carlimac

The only negative I feel is being told I'm going to the hot land down under. They don't seem to understand that that condemnation is offensive. I also don't relate very well to the verbage used.  But I admire their faith and absolute dependence on God.
 
One thing that really bugs me is a few LDS friends I have who have adopted the lingo of Evangelists and praise the Lord all over the place on facebook and Instagram.  I've talked with one of these ladies and her attitude is very much that we're too reserved in our praise of Jesus in the Mormon church ( which I disagree with). She spent many growing up years in Utah and despises the church there. Said she went inactive while she lived there, but reactivated in MN. She is very critical of anything Utah Mormonish.  She wears a cross and follows women pastors in Evangelists faiths in what feels like an attitude of "the Mormons (even though she is one) just aren't good enough for me". It feels like the same attitude of some homeschoolers towards public school families. 

Clearly, two wrongs make a right.
 
And, on a semi-related tangent: if two's good, three's obviously better.
 

Both sides are guilty?  Well, sure...so this doesn't matter?  That's too pat...too easy.
 
If a southern state government agency colluded with a traditional values lobbying group to bring punitive charges against an LBGT-owned business, such that they would be bankrupted--then refused to communicate with the press, while its representatives were consulting with said lobbying group, then let's see the evidence. 
 
And if such a thing happened, it should have been punished--as should the above referenced incident.
 
I agree that traditionlists have behaved badly, and that a lot of stories can be responded to with, "Yeah, we experienced that too."  This one seems over the top, though. 

The only negative I feel is being told I'm going to the hot land down under. They don't seem to understand that that condemnation is offensive. I also don't relate very well to the verbage used.  But I admire their faith and absolute dependence on God.
 
One thing that really bugs me is a few LDS friends I have who have adopted the lingo of Evangelists and praise the Lord all over the place on facebook and Instagram.  I've talked with one of these ladies and her attitude is very much that we're too reserved in our praise of Jesus in the Mormon church ( which I disagree with). She spent many growing up years in Utah and despises the church there. Said she went inactive while she lived there, but reactivated in MN. She is very critical of anything Utah Mormonish.  She wears a cross and follows women pastors in Evangelists faiths in what feels like an attitude of "the Mormons (even though she is one) just aren't good enough for me". It feels like the same attitude of some homeschoolers towards public school families. 

When I talk with PC, I feel quite positive about Evangelicals and Evangelical Christianity. When I talk to other Evangelicals, I find much to agree about and even feel brotherhood, until the topic of religion arises and I start being lectured on my cubicle in hell that awaits me, at which time my feelings become somewhat more negative.

Not to worry. It's only for a year. We'll be living in a community with a swimming pool. Lots to see and do during that year, then we'll be back in Idaho which is as dried up and boring and cheap as an old fig. 

When I was 13 I took it for granted that everything I learned in school was true, fact, proven.  If we have since learned that certain scientific principles have morphed or new ways of solving math problems have been invented, that didn't have much impact on my core belief system. I didn't even hear about Darwinism until college. That whole ideology was left alone because there was still respect for peoples religious beliefs at the time..  I, too learned about s variety of religions because I had friends who went to different churches. A course in Judaism or Catholicism wasn't entirely necessary. We did touch on it in history and social studies and that was enough to put those differences in perspective.  Nothing I learned in Jr. High conflicted with my religious beliefs which at that time were tender budding sprouts that could easily have been stomped on.
 
Most of my kids are grown and haven't had to deal too much with situations like this. But now this whole thing about gender fluidity crops up. It's not scientific. It hits hard right at the core, the root system of who these kids think they are. They are so impressionable at this age. My 12 yr old daughter's most frequent request in house hunting was to find a good climbing tree in the yard. For about 3 years she's been a typical tomboy who is now starting to act more feminine. These changes have nothing to do with her actual gender changing. Simply her preferences of how to play and expend her energy have changed. She would NOT wear pink or have anything to do with that color for years. Now her younger sister has picked up on that sentiment, too. Neither one of them have gone slightly boy on us.  To teach kids that is to teach a lie. And a pretty stupid one. 
 
I think teaching tolerance is very important!  But there is a better way to go about it than introducing this garbage into the curriculum. All they need to do is simply teach kids to be respectful. Not try to validate every changing whim these kids have as a fluctuation in their actual gender. I see this as being potentially very harmful for far more kids than it might help. Talk about messing with tender minds!  Ugh!!

It's been posited that at least some who say they felt same-sex-attracted at an early age might have simply felt different.  For boys, in particular, that differentness can be frightening.  It is easier to eroticize one's fear than encounter it.  Yet, every time there is a sexual encounter, the sense of not being part of the community of men only grows.  Today it is even easier for those who might be socially awkward, and who feel like outliers, to conclude, since they are repeatedly asked about this, that their differentness must be related to sexual orientation.  I'm not sure this is intentional grooming.  Perhaps it's just the post-modern quest for as much grayness as possible.

The world is so weird it is dizzying. I often wonder how many kids think they are (insert appropriate inner confusion) because of the hyper intense influence of the agenda driven crowd that perpetuate this type of (be sensitive Bytor)......................stuff.

Just to demonstrate how aged I am, I remember when parents had to opt-in for the controversial stuff.  Just sayin'

It will anyway but it's not just because of this kid. We have many enemies. 

It will anyway but it's not just because of this kid. We have many enemies. 

I toss this out for consideration.  At age 13, roughly 33% of girls are confused about what their sexual identity is.  Go figure, that many probably have not concluded puberty.  Consider also the cultural pressures to accept and empathize, along with the confusion about love vs. like vs. attraction.  Then there is the possibility that many who feel they are "different" are being steered towards the possibility that this differentness is due to sexual identity.  BTW, by 18 97% of females confidently identify as heterosexual.
 
It dawns on me that the correct answer to those surveys--especially when they are school-issued--is, "None of your business.  It is inappropriate to ask minors this question."

I don't like the death sentence but I don't particularly like the idea of criminals food and lodging being paid for by taxpayers til he/she dies a natural death. 

I appreciate these thoughts, Bini.But, speaking Merely from my own educational philosophy as an educator where school curriculum should consist of science and study - based core (yes, I'm a 3-rs kind of teacher), I can't get behind the idea of neglecting such core to teach popular social philosophy with no evidence and intolerance has nothing to do with it. Public school shouldn't be the place. Religion study as you had is at least a study of facts of culture. This program isn't. They even admit they have no material to create a curriculum. I appreciate your desire for teaching an open-mind, but when evidence-less lessons are accepted, they can bite anyone in the rear eventually.

When I was 13 I took it for granted that everything I learned in school was true, fact, proven.  If we have since learned that certain scientific principles have morphed or new ways of solving math problems have been invented, that didn't have much impact on my core belief system. I didn't even hear about Darwinism until college. That whole ideology was left alone because there was still respect for peoples religious beliefs at the time..  I, too learned about s variety of religions because I had friends who went to different churches. A course in Judaism or Catholicism wasn't entirely necessary. We did touch on it in history and social studies and that was enough to put those differences in perspective.  Nothing I learned in Jr. High conflicted with my religious beliefs which at that time were tender budding sprouts that could easily have been stomped on.
 
Most of my kids are grown and haven't had to deal too much with situations like this. But now this whole thing about gender fluidity crops up. It's not scientific. It hits hard right at the core, the root system of who these kids think they are. They are so impressionable at this age. My 12 yr old daughter's most frequent request in house hunting was to find a good climbing tree in the yard. For about 3 years she's been a typical tomboy who is now starting to act more feminine. These changes have nothing to do with her actual gender changing. Simply her preferences of how to play and expend her energy have changed. She would NOT wear pink or have anything to do with that color for years. Now her younger sister has picked up on that sentiment, too. Neither one of them have gone slightly boy on us.  To teach kids that is to teach a lie. And a pretty stupid one. 
 
I think teaching tolerance is very important!  But there is a better way to go about it than introducing this garbage into the curriculum. All they need to do is simply teach kids to be respectful. Not try to validate every changing whim these kids have as a fluctuation in their actual gender. I see this as being potentially very harmful for far more kids than it might help. Talk about messing with tender minds!  Ugh!!

When I was 13 I took it for granted that everything I learned in school was true, fact, proven.  If we have since learned that certain scientific principles have morphed or new ways of solving math problems have been invented, that didn't have much impact on my core belief system. I didn't even hear about Darwinism until college. That whole ideology was left alone because there was still respect for peoples religious beliefs at the time..  I, too learned about s variety of religions because I had friends who went to different churches. A course in Judaism or Catholicism wasn't entirely necessary. We did touch on it in history and social studies and that was enough to put those differences in perspective.  Nothing I learned in Jr. High conflicted with my religious beliefs which at that time were tender budding sprouts that could easily have been stomped on.
 
Most of my kids are grown and haven't had to deal too much with situations like this. But now this whole thing about gender fluidity crops up. It's not scientific. It hits hard right at the core, the root system of who these kids think they are. They are so impressionable at this age. My 12 yr old daughter's most frequent request in house hunting was to find a good climbing tree in the yard. For about 3 years she's been a typical tomboy who is now starting to act more feminine. These changes have nothing to do with her actual gender changing. Simply her preferences of how to play and expend her energy have changed. She would NOT wear pink or have anything to do with that color for years. Now her younger sister has picked up on that sentiment, too. Neither one of them have gone slightly boy on us.  To teach kids that is to teach a lie. And a pretty stupid one. 
 
I think teaching tolerance is very important!  But there is a better way to go about it than introducing this garbage into the curriculum. All they need to do is simply teach kids to be respectful. Not try to validate every changing whim these kids have as a fluctuation in their actual gender. I see this as being potentially very harmful for far more kids than it might help. Talk about messing with tender minds!  Ugh!!

When I was 13 I took it for granted that everything I learned in school was true, fact, proven.  If we have since learned that certain scientific principles have morphed or new ways of solving math problems have been invented, that didn't have much impact on my core belief system. I didn't even hear about Darwinism until college. That whole ideology was left alone because there was still respect for peoples religious beliefs at the time..  I, too learned about s variety of religions because I had friends who went to different churches. A course in Judaism or Catholicism wasn't entirely necessary. We did touch on it in history and social studies and that was enough to put those differences in perspective.  Nothing I learned in Jr. High conflicted with my religious beliefs which at that time were tender budding sprouts that could easily have been stomped on.
 
Most of my kids are grown and haven't had to deal too much with situations like this. But now this whole thing about gender fluidity crops up. It's not scientific. It hits hard right at the core, the root system of who these kids think they are. They are so impressionable at this age. My 12 yr old daughter's most frequent request in house hunting was to find a good climbing tree in the yard. For about 3 years she's been a typical tomboy who is now starting to act more feminine. These changes have nothing to do with her actual gender changing. Simply her preferences of how to play and expend her energy have changed. She would NOT wear pink or have anything to do with that color for years. Now her younger sister has picked up on that sentiment, too. Neither one of them have gone slightly boy on us.  To teach kids that is to teach a lie. And a pretty stupid one. 
 
I think teaching tolerance is very important!  But there is a better way to go about it than introducing this garbage into the curriculum. All they need to do is simply teach kids to be respectful. Not try to validate every changing whim these kids have as a fluctuation in their actual gender. I see this as being potentially very harmful for far more kids than it might help. Talk about messing with tender minds!  Ugh!!

Yeah, we're seeing the same thing happening in psychotherapy. I get around it by teaching my clients about solipsism and contextualism. In other words, they can believe they are whatever they want to believe they are, but they are going to have to reconcile those beliefs with both of what I teach them: something that simply can't be done.
 
It's unethical for me to engage in conversion therapy. It is not unethical for me to teach true concepts about human nature, reality, and existence.

Eventually this program will probably spread, as you say. Maybe not while your children are still in grade school, but as there's a chance, moving to a different area might not be a guarantee of anything. I would recommend homeschooling, but if that's not for you, plan on fighting the programs and lessons in whatever ways you can. Most of all, I would prepare to increase your teaching of correct principles at home and increase the encouragement of your children to be open about what they are hearing at school. Ultimately that is what matters most, because whether these messages are coming from entertainment, school, friends, or other influences.. they will eventually have to be faced by your children. And it hopefully might turn into many opportunities for them to bear testimony and stand for truth. Not an ideal situation by any means, but at least there are powerful lessons to be learned from what may (and probably will) come. 

I have a questioning mind. After all these years of talking with gays on this site, learning your viewpoints and trying to understand ( really I am)  I'm still trying to get my head around homosexuality being  something that identifies a person as any other inborn trait would. I think the first world especially has simply adopted the idea of sexual pleasure being the utopia of existence and that achieving it any way one can is perfectly justified, whether it's the usual way or not.  I think that has a lot to do with why boys who may idolize other boys or are attracted to them "become" gay. Not because they really are, but because of the messages in the world.
 
I just don't believe that you are either gay or you're not.  For example I have always been attracted to women- beautiful women. It's an aesthetic thing for me.  But those thoughts never took on a sexual tone to them because I was never exposed to, educated in or indoctrinated in that train of thought as a child or teenager. Had I been told as a young girl who idolized other women and girls that it was "normal" to also feel and want to be physical with them beyond a hug, I might have believed them.  I might have cultivated those kinds of thoughts and attractions till I actually became a lesbian in mind and practice. I think one can become what they are encouraged to become if they are pliable enough. And heaven knows there is plenty of encouragement by the LGBT crowd. I'm not saying everyone who identifies as gay or lesbian has been tutored to become that. But with the blatant message out there that whatever goes and there is nothing morally wrong with same sex relations, more people are "becoming " gay or lesbian than would otherwise.
 
I think normal, happy family relationships are pretty messed up and this is another impetus to form abnormal ties. People are afraid of family life.  
 
I also don't believe that it's a given that someone with attractions to the same sex and married to someone of the opposite sex will be a prisoner to misery. I do believe that at least a portion of our sexual attractions are taught and learned in society. One can indeed learn to enjoy things they thought they never would,  That is one of the reasons among many I am so against gays raising/adopting children. It plants the idea in their head that those actions are completely socially acceptable. The lie that it's OK with God is even perpetuated- making for some really messed up kids when it comes to learning to identify right from wrong as they grow up.  
I have to agree with others that state anything other than hetero sex is a lie of Satan to destroy humanity, Although those "stirrings", those tingling twitterpated feelings for the same sex occur, they can be played down and ignored and many people with those thoughts can go on to live happy, normal hetero  lives marrying and bringing children into the world.  That is exactly what Satan doesn't want. 

It is good to pray to God when we have questions/concerns/disires/anything else.  Great for you to take that noble step forward.

It is quite simple really.... 
 
He is violating the Law of Chastity (Sexual Relations are to be between a Man and Woman legally and lawfully married)
 
This is something he would have been taught growing up so it should not come as any surprise...
 
The fact that he goes off on other things he claims are "mistakes" made by the Church also point to the simple fact that he does not also share the belief that that Christ is leading the Church.  He is apostate plain and simple.  And that is entirely by his  choice and actions

I think that, subject to the laws of the land, any organisation has the right to set its own rules and decide who it will admit as members and whom it will disallow. I was disappointed recently when the blue foot club kicked me out when they found out that my feet are actually green. I think this is an example of blatant discrimination against people with green feet and shows a complete lack of acceptance, respect and love for green footed people. Maybe this rule is based on outdated stereotypes of green footed people, but they are the rules, and the rules of the blue foot club clearly state that only people with blue feet can be members. It may be that at some future time, the rules of the club will be changed to allow green footed people to be members, but that's not what the rules say at the moment. Until that time, I'll do my best to continue to follow those aspects of the club that I enjoyed and found to be appealing even though I no longer belong to it. And I'll do my best to to accept that my right to live as I want is just as valid as the clubs' right to do what it wants and not become angry or bitter about the club.

I'm not really sure what you mean by this. I posted this because I was curious as to the thoughts of others on how they would respond to my non-LDS friend. In context of the subject matter being discussed, the article was necessary to post.