I find myself in the odd position this morning of supporting the Allans.

[Burney]

A

One thing that could go very wrong is if you're gay but are taught at home that being gay is sinful. Some might even call this child abuse.

Call me weird, but I'm pretty chilled about schools making some efforts to correct for this.

Anyway, what has Owen Jones had to say about all this? Presumably he's come out all guns blazing and condemned the homophobic protester parents?

Child abuse? Deary, deary me, m. Don't talk such utter rot. Children have been being raised with the notion that their sexualities are sinful and shameful for millennia. It's not child abuse, it's a societal function of the dominance of Abrahamic religions (which has also had numerous upsides, btw).

And schools aren't talking about correcting it, they're essentially trying to convince children that heterosexuality is not the default setting for mankind and that homosexuality isn't aberrant.
Those things a/ simply aren't true and b/ are not positions that it is the business of schools to be proselytising to small children.

Oh, and Owen has actually attacked the MP who defended the muslim parents. He didn't risk actually attacking the Allans.

[Monty92]

Child abuse? Deary, deary me, m. Don't talk such utter rot. Children have been being raised with the notion that their sexualities are sinful and shameful for millennia. It's not child abuse, it's a societal function of the dominance of Abrahamic religions (which has also had numerous upsides, btw).

And schools aren't talking about correcting it, they're essentially trying to convince children that heterosexuality is not the default setting for mankind and that homosexuality isn't aberrant.
Those things a/ simply aren't true and b/ are not positions that it is the business of schools to be proselytising to small children.

Oh, and Owen has actually attacked the MP who defended the muslim parents. He didn't risk actually attacking the Allans.

This is where, as a critic of Islam, you get into difficult territory. If you were consistent you would be equally scathing of the doctrines of the Abrahamic religions that decree homosexuality to be a sin (doctrines that have and continue to destroy lives) and yet you instead defend them with the very same kind of weasel words ("numerous upsides") you hear from Allans who point to all the pages of the Koran that promote peace and love.

[Sir C]

This is where, as a critic of Islam, you get into difficult territory. If you were consistent you would be equally scathing of the doctrines of the Abrahamic religions that decree homosexuality to be a sin (doctrines that have and continue to destroy lives) and yet you instead defend them with the very same kind of weasel words ("numerous upsides") you hear from Allans who point to all the pages of the Koran that promote peace and love.

Have those naughty Baptists been chucking pooves off tall buildings again? They really are a pain. Not as bad as the Quakers crashing aeroplanes into skyscrapers though.

[Burney]

This is where, as a critic of Islam, you get into difficult territory. If you were consistent you would be equally scathing of the doctrines of the Abrahamic religions that decree homosexuality to be a sin (doctrines that have and continue to destroy lives) and yet you instead defend them with the very same kind of weasel words ("numerous upsides") you hear from Allans who point to all the pages of the Koran that promote peace and love.

Only if you're arguing that things can only be either good or bad, m. It is possible for me to find some of the doctrines of these religions abhorrent while also accepting that the religions themselves have also had beneficial effects for the civilisations they have formed.

Besides which, of course, there are not many societies in human history that have been wholly accepting of homosexuality (even the Greeks abhorred sodomy, for instance). There are perfectly good evolutionary reasons for this that have nothing to do with religion. However, the question of to what extent homophobia is innate is one people tend to shy away from. Religion makes a very handy scapegoat in that sense.

[Ash]

and with heterosexual practices too, I would have thought...

another Monty Python opportunity...

"What's wrong with a simple kiss, boy? You don't have to go stampeding for the clitoris!"

[WES]

Only if you're arguing that things can only be either good or bad, m. It is possible for me to find some of the doctrines of these religions abhorrent while also accepting that the religions themselves have also had beneficial effects for the civilisations they have formed.

Besides which, of course, there are not many societies in human history that have been wholly accepting of homosexuality (even the Greeks abhorred sodomy, for instance). There are perfectly good evolutionary reasons for this that have nothing to do with religion. However, the question of to what extent homophobia is innate is one people tend to shy away from. Religion makes a very handy scapegoat in that sense.

But aren't the schools just teaching that we shouldn't discriminate against homosexuals? That's hardly encouraging it, is it? And isn't it against the law to discriminate against someone based on their sexuality? In which case we are teaching children basic morality, like stealing is wrong, physically assaulting someone is wrong etc.

[Burney]

But aren't the schools just teaching that we shouldn't discriminate against ho mosexuals? That's hardly encouraging it, is it? And isn't it against the law to discriminate against someone based on their sexuality? In which case we are teaching children basic morality, like stealing is wrong, physically assaulting someone is wrong etc.

But that is not what they’re teaching. If it were, I would have no objection since that - as you say - is the law.

[IUFG]

But that is not what they’re teaching. If it were, I would have no objection since that - as you say - is the law.

They should teach equality and diversity and be done with it.

Reproduction should be for those who study biology.

[WES]

But that is not what they’re teaching. If it were, I would have no objection since that - as you say - is the law.

So give me an example of some pro-gay propaganda which in your view goes beyond teaching that we should not discriminate.

I appreciate that the line between the two can be very thin, but I think that is part of the issue.

[Burney]

So give me an example of some pro-gay propaganda which in your view goes beyond teaching that we should not discriminate.

I appreciate that the line between the two can be very thin, but I think that is part of the issue.

How about you google what is being taught and tell me what you think instead?