Hundreds of Muslim parents protest school in Britain over LGBT curriculum

First topic message reminder :


Hundreds of Muslim parents and their children – dressed up as superheroes – protested outside a primary school in Britain on Thursday against planned lessons on LGBT rights.

More than 200 protesters organized the demonstration against Parkfield Community School in Birmingham over the school program called “No Outsiders” that includes teachings about homosexuality, including same-sex relationships and marriages, and challenges homophobia.

The organizers accused assistant head Andrew Moffatt, who is gay, of promoting LGBT rights against the wishes of the parents, who carried placards reading “Say no to sexualizing children” and “respect and be respected.”



https://www.foxnews.com/world/hundreds-of-Muslim-parents-protest-school-in-britain-over-lgbt-curriculum

Raggamuffin wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

I think you will find most CofE schools are highly sought after. People move house and a lot of atheist parents will pretend go to church to just qualify for sending their kids there

Go away and grow a pairs balls and say what you mean, because what I think you mean is that you want to ban Islamic faith schools but don't want to rock the boat with your best friend - sexymama.

And yes it is the same.

This brings us full circle to who is right and who is wrong.

Muslims think homosexuality is sinful and don't their kids taught about it so they want it banned

Your view seems to be that they are wrong because you disagree with them, do you grasp the concept that from their perspective they are in the right for wanting it banned.

Its the exact same way you declare yourself right when it comes to banning faith schools, whereas the people who use these school will say you are wrong.

Its fascinating to watch you completely miss how you are viewing each other through the same lens of bigotry and intolerance for each others lifestyle, all the whole proclaiming that you only want to ban each other because they are the bigots.

You may as well be the same people

Some very good points there. It simply all comes down to opinions and beliefs in the end. If the Government makes a decision you agree with, you think they're great. If they make one you don't agree with, you think they suck.

Yes that’s very true.

Schools with a religious character or 'faith schools' as they are commonly known, account for around a third of our publicly funded schools in England and Wales. Scottish and Northern Irish schools are still divided along sectarian lines.

We oppose faith schools in principle. Parents are entitled to raise their children within a faith tradition, but they are not entitled to enlist the help of the state to do so. The state should not fund proselytisation or allow the schools it funds to inculcate children into a particular religion.

There are other reasons why organising children's education around religious identities is a bad idea. Separating children along such fundamental lines of difference is divisive and leads to religious, ethnic and socio-economic segregation.

To make matters worse, many faith schools can discriminate against pupils and teachers who do not share the faith of the school.

Despite a consistent and dramatic decline in church attendance, and a growing majority of non-religious citizens, successive governments have paved the way for ever greater religious involvement in education, often to the detriment of inclusive community schools. Data from the House of Commons library shows that the proportion of state faith schools increased in England between 2000 and 2017 - from 35% to 37% at primary level and 16% to 19% at secondary level.

This seriously limits choice for parents who do not want a religious education for their children, or do not share the faith of the local school. Indeed our research has shown that 18,000 families were assigned faith schools against their wishes in England in 2017 alone.

https://www.secularism.org.uk/faith-schools/

Get rid of faith schools and allow schools to become neutral places of learning

This will go a long wany to bring about equality and inclusion

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

My wanting to ban faith schools is not only due to being gay. It is also partly due to them being a potential breeding ground for intolerant views and extremism - something you should appreciate

Regardless, it is not remotely the same. One is banning to prevent intolance the other is happening because of it.

I think you will find most CofE schools are highly sought after. People move house and a lot of atheist parents will pretend go to church to just qualify for sending their kids there

Go away and grow a pairs balls and say what you mean, because what I think you mean is that you want to ban Islamic faith schools but don't want to rock the boat with your best friend - sexymama.

And yes it is the same.

This brings us full circle to who is right and who is wrong.

Muslims think homosexuality is sinful and don't their kids taught about it so they want it banned

Your view seems to be that they are wrong because you disagree with them, do you grasp the concept that from their perspective they are in the right for wanting it banned.

Its the exact same way you declare yourself right when it comes to banning faith schools, whereas the people who use these school will say you are wrong.

Its fascinating to watch you completely miss how you are viewing each other through the same lens of bigotry and intolerance for each others lifestyle, all the whole proclaiming that you only want to ban each other because they are the bigots.

You may as well be the same people

False equivalency

The equivalency would be homosexual schools compared to faith schools

Banning faith schools and making them neutral has nothing to do with intolerance but fairness

I would add the other equivalency would be teaching homosexuality and religion in schools

Nobody is calling for religion to be banned in school

And actually these parents are against any view to teach inclusion towards gay people

You see this is why smelly, you have the intellect of a toddler

I am against faith schools and I am hetrosexual, the reason being that having neutral schools, removes a bias. I would also be against a homosexually based school.

It then does not matter what parents think on whos beliefs are right or wrong

The situation has been nullified, by neutral schools by the fact the schools will teach religion, inclusion and tolerance

Schools should be neutral

That is being fair.

Lets face the real reality of what this is really about.

Its the supression of free speech, knowlege and liberal values being taught within schools.

Schools are a place of learning and in certain countries around the world. They supress knowledge and beliefs. As they dont want people to be able to see for themselves or make their own minds up for themselves. Hence people will restrict things like evolution, secularism etc, as they fear such knowledge.

It also shows how lacking in faith they are within their own beliefs. As they wish such teaching to be supressed. This is what it really boils down to. Its why some people that follow the Abrahamic religions fear children being taught inclusion. As they believe it directly conflcts with their beliefs. Its shows they are not open to their children learning, but want this to be supressed, in order that they can control their own children's beliefs.

As seen this is never allowing children to grow and actually come to their own beliefs and ideas. In other words. Its stunting the learning growth of children. Hence if we surrender to a few bigoted parents on this. Then we are failing all children in providing them with the tools to succeed in life. Its why you will always find people whether political or religious, when dogmatic. That most fear people having acess to all knowledge. As they fear this loss of control over other people. This is steeped dogmatically in the very fabrics of the Abrahamic religions. When Eve opens her eyes to knowledge, by eating from the tree of knowledge. The deity wanted to deny Adam and Eve knowledge and make knowledge a sin. That is where the problem lies within and it shows up the contradiction and hypocracy in smellys arguments 

So this is a battle of ideas. Where one side is wanting to be open to teach all children  and another trying to supress knowledge for children, as they fear knowledge itself. As knowledge leads people to question things and when people question things it leads to doubt. Hence these people live in fear, because they are already full of doubt, but cannot admit to this. As they clearly lack faith in their own beliefs. Someone strong in faith does not fear their beliefs being challenged, but here these parents fear knowledge. As they know it rightly challenges their beliefs.

Children are not the property of parents, they are merely their guardians in helping to raise them into the world, with an open mind. So they can come to choose their own paths in life. Its why schools happen to be the best places for children to learn, if they take a neutral stance politically.

Knowledge should never be supressed and hence why we dont need faith schools.

We need netrual non-biased schools

But a lot of people like faith schools, so they're going to disagree. Catholic schools seem to be highly sought after.

Raggamuffin wrote:But a lot of people like faith schools, so they're going to disagree. Catholic schools seem to be highly sought after.

That is because there is a misconception around faith schools and their performances

The fact is these schools are allowed to discriminate on entry

So the best way to make a system fair to all, is to scrap all faith based school systems, making them neutral

I used to like smoking when going to the pub, and now I cannot

Things change and people need to see what is better for children of this country.

A schooling system that teaches, religions, inclusion, tolerance etc.

You dont need a faith school to do that and in fact such schools create exclusion and intolerance

Well that's your opinion, but it's not the opinion of some other people.

Raggamuffin wrote:Well that's your opinion, but it's not the opinion of some other people.

Which is the problem though is it not Rags?

People are thinking of themselves and not the children. They simple want to be able to control their children beliefs by denying them knowledge.

If people wanted their children to truely learn and have knowledge, they would never try to supress knowledge

Of which is happenning with these protests.

Thor wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Well SM says she thinks homosexuality is a sin, so do you think she will go on the rampage hurling gay people off buildings?

Nope, as unlike ISIS and other extremists. She is not calling for the killings of homosexuals based on islamic beliefs. They are doing so based on their beliefs.

Nothing is set in stone and things can change in how people view beliefs. As they are interpretations

Hence beliefs can and do lead to violence

You said a belief does lead to violence though.

A Muslim belief on homosexuality does end up hurting and kill homosexual people

Are you now retracting that on the grounds that you don't think SM's belief would lead her to hurt a gay person?

Thor wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Well that's your opinion, but it's not the opinion of some other people.

Which is the problem though is it not Rags?

People are thinking of themselves and not the children. They simple want to be able to control their children beliefs by denying them knowledge.

If people wanted their children to truely learn and have knowledge, they would never try to supress knowledge

Of which is happenning with these protests.

They are thinking of their children, they just have a different idea of what's best for their children.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thor wrote:


Which is the problem though is it not Rags?

People are thinking of themselves and not the children. They simple want to be able to control their children beliefs by denying them knowledge.

If people wanted their children to truely learn and have knowledge, they would never try to supress knowledge

Of which is happenning with these protests.

They are thinking of their children, they just have a different idea of what's best for their children.

Are they?

They are wanting to control their children's beliefs and thus to supress any knowledge that conflicts with their beliefs.

So how do we decide what is best for children?

Giving access to knowledge or supressing knowledge?

Raggamuffin wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

That's not my point.   Of course you can't tell people what to think or believe.   The same could be said of racism and sexism.   But that doesn't make it right.   Not so long ago homosexuality was illegal.   Thank God someone changed their thinking and stopped that.

You mean it's good that people in government are prepared to change the way they think. I agree, unless it's something I don't agree with. It all depends on whether you agree with the government doesn't it?

No. Perhaps I'm not explaining this properly. I'm referring to people's thought processes, their mindsets. These need to change. We don't live in the middle ages anymore where religion holds the whip hand. Why is it OK to label homosexuals sinful. They're born that way. Ergo, if you're religious, God made them. Why would God revile something He created? It doesn't make any sense.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thor wrote:


Nope, as unlike ISIS and other extremists. She is not calling for the killings of homosexuals based on islamic beliefs. They are doing so based on their beliefs.

Nothing is set in stone and things can change in how people view beliefs. As they are interpretations

Hence beliefs can and do lead to violence

You said a belief does lead to violence though.

A Muslim belief on homosexuality does end up hurting and kill homosexual people

Are you now retracting that on the grounds that you don't think SM's belief would lead her to hurt a gay person?

Not retracting anything

I have know sexy for more than likely a decade with debating and never seen her back any extremist Islamic position

That means I personally do not think her interpretation of the beliefs will lead to violence. 

The reality is we know such beliefs can and do lead to violence

So how am I wrong in that statement?

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

But you want to ban faith schools??But not faith being taught in school.

OK so you clarified your position and now I accept it.

Which do you think is more intolerant??

Islamosupremacists wanting to ban homosexuality being taught in schools

Or

Homosupremacists wanting to ban faith schools???

My wanting to ban faith schools is not only due to being gay. It is also partly due to them being a potential breeding ground for intolerant views and extremism - something you should appreciate

Regardless, it is not remotely the same. One is banning to prevent intolance the other is happening because of it.

I think you will find most CofE schools are highly sought after. People move house and a lot of atheist parents will pretend go to church to just qualify for sending their kids there

Go away and grow a pairs balls and say what you mean, because what I think you mean is that you want to ban Islamic faith schools but don't want to rock the boat with your best friend - sexymama.

And yes it is the same.

This brings us full circle to who is right and who is wrong.

Muslims think homosexuality is sinful and don't their kids taught about it so they want it banned

Your view seems to be that they are wrong because you disagree with them, do you grasp the concept that from their perspective they are in the right for wanting it banned.

Its the exact same way you declare yourself right when it comes to banning faith schools, whereas the people who use these school will say you are wrong.

Its fascinating to watch you completely miss how you are viewing each other through the same lens of bigotry and intolerance for each others lifestyle, all the whole proclaiming that you only want to ban each other because they are the bigots.

You may as well be the same people

Just because you say something, doesn't make it so.

It isn't the same.

We disagree on this point. We aren't going in circles, we aren't even on the same tracks.

Thor wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

They are thinking of their children, they just have a different idea of what's best for their children.

Are they?

They are wanting to control their children's beliefs and thus to supress any knowledge that conflicts with their beliefs.

So how do we decide what is best for children?

Giving access to knowledge or supressing knowledge?

They think it's best for their children to believe certain things. You might disagree, but that's just your opinion.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thor wrote:


Are they?

They are wanting to control their children's beliefs and thus to supress any knowledge that conflicts with their beliefs.

So how do we decide what is best for children?

Giving access to knowledge or supressing knowledge?

They think it's best for their children to believe certain things. You might disagree, but that's just your opinion.

Dodged the question

So how do we decide what is best for children?

Giving access to knowledge or supressing knowledge?

HoratioTarr wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You mean it's good that people in government are prepared to change the way they think. I agree, unless it's something I don't agree with. It all depends on whether you agree with the government doesn't it?

No.   Perhaps I'm not explaining this properly.  I'm referring to people's thought processes, their mindsets.   These need to change.    We don't live in the middle ages anymore where religion holds the whip hand.    Why is it OK to label homosexuals sinful.   They're born that way.  Ergo, if you're religious, God made them.  Why would God revile something He created?   It doesn't make any sense.  

Yes, but many people don't want to change their mindset. They say that their beliefs should not change with the times.

Thor wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

They think it's best for their children to believe certain things. You might disagree, but that's just your opinion.

Dodged the question

So how do we decide what is best for children?

Giving access to knowledge or supressing knowledge?

I answered the question. Those parents think their children are better off having certain beliefs. You might disagree, but that's just your opinion.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thor wrote:


Dodged the question

So how do we decide what is best for children?

Giving access to knowledge or supressing knowledge?

I answered the question. Those parents think their children are better off having certain beliefs. You might disagree, but that's just your opinion.

So you agree with parents to supress knowledge then

Wow

You see, sometimes parents do not know what is best

For example there is parents out their brainwashed with beliefs against vaccines and by doing so placing the lives of children at risk, due to their beliefs.

I will always place access to knowledge over the beliefs of parents

As the child should be free to decide what they believe in and not have the parents control their beliefs

That is the parents being inherantly selfish to their beliefs and not allowing their children to think for themselves

Eilzel wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

I think you will find most CofE schools are highly sought after. People move house and a lot of atheist parents will pretend go to church to just qualify for sending their kids there

Go away and grow a pairs balls and say what you mean, because what I think you mean is that you want to ban Islamic faith schools but don't want to rock the boat with your best friend - sexymama.

And yes it is the same.

This brings us full circle to who is right and who is wrong.

Muslims think homosexuality is sinful and don't their kids taught about it so they want it banned

Your view seems to be that they are wrong because you disagree with them, do you grasp the concept that from their perspective they are in the right for wanting it banned.

Its the exact same way you declare yourself right when it comes to banning faith schools, whereas the people who use these school will say you are wrong.

Its fascinating to watch you completely miss how you are viewing each other through the same lens of bigotry and intolerance for each others lifestyle, all the whole proclaiming that you only want to ban each other because they are the bigots.

You may as well be the same people

Just because you say something, doesn't make it so.

It isn't the same.

We disagree on this point. We aren't going in circles, we aren't even on the same tracks.

Well fucking done

The penny has finally dropped

It's your OPINION vs their OPINION vs my OPINION.

Your opinion doesn't invalidate my opinion, it's not worth more or less.

The only thing that can I validate a person's opinion are facts that prove the opposite but even facts are losing their power when entitled social justice warriors like you are involved.

You seem to be completely incapable of comprehending a world where you aren't the centre of the universe.

Its almost like you've just moved out of mummy and daddies and have heard the word "no" for the first time in your life.

You want to stick 2 fingers up at these Muslims??? Guess what?? They are sticking 2 fingers up right back at ya

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Just because you say something, doesn't make it so.

It isn't the same.

We disagree on this point. We aren't going in circles, we aren't even on the same tracks.

Well fucking done

The penny has finally dropped

It's your OPINION vs their OPINION vs my OPINION.

Your opinion doesn't invalidate my opinion, it's not worth more or less.

The only thing that can I validate a person's opinion are facts that prove the opposite but even facts are losing their power when entitled social justice warriors like you are involved.

You seem to be completely incapable of comprehending a world where you aren't the centre of the universe.

Its almost like you've just moved out of mummy and daddies and have heard the word "no" for the first time in your life.

You want to stick 2 fingers up at these Muslims??? Guess what?? They are sticking 2 fingers up right back at ya

I actually invalidated your opinion and it was very easy to do so with reason. As it was a False equivalency

You are entittled to your opinion, but you have to reason the merits of this

You have not done so

You want some parents and yourself to force your beleifs and supress knowledge that conflicts with your beliefs

If not for the opening of knowledge in the west. Society would have never become enlighted and advanced as they have today

Hence I want children to have access to knowledge

Parents do not always know what is best and children are not property like cattle

So again

False equivalency

The equivalency would be homosexual schools compared to faith schools

Banning faith schools and making them neutral has nothing to do with intolerance but fairness

I would add the other equivalency would be teaching homosexuality and religion in schools

Nobody is calling for religion to be banned in school

And actually these parents are against any view to teach inclusion towards gay people

You see this is why smelly, you have the intellect of a toddler

I am against faith schools and I am hetrosexual, the reason being that having neutral schools, removes a bias. I would also be against a homosexually based school.

It then does not matter what parents think on whos beliefs are right or wrong

The situation has been nullified, by neutral schools by the fact the schools will teach religion, inclusion and tolerance

Schools should be neutral

That is being fair.

Lets face the real reality of what this is really about.

Its the supression of free speech, knowlege and liberal values being taught within schools.

Schools are a place of learning and in certain countries around the world. They supress knowledge and beliefs. As they dont want people to be able to see for themselves or make their own minds up for themselves. Hence people will restrict things like evolution, secularism etc, as they fear such knowledge.

It also shows how lacking in faith they are within their own beliefs. As they wish such teaching to be supressed. This is what it really boils down to. Its why some people that follow the Abrahamic religions fear children being taught inclusion. As they believe it directly conflcts with their beliefs. Its shows they are not open to their children learning, but want this to be supressed, in order that they can control their own children's beliefs.

As seen this is never allowing children to grow and actually come to their own beliefs and ideas. In other words. Its stunting the learning growth of children. Hence if we surrender to a few bigoted parents on this. Then we are failing all children in providing them with the tools to succeed in life. Its why you will always find people whether political or religious, when dogmatic. That most fear people having acess to all knowledge. As they fear this loss of control over other people. This is steeped dogmatically in the very fabrics of the Abrahamic religions. When Eve opens her eyes to knowledge, by eating from the tree of knowledge. The deity wanted to deny Adam and Eve knowledge and make knowledge a sin. That is where the problem lies within and it shows up the contradiction and hypocracy in smellys arguments

So this is a battle of ideas. Where one side is wanting to be open to teach all children  and another trying to supress knowledge for children, as they fear knowledge itself. As knowledge leads people to question things and when people question things it leads to doubt. Hence these people live in fear, because they are already full of doubt, but cannot admit to this. As they clearly lack faith in their own beliefs. Someone strong in faith does not fear their beliefs being challenged, but here these parents fear knowledge. As they know it rightly challenges their beliefs.

Children are not the property of parents, they are merely their guardians in helping to raise them into the world, with an open mind. So they can come to choose their own paths in life. Its why schools happen to be the best places for children to learn, if they take a neutral stance politically.

Knowledge should never be supressed and hence why we dont need faith schools.

We need netrual non-biased schools

If you think I have not refuted your opinion, then by all means, please attempt to do so

Thor wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I answered the question. Those parents think their children are better off having certain beliefs. You might disagree, but that's just your opinion.

So you agree with parents to supress knowledge then

Wow

You see, sometimes parents do not know what is best

For example there is parents out their brainwashed with beliefs against vaccines and by doing so placing the lives of children at risk, due to their beliefs.

I will always place access to knowledge over the beliefs of parents

As the child should be free to decide what they believe in and not have the parents control their beliefs

That is the parents being inherantly selfish to their beliefs and not allowing their children to think for themselves

I didn't say I agreed, I said that people have different ideas about what's best for their children.

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

I think you will find most CofE schools are highly sought after. People move house and a lot of atheist parents will pretend go to church to just qualify for sending their kids there

Go away and grow a pairs balls and say what you mean, because what I think you mean is that you want to ban Islamic faith schools but don't want to rock the boat with your best friend - sexymama.

And yes it is the same.

This brings us full circle to who is right and who is wrong.

Muslims think homosexuality is sinful and don't their kids taught about it so they want it banned

Your view seems to be that they are wrong because you disagree with them, do you grasp the concept that from their perspective they are in the right for wanting it banned.

Its the exact same way you declare yourself right when it comes to banning faith schools, whereas the people who use these school will say you are wrong.

Its fascinating to watch you completely miss how you are viewing each other through the same lens of bigotry and intolerance for each others lifestyle, all the whole proclaiming that you only want to ban each other because they are the bigots.

You may as well be the same people

Just because you say something, doesn't make it so.

It isn't the same.

We disagree on this point. We aren't going in circles, we aren't even on the same tracks.

Well fucking done

The penny has finally dropped

It's your OPINION vs their OPINION vs my OPINION.

Your opinion doesn't invalidate my opinion, it's not worth more or less.

The only thing that can I validate a person's opinion are facts that prove the opposite but even facts are losing their power when entitled social justice warriors like you are involved.

You seem to be completely incapable of comprehending a world where you aren't the centre of the universe.

Its almost like you've just moved out of mummy and daddies and have heard the word "no" for the first time in your life.

You want to stick 2 fingers up at these Muslims??? Guess what?? They are sticking 2 fingers up right back at ya

Any opinion that seeks to force its way on others, based on religion alone, is flimsy. Religions are ultimately unprovable, and therefore shouldn't trump the rights of any human beings.

Do I have more concern about Islamic Faith schools the Christian ones? Yes. I'd still close all of them down.

But opinions backed only by religion are not opinions that I value highly. Most of the world follow different religions, so almost everyone is basing their lives around lies.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thor wrote:

So you agree with parents to supress knowledge then

Wow

You see, sometimes parents do not know what is best

For example there is parents out their brainwashed with beliefs against vaccines and by doing so placing the lives of children at risk, due to their beliefs.

I will always place access to knowledge over the beliefs of parents

As the child should be free to decide what they believe in and not have the parents control their beliefs

That is the parents being inherantly selfish to their beliefs and not allowing their children to think for themselves

I didn't say I agreed, I said that people have different ideas about what's best for their children.

So you agree to access to knowledge, which places the parents protesting here, in the wrong, correct?

You cannot have it both ways and as seen parents may think they know best, but that may not be what is best

The point is allowing children to have access to knowledge so they can come to form their own views

Their parents will teach them their beliefs and the school will offer up more differing views

Hence they have no reason to protest against the school, as they are denying their children access to knowledge, controlling them like slaves

Children of 5 years old can barely tie their own shoe laces...


Leave them alone to learn the basics of life and to be children... they have plenty of time years ahead to start thinking about adult relationships...!

Tommy Monk wrote:Children of 5 years old can barely tie their own shoe laces...


Leave them alone to learn the basics of life and to be children... they have plenty of time years ahead to start thinking about adult relationships...!

So anyone that wants to supress knowledge and education for children

Thor wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I didn't say I agreed, I said that people have different ideas about what's best for their children.

So you agree to access to knowledge, which places the parents protesting here, in the wrong, correct?

You cannot have it both ways and as seen parents may think they know best, but that may not be what is best

The point is allowing children to have access to knowledge so they can come to form their own views

Their parents will teach them their beliefs and the school will offer up more differing views

Hence they have no reason to protest against the school, as they are denying their children access to knowledge, controlling them like slaves

I've already said what I think about the protest situation. There is no point trying to force these parents to accept something they don't want to accept. I don't think the "lessons" are necessary, so the best thing is to not bother with them.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thor wrote:

So you agree to access to knowledge, which places the parents protesting here, in the wrong, correct?

You cannot have it both ways and as seen parents may think they know best, but that may not be what is best

The point is allowing children to have access to knowledge so they can come to form their own views

Their parents will teach them their beliefs and the school will offer up more differing views

Hence they have no reason to protest against the school, as they are denying their children access to knowledge, controlling them like slaves

I've already said what I think about the protest situation. There is no point trying to force these parents to accept something they don't want to accept. I don't think the "lessons" are necessary, so the best thing is to not bother with them.

So the parents are supressing knowledge and trying to control the beliefs of children, treating them like slaves. Denying them the ability to learn knowledge and other ideas.

Is that a good way to raise children?

The simple answer is no

Society has had to accept many changes for the better and these parents are no different from countless other changes in the past.

They may not like it, but our society teaches inclusion and tolerance. Where all children should come to understand this knowledge

It will go a long way to help prevent discrimination and prejudice

Slaves? The art of exaggeration is alive and well on this thread.

Raggamuffin wrote:Slaves? The art of exaggeration is alive and well on this thread.

Not really, when they are denying them the ability to think for themselves and hence controlling them, through said beliefs.

They are thus slaves to those beliefs, where the parents have a form of shackles in place. To keep them caged to those beliefs.

I would also love to understand how children learning the basics of inclusion, is stopping them being children?



Does teaching basic maths and English also stop them being children?

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

That is something at least, though I'm sure there is a long way to go

Small steps x

Small steps....I love that.

In the  UK, Homosexuality was legalised in 1967, it took till 2014 until gay marriage was legalised, small steps.
You cant change attitudes, opinion, society and laws overnight, but they can be changed with time.

Religion holds back progress imo, society may change, but religious books are set in stone, it's a pity they cant be updated to move with the times.

Syl wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Small steps x

Small steps....I love that.

In the  UK, Homosexuality was legalised in 1967, it took till 2014 until gay marriage was legalised, small steps.
You cant change attitudes, opinion, society and laws overnight, but they can be changed with time.

Religion holds back progress imo, society may change, but religious books are set in stone, it's a pity they cant be updated to move with the times.

There would be no point having religious books if they changed according to the opinions and whims of others. That's kind of the point of religion - it stays the same in a changing world. Of course there are some changes within Churches but why should a Church budge on their fundamental beliefs just because some people don't like them?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

Small steps....I love that.

In the  UK, Homosexuality was legalised in 1967, it took till 2014 until gay marriage was legalised, small steps.
You cant change attitudes, opinion, society and laws overnight, but they can be changed with time.

Religion holds back progress imo, society may change, but religious books are set in stone, it's a pity they cant be updated to move with the times.

There would be no point having religious books if they changed according to the opinions and whims of others. That's kind of the point of religion - it stays the same in a changing world. Of course there are some changes within Churches but why should a Church budge on their fundamental beliefs just because some people don't like them?

Well actually they budge on these beliefs all the time

The views on homosexuality are found with leviticus/Deuteronomy etc and yet there is countless other beliefs around sin. That are simple ignored within the same chapters

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Small steps x

Small steps....I love that.

In the  UK, Homosexuality was legalised in 1967, it took till 2014 until gay marriage was legalised, small steps.
You cant change attitudes, opinion, society and laws overnight, but they can be changed with time.

Religion holds back progress imo, society may change, but religious books are set in stone, it's a pity they cant be updated to move with the times.

There would be no point having religious books if they changed according to the opinions and whims of others. That's kind of the point of religion - it stays the same in a changing world. Of course there are some changes within Churches but why should a Church budge on their fundamental beliefs just because some people don't like them?

They change frequently. I wonder how 16th century Christians would feel about divorcing, marrying people of different faiths, female vicars etc?

Homosexuality is actually such a minor note - hardly among the 'fundamental' beliefs of any faiths.

It was Syl who said they were set in stone.

Eilzel wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Well fucking done

The penny has finally dropped

It's your OPINION vs their OPINION vs my OPINION.

Your opinion doesn't invalidate my opinion, it's not worth more or less.

The only thing that can I validate a person's opinion are facts that prove the opposite but even facts are losing their power when entitled social justice warriors like you are involved.

You seem to be completely incapable of comprehending a world where you aren't the centre of the universe.

Its almost like you've just moved out of mummy and daddies and have heard the word "no" for the first time in your life.

You want to stick 2 fingers up at these Muslims??? Guess what?? They are sticking 2 fingers up right back at ya

Any opinion that seeks to force its way on others, based on religion alone, is flimsy. Religions are ultimately unprovable, and therefore shouldn't trump the rights of any human beings.

Do I have more concern about Islamic Faith schools the Christian ones? Yes. I'd still close all of them down.

But opinions backed only by religion are not opinions that I value highly. Most of the world follow different religions, so almost everyone is basing their lives around lies.

Tell ISIS their efforts to enforce their religious opinions on others is flimsy, do you know they "this is sparta" kicked gay Iraqis off rooftops on a daily basis.

Secondly religious freedom is a human right enshrined in Law.

And here's the kicker, your opinions on religion are invalidated by the fact that religious freedom, specifically the right to manifest and practice your religion in private and PUBLIC are backed up by law.

Your opinion isn't backed by law, so your desire to see all faith schools shut down is in fact violating those peoples human rights.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

Small steps....I love that.

In the  UK, Homosexuality was legalised in 1967, it took till 2014 until gay marriage was legalised, small steps.
You cant change attitudes, opinion, society and laws overnight, but they can be changed with time.

Religion holds back progress imo, society may change, but religious books are set in stone, it's a pity they cant be updated to move with the times.

There would be no point having religious books if they changed according to the opinions and whims of others. That's kind of the point of religion - it stays the same in a changing world. Of course there are some changes within Churches but why should a Church budge on their fundamental beliefs just because some people don't like them?

Well they do budge, women are allowed to hold certain positions in the church now, gay people are allowed to marry etc, society may change in spite of the religious books.
But....some people choose to follow word for word whatever the Bible, Quran, Torah, etc, say, and it obviously causes more harm than good when it's teaching people to not accept others because of their differences..

Raggamuffin wrote:It was Syl who said they were set in stone.

But you did ask rags, why should churches budge on the fundementally beliefs.

They have countless times.

So the question to ask is why not so with homosexuality

In fact no verse says its a sin to be gay

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Well fucking done

The penny has finally dropped

It's your OPINION vs their OPINION vs my OPINION.

Your opinion doesn't invalidate my opinion, it's not worth more or less.

The only thing that can I validate a person's opinion are facts that prove the opposite but even facts are losing their power when entitled social justice warriors like you are involved.

You seem to be completely incapable of comprehending a world where you aren't the centre of the universe.

Its almost like you've just moved out of mummy and daddies and have heard the word "no" for the first time in your life.

You want to stick 2 fingers up at these Muslims??? Guess what?? They are sticking 2 fingers up right back at ya

Any opinion that seeks to force its way on others, based on religion alone, is flimsy. Religions are ultimately unprovable, and therefore shouldn't trump the rights of any human beings.

Do I have more concern about Islamic Faith schools the Christian ones? Yes. I'd still close all of them down.

But opinions backed only by religion are not opinions that I value highly. Most of the world follow different religions, so almost everyone is basing their lives around lies.

Tell ISIS their efforts to enforce their religious opinions on others is flimsy, do you know they "this is sparta" kicked gay Iraqis off rooftops on a daily basis.

Secondly religious freedom is a human right enshrined in Law.

And here's the kicker, your opinions on religion are invalidated by the fact that religious freedom, specifically the right to manifest and practice your religion in private and PUBLIC are backed up by law.

Your opinion isn't backed by law, so your desire to see all faith schools shut down is in fact violating those peoples human rights.

Since it's only my opinion, it isn't violating anything

Raggamuffin wrote:It was Syl who said they were set in stone.

The books are set in stone....as in they dont rewritten every decade or so to keep up with modern thinking.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:It was Syl who said they were set in stone.

The books are set in stone....as in they dont rewritten every decade or so to keep up with modern thinking.

Yes. You think they should be rewritten?

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:It was Syl who said they were set in stone.

The books are set in stone....as in they dont rewritten every decade or so to keep up with modern thinking.

But even that is not really true.

Its more about what books have been accepted into the bible. As countless other gosples have been omited and the book of enoch for example from the Old testament. Has been left out. Even some early examples of the gosples have different parts to stories. So its clear there was some later editing going on. The earliest copies of the Gosple of mark, do not have the last twelve verses found in his gosple in Modern bibles.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:
The books are set in stone....as in they dont rewritten every decade or so to keep up with modern thinking.

Yes. You think they should be rewritten?

The problem is some people take them literally, which is obviously the way to madness.
Personally I think there are far better books to read for advice and guidance if and when you need it.

Thor wrote:

Syl wrote:
The books are set in stone....as in they dont rewritten every decade or so to keep up with modern thinking.

But even that is not really true.

Its more about what books have been accepted into the bible. As countless other gosples have been omited and the book of enoch for example from the Old testament. Has been left out. Even some early examples of the gosples have different parts to stories. So its clear there was some later editing going on. The earliest copies of the Gosple of mark, do not have the last twelve verses found in his gosple in Modern bibles.

I am not an expert on any of the religious books so I will take your word for that.

Syl wrote:

Thor wrote:

But even that is not really true.

Its more about what books have been accepted into the bible. As countless other gosples have been omited and the book of enoch for example from the Old testament. Has been left out. Even some early examples of the gosples have different parts to stories. So its clear there was some later editing going on. The earliest copies of the Gosple of mark, do not have the last twelve verses found in his gosple in Modern bibles.

I am not an expert on any of the religious books so I will take your word for that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16

If you are interested Syl

Eilzel wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Tell ISIS their efforts to enforce their religious opinions on others is flimsy, do you know they "this is sparta" kicked gay Iraqis off rooftops on a daily basis.

Secondly religious freedom is a human right enshrined in Law.

And here's the kicker, your opinions on religion are invalidated by the fact that religious freedom, specifically the right to manifest and practice your religion in private and PUBLIC are backed up by law.

Your opinion isn't backed by law, so your desire to see all faith schools shut down is in fact violating those peoples human rights.

Since it's only my opinion, it isn't violating anything

Correct

And their desire to stop THEIR children from. Learning about LBGT stuff isn't violating anything either

Is it??

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Since it's only my opinion, it isn't violating anything

Correct

And their desire to stop THEIR children from. Learning about LBGT stuff isn't violating anything either

Is it??

Its supressing knowledge

Its violating the right of that child to learn through education

Hence those parents are trying to control the belief of children

Parents have no right to supress knowledge or education

They can of course home school if they like, but have to also follow a curriculum

Unless of course you back countries like Saudi, where thy actually supress knowledge

Thor wrote:

Syl wrote:
I am not an expert on any of the religious books so I will take your word for that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16

If you are interested Syl

Ta, I will have a look.

My view is (and I am not religious so that obviously colours my view) the bible and every other religious tome was written by men for men....women, gay people, anyone who does not believe, anyone who was not accepted to be equal centuries ago are still not accepted in the books today, society has evolved but the books never do.

Syl wrote:

Thor wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16

If you are interested Syl

Ta, I will have a look.

My view is (and I am not religious so that obviously colours my view) the bible and every other religious tomb was written by men for men....women, gay people, anyone who does not believe, anyone who was not accepted to be equal centuries ago are still not accepted in the books today, society has evolved but the books never do.

I agree that they have been written by men. There is even plenty of doubt to the validity of the hadiths, which were written centuries after Muhammad lived. Even the Quran is under scuitiny.

The biggest gripe I have with Christians, (those anti-homosexual) never abide by countless other commands and sins

Thor wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Children of 5 years old can barely tie their own shoe laces...


Leave them alone to learn the basics of life and to be children... they have plenty of time years ahead to start thinking about adult relationships...!

So anyone that wants to supress knowledge and education for children

Some people like to drink their own piss... some people like to shit on each other...


Should children be taught that this is right/normal/natural, at a very early age, all in the name of "inclusivity" and to prevent the "supression of knowledge"...!?