Originally Posted by Graham

Pardon me if I disagree. This sounds the same as "it's right to teach children about Darwin IF their parents consent to it".

Do you want to *educate* children or *indoctrinate* them? If you want the former, you give them the facts and let them decide. If you want the latter you say "this is how it is, don't ask questions".

I can't see any advantage in the latter except to preseve the "power base" of a group that is becoming increasingly isolated.



Kent council are pandering to the prejudices of homophobes.



And what about those who *aren't* christian and would prefer that their children get taught *all* the facts? Why should the majority suffer for the beliefs of what is now most certainly (and you can argue this all you want, but you know it's true) a minority?



What do you call a "young age"? 5? 7? 11? 13? 16? Where do *you* draw the line? Ideally, of course, the "right age" is the age at which *the child* starts asking questions, but that will vary from child to child, so a decision has to be made somewhere along the line.

Personally I think the right time is to teach children *before* they actually *need* the knowledge, rather than *after*. Sex education (and, more importantly, and something we sadly lack in this country *relationship* education*) should begin *before* puberty and continue *during* that time so that when they need it, they'll have it.

(To those who argue that "if we don't teach them about it, they won't do it", my response is that that makes as much sense as "if I don't teach my child to swim they won't go near the water, fall in and drown"!)



But homosexuality is *NOT* a "matter of choice"! Someone doesn't sit down at age 14 and say "hey, I think I'll fancy another boy/ girl, that's a good idea!", they find themselves *drawn* to the same sex, for reasons which are completely beyond them.

Now the question is what happens then. If they have been *taught* that it is not "unnatural" or "sinful" or "evil" or whatever to feel this way and that people to talk to and information about how they feel is available (which is *not* "promotion" of homosexuality as an "alternative" style of relationship) then they will be saved at least *some* of the anxiety and stress and suffering that otherwise they would encounter because of Section 28 et al.

So, do you want these children to suffer?