Derek Keefe reflects on the various Christian responses to the Day of Silence with a postive consideration of the Golden Rule Pledge.
The opposite of promoting homosexuality in the public schools is not -not promoting homosexuality. Rather it is promoting the idea that homosexuality is immoral & perverse.
Not politicizing the school system with homosexuality is the middle ground. Most school’s don’t promote a “day of silence” – they fairly regard school as a place of learning and not a place of political propagandizing of one stripe or another.
Imagine the disruption and attention pro-lifers could generate if they had a day-of-silence for unborn children???
They don’t do this because they are not radicals. The homosexuals are.
I think you might have missed the memo Fitz – The DOS isn’t about politics – its about gay kids being the targets of violence and abuse.
jayhuck ~ May 3, 2008 at 7:49 pm99290…DOS [is]…about gay kids being the targets of violence and abuse.
jayhuck ~ May 3, 2008 at 7:49 pm
…DOS [is]…about gay kids being the targets of violence and abuse.
It is taken to mean that the person who is silent agrees with the homosexual agenda.
So, a teacher, a school/government employee –keeping his mouth shut the whole day, gives the impression that the school is behind the homosexual agenda, just as the school would, as secularists would say, be promoting “religion” if the teacher referred to the Bible in class.
Fitz ~ May 3, 2008 at 11:37 am99218Imagine the disruption and attention pro-lifers could generate if they had a day-of-silence for unborn children???They don’t do this because they are not radicals. The homosexuals are.
Fitz ~ May 3, 2008 at 11:37 am
You are correct!
Pro-lifers aren’t radicals???? Are we talking about the same pro-lifers that have carried guns to protests and shot and people entering clinics – they aren’t radicals? you could have fooled me. – LOL
jayhuck ~ May 4, 2008 at 11:46 am99382Pro-lifers aren’t radicals????
jayhuck ~ May 4, 2008 at 11:46 am
Pro-lifers aren’t radicals????
Correct, over all.
jayhuck ~ May 4, 2008 at 11:46 am99382Are we talking about the same pro-lifers that have carried guns to protests and shot and people entering clinics – they aren’t radicals?
jayhuck ~ May 4, 2008 at 11:46 am
Are we talking about the same pro-lifers that have carried guns to protests and shot and people entering clinics – they aren’t radicals?
Some are. However, the pro-life movement isn’t radical. The pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice movement is.
jayhuck ~ May 4, 2008 at 11:46 am99382you could have fooled me
you could have fooled me
Well, maybe you’re easy to fool.
I think, perhaps, you are projecting.
If you respect NARTH and Nicolosi even a little bit, you might want to read the most recent article over on BoxTurtleBulletin about them:
NARTH inserts foot in mouth again
“The DOS isn’t about politics – its about gay kids being the targets of violence and abuse.”
This is the (not to clever) obviation of the left. The same could be said of a day of silence against violence against unborn children. One could have a DOS against the war, or against animal cruelty, or for the promotion of wearing seatbelts.
It’s a pro-typical Marxist tactic -making anyone against the day essentially FOR violence against homosexuals.
Such obvious grandstanding and moral bullying cant be the reason for politicizing the school day. On a practical level multiple groups could use this format. On a more obvious level they are simply using this tool to normalize homosexuality & get the school authorities to seemingly sponsor it.
jayhuck ~ May 4, 2008 at 12:36 pm99393Roberto,I think, perhaps, you are projecting.
jayhuck ~ May 4, 2008 at 12:36 pm
YOU’RE the one who said that he could be fooled. I am merely agreeing.
Homosexuality IS normal – it is not a disease. You can view it the way you want but there were over 7,000 schools and colleges taking part in the DOS this year and it shows no signs of diminishing – and I say Amen! Attention does need to be brought to this problem. The people who are against it are usually so anti-gay they exchange their compassion for politics – Gay people didn’t make this a big deal or political, the opponents of the DOS did that.
jayhuck ~ May 4, 2008 at 1:08 pm99415Fitz,Homosexuality IS normal…
jayhuck ~ May 4, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Homosexuality IS normal…
No, it isn’t.
jayhuck ~ May 4, 2008 at 1:08 pm99415…it is not a disease.
…it is not a disease.
A virus doesn’t cause it. A bacterium doesn’t cause it. So what?
You’re doing it again. The well established understanding is that schools are for learning and groups should not politicize the school day.
As I point out, multiple causes could use this approach – yet they don’t. This is because they are not “ends justify the means” type of radicals.
As for your statistics, all that has to happen is for one kid or small group to “not talk” that day without retribution & it is considered to be “taking part in the DOS” . The my local high school is listed as a participant in the “day of silence” but none of the parents or their kinds have heard anything about it.
“Attention does need to be brought to this problem”
Ah-ha. Well their in lies the politics “attention needs to be brought to any number of problems” that doesn’t mean our schools should become propaganda weapons for this cause or another.
Naturally there will be people opposed to this agenda and they will (naturally) seek to counter that “day” by speech of their own or keeping their kids home. That’s the whole point of the policy of maintaining schools as environments for learning, not political rallies.
You further prove my point by claiming that its the opponents who are haters or for violence and the ones causing the trouble.
Clearly they are not. You would have to be a FOOL to think that having a pro-gay agenda day (regardless of the form) won’t disrupt school activities. The sponsors of the DOS are well aware of what they are doing and the trouble they are trying to cause.
Yes, I’m sure they would prefer if the opposition roles over for it.. (Who Wouldn’t?)
But the question “who started it?” is always germane when a fight breaks out.
Again – it wasn’t the gay kids that made this event political – it was its opponents – this is not about politics, as much as you feel it must be. DOS opponents hate the fact that sympathy is being garnered for gay people through this event and have to label it political to try and quiet it. Conservative tactics 101
Would a day of silence for unborn children be political?
You’re being obtuse, any “day” for any “cause” is political.
Reading, writing – arithmetic. That’s what school is for.
You add the “gay kids” like this is some innocent rally to “stop the violence” – this is a well orchestrated national campaign.
People of faith are killed & assaulted every day for their beliefs. If they kids started a DOS at my school over it- I would acknowledge it as political.
Oh Fitz, please – school is about so much more than RWA – It is about forming friendships, getting involved in organizations, learning how to get along with others, learning about different viewpoints, learning how to function as a social animal, finding out about yourself, etc…… To say otherwise is to ignore reality. Learning should be the fundamental thing that goes on at school, but learning doesn’t and shouldn’t just involve basic school subjects. The DOS has well-defined rules that govern it and there is nothing about it that should impede the learning process.
What “impedes the learning process” is a group so dedicated to propagandizing the youth that they wont draw the line at the school house door.
DOS cause hundreds of parents to keep their kids home. They don’t want to “counter-protest” on that day nor do they want their own “traditional morality day”.
Only the homosexual lobby has been radical and uncivilized enough to blatantly turn our schools into political rallies.
Imagine what would happen if everybody else stooped to the same tactics?
That’s “impeding the learning process”
The only problems with the DOS come from anti-gay people who try to oppose it – the same people who made it a big deal in the first place – don’t lay the problems with the DOS at the feet of the gay youth who are participating – it is not their fault.
Propagandizing the youth???? It is the gay youth who are doing this.
Again – Conservative tactics 101 – cause a great stir over something that wasn’t a big deal to start with and then blame that something for impeding the learning process – LOL
Of course, the homosexual lobby would like as little fuss possible, and, so, it makes it seem as though it’s agenda is harmless, almost beneficial.
So, those who claim to be homosexual, their supporters and activists Institute of “Day of Silence,” enlisting vulnerable students against, what the lobby says is, “violence against homosexuals.”
The REAL agenda is to get as many to participate in a show that will be taken to mean support for the homosexual agenda to change this culture, this society, this country to the Will of less than 2% of the population.
it’s agenda — –> its agenda
The homosexual lobby wants to change this culture, this society, this country. They know that the change must be as unnoticed as possible.
That means that a pro-homosexual demonstration must be seen, in the subconscience, as such while being advertised as something harmless, like just a statement against violence. After all, everybody is against violence. That’s why the insistence that this “Day of Silence” is nothing but a demonstration against violence; but it is perceived as a pro-homosexual-agenda statement.
It’s also all about making indoctrination in the homosexual agenda seem harmless by referring to it as mere “education,” and where better to get that point across than at a school, with vulnerable students? And YOU say “peer pressure”?
And YOU say — –> Can YOU say
Gay people didn’t make this a big deal or political, the opponents of the DOS did that.
Those who claim to be homosexual DID make this a big deal, advertising it as a harmless demonstration against violence. It was intended, however, to be a pro-homosexual demonstration and it was perceived that way. Perception is key. Intention is merely a ruse.
7,000 schools and colleges in this country don’t appear to share your belief Roberto – and I’m siding with them
You are an avid ambassador of your brand of Christianity. You embody the beliefs, the methods, and the agenda of those who share your view of the place of your faith in the culture and in politics. You ever so clearly illustrate how the world would be if you were unfettered in your desires.
You make my work easier.
Roberto – Try and make your points in a single, more lucid post.
Jayhuck and all.
Saying “the only problem with DOS is the people who are against it” reveals itself to be intellectually shallow and agenda driven.
For the hundredth time: Imagine I start a pro-life day at my local school. Naturally I am going to expect the pro-choice camp to either protest my day in some way – pressure the school from ever allowing it – or start a pro-choice day of our own.
You sound foolish claiming that your DOS is so conflict free & harmless that SHOCK- how could anyone get upset.
The example above illustrates why the DOS is a blatant attempt to turn schools into activist forums.
The middle ground is to not have any disruptive political activity in schools.
Not to unfairly choose the DOS as the one harmless activity.
By opposing DOS those parents, students & teachers show themselves to be the fair-minded & reasonable educators.
By opposing the DOS those parents and teachers have done nothing but create unnecessary chaos – they are the ones responsible for any problems with learning that exist during that day.
No more different than the same rhetoric that comes from the mouths of youth who have spent their formative time within gay social gorups and gay affirming therapy. Sorry – I just happen to see people who are easily influenced.
Mary – I never grew up with gay affirming therapy or gay social groups, and yet I knew I was gay and supported gay causes. I guess I give people the benefit of the doubt and assume they are intelligent individuals. These youth formed their own gay social groups.
Fritz said in post 99579 :
Imagine I start a pro-life day at my local school. Naturally I am going to expect the pro-choice camp to either protest my day in some way – pressure the school from ever allowing it – or start a pro-choice day of our own.
And why would you expect that Fritz? What is it you would be planning to do on this pro-life day that you would expect such a response? If your support for the pro-life stance is so weak that you aren’t even willing to try because some people might be opposed to it, then that is something you have to live with. The people involved with DOS felt strongly enough about fighting bigotry against gay and transgendered people that they weren’t going to be deterred because some people wouldn’t like it.
You believe opposing efforts to stop bigotry and violence against gay and transgendered youth is “fair-minded & reasonable?”
I’m sure no one would object to your silent protest for your pro-life position. Some may not agree, but I’m absolutely certain that there would be no counter protest, no organized walkout, and certainly no preachers screaming through bullhorns outside.
And no one would (laughably) be calling your silence “disruptive”
You see, Fitz, you are projecting your own obnoxiousness on others and assuming they have as little moral character and basic decency as you.
Jayhuck, Tim & Ken
You reveal yourselves to be ignorant of the consistent policy of most of the populace & the long history of education policy on these issues.
No matter the “cause” or zeal of those sponsoring it, – public school’s are ripe for political rancor by multiple agendas. The common good of students and the educational environment in never served by the regression of our public schools into activist political rallies.
Only homosexual groups have routinely tried to promote there cause’s through the captive audience that is children and the school day. This reveals the weakness of their agenda and the necessity to form other children’s minds while still young.