Anti-gay right advances new smear that DOE official Jennings promoting "Child Porn in the Classroom"
Conservative blogs have claimed that Department of Education official Kevin Jennings is unfit as "Safe Schools Czar" because he supposedly promoted "child porn" by allowing an education organization he founded to recommend for students in grades 7-12 books that included sexually explicit content. The organization, however, specifically stated on its book list website that "some titles for adolescent readers contain mature themes" and recommended that "adults selecting books for youth review content for suitability"; further, schools regularly teach books that contain sexually explicit material.
Conservatives smear Jennings as promoting "child porn"
In a December 4 post on his Gateway Pundit blog - headlined, "Breaking: Obama's 'Safe Schools Czar' Is Promoting Child Porn in the Classroom" - Jim Hoft wrote that "Scott Baker from Breitbart-TV.com and Co-Host of 'The B-Cast' submitted this shocking report today on Obama's deviant Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings." In the post, Baker wrote that the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which Jennings founded and previously served as executive director, published a reading list for students in grades 7-12 that contained books which included "X-Rated" and sexually explicit content:
We were unprepared for what we encountered. Book after book after book contained stories and anecdotes that weren't merely X-rated and pornographic, but which featured explicit descriptions of sex acts between pre-schoolers; stories that seemed to promote and recommend child-adult sexual relationships; stories of public masturbation, anal sex in restrooms, affairs between students and teachers, five-year-olds playing sex games, semen flying through the air. One memoir even praised becoming a prostitute as a way to increase one's self-esteem. Above all, the books seemed to have less to do with promoting tolerance than with an unabashed attempt to indoctrinate students into a hyper-sexualized worldview.
[...]
And this is not about censorship: It's about deciding what constitutes appropriate reading material for children. We're perfectly OK with these books existing and being read by adults; we only start to worry when these books are assigned to children. All sorts of books are excluded from school reading lists, for all sorts of reasons. Even many books once considered classics are now considered off-limits due to language or attitudes now deemed inappropriate. And yet, according to Kevin Jennings and GLSEN, books about a 13-year-old getting "my cock sucked and my ass fucked" or about a teenager enjoying the "exquisite bitter taste" of his friend's semen are not just acceptable, they're highly recommended. As GLSEN's own site says, "All BookLink items are reviewed by GLSEN staff for quality and appropriateness of content." Really? (Note: GLSEN does advise adults to "review content for suitability.")
Although GLSEN does not address how books get added to its list, it's hard to imagine that they are chosen by low-level staffers or volunteers, with no oversight. Since the list of recommended books is one of the organization's primary tools ("The GLSEN BookLink, an online library of recommended resources, along with the Safe Space program remain cornerstones of GLSEN's education work." source), it's likely that the books were chosen carefully. Kevin Jennings stepped down as Executive Director last year after leading GLSEN since its inception, but every single book mentioned in this report was added to the list while Jennings was in charge (dates are given for each title's addition to the list). Therefore, it's reasonable to believe he was aware of the addition of these works -- especially since most were added when GLSEN was still quite small and the Executive Director had a hands-on role in daily operations.
Conservative blogs latch on to Baker's smears. In a post headlined, "Explosive: The not-safe-for-school reading list of the safe schools czar," Michelle Malkin wrote that "Scott Baker and a collaborative research team have waded through the sexually explicit reading list endorsed by safe schools czar Kevin Jennings and the group he founded -- GLSEN ... Make sure you have an empty stomach before you read." Malkin later added: "Would Barack and Michelle Obama approve of their daughters reading this in their classrooms?" In a post headlined, "Good News: Obama 'Safe Schools' Czar Recommends Child Porn to Kids," Jawa Report wrote of the list: "If Jennings was involved, not only should he be fired but he should also have his ass kicked. Either way, somebody's ass needs to be kicked." Jennings is the frequent target of smears, which often originate from conservative blogs.
GLSEN: "We recommend that adults selecting books for youth review content for suitability"
As Baker acknowledged, in describing its BookLink section, GLSEN states in red type: "All BookLink items are reviewed by GLSEN staff for quality and appropriateness of content. However, some titles for adolescent readers contain mature themes. We recommend that adults selecting books for youth review content for suitability. The editorial and customer reviews listed at Amazon.com often provide information on mature content." From the section:
Schools regularly teach books that contain sexually explicit material
Regularly used books such as Catcher in the Rye, Color Purple, 1984, Of Mice and Men contain sexually explicit passages. Many classic novels include sexually explicit material. The American Library Association notes on its website that many of the top 100 novels of the 20th century have been the subject of objections over issues such as "sexual references," "sexually explicit passages," "rape," "masturbation," "bestiality," "explicit sex scenes," and "trashy sex." These titles include books regularly taught in schools, such as Catcher in the Rye, The Color Purple, Beloved, Lord of the Flies, 1984, Of Mice and Men, Brave New World, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, and Rabbit, Run. From the ALA's list:
Catcher in the Rye, JD Salinger.
Removed from the school libraries in Morris, Manitoba (1982) along with two other books because they violate the committee's guidelines covering "excess vulgar language, sexual scenes, things concerning moral issues, excessive violence, and anything dealing with the occult." ... Removed from the required reading list of a Medicine Bow, Wyo. Senior High School English class (1986) because of sexual references and profanity in the book. Banned from a required sophomore English reading list at the Napoleon, N. Dak. High School (1987) after parents and the local Knights of Columbus chapter complained about its profanity and sexual references. Challenged at the Linton Stockton, Ind. High School (1988) because the book is "blasphemous and undermines morality." Banned from the classrooms in Boron, Calif. High School (1989) because the book contains profanity. Challenged at the Grayslake, Ill. Community High School (1991). Challenged at the Jamaica High School in Sidell, Ill. (1992) because the book contained profanities and depicted premarital sex, alcohol abuse, and prostitution. Challenged in the Waterloo, Iowa schools (1992) and Duval County, Fla. public school libraries (1992) because of profanity, lurid passages about sex, and statements defamatory to minorities, God, women, and the disabled.
The Color Purple, Alice Walker.
Challenged as appropriate reading for Oakland, Calif. High School honors class (1984) due to the work's "sexual and social explicitness" and its "troubling ideas about race relations, man's relationship to God, African history, and human sexuality." After nine months of haggling and delays, a divided Oakland Board of Education gave formal approval for the book's use. Rejected for purchase by the Hayward, Calif. school's trustee (1985) because of "rough language" and "explicit sex scenes." Removed from the open shelves of the Newport News, Va. school library (1986) because of its "profanity and sexual references" and placed in a special section accessible only to students over the age of 18 or who have written permission from a parent. Challenged at the public libraries of Saginaw, Mich. (1989) because of its language and "explicitness." Challenged as an optional reading assigned in Ten Sleep, Wyo. schools (1990). Challenged as a reading assignment at the New Burn, N.C. High School (1992) because the main character is raped by her stepfather. Banned in the Souderton, Pa. Area School District (1992) as appropriate reading for 10th graders because it is "smut." Challenged on the curricular reading list at Pomperaug High School in Southbury, Conn. (1995) because sexually explicit passages are appropriate high school reading. Retained as an English course reading assignment in the Junction City, Oreg. high school (1995) after a challenge to Walker's Pulitzer Prize-winning novel caused months of controversy. Although an alternative assignment was available, the book was challenged due to "inappropriate language, graphic sexual scenes, and book's negative image of black men." Challenged at the St. Johns County Schools in St. Augustine, Fla. (1995). Retained on the Round Rock, Tex. Independent High School reading list (1996) after a challenge that the book was too violent. Challenged, but retained, as part of the reading list for Advanced Placement English classes at Northwest High Schools in High Point, N.C. (1996). The book was challenged because it is "sexually graphic and violent." Removed from the Jackson County, W. Va. school libraries (1997) along with sixteen other titles. Challenged, but retained as part of a supplemental reading list at the Shawnee School in Lima, Ohio (1999). Several parents described its content as vulgar and "X-rated." Removed from the Ferguson High School library in Newport News, Va. (1999). Students may request and borrow the book with parental approval. Challenged, along with seventeen other titles in the Fairfax County, VA elementary and secondary libraries (2002), by a group called Parents Against Bad Books in Schools. The group contends the books "contain profanity and descriptions of drug abuse, sexually explicit conduct, and torture.
Beloved, Toni Morrison.
The 1987 Pulitzer Prize winning novel has been required reading for the advanced placement English class for six years. Challenged in the Sarasota County, Fla. schools (1998) because of sexual material.
Lord of the Flies, William Golding.
Challenged in the Waterloo, Iowa schools (1992) because of profanity, lurid passages about sex, and statements defamatory to minorities, God, women and the disabled.
1984, George Orwell.
Challenged in the Jackson County, FL (1981) because Orwell's novel is "pro-communist and contained explicit sexual matter."
Of Mice and Men, John Steinbeck.
Challenged at the Jacksboro, Tenn. High School (1991) because the novel contains "blasphemous" language, excessive cursing, and sexual overtones. ... Challenged in the Waterloo, Iowa schools (1992) and the Duval County, Fla. public school libraries (1992) because of profanity, lurid passages about sex, and statements defamatory to minorities, God, women, and the disabled.
Brave New World, Aldous Huxley.
Removed from classroom in Miller, MO (1980), because it made promiscuous sex "look like fun" and challenged frequently throughout the U.S. Challenged as required reading at the Yukon, Oklahoma High School (1988) because of "the book's language and moral content." Challenged as required reading in the Corona-Norco, California Unified School District (1993) because it is "centered around negative activity." Specifically, parents objected that the characters' sexual behavior directly opposed the health curriculum, which taught sexual abstinence until marriage. The book was retained, and teachers selected alternatives if students object to Huxley's novel.
As I Lay Dying, William Faulkner.
Banned in the Graves County School District in Mayfield, KY (1986) because it contained "offensive and obscene passages referring to abortion and used God's name in vain." The decision was reversed a week later after intense pressure from the ACLU and considerable negative publicity. Challenged as a required reading assignment in an advanced English class of Pulaski County High School in Somerset, KY (1987) because the book contains "profanity and a segment about masturbation."
Their Eyes were Watching God, Zora Neale Hurston.
Challenged for sexual explicitness, but retained on the Stonewall Jackson High School's academically advanced reading list in Brentsville, VA (1997). A parent objected to the novel's language and sexual explicitness.
Song of Solomon, Toni Morrison
Challenged, but retained, in the Columbus, Ohio schools (1993). The complainant believed that the book contains language degrading to blacks, and is sexually explicit. Removed from required reading lists and library shelves in the Richmond County, GA. School District (1994) after a parent complained that passages from the book were "filthy and inappropriate."
Native Son, Richard Wright
Challenged in Goffstown, N.H. (1978); Elmwood Park, N.J. (1978) due to "objectionable" language; and North Adams, Mass. (1981) due to the book's "violence, sex, and profanity." Challenged at the Berrian Springs, Mich. High School in classrooms and libraries (1988) because the novel is "vulgar, profane, and sexually explicit." Retained in the Yakima, Wash. schools (1994) after a five-month dispute over what advanced high school students should read in the classroom. Two parents raised concerns about profanity and images of violence and sexuality in the book and requested that it be removed from the reading list. Challenged as part of the reading list for Advanced Placement English classes at Northwest High School in High Point, N.C. (1996). The book was challenged because it is "sexually graphic and violent." Removed from Irvington High School in Fremont, Calif. (1998) after a few parents complained the book was unnecessarily violence and sexually explicit. Challenged in the Hamilton High School curriculum in Fort Wayne, Ind. (1998) because of the novel's graphic language and sexual content.
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Ken Kesey.
In 1974, five residents of Strongsville, Ohio, sued the board of education to remove the novel. Labeling it "pornographic," they charged the novel "glofiries criminal activity, has a tendency to corrupt juveniles and contains descriptions of bestiality, bizarre violence, and torture, dismemberment, death, and human elimination."
Slaughterhouse Five, Kurt Vonnegut.
Challenged as an eleventh grade summer reading option in Prince William County, Va (1998) because the book "was rife with profanity and explicit sex:" Removed as require dreading for sophomores at the Converty, R. I. High School (2000) after a parent complained that it contained vulgar language, violent imagery, and sexual content.
Go Tell it on the Mountain, James Baldwin.
Challenged as required reading in the Hudson Falls, N.Y. schools (1994) because the book has recurring themes of rape, masturbation, violence, and degrading treatment of women. Challenged as a ninth-grade summer reading option in Prince William County, Va. (1988) because the book was "rife with profanity and explicit sex."
A Separate Peace, John Knowles.
Challenged in Vernon-Verona-Sherill, NY School District (1980) as a "filthy, trashy sex novel." Challenged at the Fannett-Metal High School in Shippensburg, Pa. (1985) because of its allegedly offensive language. Challenged as appropriate for high school reading lists in the Shelby County, Tenn. school system (1989) because the novel contained "offensive language." Challenged at the McDowell County, N.C. schools (1996) because of "graphic language."
Rabbit, Run, John Updike.
Restricted to high school students with parental permission in the six Aroostock County, Maine community high school libraries (1976) because of passages in the book dealing with sex and an extramarital affair. Removed from the required reading list for English class at the Medicine Bow, Wyo. Junior High School (1986) because of sexual references and profanity in the book.
"I Want My Country Back" How much more Racism can this Country Take?
"STRAIGHTS ONLY" "NO GAYS OR LESBIANS ALLOWED"
Imagine a Sign like that in the window of your local Marriage License Office, wouldn't that just make you feel Patriotic & Proud?
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
Funny, when Nutbag Evangelicals are pushing there Theocratic agenda, lying is considered a "Traditional Value".
Read the Bible and say that this picture isn't at least 95% true
http://www.threeriversonline.com/bible_fiction.jpg
They called it "fistgate", but it seemed more of an attack on homosexuality then on the action, claiming gay organizations only promote sex and that Jennings seems to promote sex for children.
---------------------------------------
The Midnight Review
*The sole judge of whether or not a work is legally obscene shall be the average person applying prevailing community standards in such jurisdiction where the work is being challenged.
*The work in question must clearly and unambigiously depict sexual or excretory activities and/or organs in a patently offensive manner, in words and/or pictures.
*Taken as a whole, the work must be shown beyond reasonable doubt to both a) appeal solely to prurient interest and b) be utterly without redeeming educational, literary, political or scientific merit.
Come to think of it, what the Elmer Gantry crowd would just love to see is some socioeconomic backwater having an unwritten, "common law" standard of zero tolerance when it comes to obscenity for which to file a legal challenge of suspected obscene or indecent material, all the while taking advantage of the vulnerable and easily-led in such jurisdiction to (in theory) ensure a Pyrrhic victory--howbeit through bribery, witness tampering, suborning perjury and perversion of the "average person" test.
Then again, Miley Cyrus can make the disgraceful "Party in the USA" video and still claim to belong to a faith-based family, even as Clear Channel Music Group's proceeds from the album (available exclusively from Wal-Mart) go towards the same machine that pays Rush Limbaugh $80m a year, yet there are millions who'll never stop to ponder it. Maybe I opine and digress a bit much here but I don't think it's entirely irrelevant...
No, I had to read "Death of a Salesman."
Sex is a sacred thing between a priest and his alter boys.
.
.
These people are trying to protect these kids from something they already know about.
You are right about the curiosity of children, even at earlier ages than upper elementary. But as a parent, it is my job to educate and provide information so that what they see and hear about on the bus, in the playground is evaluated and discussed under my terms as a parent. What I don't want is for them to have to read or be taught things that I feel are age inappropriate about sexual relationships, that I have no access to.
I looked at those magazines when a pre-teen and was 'caught' by my parents. They took the time then to further provide information about the emotional impact on me those pictures had and to consider how the objectification of women was an unacceptable standard in my household. I already had been told by the them the logistics of and what the context of appropriate sexual activity was. However, they never had to fight against a teacher's efforts to alter or undermine the information that they were obligated to give me.
I do the same with my children and I am saddened that through media and other exposure, they have had to question much earlier than I would have liked as a parent. So much of their world is sexualized and I think they have missed out on the innocence of childhood because of it. But when asked,we've answered those questions and have emphasized tolerance and understanding. And in our families, we have homosexuals that we love and care about. We have discussed their situations with our children, why two aunt Sallys?, but when it was appropriate by our standards, not introduced by a teacher or advocate that tries to steal my job and my children's youth.
Thanks for reminding me that the 'state' is better equipped to handle the burden of parenting.
Nothing like socialism to determine acceptable conduct for it citizens, in areas of parenting, speech, vocation, thought and otherwise. Power to the (right kind of) people!
Speaking truth to/about progressives with a shout out to marxist social engineers.
You do know that the state can take away children from parents for neglect and emotional (not even physical) abuse, I presume. Is that "socialism"? If not, then isn't that "determin(ing) acceptable conduct for it [sic] citizens, in areas of parenting"? And if so, isn't it pretty absurd to say that parents should get away with that sort of thing because the alternative is a misapplied labeling of "socialism"? Of course, there's a degree to be determined as to what is reasonable for the state to do, but I'm not seeing that nuance in the phrasing of "the 'state' is better equipped to handle the burden of parenting".
If you really think society doesn't have a vested interest in sex education, tell me why. If you think they do, but they still shouldn't have any role in such education, that's insane. If society has a valid concern, then it has every right to apply reasonable measures to address it, and violating your personal sense of responsibility does not make them unreasonable. And if you do understand the need for sex education, and you just personally want to handle it yourself, then you didn't make that clear in your previous post. If that is the case, you'd be better served by clarifying yourself instead of puking out your predictable and obnoxious references to Marxism.
Thank you in advance for making some token effort at improving your sophomoric behavior.
since 'the state' obviously cannot do anything right, I presume you're giving up on those socialistic public roads and socialistic fire and police departments too?...
It's worth noting that most of the complaints about books noted above, etc had to do with a time more close to the law's passage that allowed parents to challenge how and with what their children were being educated. Most of the books shown remain in our school libraries but with a key difference, it is done with parental approval and with educators deferring to the rights of parents.
The dilemma with the glesn site and with some educators is that this information is provided for teachers to circumvent the rights of parents. The book link is for educators not parents and the warnings are for adults, not parents to review.
I have no problem teaching children tolerance for all/any individuals with whom they may differ, but demand for acceptance is another issue. What glesn does is to encourage educators to use these books to bring children into their worldlife view, outside of scrutiny any parent that might not approve. When caught having an agenda to sexualize children prematurely and 'normalize' (both non-typical& typical) sexual behavior, the perpetrators cry foul and complain of bias against their sexual orientation. The concern of most parents is that they don't want their elementary aged children being told about any sexual behavior, either straight or gay, at that time in their lives. It is making children 'hypersexualized' against their wishes.
The concern about Jennings, going back to his advice for a student engaged in an age inappropriate sexual relationship, is that he would give that advice without recognizing the rights of the child's parents to know what's going on. The reaction of reasonable people to this type of attitude is to mistrust and basically uncover the attempt to go around acceptable standards for parental involvement. To overexpose and desensitize kids to the consequences, responsiblities when engaging in any type of sexual relationship when emotionally and cognitively unprepared is reprehensible and certainly usurps the central role of parents in the raising of their children.
Speaking truth to/about progressives with a 'non-shout out' to everyone on National Silence Day
Got now?
Or do you need Barney the Purple Dinosaur to sing it to you?
Now quit listening to Rush the Fathead and the rest of the right-wing noise machine, and get some facts for a change, since the right-wingers like Rush, Beck, Hannity, etc. are laughing at you all the way to the bank.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I love the brainy repartee with the intelligentsia of the left with whom I sometimes engage on this site. Your concise utterance demonstrated the keen sense of insight and depth of wisdom that is so often articulated here by those who subscribe to the vapid and superficial views of the left. Good show man!
In the meantime, why would he suggest a condom be used if nothing sexual was going on between a student and an adult he met in a bus station bathroom and when home with him?
Hark, I hear tale of Jenning's exploits as a guidance counselor....
By the by chuckster, thanks for proving that when left with no salient point to reference, leftys go right for the name-calling.
Speaking truth to/about progressives with a shout out to everyone who would find sexual intercourse in a public bathroom something to be honored!!
Good grief. Now please, by all means, continue with your demeaning of MMfA regulars' brain workings. We love irony.
What in the hell is wrong with you?
And as far as Jennings advice to that age of consent student, as a teacher myself my students often confide in me things that are very confidential. I would be breaking the trust of these kids (that I care very much about) if I told their parents or any other faculty member and as a result they would never confide in any adult again. In my opinion if these kids are reaching out to me instead of their parents that means they trust me to give them good advice. Maybe they can't talk to their parents about these things. Maybe their parents are abusive and they would be beaten if the parent knew what the kid was telling me about. There are many issues a teacher has to take into consideration when dealing with students. It's not always a black and white issue.
And a side note, any teacher would confide in the school counselor (whose job it really is to deal with issues that put a student in danger) if a kid confided in me anything that would bring harm to that student or anyone else.
As a teacher yourself, you must have heard of the lawsuits filed under FERPA when teachers/administrators acted with 'disregard' to rules of the school district or of law. You walk a fine line when you keep important information from a parent and I know of people, good people, who have lost or jeopardized their careers when they promised to keep a student's secret.
I have worked with young people in a variety of settings, the groundrules are clear, critical information WILL be shared with parents. It protects me and them, too. Kids still talk to me and have come to me to provide an opening to bring parents into the dialogue. I can't imagine operating otherwise.
The books in question here aren't "great works" by any means. Maybe you should read them a bit and actually find out the kind of garbage you're arguing in favor of.
As yet, Gloria goes gay pride is probably not on anyone's list of the great works of time.
I am not asking to purge the libraries, just make certain like the one I list above, is not handed to kids without parental input. Most of the books that media matters (for very little) ids as 'banned' in fact remain on most school districts approved list.
What glesn does is to try to get educators to bypass parental oversight in these matters, forcing children to have to grapple with issues beyond their emotional abilities and without a parent's important perspective.
Meanwhile, in the real world...
'Nuff said. Either proudtobestupid is literally illiterate, or he's a outright liar. Since he's a conservative, either or both is possible...
"...you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance."
"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her."
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ."
"if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you."
"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."
"But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death"
" If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him."
Yup, that "Holy" Bible is chock full of good moral values! And I could go on and on and on and on...
Acts 2:21 This is a verse that still offers hope today.
21And everyone who calls
on the name of the Lord will be saved.
I trust that as you search the Word of the Lord, you too will be saved.
And if you don't believe me, prove that DtGPSR doesn't exist.
All hail Dave!
Randy
I don't have to because it's enough that you belief. And since we both have read each other's reference, mine from Acts your's from another source, we will just reflect on both and trust that truth hits our heart.
Remember Randy, you can call upon the name of the Lord anytime, anywhere and be saved. If not, I hope dave is up to the task.
DtGPSR sounds cool, but I would rather hail Zeus. At least he oversaw intelligent peoples who were at the forefront of the growth of philosophy, science, math, medicine and democracy. Unlike that Yahweh guy. All he oversaw was, ummmm, well, ritualistic, superstitious, ignorant goat herders who loved wars, wars and more wars. Oh, and he really hates gays too. But he is a just, loving god.
Tell you what, I will believe in your lord when all you Christians get together, and pray for some of my fellow service members who lost limbs, to have your god regrow those limbs like he does for his chosen one's: the salamanders. Once those amputees grow their limbs back solely because of prayer, I will believe.
Until then, don't pray in my schools and I won't think in your churches.
The great thing is you don't have to. But for some just knowing that when you do call out, He is there.
I wish the same for those who have been hurt, that they be physically mended. But I also believe that spiritual mending can be accomplished, a ready made miracle for everyone.
And I would agree, that school is no place to educate children regarding prayer. I teach mine at home. But, at any time, church is a great place to think carefully about what is happening in your life.
Yeah, you ask what they would rather have, their legs or "spiritual mending." There is no such thing as a prayer or spiritually induced "miracle." That is thinking for the ignorant.
At least tell me you don't think the earth is only 6,000 years old.
And I'm sorry, but nothing good ever comes out of thinking at a church, and not much good has ever come from religion, especially religious dogma. It was called the Dark Ages for a reason. And the Rapture mentality is bringing us back there again.
Your "good book" is the reason you dislike gays. Your god tells you to "love thy neighbor" unless they are gay or have different beliefs as you. Blind religious faith and the inability to confront religious dogma in a fair conversation is one of the biggest problems this country is facing right now. That and our horribly pathetic "news" media. All of it.
What I don't like is the attempt by glesn and Jennings to steal the youth and innocence of children by exposing them to sexual material too early and without input by parents.
As far as the bible, as I stated before, anyone, anytime can call on the Lord to be saved. No preconditions, correct politics or status, just call.
But its good to know you "recognize" human beings who are gay. How Christian of you.
As far as the fable thing....still if you ever need to......just call on his name.
Here's hoping you find true jolliness as the world celebrates a holiday with no basis for existing. :>
And by the way, there is more historical evidence for Santa Clause existing (St. Nicholas) than there is historical evidence for Christ (which there is no credible historical evidence outside of conflicting gospel stories). So, I guess you better rethink this holiday of yours.
Again, you can't prove a god exists, so you might as well stop trying. Its futile.
Nobody ever died from observing a teat or hearing an expletive. I can't say the same of being shot at.
Randy
No one is more militant than the global elites trying to push the anti-family agenda on these poor kids.
Yes s3x is in books, but not like what is described above for first graders.
No one cares about these people being gay, but please don't be exposing our kids to this stuff that their parents may not want them to see so early.
We shouldn't have to opt kids out of classes...we pay for the schools too.
Randy
Free speech is OK only when you approve of it I guess.
It was Obama's people who were trying to go around arresting talk show hosts for speaking against Obama during his campaign.
This administration is starting to reek of 1984.
But if I were to adopt the "progressive Taliban" POV, the difference is between the eradication of hate speech vs. "potty mouth" words. Problem is where do you draw the line. Some of those books described above use the word n/gger. Is the mere use of the word in a fictional or biographical setting harmful to children? No. But I think we all agree that children should not be allowed to use that word in school, as I can't think of a nice public forum usage, besides mere recitation, and many progressives balk at that. I don't. All words, however malevolent, have a place in the world, if only to instruct and contextualize history.
On the other hand, fukk and other "bad" words are really innocuous utterances, in books or spoken aloud, and the schools (and the conservative Taliban) need to lighten up.
Randy
Reminder: thou shalt not bear false witness. You have some confession to do, liar...
Forgot the question mark.
Randy
I know because I had to comfort a crying child in my class who discovered one that I hadn't yet found and removed.
:-P
Randy
One about a rolling donut comes to mind.
Recently, a PEACEFUL anti-abortion protester (who was sitting in a chair) was shot dead because someone on the left thought his sign was obscene (it showed an aborted fetus)
I guess he was not supposed to have freedom of speech.
No one ever died because they looked at a photo of an aborted fetus... Mr. Double Standard.
Also, a person in NH lost his column and radio show because he used a 'forbidden word' to describe someone who was gay, like all 5th graders might.
Double standard everywhere.. eh? It's only free speech if you approve of it I guess.
Also, there are many court cases citing that children in school do NOT have freedom of speech rights while in school, that the orderly conduct of the school comes first. I don't actually agree with that. So the double standard isn't mine, it's the court's.
Randy
However, I believe in separation of school and religion, and likewise separation of school and personal values... deal?
Randy
When you spin your story with inaccuracies, it doesn't help your argument.