# 'Don't say gay' bill has passed the Tennessee Senate



## smile72 (May 21, 2011)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43115864/ns/us_news-life

This bill forbids Tennessee public school teachers and students in K-8 from discussing the fact that some people happen to be gay. Though George Takei offers a suggestion.Anytime you need to say 'gay' say 'Takei'. "You could safely proclaim you support Takei marriage. If you're in a more festive mood, you can march in a Takei Pride Parade. Even homophobic slurs don't seem as hurtful if you say, 'That's sooo Takei.'"

What are your opinions on this bill?


----------



## prowler (May 21, 2011)

Well that's takei.


----------



## Paarish (May 21, 2011)

only in america


----------



## coolness (May 21, 2011)

gay gay gay gay gay gay gay gay gay


----------



## Another World (May 21, 2011)

smile72 said:
			
		

> This bill forbids Tennessee public school teachers and students in K-8 from discussing the fact that some people happen to be gay.



telling someone in the US what they can and can not say is unconstitutional. this bill is fucking bullshit. i personally feel that kids k-7 do not need to be discussing sexual orientation at all at their age, that still doesn't mean that you can ban an entire topic.

-another world


----------



## smile72 (May 21, 2011)

Another World there are people who are gay who should be mentioned in history class, such as in the Holocaust when gays were killed by the Nazis, my middle school history teacher left that out until I pointed it out, it looked like my history teacher winced in pain as she heard me say it. Before she was forced to agree with me.


----------



## The Catboy (May 21, 2011)

Another World said:
			
		

> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I am going to disagree. I think kids need to know about sexual orientation to really prevent this kinda stuff from happening and stop the ignorance in the future. I am not talking about sex or anything like that, just pointing out that there are people of different sexuality and they are the same people as anyone, who just happen to have a different sexuality. I feel as though people learning that later doesn't help and only causes the problems we have now.
I don't expect this bill to stay very long, it's completely unconstitutional.


----------



## Creqaw (May 21, 2011)

So what does takei mean? Or is some made up word?


----------



## RupeeClock (May 21, 2011)

Doesn't this basically violate free speech?
If we really consider ourselves a progressive species, then by all means the educated concept of "partnership" shouldn't be limited to "when a man and a woman"...

This sort of bill would prevent sexual education to cover the of homosexual relations, and it's a critical time for anyone who is unsure of their sexuality to receive the information.


----------



## The Catboy (May 21, 2011)

Django0 said:
			
		

> So what does takei mean? Or is some made up word?


George Takei


----------



## antwill (May 21, 2011)

Django0 said:
			
		

> So what does takei mean? Or is some made up word?


He's the gay asian from Star Trek. So I guess it's just people trying to make a joke by using some sort of a loophole.


----------



## smile72 (May 21, 2011)

No Cat Boy Takei said it himself to use the word Takei instead of gay.


----------



## smile72 (May 21, 2011)

Did anyone read the article, hell did anyone read pass the first sentence of my synopsis, hell it says George Takei offer a suggestion, (yes I know poor grammar).


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 21, 2011)

"Takei Pride Parade" made me laugh.

Hmm... Takei Rights, Takei Marriage, Takei Porn, Takei Bar, Takei Sex.

Nope. Still seems out of context.


----------



## antwill (May 21, 2011)

So I'm just guessing here but am probably correct in saying that Tennessee is a fairly religious state?


----------



## The Catboy (May 21, 2011)

smile72 said:
			
		

> No Cat Boy Takei said it himself to use the word Takei instead of gay.


No, I didn't get a chance to read it, I just woke up. So it's early for me.
On topic: Takei is still a strange replacement


----------



## smile72 (May 21, 2011)

Anything in the South of the United States is massively religious.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 21, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A Takei Little Catboy sounds so.... weird.

At least it rhymes. Imagine if "gay" was replaced with "nesbitt". Nesbitt Pride Parade.


----------



## smile72 (May 21, 2011)

Why? I think he's a fine replacement and makes word more fun to say "Takei Pride Parade", sounds so awesome!!!!


----------



## Nujui (May 21, 2011)

I don't understand that bill really. What's the point of it?

I even less understand why you would replace gay with takei


----------



## Clydefrosch (May 21, 2011)

cause actor george takei is a homosexual himself.

and if you ban the word gay, he suggests you say takei instead, since it isnt gay, but people usually know he is gay so they'd know what you mean by context


----------



## spinal_cord (May 21, 2011)

[youtube]dRkIWB3HIEs[/youtube]


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 21, 2011)

spinal_cord said:
			
		

> [youtube]dRkIWB3HIEs[/youtube]


I lol'd so hard. I dunno why, it's just... so funny. XD


----------



## Pong20302000 (May 21, 2011)

A Takei Little cat boy lol

cant believe some people but hey whatever floats there boat

glad George found a way to have a laugh about it


----------



## Nujui (May 21, 2011)

Clydefrosch said:
			
		

> cause actor george takei is a homosexual himself.
> 
> and if you ban the word gay, he suggests you say takei instead, since it isnt gay, but people usually know he is gay so they'd know what you mean by context


That makes even less sense.

"Hey, since we can't say gay anymore, let's change it to my last name! Everyone knows I'm gay, so it'll be alright."


----------



## BlueStar (May 21, 2011)

Duskye said:
			
		

> Clydefrosch said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Uh...  What part of that doesn't make sense?  Makes perfect sense to me.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 21, 2011)

Takei sounds extremely awkward. Really.


----------



## Nujui (May 21, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> Duskye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I just don't understand why people would change it to that. I'd rather just have gay, but hey that's me.

And plus it just sounds very weird.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 21, 2011)

Duskye said:
			
		

> BlueStar said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't think you get what the bill is about.


----------



## Shiro09 (May 21, 2011)

I find this bill Takei


----------



## Nujui (May 21, 2011)

KingdomBlade said:
			
		

> Duskye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I do know what the bill is about, it's forbid public school teachers and students in grades kindergarten through eight from discussing the fact that some people are gay. 

Which I don't understand either. So if I was a teacher/student and me and other people  were discussing that people are gay, I would be breaking the law?

It just seems to much really. If that was my school there in Tennessee, the whole school would be law breakers.


----------



## cwstjdenobs (May 21, 2011)

Lol. My 9 year old little brother already knows there are gay people in the world.

What's wrong with people, do they really think that discussing sexuality will make straight people gay? Because only going on about straight sex has always stopped gay people existing.

Love the "It's OK to be Takei" campaign.


----------



## leeday100196 (May 21, 2011)

See here in australia we don't care what we're called. So we go off our nuts at each other with 'gay' or '[censored]' or 'homo' etc etc but I don't see why in one country it's allowed and in another its banned, I think that's STUPID. 

and that's Leeday's Opinion of the Day.


----------



## Pong20302000 (May 21, 2011)

Lol
confusing time

Gay now replaced with Takei
Flintstones, lets have a Takei old time
Flintstones in was used in context: gay meant happy 
Geroge happy that Takei means gay
as Takei is gay

therefore 
Takei = Gay = Happy

so when your happy say your Takei


----------



## Nujui (May 21, 2011)

And of course it's allowed to talk about people being straight, cause that's totally fair.


----------



## BlueStar (May 21, 2011)

Duskye said:
			
		

> BlueStar said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



But if you're a member of staff or a pupil in a school in Tennessee you _cant_, that's the point!  If you're a kid and you want to ask a question like "Why does my friend have two mommys?" then I guess your teacher will have to respond with something like "THAT INFORMATION IS CLASSIFIED!"

So to get round it, the suggestion the kid can ask in a class discussion, "What should I do if someone is being bullied for being Takei" or whatever.

It's not all that difficult to get your head round.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 21, 2011)

Pong20302000 said:
			
		

> Lol
> confusing time
> 
> Gay now replaced with Takei
> ...


It's not the word "gay", it's discussion of homosexuality completely. SO, technically this is banned too.


----------



## Magmorph (May 21, 2011)

I feel pretty,
Oh, so pretty,
I feel pretty, and witty and.. takei


----------



## Nujui (May 21, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> Duskye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And I'll say it again.

"And of course it's allowed to talk about people being straight, cause that's totally fair."

I just hate it when things like this get passed.


----------



## BlueStar (May 21, 2011)

Duskye said:
			
		

> And I'll say it again.
> 
> "And of course it's allowed to talk about people being straight, cause that's totally fair."
> 
> I just hate it when things like this get passed.



Right - but you were acting like you don't understand George Takei's workaround.  It's not the people who made the law who are suggesting it.


----------



## Nujui (May 21, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> Duskye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I do know his workaround, I just rather have something instead of "Takei". Just sounds, like other people said, extremely weird.


----------



## KingdomBlade (May 21, 2011)

BlueStar said:
			
		

> Duskye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The workaround isn't going to work. Takei now becomes a reference to homosexuality. It's not the word that's banned, it's the discussion of homosexuality in general.


----------



## The Catboy (May 21, 2011)

Duskye said:
			
		

> And of course it's allowed to talk about people being straight, cause that's totally fair.


Because if we don't talk about homosexuality, it will go away. That's pretty much the basis of this law. 
I don't expect this law to stay very long, even in the Bible thumping South, they still have to follow the 1st Amendment.


----------



## Destructobot (May 21, 2011)

smile72 said:
			
		

> This bill forbids Tennessee public school teachers and students in K-8 from discussing the fact that some people happen to be gay.
> Not yet it doesn't. It only passed in the senate, not the house of representatives. If it does pass in the house the ACLU and various gay rights groups will challenge it in court, and almost certainly win a stay preventing it from being enforced until it has made its way through the courts.
> 
> 
> ...


No. Many countries ban homosexuality altogether, not just talking about it in school.


----------



## Magmorph (May 21, 2011)

What are you supposed to call bisexual people?


----------



## Nujui (May 21, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> Duskye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, I know, I don't expect it to stay either.


----------



## smile72 (May 21, 2011)

Destructobot, you did read the title right I said it just passed the Tennessee senate, i never said the governor signed it. I just said what the bill forbids.


----------



## SamAsh07 (May 21, 2011)

Takeiiii!!! Can I join the parade now?? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Seriously this is weird. Gay is better.


----------



## geminisama (May 21, 2011)

This bill is so freaking Takei.


----------



## GeekyGuy (May 21, 2011)

30084pm said:
			
		

> only in america



Hardly...I'll give you a moment to think about it.

But yeah, it is ironic considering our constitution is based almost entirely on a person's right to free speech. This is disturbing news, to say the least. Not surprising, but disturbing all the same.


----------



## Paarish (May 21, 2011)

GeekyGuy said:
			
		

> 30084pm said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I was mainly talking about the change from gay->takei

or should i say takei->takei


----------



## Jamstruth (May 21, 2011)

I want an "Its okay to be Takei" t-shirt now 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




For those not getting the whole "Takei" instead of "Gay" thing. The Bill is nicknamed the "Don't say Gay Bill" so he's proposing an alternative to gay AS A JOKE! He knows its stupid, he knows its awkward, he knows it doesn't get around the law but most of all he knows its FUNNY! And funny stuff gets it into the public conciousness/internet conciousness very easily.

As for the bill: Truly America is the land of the free.


----------



## The Catboy (May 21, 2011)

Jamstruth said:
			
		

> As for the bill: Truly America is the land of the free.


Sadly compared to most counties when it comes down to homosexuality, America is better than most. Some places like the Middle East, it's a death sentence.


----------



## Jamstruth (May 21, 2011)

Yes but they don't proclaim themselves to be the "Free World" where their entire society is founded upon equal rights for everyone.

And yeah, life for Homosexuals is terrible in the Middle East, Africa too for some places. Its that damn religion thing that causes it. In the Middle East at least. Its against the Qu'ran therefore illegal and punishable severely.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (May 21, 2011)

Takei is the fucking man. If he's not busy steering the USS Enterprise or running shirtless down it's halls with a fencing sword, he's making the best anti-bigotry ads and statements ever.


----------



## The Catboy (May 21, 2011)

Jamstruth said:
			
		

> Yes but they don't proclaim themselves to be the "Free World" where their entire society is founded upon equal rights for everyone.
> 
> And yeah, life for Homosexuals is terrible in the Middle East, Africa too for some places. Its that damn religion thing that causes it. In the Middle East at least. Its against the Qu'ran therefore illegal and punishable severely.


Yeah true, then again America has had a long history of just using one group of people after another as an excuse to ignore the real problems. Really that's all this whole issue is.
It's not about freedom since it was clear from the start that America was only going to hypocritically ignore those claims and just pretend to be the greatest place on Earth, only covering the ugly truth.

Ugg, I am not even going to derail this thread on how I feel about that.


----------



## Foxi4 (May 21, 2011)

U.S State Laws never cease to amaze me, and there's a handful of more ridiculous ones than just this one.

*In Reno, Nevada:
*


			
				QUOTE said:
			
		

> Sec. 8.14.040. Sale of sexual paraphernalia.
> 
> It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, offer to sell or display for sale any device, including but not limited to dildos and artificial vaginae, designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs.
> 
> ...




...and you're worried about "not saying the G word".


----------



## Hop2089 (May 21, 2011)

Lolipops banned in Washington D.C. lol

The world has no hope left in it.


----------



## machomuu (May 21, 2011)

Well the original meaning of gay isn't homosexual. Heck, it's not even the formal use.  It's jut it's most prominent use.  People know what it means when you say something's gay, I don't think it's wrong to say.

Just like black.  Black can be a color, something that it impure, or a minority.  I don't get offended when someone calls something that's ghetto "black", because that's an informal unofficial meaning and is not an insult towards me (and yes, I talk like this in real life, I am just the opposite of ghetto).


----------



## notmeanymore (May 21, 2011)

As much as I support the idea behind it, this is over-strict, and is going about things all wrong.

I honestly believe I'd have lived a better life had I never learned about sex in 5th grade.


----------



## KingVamp (May 21, 2011)

Guild McCommunist said:
			
		

> *Gay* is the fucking man. If he's not busy steering the USS Enterprise or running shirtless down it's halls with a fencing sword, he's making the best anti-bigotry ads and statements ever.











Pointless (yet funny). That like trying to change a state marriage to something else for gays, no it still a state marriage no matter the change of name.

If I want use marry for my union then gays should be able too. Sorry mind lock on another thread.

It still gay, it still takei, it the same no matter what. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




This is just silly. This is nothing,but unnecessary censoring.  

We should try to censor straight next.


----------



## Jamstruth (May 21, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> Well the original meaning of gay isn't homosexual. Heck, it's not even the formal use.  It's jut it's most prominent use.  People know what it means when you say something's gay, I don't think it's wrong to say.


Uhm... that's just the bill's nickname. It prohibits the discussion of homosexuality in schools (up to a certain age?) but not of heterosexuality. The gay/Takei thing is a device to gain interest in fighting the bill.


----------



## The Catboy (May 21, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> Well the original meaning of gay isn't homosexual. Heck, it's not even the formal use.  It's jut it's most prominent use.  People know what it means when you say something's gay, I don't think it's wrong to say.


That's not what this bill is about (although I do disagree when someone uses gay to mean something is stupid) this bill prohibits discussion about homosexuality in the school K-8 and pretty much means they will only focus on heterosexuality. Pretty much they are pretending homosexuals don't exist by just not talking about us.
As for what Takei is doing, he is mocking this bill to bring awareness to both the serious nature of this bill as well as how silly it really is.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

since no one has actually posted the bill, I will go ahead and do it!


```
SB0049
00120166
-1-


SENATE BILL 49
By Campfield

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49,
Chapter 6, Part 10, relative to education.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE:
SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 49-6-1005, is amended by adding
the following as new subsection (c) and by relettering the existing subsection (c) accordingly:

(c)

(1) The general assembly recognizes the sensitivity of particular subjects
that are best explained and discussed in the home. Human sexuality is a
complex subject with societal, scientific, psychological, and historical
implications; those implications are best understood by children with sufficient
maturity to grasp their complexity.
(2) Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, no public elementary or
middle school shall provide any instruction or material that discusses sexual
orientation other than heterosexuality.
SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon becoming a law, the public welfare requiring
it.
```

The general assembly recognizes the sensitivity of particular subjects
that are best explained and discussed in the home. Human sexuality is a
complex subject with societal, scientific, psychological, and historical
implications; those implications are best understood by children with sufficient
maturity to grasp their complexity.

translation: There saying that the correct place to discuss such matters is in the home, when the child is mature enough to understand such matters.  there is nothing wrong with that!

Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, no public elementary or
middle school shall provide any instruction or material that discusses sexual
orientation other than heterosexuality.
SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon becoming a law, the public welfare requiring
it.

translation: If another law is passed that explicitly states that children really need to know about sexuality in school systems, this bill permits it to follow through with it's designed intentions. Sexual education isn't taught in school in the state of Tennessee until high school. that's when my sister took the class. I myself didn't take sex ed until late in 8th grade in Kentucky.

really, should teachers be teaching a 10 year old how to put a condom on a cucumber?

edit:source 1, source 2


----------



## KingVamp (May 21, 2011)

Ok,but then that still not a reason to censor gay. If any censor is done then all
things that show/tell sexual orientation should be censored.

So they can discuss heterosexuality, but not homosexuality? 

If that how they feel then it should be not to discuss any sexuality.


----------



## Giga_Gaia (May 21, 2011)

So, they can't tell it at school. Big deal, people could just go out on the streets and call other people gays.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> Ok,but then that still not a reason to censor gay. If any censor is done then all
> things that show/tell sexual orientation should be censored.
> 
> it was a joke because Senator Stacey Campfield realized that it would be taken way out of context.
> ...



he said it‘s necessary because the state’s curriculum is unclear on what can be taught.


----------



## Jamstruth (May 21, 2011)

The Living Shadow said:
			
		

> Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, no public elementary or
> middle school shall provide any instruction or material that discusses sexual
> orientation other than heterosexuality.
> SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon becoming a law, the public welfare requiring
> ...


Actually it says that they can talk about heterosexuality only. Kinda discriminatory don't you think? Why should they be able to teach one sexual orientation to their "underage minds" while the others are deemed too complex and immoral to teach to them?


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

Jamstruth said:
			
		

> The Living Shadow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Have you ever been to Tennessee? I doubt it, but the moral construct is quite different to that of Europe, I can imagine. there are homosexual people in Tennessee but they are in the extreme minority, why would they take the time to teach something that a majority of the class has no need in knowing? where I lived previously, in the Knoxville greater metropolitan area. I never ran across one homosexual individual. like I said, those who practice homosexuality are in the extreme minority.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (May 21, 2011)

Many of the homosexuals in Tennessee are in extreme _hiding_.

(Or they live in one of the major cities where they can be more open)

They are indeed a minority, but they're absolutely there.


----------



## KingVamp (May 21, 2011)

It really that hard to say in a little section "There are people who go with the same gender (men with men and girls with girls,) but they can't reproduce.  You will learn more when you get order." or something?

It not like they didn't exist.


----------



## machomuu (May 21, 2011)

A Gay Little Catboy said:
			
		

> machomuu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh, I get it.  I did read the OP, I guess I interpreted it incorrectly.  Sorry for my ignorance, which on my part is hypocritical as well.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (May 21, 2011)

KingVamp: A lot of families here feel that teaching of that sort of thing should be done by parents rather than schools.


----------



## Jamstruth (May 21, 2011)

The Living Shadow said:
			
		

> Have you ever been to Tennessee? I doubt it, but the moral construct is quite different to that of Europe, I can imagine. there are homosexual people in Tennessee but they are in the extreme minority, why would they take the time to teach something that a majority of the class has no need in knowing? where I lived previously, in the Knoxville greater metropolitan area. I never ran across one homosexual individual. like I said, those who practice homosexuality are in the extreme minority.


So what you're saying is that because most people will never see one they don't need to know of their existance? What if they moved away from Tennessee to, say, San Francisco? They'd see a lot there, and how would they react?
If you don't teach kids about it it breeds confusion, and humans hate what they don't understand. If we teach kids about it hopefully we pave the way to a more understanding society in the future. What if one of the kids was gay? What if later they were weirded out when they started being attracted to guys because they were never told there was another sexual orientation?
I never came across a gay person until I was 14. I knew vaguely about them and I knew him before he came out and he's a pretty cool guy (though he DOES creep me out sometimes but I'd call out a straight guy on some of the things he says). Because I knew a bit about it, I just accepted it. If I didn't know anything about it I'd have been pretty darn weirded out by it.

The main problem with this law is that if you're gonna ban the teaching of Sex Ed in schools under a certain age then fine. That's entirely your thing. Ban all teaching of Sex Ed except for one side of it however? THat's just gonna cause trouble and be disciminatory.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> Many of the homosexuals in Tennessee are in extreme _hiding_.
> 
> (Or they live in one of the major cities where they can be more open)
> 
> They are indeed a minority, but they're absolutely there.



look, I don't have a problem with those who either choose, or are by birth homosexual. allot of my old friends from Tennessee feel the same way and if they where in fact, homosexual they know I wouldn't have a problem with it. There are allot of people in Tennessee, I lived in a town of less than 200 people after I moved back from Florida, right outside of Gatlinburg. There was no difference between when I lived in Gatlinburg, and the town I lived in after I moved back. I can't talk for the whole state, but I can talk from my own experiences. From what I have experienced, those who are either openly, or secretly gay when in a extreme minority.


----------



## KingVamp (May 21, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> KingVamp: A lot of families here feel that teaching of that sort of thing should be done by parents rather than schools.


Then heterosexuality should be to right?

@ Vulpes Abnocto (below) 

That doesn't seem fair. That like a homosexuality couple saying that their adopted kid shouldn't learn heterosexuality through the school.  

Any sexual practices should be taught by parents. 

Maybe I'm thinking about it too hard.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (May 21, 2011)

KV 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




I don't quite understand you.

But I'd say this was the basis of this whole bill being brought to light: that families didn't want their kids taught about alternative sexual practices by schools.


----------



## Foxi4 (May 21, 2011)

The way I see it, sexuality is a personal matter - if it should be taught or explained by anyone, it's by the parents, not the school.

The schooling system is supposed to prepare you to work in the society and find a fitting job that reflects your talents. Your sexuality has *nothing* to do with it.

I hate it when the government or the media take the responsibility off parents and put it on someone else. Actually, I'm leaning towards the "It's for the benefit of us all" side of the argument, even though these guys are insane in the first place.

Sexuality is not a thing that should be preached about, it's not something you can be taught. It's something you discover yourself at a certain age, and no ammount of sex-ed can change what's hard-coded into you. If confused, you should head straight to your parents or a specialist, not your teacher.


----------



## Nathan Drake (May 21, 2011)

What I find odd is that discussion can't even take play for the better part of their school lives. Are gay teachers supposed to oppress their own sexuality because of the ignorance that still exists throughout many parts of America? Do students have to further hide who they are?

Also, did people miss the part where *students* couldn't discuss it? Far more happens in school than just traditional learning.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> So what you're saying is that because most people will never see one they don't need to know of their existance? What if they moved away from Tennessee to, say, San Francisco? They'd see a lot there, and how would they react?
> If you don't teach kids about it it breeds confusion, and humans hate what they don't understand. If we teach kids about it hopefully we pave the way to a more understanding society in the future. What if one of the kids was gay? What if later they were weirded out when they started being attracted to guys because they were never told there was another sexual orientation?
> 
> I never said that, of course people know that there are people who are gay. everyone knows that there are gay people out there.
> ...



the child is sent home with a permission slip before he or she is taught about such things, if the childs parents want them to learn about such things, they can forbid the teaching of the class to the student, and teach there child as they see fit.



			
				Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> I don't quite understand you.
> 
> But I'd say this was the basis of this whole bill being brought to light: that families didn't want their kids taught about alternative sexual practices by schools.



Vulpes Abnocto, are you talking to me or KingVamp?


----------



## Jamstruth (May 21, 2011)

The Living Shadow said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Same thing happens here. BUT once again I say: Why is it that the school is forbidden to teach anything BUT heterosexuality? If the parents don't want their child taught about everything then they don't sign the slip and just teach their child what they want to. I'm struggling to find a way of saying it any clearer than I already have. If you're going to have Sex Ed at all why limit what it can teach when they already sign a permission slip to say they want their child taught about it anyway?


----------



## KingVamp (May 21, 2011)

I didn't even remember getting a permission slip when I first was shown heterosexual stuff in 5th grade. 
Nor it being color coded. It was a right in your face thing. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Unless it was that don't sign, then they can trick. 

Anyway shouldn't there be a permission slip to see both sexualities, at least on two different days?


----------



## Foxi4 (May 21, 2011)

Jamstruth said:
			
		

> The Living Shadow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'll give you the "key" analogy that I was humorously taught on Biology back in Secondary... or Primary... I don't remember, I found it funny.

"Y'see kids, this here is a door key, and this is a door. It has a slit - you put the key into the slit, turn it 'round and the door opens. You can jack the key into any orifice you deem necessary, might be fun, but only jamming it into the key hole will give you the desired effect - an opened door. And that's all you need to know about sexuality."

This is why only "hetero" is being taught.


----------



## purechaos996 (May 21, 2011)

GAY GAY GAY GAY GAY GAY GAY GAY GAY....U MAD?!

Trolling aside, What ever happened to that thing called FREE SPEECH! Ya know I'm sure that was probably one of the more important things in the constitution. >.> Stupid.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

Jamstruth said:
			
		

> The Living Shadow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If the mother or the father is in the opinion that there child should learn these things, then they have right to decline the class for there child and teach them these things on there own. Like I said earlier homosexuals are in the minority, the senate, house etc make the rules. this is the first time that it has been clarified what will be taught in the classroom, if someone else wants to introduce a bill, an amendment etc. saying that the children must be taught of these other forms of sexuality, they have the option to do such things. Let me ask you this, if there was a significant following for the rights of men and woman to preform bestiality, and it wasn't specifically stated in the bill. Would you hear an uproar about it? I'm sure there is a minority of individuals who preform sexual acts with animals, I don't think you would want children learning about that, now would you?


----------



## KingVamp (May 21, 2011)

So you comparing homosexuality to bestiality?

Gays are still in the same species last time I check.

@foxi4 After that "Some doors and keys like to do other things. Here a door and another door. Slam!  Here a key and another key. Ching! 






@The Living Shadow If heterosexuality can be taught school then homosexuality, which sexualities go hand to hand not like bestiality,
should be as well.

human to human sexuality =/=  human to animal sexuality to bring that up.


----------



## Warrior522 (May 21, 2011)

Foxi4 said:
			
		

> "Y'see kids, this here is a door key, and this is a door. It has a slit - you put the key into the slit, turn it 'round and the door opens. You can jack the key into any orifice you deem necessary, might be fun, but only jamming it into the key hole will give you the desired effect - an opened door. And that's all you need to know about sexuality."



*roaring applause*


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> So you comparing homosexuality to bestiality?
> 
> Gays are still in the same species last time I check.



No, I wasn't I was saying that parents have the right to choose what they want there children to learn about. 

I'm sorry if you misread that, or if I didn't come across clear enough.

edit: I haven't had anything to eat, I'll be back.


----------



## Jamstruth (May 21, 2011)

The Living Shadow said:
			
		

> If the mother or the father is in the opinion that there child should learn these things, then they have right to decline the class for there child and teach them these things on there own. Like I said earlier homosexuals are in the minority, the senate, house etc make the rules. this is the first time that it has been clarified what will be taught in the classroom, if someone else wants to introduce a bill, an amendment etc. saying that the children must be taught of these other forms of sexuality, they have the option to do such things. Let me ask you this, if there was a significant following for the rights of men and woman to preform bestiality, and it wasn't specifically stated in the bill. Would you hear an uproar about it? I'm sure there is a minority of individuals who preform sexual acts with animals, I don't think you would want children learning about that, now would you?


Sorry but...that is the most messed up analogy I have EVER heard. You are seriously comparing consentual sex between 2 humans to bestiality. I'm sorry but it doesn't work.
Yes, homosexuals are in the minority so are certain races. Are you saying that schools should not be allowed to discuss Muslims (for example) just because of that? I'll admit its not the best analogy but I doubt there are many Muslims in Tennessee either.


----------



## Nathan Drake (May 21, 2011)

I'm sure this has already been brought up, but, this has to be unconstitutional. I wouldn't be surprised if this made it to the Supreme Court for sheer ignorance if they were willing to fight it enough.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (May 21, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> I didn't even remember getting a permission slip when I first was shown heterosexual stuff in 5th grade.
> Nor it being color coded. It was a right in your face thing.



What heterosexual stuff?

I had to take sex ed way back then and they taught us about sexual organs and reproduction. They don't teach you heterosexual sexual activities, they teach you about reproduction and how to prevent reproduction. They don't teach you about the pleasure of sex, they teach you the science of it. And there's no real scientific benefit to teaching homosexual intercourse since you can't reproduce through it and you can't get pregnant through it.


----------



## Ikki (May 21, 2011)

Okay I'm going to say dick instead of chode because that totally changes things.


Seriously, what's even the point of this? It's just a different word used to say the same thing.


----------



## Jamstruth (May 21, 2011)

Guild McCommunist said:
			
		

> KingVamp said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Fair enough, but why forbid it? THis is where we got into, why forbid any discussions about homosexuality? Fair enough it might not be the topic of the lesson but the kids may have questions, questions that the teachers are not allowed to answer.


----------



## KingVamp (May 21, 2011)

Guild McCommunist said:
			
		

> KingVamp said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is one comment I may have to agree with,but

You didn't think there any science behind why man would go with man or girl with girl? 

Or a least teach safety to those who are homosexual? They still got stuff to look out for.

I guess what can happen during sex can cover that too,but there is no reason to ban homosexual talk.

You post before I though it out more clearly.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (May 21, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> Guild McCommunist said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Most sex ed courses cover STDs and say the methods you can get them (oral, anal, vaginal), so you know how to get it regardless of who your sexual partner is.

And the "science" behind homosexuality is about the same science behind being black, white, Asian, whatever. It's just there. You're born with an attraction to certain things, and some people are just born with an attraction to the same sex. It happens, and most people who are homosexual know it and either accept it or suppress it.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (May 21, 2011)

OBJECTION!

This violates the teacher's and student's rights to free speech. Say what you will about "derp derp, you can't threaten the president" Discussion of homosexuality in no way shape or form threatens anyone's Life, Liberty OR their Pursuit Of Happiness, whereas threatening the president does. Got it? Good.

Furthermore all this bill does is hide homosexuality. Hide it and pray the gay away, right? If you obscure a certain population of people by way of obscuring knowledge, you then do nothing but spread fear, misinformation and hate. People hate and fear what they don't know, and more often than not spread misinformation to make up for the lack of factual information.

Homosexuals are born this way, and most of the time get an idea about their sexuality well before the 8th grade. When you're "different", you tend to notice these things earlier than others. Obscuring the issue will only create tortured and confused boys and girls that don't know why they feel the way they do toward the same sex.

All this bill does is to perpetuate the gross UNTRUTH that homosexuals are somehow defective and don't deserve the rights of everyone else on this planet.


----------



## JonnyPoots (May 21, 2011)

A problem with the wording of this bill is "those implications are best understood by children with sufficient maturity to grasp their complexity." Sex is sex, only hetero- can lead to procreation. The other problem with the wording is the notion of hetero- versus homo-, as apposed to procreative vs. recreational. I'm not sure about sodomy laws in Tennessee (in Idaho they include anal sex between male and female to be sodomy), but could male/female anal be discussed as it is still heterosexual (edit: I understand this to be less likely for k-8 students but the question can come up innocently). Or is that, as far as Tennessee is concerned just "straits actin' like gays."



Oh, and hello all, im JonnyPoots, faceless for now, but not for long.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

Jamstruth said:
			
		

> The Living Shadow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Let me clarify what I meant, when I say that. I mean that if you grant the teaching of homosexual practices is school systems, you open the door to any and every which way sexual practice to demand to be taught in the school systems. If you grant homosexual education in one state where it isn't illegal, who's to say that those who practice the sexual measures of bestiality will not scream to have the same treatment in say, Washington state. Bestiality is legal in Washington state, shouldn't they have the right to demand that the children be taught these practices as well?

those who practice consensual sex absolutely have the right to perform such acts, like I said earlier as long as no one is forced to participate, or involves a child I could care less.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (May 21, 2011)

Bestiality? Really? That's the only argument you could come up with? 

Fuck this, I'm out like a fat kid in dodgeball.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

TwinRetro said:
			
		

> Bestiality? Really? That's the only argument you could come up with?
> 
> Fuck this, I'm out like a fat kid in dodgeball.



It isn't an argument, it's just a possibility. Everyone screams to have there fair share, right?


----------



## MelodieOctavia (May 21, 2011)

The Living Shadow said:
			
		

> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




People like you make me physically ill. I will not honor your arguments another response. In intelligent debate, it seems you have brought a spork to a swordfight.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

TwinRetro said:
			
		

> The Living Shadow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think you might have misinterpreted what I meant, I am not, nor will I ever be for bestiality, I mean that there will be some whack job out there screaming for his right to have his child and other peoples children rights to learn about said sexual acts.


----------



## palasx (May 21, 2011)

OK, WTF! I hate my country i really fucking do sometimes. Let me paint for you the mental picture that happened in my head so i can get it out of there before it causes my brain to ass-plode.

Student : "Teacher, is it true that ancient rome, ancient greek, the british monachry circa 1200-1600 a.d., the French, and a whole host of great people who contributed to the progression of humanity all had minorities that prefered same-sex, or homosexual, or GAY partnerships that they held in monogomy during their long healthy and happy lives?"

Teacher : "I cannot answer you. If i tell you the truth, if i TEACH YOU, i will lose my job, my benefits, and my family will starve because the government wants to punish me for sharing the truth my anyone not in high school. Also, that is a run on sentance, go stand in the hall and stop trying to get me fired!"

Other Student : "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!" 

Secretly Gay Student : (inner monologue)"OMG! I'm gay! That's so bad my teacher can't even talk about it in class! Im a horrible person. Since i'm gay, if i talk in class my teacher will be fired! I will stop participating, subsequently do badly in school, not go to college, and end up working at WacDonalds all my life, thereby ruining this great country even more! FUCK ME RUNNING!"


yeah, so thats how i see it. like i said, i hate my country a lot these days.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (May 21, 2011)

Then his or her incoherent ramblings will be drowned out by the vast majority that disagree with his mode of sexuality. Animals are not able to consent in the manner that we do. It's debatable that an animal would consent to having sexual intercourse with another species, but that's for another debate. One that I do not wish to participate in. The prospect, as I said, makes me physically ill.

It's pretty much the same reason NAMBLA/NAMGLA/etc... has never grabbed the public's approval (if it ever will)

You can't compare Homosexuality to any form of sexual deviance. Homosexuality is a sexual preference. Bestiality and pedophilia is a mental sickness.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (May 21, 2011)

You know, I'm alright with people in grade 7 learning the sexual stuff. My school taught me it at that year. I was okay with it. Hell we tried getting the teacher to say nuts instead of testicles lol. But to say "yeah, you're not allowed to say gay" you're basically teaching kids that there's no such thing as gay people. And when they finally find someone who's gay, it's going to be a shock. It's not going to teach tolerance or anything. It's not cool.

Sidenote: I didn't know Takei was gay. I love that guy, he's awesome!


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

TwinRetro said:
			
		

> Bestiality and pedophilia is a mental sickness.
> 
> QUOTE(The Living Shadow @ May 21 2011, 06:11 PM) some whack job out there screaming for his right to have his child and other peoples children rights to learn about said sexual acts.



that's what I was trying to say, there crazy and see this happening and demands that he have equal treatment, launch a lawsuit until either he won and they gave in lost in court.


----------



## KingVamp (May 21, 2011)

The Living Shadow said:
			
		

> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Homosexual and Heterosexuality is on the same coin. It all about human and nothing else in equation like bestiality which is another thing all together.


Homosexual and heterosexuality shouldn't be split. We all are humans.

Saying humans do animals is to far from them two. 

Say " Do you want you kids learn about men with animals? No then didn't let them learn about men with men" isn't going to fly.

If you still want to go that way then heterosexuality shouldn't be talk about either. 

Stop with the double standers with loose to no reasons.

Are you calling homos crazy?

I bet if homosexuality was the majority wouldn't even pull out that loose reasoning.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

KingVamp said:
			
		

> The Living Shadow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



no, I wasn't nor will I ever claim that they are crazy. 

You can't honestly say that there are people who are out there, that would scream for this to be taught in school if they thought that they had a chance?


----------



## Quietlyawesome94 (May 21, 2011)

The Living Shadow said:
			
		

> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Could someone point out to me where it says in the constitution that the state should teach kids about sexual orientation? This country has done just fine for the last 200+ years with this crap in schools (and look where  we are now that it is)

State,  you worry about more important things like national security and the economy.

Parents, you teach your kids what you think is right and wrong and let your kids decide what they are going to do with it.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (May 21, 2011)

Everyone with a claim to present to the courts have to be heard by the presiding judge. No judge would ever hear a claim that Bestiality should be legal and taught in schools. The case, and the man presenting it would be thrown out on his ear. Not to mention he would never find an attorney to represent his case.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

TwinRetro said:
			
		

> Everyone with a claim to present to the courts have to be heard by the presiding judge. No judge would ever hear a claim that Bestiality should be legal and taught in schools. The case, and the man presenting it would be thrown out on his ear. Not to mention he would never find an attorney to represent his case.



I'm sure there are attorneys out there who are either desperate enough, or corrupt enough that they would take the case.

edit: like  I said earlier, bestiality is still legal in Washington state, obviously there are judges out there who would hear and rule in favor of the dependent.


----------



## Foxi4 (May 21, 2011)

I see that the discussion is getting heated up.

I usually don't touch subjects like this with a 20-feet long pole, but this time I'll make an exception seeing that I'm drinking Red Bull Vodka and I don't really care.

Heterosexuality is the *norm*, it's how humans were designed to sexually interact. The only way to actually get offspring is to mix male and female D.N.A, thus heterosexual intercourse is conscidered "normal" behaviour.

Everything other than a heterosexual intercourse is a deviation. Don't get me wrong though - it doesn't mean it's wrong.

Homosexuality is *not* the norm, however, it is *not* harmful to anyone, thus it is accepted.

Pedophilia is harmful to the child, obviously, thus it is coscidered taboo and is not and will not be accepted.

Bestiality works the same way - you can't ask an animal for consent. Unless it's a dog-on-gal action, seeing that dogs are capable of doing anything from plush toys to tree stumps, the animal is probably not so happy that you're having intercourse with it. Ergo, it is harmful.

I could go on with other deviations, but that's not the point.

The point is that whatever flavour of sexuality you have - it's okay as long as it is not harmful to anyone.


----------



## BlueStar (May 21, 2011)

Children and animals are not able to consent by law like adult humans can.  The only reason people bring these things up is because they dislike homosexuality but they can't work out a logical argument against it.  It's easy, on the other hand, to make an argument against paedophilia or beastiality, so they try to switch the argument to that.

People do it on the marriage question as well.

"If you let gay people marry, people will want to marry their dogs!"

The logic being gay marriage will = dog marriage, we all agree dog marriage is wrong, therefore gay marriage=wrong

But it's the fact that heterosexuals can get married that means gay people want to get married.  So by the same token...

Hetero marriage will = gay marriage, we've established gay marriage is wrong, therefore straight marriage=wrong.

If you can't come up with a decent argument, just say 'I don't think kids should be allowed to discuss homosexuality in school because my brain has been transported into my head from the year 1858' rather than trying to twist the argument into something you can actualy muster up a coherent thought about.


----------



## Quietlyawesome94 (May 21, 2011)

Foxi4 said:
			
		

> I see that the discussion is getting heated up.
> 
> I usually don't touch subjects like this with a 20-feet long pole, but this time I'll make an exception seeing that I'm drinking Red Bull Vodka and I don't really care.
> 
> ...




AIDS?


----------



## smile72 (May 21, 2011)

Quietlyawesome94, AIDS, is only in a small minority of the gay community, you idiot. It's mainly prevalent among straight blacks in Africa.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 21, 2011)

oh, didn't you hear?

edit: post's been removed, but short explanation of my post, A man has been cured of aids due to gene manipulation.


----------



## smile72 (May 21, 2011)

Quietly, I remember how well that went for African Americans post Reconstruction in the South, I remember hearing in history class about lynching, oh and there was a lot more bullying and harassment of gay men by straights before there were representations of gays on television, and in schools.


----------



## TLSS_N (May 22, 2011)

well, I've said my piece and this topic doesn't seem to be going anywhere anymore. seems dead so I'll come back later and check it out.

bye, all.


----------



## FAST6191 (May 22, 2011)

"it's how humans were designed to sexually interact"

I will first acknowledge the rest of your post.

On the quoted section you might have some willing to debate you on that-
Short version
As far as procreation goes sure but along the way society formed as a coping mechanism against physics as it were thus procreation can surely not be considered even really as a limit of human sexual practice.

Regarding science itself on a purely mechanical line of thought maybe but biology and indeed all of science is predicated upon multiple systems interacting to produce a larger work.

Equally the nature vs nurture debate seems to have been skipped over- I am quite happy to accept people are born to grow or at least have a very high probability of growing into one of the many sexual preferences but to exclude of all other mechanisms is not something I can get behind.
Not wishing to bring any negative connotations the basis for this logic as I am too lazy at present to go looking for some direct research is some of the stuff that has gone into drug addiction- genetic, social and other factors all have prominent roles in such things.

Re: "children being "confused" by those having parents or multiple parents of the same sex"- is this not the point of education in such matters? Also parents not together/with other partners, single parents, 3 or more parents as it were- how to explain this or even if it is necessary to preface any of it.
I should also mention something along the lines of children are not necessarily small people- their minds work somewhat differently (see most literature aimed at children).

As for other things touched upon
Parents rights are tricky- we have schools and syllabuses precisely to try and ensure those wandering into the world have an understanding of how things work. I am not sure quite how this concession with regards to sexuality was allowed to remain but this might be tangential to the debate or involve politics (I agree that, probably for worse, that it would be political suicide to try and remove the parental ability to prevent such things from being taught).
Case(s) in point we all point and laugh when people attempt to refuse to have their children taught evolution, we all shake our heads when they try to prevent them from learning of other religions/histories, most will quite happily defend those who fail to acknowledge some of the religion based higher education establishments and I will also throw in those who try to prevent vaccinations. Short version- things born of ignorance are not typically celebrated as milestones of civilisation.
I will lob this debate, such that it is, into that mix.

Re: minorities can be left for later. This to my mind is dangerous as it is close to if not outright downplaying of things which can be quite damaging- see people lambasting US news for dedicating a comparatively small amount of time to places other than the US and [current US led warzone] or indeed returning to education for a moment the criticism levelled at the US education system regarding the "average" knowledge of non US geography, healthy eating, non US history, languages and similar things (not wishing to pick on the US much- the same charges are often levelled at most first world countries).


----------



## _Chaz_ (May 22, 2011)

I don't get it, what's wrong with the word "gay"?
This seems much more offensive than just allowing people to say the word "gay". It's like censoring a culture.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (May 22, 2011)

_Chaz_ said:
			
		

> I don't get it, what's wrong with the word "gay"?
> This seems much more offensive than just allowing people to say the word "gay". It's like censoring a culture.




If you read the article, or the bill itself, it's not just the word, but discussing Homosexuality altogether that has been barred.


----------



## _Chaz_ (May 22, 2011)

TwinRetro said:
			
		

> _Chaz_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So it's not like censoring a culture... it IS censoring a culture.


----------



## Foxi4 (May 22, 2011)

Don't worry Twin.

Homosexuals proved to be quite skilled in always finding a way to the "backdoor".


----------



## Ikki (May 22, 2011)

NVM


----------



## Shabutie78 (May 22, 2011)

30084pm said:
			
		

> only in america


can't tell if trolling or just extremely retarded.

let me fix it for you.

only in america
and afghanistan, and iraq, and iran, and lebanon, and nigeria, and sri lanka, and uganda, and egypt, and costa rica, and about 30 other primarily african countries.
americans don't always (if ever) agree with american government. that's a very common misconception among you euro teens.


----------



## Foxi4 (May 22, 2011)

Shabutie78 said:
			
		

> 30084pm said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



...why do you even compare the US to third-world countries?

That's like... worse than the post you're responding to. That's like being happy with bathing in crap instead of having a shower of mud.


----------



## DSGamer64 (May 22, 2011)

Another World said:
			
		

> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And telling someone they can't marry someone that they love just because of sexual orientation should be unconstitutional as well, but so long as you have a bunch of right wing Jesus loves me pro war anti marijuana gun slinging hicks constantly bitching about same sex marriage, there will never be social progress in the US. Maybe if you had some politicians with the balls to tell those kinds of people off, we wouldn't have people crying foul over homosexuals not getting their rights from the government.


----------



## DSGamer64 (May 22, 2011)

Foxi4 said:
			
		

> Shabutie78 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The way Americans treat homosexuals is the same way some Arabic nations treat their women, which is like absolute garbage. There will never be equality anywhere until women and men are treated equally in every aspect of society and same sex marriage is accepted by governments. Social progress will never happen so long as people think it's acceptable to shove their ideals down our throats because they happen to be religious and it's something they don't like.


----------



## machomuu (May 22, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Uh...why do you say "they"?  You're American, too.


----------



## DSGamer64 (May 22, 2011)

You should learn to read better then. Why would I want to live in a country with such horrible ignorance towards it's own people? Sure, my government doesn't support same sex marriage, but then again they are also a bunch of right wing idiots as well.


----------



## machomuu (May 22, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> You should learn to read better then. Why would I want to live in a country with such horrible ignorance towards it's own people? Sure, my government doesn't support same sex marriage, but then again they are also a bunch of right wing idiots as well.


America isn't a country...are you trolling?


----------



## Sheimi (May 22, 2011)

Wow, really. Seems like they are taking my rights away...I just don't see whats wrong with the word "gay"


----------



## DrOctapu (May 22, 2011)

Forbid discussing religion until the 9th grade. I'm sure that'd go over well with them.


----------



## trumpet-205 (May 22, 2011)

What happened to the freedom of speech?


----------



## Foxi4 (May 22, 2011)

trumpet-205 said:
			
		

> What happened to the freedom of speech?



What's up with people demanding it?

You have the freedom of speech and others have the freedom of not listening to what you have to say because they don't care. Freedom of speech is a tired concept - whenever something's banned, people throw the freedom of speech card like it's the answer to every single problem of the world.

Sexual orientation is not a matter of scholar discussion - you discover it when you grow up. Schools just explain how it's "meant to be done" a'la nature's design, that's all.


----------



## DSGamer64 (May 22, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> DSGamer64 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Clearly you can't read anything in regards to the fact that I am not American. Stop posting, you are wasting bandwidth with your nonsense.


----------



## Foxi4 (May 22, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> machomuu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He meant that America is not a country but a continent, and you happen to inhabit it. You're Canadian, aren't you?


----------



## DSGamer64 (May 22, 2011)

trumpet-205 said:
			
		

> What happened to the freedom of speech?



Freedom of speech is the biggest bunch of BS in the US constitution. People cry foul over censorship and whine about not getting their free speech when they say something that is nothing more then bigotry, ignorance or racism. There is no such thing as free speech, because if you could freely speak exactly what you wanted to, anything related to race, gender or sexual orientation would not likely get you arrested.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (May 22, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> trumpet-205 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I would ask you kindly to please refrain from posting such ignorant statements about a country you don't even live in.


----------



## DSGamer64 (May 22, 2011)

Foxi4 said:
			
		

> DSGamer64 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What does my post that he quoted have anything to do with America not being a country? Absolutely nothing. 

Clearly people don't understand how things can be implied, either that or they are too stupid to comprehend proper uses of the English language in order to converse. Americans are ignorant towards their own people, because of things like race and sexual orientation, clearly some people can't read between the lines and understand what someone is saying despite the fact that it's very easy to understand. Kids need to go back to school and stop spending all their time on forums until they can learn to comprehend the English language properly.


----------



## JoostinOnline (May 22, 2011)

Lol, does this mean teachers/students can't quote the bill when in Tennessee?  I imagine it says "gay" somewhere.


----------



## DSGamer64 (May 22, 2011)

TwinRetro said:
			
		

> DSGamer64 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Right, why should I? You know it's true. You can't have freedom of speech without having whatever you say having negative implications. Be thankful you have the right to vote, many people in this world don't.


----------



## Foxi4 (May 22, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not that I want to argue with ya, but if several people that are native english speakers don't really get what you're saying, it is likely that there's something wrong with the way you're trying to grasp your point rather than their reading comperhension.


----------



## JoostinOnline (May 22, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Freedom of Speech does not include slander, and a lot of people don't understand that.  They think it's okay to say whatever they want.

However, I do think that this bill goes against the Constitution, since "gay" is not slander.


----------



## DrOctapu (May 22, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's a good thing, dude. That's what it's meant for. Would you rather live in a world were only one opinion could be voiced?


----------



## MelodieOctavia (May 22, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Since you seem to know everything about a country you have absolutely no stock in, I would assume you have heard of Inalienable Rights...that is to say the rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? These rights trump ANY constitutional amendments including Freedom of speech. Chew on that one for a bit before you start slapping on the keyboard, yeah? I'm sure you're smart enough to put 2 and 2 together.


----------



## DSGamer64 (May 22, 2011)

JoostinOnline said:
			
		

> DSGamer64 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No it's not slander, just goes to show you that politicians are dumb. The problem with society today is that everyone is afraid that whatever they might say will hurt someone else's feelings, which I disagree with. I mean you look at Christmas time now, everyone says 'holiday party' and 'holiday shopping' instead of using the word Christmas (at least here anyway, I am sure it happens in the US though). I mean, people need to grow some skin really, if they are that offended to traditions and things that were once considered acceptable, then just ignore it or turn off your TV's and live like hermits. Canada seems to be a bit gungho on making the butt hurt people happy, they banned a 31 year old song before it was radio edited because it contained a slang for gay people, but in 1980 the word in question was not considered to have the same negative connotations as it does now. That song was Money for Nothing by Dire Straits, great tune actually. The point is, if people are so hurt over simple things like this, then they should just lock themselves away or something and ignore the world.

I personally avoid the use of the word 'gay' when possible, but mainly for referencing something silly or dumb, not the people.


----------



## trumpet-205 (May 22, 2011)

WOW.

I'm totally amazed because of what I said freedom of speech there is this huge flame war going on.

I never intended to use "freedom of speech" to say that everything is permitted.

But I'm sure people can all agree that gay or homosexual should not be limited for discussion just because of some opinions and/or politics.


----------



## Valwin (May 22, 2011)

the more they want people not to say it the more it will be say  i will say as much as i want


----------



## machomuu (May 22, 2011)

DSGamer64 said:
			
		

> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You said the words "why would I want to live in a country..." and were referring to America when you said that.  But America's not a country, it's a continent.


----------



## vincentx77 (May 22, 2011)

Interesting discussion... I'm so sorry I came late to the dance. After reading ten pages of responses, I have a couple of opinions.

First, I think it's reasonable to assume, at least in the confines of this discussion, when someone says America, (s)he is referring to the US. There are two American continents, so if you're going to be THAT anal about it, you need to be more specific in your ranting.  

Next, as a gay person living in the south, more specifically right next door to Tennessee , I can assure you that we are everywhere. Johnson City has a gay club that's popular enough that the folks in Western North Carolina and the other surround areas flock to it. I know TN is a bit back backwards, but I didn't realize they still had these kinds of issues. 

Most kids have some form of sex ed when they are 10 years old (5th grade, I think). Most kids have already started talking about sex with each other before that. Some kids have already started experimenting. Others will do it soon after. It is a fact that most parents don't properly educate their children about sex. It is a fact that people, in general, who haven't been properly educated about sex have higher instances of unwanted pregnancy and STDs. That's even higher in young adults and adolescents. Add to that LGBT children/teens (yes, they exist) have an even more difficult time ascertaining correct information, I know there are a lot of parents who think that sex should only be taught in the home, and sadly, most of those people are the ones who don't ever actually do the teaching.

And saying that you can't discuss homosexuality in a non-sexual circumstance is just silly. Pretending something isn't there doesn't make it go away.


----------



## Shabutie78 (May 22, 2011)

Foxi4 said:
			
		

> ...why do you even compare the US to third-world countries?
> 
> That's like... worse than the post you're responding to. That's like being happy with bathing in crap instead of having a shower of mud.


it doesn't matter if a country is a third world country or not. countries, cultures, vary from place to place.
also, i wasn't comparing the US to the other countries. i was naming other countries where stuff like this happens. my point is, it's not uncommon - and it's not only in america.
it's true, it sucks that this kind of thing happens, and it's a bit embarrassing that our (american) homosexuals receive treatment comparable to those of third world countries, but we don't always agree with our government. so no, i'm not happy with bathing in shit over mud. i want to get the fuck out of this country.


----------



## JoostinOnline (May 22, 2011)

trumpet-205 said:
			
		

> I'm totally amazed because of what I said freedom of speech there is this huge flame war going on.
> Don't worry about it.  If you didn't say it, someone else would and we would be at the same point.
> QUOTE(machomuu @ May 21 2011, 11:42 PM) You said the words "why would I want to live in a country..." and were referring to America when you said that.  But America's not a country, it's a continent.


If we are getting technical, "America" isn't a continent either.  North America and South America are continents.  If someone says "America", they mean "the United States of America".


----------



## Shabutie78 (May 22, 2011)

JoostinOnline said:
			
		

> If we are getting technical, "America" isn't a continent either.  North America and South America are continents.  If someone says "America", they mean "the United States of America".


i think he was just getting overtechnical (nitpicky) to further try to prove his point.


----------



## machomuu (May 22, 2011)

JoostinOnline said:
			
		

> machomuu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Actually I was being deadly serious and not technical at all.  Ignorance pisses me off.


----------



## BlueStar (May 22, 2011)

People in the UK may find this debate brings back memories of the passing and repeal of Section 28

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28


----------



## Destructobot (May 22, 2011)

machomuu said:
			
		

> JoostinOnline said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have to agree. If Tennesseeans are americans, Mexicans are too, what with Mexico being a state (i.e. nation) in the Americas and all. The whole "America means USA" thing has always pissed me off. Venezuela (run by super-commie Hugo Chávez) is also an American state. Not part of this particular union, but a state in the Americas nonetheless.


----------



## FAST6191 (May 22, 2011)

I will ignore the debate on the dictionary instead pointing at vincentx77's post as it says most of what I might.

It occurred to me that I never picked apart the would be bill. Nod due to The Living Shadow for sparing my lazy self the effort of wading through the minefield that is most US legislation. Afraid I am too lazy to grab the existing legislature to see if this is a net benefit or not (by the looks of things it is not though).


```
SB0049
00120166
-1-


SENATE BILL 49
By Campfield

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49,
Chapter 6, Part 10, relative to education.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE:
SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 49-6-1005, is amended by adding
the following as new subsection (c) and by relettering the existing subsection (c) accordingly:

(c)

(1) The general assembly recognizes the sensitivity of particular subjects
that are best explained and discussed in the home. Human sexuality is a
complex subject with societal, scientific, psychological, and historical
implications; those implications are best understood by children with sufficient
maturity to grasp their complexity.
(2) Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, no public elementary or
middle school shall provide any instruction or material that discusses sexual
orientation other than heterosexuality.
SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon becoming a law, the public welfare requiring
it.
```

Picking apart (1) I already doubted the need for parental overview 

Historical implications is an odd one to my mind- certainly it would not do to forget history and especially not in this area. However it seems it will require some serious tact to teach properly. I would hate to be the first prosecutor to try and nail someone for falling short here too.
If anything the whole statement almost looks like a call for a comprehensive/cross field teaching of such matters rather than the scientific principles and "don't do it" that presently passes for education.

"those implications are best understood by children with sufficient maturity to grasp their complexity"
Interesting- I have issues with the practice but are not most other subjects taught at highly simplified levels and complexity piled on and subjects linked together as things move forward?

Onto (2)
"that discusses sexual orientation other than heterosexuality"
I believe we have already dismissed this statement and I have nothing that will further the discussion on that at this point but I will note the clever wording- whether it was intentional (someone appreciates that orientation is a spectrum) or not (someone liked some more poetic language or maybe working with a twisted version of political correctness) I will leave to others to debate (it will probably require looking at early discussion or first drafts of the thing).

@ BlueStar thanks for the parallel- it had not crossed my mind primarily as the LEA's and/or schools I found myself the subject of seemed to ignore it. That or the textbooks were so ancient that they fell before the law.


----------



## ZAFDeltaForce (May 22, 2011)

While I agree it's beneficial for children of gay/Takei parents to avoid verbal bullying, I'd say it's taking things a little too seriously.

That said, if anyone chooses to be Takei, I'd say they also choose to be labelled as such. So what's wrong with accusing Takei people of being Takei? I don't think there's anything offensive about discussing how people happen to be Takei anyway

Of course what I'm saying is not similar to the scenario of an African American/British/etc being labelled as _that _derogatory term. They, like members of every other race, did not choose to be a member of such a race and so do not choose to be labelled as such


----------



## BlueStar (May 22, 2011)

ZAFDeltaForce said:
			
		

> While I agree it's beneficial for children of gay/Takei parents to avoid verbal bullying, I'd say it's taking things a little too seriously.
> 
> That said, if anyone chooses to be Takei, I'd say they also choose to be labelled as such. So what's wrong with accusing Takei people of being Takei? I don't think there's anything offensive about discussing how people happen to be Takei anyway
> 
> Of course what I'm saying is not similar to the scenario of an African American/British/etc being labelled as _that _derogatory term. They, like members of every other race, did not choose to be a member of such a race and so do not choose to be labelled as such



I don't think you get the purpose of the bill.  It's not to stop people calling gay kids gay.  It's to stop teachers telling children about homosexuality, or children having their questions about the subject answered.


----------



## _Chaz_ (May 22, 2011)

I'm really tired of people saying that Americans are homophobic.

Unless you directly mirror all of your country's politicians, I suggest you stop thinking we all do.


----------



## rastsan (May 22, 2011)

provide any instruction or material that discusses sexual orientation other than heterosexuality.  

So my nephews the one who is 7 cannot discuss his own relatives sexual orientation (if he lived there, not that he can anyways catholic school).  

another real good point they should have thought of-
Strange But for all the real bad perverts out there... not being able to instruct the student that - that person should not be touching them that way or doing that very specific thing to them....
not being able to discuss anything other than heterosexuality.
americans can just be so silly sometimes.


----------



## _Chaz_ (May 22, 2011)

rastsan said:
			
		

> provide any instruction or material that discusses sexual orientation other than heterosexuality.
> 
> So my nephews the one who is 7 cannot discuss his own relatives sexual orientation (if he lived there, not that he can anyways catholic school).
> 
> ...


You're Canadian, you're American.


----------



## smile72 (May 22, 2011)

He is North American, only slightly American. I'm completely American, kinda. No it's mostly Republicans and southerners in the bible belt. The ones who believe the best way to prevent teenage pregnancy is to teach abstinence or to not talk about sex at all.


----------



## Fishaman P (May 23, 2011)

WTF.


----------



## Schlupi (May 23, 2011)

This is sickening. I am tired of these ignorant and discriminate laws being passed and I think people should grow the fuck up.


----------

