teaching without bounds

[kronas]

the controversial section 28 clause which forbids promotion of homosexual relationships in schools is to be abolished on tuesday

but kent council is to keep the clause

this has angered gay rights activists

"We have had tremendous backing from schools and parents across the county, who, while wanting to encourage tolerance, are also clear they want to see family, Christian and other religious and traditional values emphasised."


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/3277499.stm

im all for it not everyone is hetrosexual some find out they are bisexual or gay later on or do already know they are if your going to teach safe 'straight' sex to a group of people where maybe one or two do turn out to be homosexual/lesbian then safety/safe sex is a primary concern

[Russ]

Safe sex is a primary concern in any relationship.

[kronas]

Originally Posted by Russ D

Safe sex is a primary concern in any relationship.

yep but you cant have the knowledge of other 'choices' that you make unless someone confronts you about them ofcourse you should know which way you swing.......

[philip.j.fry]

It's right to teach about all forms of sexual/romantic relationships in schools. We're living in a society that has many forms of interpersonal relationships and children need to know about all these to protect themselves (from disease etc) and to make their own choices about their lifestyles. Things like gender issues should be included in this education.

By ignoring it, Kent council are hurting the children in the schools, by ignoring it they are not making these issues not exist and are making it into a problem.

Originally Posted by Russ D

Safe sex is a primary concern in any relationship.

Absolutely.

But if the type of relationship you want to have isn't even *discussed* in case that's considered to be "promotion" of it, then you may be denied vital information about the Safe (or, rather "Safer") Sex message.

[aliferste]

Its not as if the removal of Clause 28 is going to stuff homosexuality down Kids throats!

All they have to do is turn on the telly or open a magazine !

There are a large number of teenage boys that commit suicide due to sexuality issues. t least this might make them think a little more !

[ic14]

Well as a Bisexual i think the removal of clause 28 is a ggod thing, which is why i think kent councils decsion is strange.

[Russ]

I say keep Section 28 and get all the kids on to nthellworld.co.uk - after all there's enough 'armchair experts' on here to teach them the ways of the world

Originally Posted by philip.j.fry

It's right to teach about all forms of sexual/romantic relationships in schools. We're living in a society that has many forms of interpersonal relationships and children need to know about all these to protect themselves (from disease etc) and to make their own choices about their lifestyles. Things like gender issues should be included in this education.

By ignoring it, Kent council are hurting the children in the schools, by ignoring it they are not making these issues not exist and are making it into a problem.

Its right to teach children about all forms of sexual relationships IF their parenst consent to it.
Kent council are doing what they think is right and having being informed byu parents that thye want a christian way of life taught to their children the council is standing by the parents wishes.
I would not want my young child to be taught all about homosexual relationships at a young age, I dont even think I would want them being taught about hetrosexual relationships at a young age.

Now before I get accused of being homophobic, I dont htink its wrong, I dont think its right either, its a matter of choice. Now if homosexuality is a matter of choice then parents have the right of choice to have thier children taught in a manner that they wish.

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Russ D

I say keep Section 28 and get all the kids on to nthellworld.co.uk - after all there's enough 'armchair experts' on here to teach them the ways of the world

Theres nothing armchair about my experiences Russ

Originally Posted by aliferste

There are a large number of teenage boys that commit suicide due to sexuality issues. t least this might make them think a little more !

I suspect you will find that they dont commit suicide because they are gay, they do so because they suffer ignorance and intollerance.

Recent moves will not make people look at homosexuality any different, I dont openly go around displaying that I am hetrosexual and I think its not too much to expect homosexual people to be discreet either. But as always you get a minority, Gay rights people can have a chip on their shoulders and they say be openly gay......why? is the man walking down the road there openly hetrosexual, or is he gay, is the teahcer of your child hetrosexual or is she a lesbian? What ****ing difference does it make? what difference is there whether or not this clause is lifted or not? Tolerance will only happen when extremes are stopped and this counts for both parties. For instance kids can see Gay pride, but god help anyone that started "Hetro Pride" while these differences are allowed bigotry will continue, whether or not the clause is lifted.

[downquark1]

Originally Posted by timewarrior2001

What ****ing difference does it make? what difference is there whether or not this clause is lifted or not? Tolerance will only happen when extremes are stopped and this counts for both parties. For instance kids can see Gay pride, but god help anyone that started "Hetro Pride" while these differences are allowed bigotry will continue, whether or not the clause is lifted.

The is like current society which now sees being black 'cooler' than being white - in America at least.

Originally Posted by timewarrior2001

Its right to teach children about all forms of sexual relationships IF their parenst consent to it.

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 doing what they think is right

Kent council are pandering to the prejudices of homophobes.

and having being informed byu parents that thye want a christian way of life taught to their children the council is standing by the parents wishes.

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?

I would not want my young child to be taught all about homosexual relationships at a young age, I dont even think I would want them being taught about hetrosexual relationships at a young age.

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"!)

Now before I get accused of being homophobic, I dont htink its wrong, I dont think its right either, its a matter of choice. Now if homosexuality is a matter of choice then parents have the right of choice to have thier children taught in a manner that they wish.

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?

Originally Posted by Russ D

I say keep Section 28 and get all the kids on to nthellworld.co.uk - after all there's enough 'armchair experts' on here to teach them the ways of the world

Well I say it's a bloody good job that there *ARE* people who are willing to give out the information that these children so desperately *need* to help them understand what they are feeling.

It's just a damned shame that they are *forced* to go to "alternate" sources of information because the ones that are *supposed* to supply the information have let them down so badly due to the homophobic legislation of Section 28.

Originally Posted by Russ D

I say keep Section 28 and get all the kids on to nthellworld.co.uk - after all there's enough 'armchair experts' on here to teach them the ways of the world

Section 28 is nothing more than legislated bigotry. I believe that if people are introduced to the concept of these issues at a young enough age, in a *neutral* fashion then you will end up with a society that is a lot more tolerant of the different lifestyles that people lead.

Originally Posted by Graham

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.

My personal opinion is that all humans are initially bisexual, but for whatever reason, societal pressures push them one way or the other, be it straight, gay or bi. We are after all a hedonistic species. Homosexual activity is now very well documented within the animal world, and at the end of the day we are nothing more than animals.