From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Call/Fax/Write Fernandez
Date: 13 Dec 1992 01:34:41 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
> The point of the curriculum is to introduce these concepts not at the
> time which is most convenient for the parent, but at a time when it
> seems most important to the child's development.  

When you go teaching something agaisnt a large number of parent's will, 
you'd better be sure about it. 

> Contrary to what a
> lot of people seem to think, children learn terms and concepts like
> "gay" and "faggot" and "dyke" very early on.  It doesn't matter that
> the parents aren't prepared to deal with those issues; the issues are
> already there.

But as I said in another post, they have *no* concept of what it means 
in an adult's sense; they mean it differently.  As they get older, they 
begin to pick up more of it.  So if you are trying to deal with kids 
calling each other faggot, you have to deal with it on their terms.
Telling them that Heather's mommy and her roommate sleep together 
isnt going to do that.  Telling them that kids who are different 
are ok, is.  Telling them that mommy and her roommate sleep together 
is only going to have significance for them when they get older. 

> Hence, I don't think that the book saying that "Nancy and
> Ellen sleep together" is sexually suggestive to the average
> six-year-old.  It merely explains that some people of the same gender
> have relationships on the same level as Mommy and Daddy's.

And the majority of people do *not* find that an acceptable lifestyle 
choice, and do *not* want it taught to their kids as if it is.  They 
are willing to live and let live, but don't want their kids taught 
something they do not find acceptable.  Why the need to force it, 
if they are willing to live and let live? 

> It's my personal opinion that the schools should do this because the
> evidence tends to point in the direction of same-sex relationships
> being equally "normal" as opposite-sex relationships. 

Says the gay-rights lobby, but the majority are harldy convinced of 
this. 

> "Heather
> Has Two Mommies" doesn't attempt to present homosexuality as a
> positive or negative phenomenon; it merely presents it as a phenomenon
> that exists.

You're telling me that the intention isn't to present it in a positive
manner, so that kids will be acceptive of kids who's parents are gay?
Come on.  When doing something like this, if you present it is a valid 
thing, it is by default considered positive.   If it didn't present it 
as positive, WHAT good would it be doing the kids you are supposedly 
trying to help with it?  

> >I disagree.  Most parents I know, and knew as a kid, said that *all*
> >people are people and should be respected, regardless.
> 
> I've already addressed why I think that's insufficient in another
> post.  For the most part, I believe parents are not addressing the
> subject of homosexuality with their children.

And if they don't do it to your satisfaction, you will see to it that 
it is done for them, if they like it or not? 

Walter Smith
smithw@cs.itc.hp.com