From: rlc1028@zeus.tamu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Date: 1 Jan 1993 16:59 CST
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.tamu.edu

In article <1992Dec29.150908.2994@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, wgb3@pyuxf.uucp (25336-buoni) writes...

|Who cares about whether or not the individuals in question are persecuted
|unfairly?  The original post dealt with the children NOT the individuals!
|Afterall, it is not the children who commited the offense. 

	Oh, it matters quite a bit.  The children are only being taught
to be tolerant of Homosexual families because the parents face 
discrimination which includes violence among other things, and in the hopes 
that in the future, children of such families will not be teased because 
of their parents.

	Whatever teasing the children might face is considered worth the
long-run goal.  We could choose to protect the children of drug addicts in 
such a way, but if people think that drug addiction or beastiality are 
not worth protecting from discrimination, then we could find other ways
to help the kids of such parents.


| 
|>	If the world could depend on you to teach your children to follow
|>your example of tolerance, there would be no need for teaching it in 
|>school.  
| 
|Shouldn't this read "if the world could depend on you to teach your children
|to follow MY example of tolerance ...".

	It could.  But I think I might be satisfied with your idea of 
tolerance as long as it's something like "live and let live".  If we could 
get people to do this, other measures would probably not be seen as 
necessary.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Besides, my understanding is that 
|what is being taught is acceptance NOT tolerance.  If tolerence was the 
|main objective then we need not mention homosexuality at all; just teach the
|kids that all people deserve respect regardless of their differences!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

	Yes, this might work, though in the past, when such a general 
approach has been tried, Homosexual people have tended to get overlooked.

	Tolerance IS acceptance of a kind.  what you are talking about is
an accpetance of a moral position that says "Homosexuality is good, and we 
recomment you practise it."  But the accpetance I would be satisfied with 
is "Homosexual relationships form one of any kinds of family units; and
such people are not to me scorned or mistreated because of this, ragardless 
of whether you think Homosexuality is wrong or right according to your 
religion".




|Better yet, why not school choice?  If I am paying for my children's 
|education, which I am, why should'nt I be given the choice of which school
|I would like to send them to?  Isn't the purpose of the government to serve 
|the people?  In a "free" society one would think so!

	And further, if you are paying to send your child to the school of 
your choice, why should you pay to send someone else's kid to school too?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|My guess is that what is being sought is acceptance, not tolerance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

	Your guess?  


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|problem is that living a gay lifestyle is not OK (my values).  That is not
|to say that homosexuals are inherently evil, but that God did not intend us 
|to function this way.  Nor did he intend for us to be sexually active 
|outside of marriage, indulge in "immoral" behavior, ....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

	When you say the phrase "Gay lifestyle is/isn't OK", what does that
mean?  Apart from G-d and all that, what do you mean by it in a social and 
political context.  Because you think it's not "ok", what then do you think
society should do about homosexual citizens?

	

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
|These are my beliefs.  I don't expect you to adopt them, nor do I expect you to
|accept them.  All I ask in return is that you give me the same respect in
|return.  In my view, teaching my children views which are in direct conflict
|with our (my wife and I) values is a violation of this respect. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

	What would you have us do if your religion taught that it was wrong
to integrate the races?  Yes, I know it doesn't.  But I want to know what 
you'd have the schools do if teaching racial equality conflicted with your
religion.

	You see, I want to know because the more fundamental issue here 
is what to do when social agenda in school conflicts with parents' reli-
gious values.  In the case of racial integration, would majority rule 
simply override your religious rights?  Or, do your religious rights 
really exist in the case of your children's school curricula?  

Gadson
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality