Good As You

I can't watch more than 3 minutes of this, quite honestly. My goodness. "They'd be fine if it were just to get along with fellow students, but it goes deeper"... except it doesn't. I'm honestly beginning to dislike the word "family" thanks to groups like this.

Also... am I the only one that thinks that Candi sounds like a stripper name?

Day of Silence doesn't celebrate homosexuality, it laments and protests violence against someone because of sexual orientation. Day of Silence is about as celebratory as Holocaust Remembrance Day.

what a twunt. "nothing more than animals tromping through the jungle"?????? i am freaking speachless.

Oh so according to her, lgbts don't have children attending schools.

And also according to her, Focus On the Family ISN'T an outside interest group with an agenda to promote.

that web site of theirs is twisted, even more so than the normal FOF sites.

My bad. I saw the word "Focus" and asssumed that's who this was from. Oops.
But my point still applies: an outside action group with an agenda is complaining about outside action groups they disagree with.

I tried to watch this but was ready to barf my guts after a few minutes.

I always thought the opposite of homosexuality was heterosexuality, not Christianity. I teach English and every book I teach involves some sort of male-female relationship. So wouldn't the opposing viewpoint be the positive presentation of same-sex couples?

Yes, stojef, it WOULD. Somebody should tell THEM that. They don't seem to know it.

stojef and Bill S, they know that same-sex relationships should be a perfectly valid use of viewpoint discrimination, since the other relationships that they discuss are overwhelmingly skewed toward opposite marriage. And, none of us have a problem with the fact that opposite marriage comprises almost all of those other relationships - it pretty realistically represents society, but only to the extent that it is diverse enough to include some mention of the reality of same-sex relationships.

But Candi also knows that her use of viewpoint discrimination is a Trojan horse for them to get their twisted, scientifically unsound, APA shunned "ex-gay" reprogramming religiosity interjected into public schools. That is a gross overstepping of viewpoint discrimination. But, if they were ever able to succeed in doing that, then it would become perfectly valid for actual psychologists (with actual accredited degrees) to come in and counter those dangerous lies with sound, rational, reassuring truth.

She also shrieks about "openly gay speakers" coming into classes... WHEN has that ever happened - maybe if the LGBT parent of a child came in for "Show and Tell", or something. Otherwise, I have never heard of it happening. Maybe I'm not as current on the topic as I should be, but I've never heard of it happening.

But, even if they are there, they wouldn't be touting the benefits or "ecstasy" of being LGBT. They would be there discussing the need for tolerance of individuals in a diverse culture. And, that should never be allowed to become an opening for an anti-tolerant "ex-gay" liar to come in and spew their intolerance.

The radical religious fanatics might think that they could use the legal system against the children in public schools, but those laws are in place to protect those very children from "lunacy gone wild". And, I don't think that any of the educators in question are going to feel intimidated by threats from the radicals at Alliance Defense Fund.

Why don't people start pointing out that 99.98% of all criminals in federal lock up are religionists? only 0.02% of the federal prison population are athiests. So, who really has the moral high ground here? Obviously, not them.