)

If you believe in the naturalistic fallacy. I don't. No all things that are innate are good. People have all kinds of violent and perverted tendencies which are not of their own making. In fact, I believe it has been established that your genes have a huge influence on the chance that you are going to be a violent person.

Even if bestiality is not chosen, and an unwanted condition, why would we not have the moral right to impose a penalty on the practice, even the death penalty?

[LtdGovt]

Yes, I was responding to one of your comments, that much is true. What isn't true and is obvious for all to see is that I wasn't responding to the comment you reference above. And all anybody has to do is read post 32 and the post to which I replied to see your obfuscation for what it is.

There would be no reason to being about that matter, unless you were referring to what I have said. You had probably read my comment and decided to say something about it.

Your continued failure to reference specific flaws in anything I've posted is quite telling.

I believe imitation is an indication of weakness. As for the specific flaws, I have already pointed them out - your failure to respond to my points does not make them less real.

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

The problem is that you can't look inside a person's head.

Actually, with brain scans and scientific testing, you can make a pretty accurate representation of what's going on in someone's head.

Which one of your statements, above, is accurate?

[Judith Anne]

My comment: Science, including the science of the human brain, is still learning. For you to continually post that the brain is fixed in granite, instead of plastic and malleable at all phases of life is ridiculous on the face of it. Humans are omnisexual. A multitude of stimulants can excite sexual desire in homosexual or heterosexual people. Choices, habits, interests, social and legal boundaries all affect people.

Your Comment: Sounds like pseudescience to me. I don't know about women, but no amount of choices, habits, intersets, societal and legal boundaries could make men attracted to other men.

My response: Just to let you know, I am a retired nurse. I don't know a whole lot about the human brain, but I do know some, and what I posted is not pseudoscience. As your arguments show, you are uneducated about the anatomy, physiology, functions, adaptation, chemistry, and physics of the human brain. Your ignorance causes you to ignore anything you know nothing about--to you, it doesn't exist.

Maybe after you have some real education, you can then talk about personality theory, sexual maturation, the effects of socialization on sexual expression, habit training, etc.

When you do have some genuine education, then perhaps you won't be so OBVIOUSLY agenda driven.

[LtdGovt]

Which one of your statements, above, is accurate?

Both of them are accurate, as I have already stated:

Actually, with brain scans and scientific testing, you can make a pretty accurate representation of what's going on in someone's head. The 'you' in the second part was referring to a private person who had done no such experiment (therefore, he/she cannot know what is going on).