Ann Coulter said, "sex ed teachers refuse to accept morals". "Accepting morals" is the same thing as "teching morals"? Not in my book it's not. Ann said they "refuse to accept" which to me means that the teachers have no morals--they refuse to accept any morals. That's a long way from what the sex ed person actually said, "sex ed teachers think that morals should be taught by parents and churches", there is nothing in this quote about accepting morals, all it addresses is the fact that parents and churches are the proper source for moral teaching and not sex ed teachers.
Yes, you do.
Why are you quoting her then? Her fallacious statement is the topic here.
I post on a number of threads, but my marriage is being threatened so I use every avenue at hand to try to address the issue.
Your morals are not the issue here, it's the imposition of morals by one group on another group. I've said over and over again that I am supporting legal equality of consenting adults, not child abuse.
We are discussing whether she lied. You did not answer my very simple question: are the two statements exactly the same in meaning? I don't think that they are. You?
Bias, schmias, give me facts and I'll deal with them.
Okay, with an actual name to google, I read about this. I don't think this is appropriate, I object to it. Are you suggesting that this is happening all over the country? Or what exactly are you saying? As I understand it, this was objected to and stopped. What wasn't clear is if these were self-identified gay kids or who were the kids at this thing? The articles I read were not clear on this point.
Here's an article by the Boston University School of Theology in which they have questions about how the story was reported and clarification of what actually happened. http://sthweb.bu.edu/shaw/anna-howard-shaw-center/biography?view=mediawiki&article=Fistgate
This statement bears on the issue as well, from the Conservative Petitions website, "Governor Cellucci has chosen to maintain his alliance with groups on the radical fringe of the homosexual community in Massachusetts"
I also found an article about Sarah Palin under "iron-fistgate": http://www.commonmistakesblog.com/2008/08/top-ten-sarah-palin-scandals.html
This doesn't sound right to me, but I also know that there are crazies in the homosexual community just like in all communities. I couldn't find anything on any of the Massachusetts Education or Public Heath sites about this.
So are all gay and transpeople going to declared unfit to be full citizens because of this? And the Bible too of course? Sometime you should explain to me about all the other laws in the Bible that you don't follow and how you decide which of God's laws you will obey.
Her statement was false unless "refusing to accept morals" means the same thing as "letting parents and churches teach morals".
I work with what you give me, and two sentence quotes with no background and supported by Ann Coulter didn't leave me much to go on. If you don't want me to make assumptions perhaps you should cite your sources right up front and stop taking anti-gay pot-shots at me with your "homosexual agenda" quips.
Partly because Joan of Arc was burned at the stake for being a transsexual. Maybe 600 years of deliberate religious persecution has something to do with it. Or maybe it's just that having "Christians" vote away my Constitutional rights chafes a bit.
I don't know that I have ignored your sources as much as having looked at them and found them wanting. I noted that most of the sites with comments about fistgate were religious ones delivering diatribes, the only one I saw that was rational was the Boston University of Theology and they had questions about the documentation/validity of the story.
While disparaging me for being "blind" I think that we should recognize that you have as yet to answer my question about what Ann said vs what the sex ed teacher said, are they the same in you view? Do the statements mean the same thing?
