Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Chicago proposes gay-friendly high school.....Fundies say two men can't make a baby

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 06:50 AM
Original message
Chicago proposes gay-friendly high school.....Fundies say two men can't make a baby
These people....... :crazy:



from OneNewsNow, the Fundie-friendly news service of the American Family Association:



Windy City proposes 'gay'-friendly school
Pete Chagnon and Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 10/14/2008 6:00:00 AM


A battleground is forming in Chicago over a proposed "gay"-friendly high school for homosexual, lesbian, and transgendered students, or any other students who want to attend. According to reports, taxpayer money would be used to fund the school.

The school would be called the Pride Campus of Social Justice High School, and plans are under way to possibly open its doors in 2010. Advocates of the school say it is needed in order to combat the bullying, dropout, and depression rate among homosexual students. The Chicago Sun-Times quotes a member of the school's design team who says students at the school would be taught about "gay and lesbian historical figures" so those students "have heroes."

Laurie Higgins and her group, the Illinois Family Institute, are at the forefront of the fray. "A high school that is dedicated to or centrally focused on homosexuality necessarily requires that public educators have come to some prior conclusions about the nature and morality of homosexuality," she points out. Those are aspects of homosexuality that she says stand "far outside the purview of public educators."

Pro-family advocate Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (Caution: This website contains graphic images) takes issue with the fact that the school would be run on taxpayer monies. "The taxpayers -- whether they're Christians, Orthodox Jews, Muslims -- they will be funding (this) pro-homosexual indoctrination school for so-called 'gay' youth," he explains.

The activist also takes issue with the prospective principal of the school -- 29-year-old Chad Weiden -- who was asked what it would have been like if had had a school like Pride Campus to attend.

"...He says quote: 'I would have made progress a lot earlier. I would have had a model of what it meant to be a gay man -- that a gay man could be in a committed relationship, a marriage; could have children. I didn't know that was possible.'

"Well, it's not possible," LaBarbera reacts. "Two men cannot produce a child -- and they can't, quote, 'have children.'"

Higgins agrees that public funding for the school would be inappropriate. And as for the rationale for the school being needed to combat bullying of homosexual students, she believes rules of conduct should be established and enforced on an equal basis. "The task is to combat harassment and abuse and bullying, while not affirming disordered thinking and immoral behavior," she explains.

And while she acknowledges that some homosexual students are bullied, Higgins' experience in public education reveals another group that she feels suffers more. "I can say with assurance that the kids who are very conservative Christians are probably the ones who are the most ridiculed or made fun of," she states.

Chicago Public Schools is soliciting public input for a vote. LaBarbera and Higgins both encourage concerned Chicago parents to petition that the school not be allowed to open.


http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=282984 (if Rick-rolled, you can access the story from www.afa.net - scroll down to the OneNewsNow area)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MiniMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 07:00 AM
Response to Original message
1. The conservatives have to be careful with the logic that there could be a baby
in a relationship as a definition of marriage. Does that mean that a woman who has had a hysterectomy for medical reasons, or a man who has had a vasectomy can't get married? They don't have any possibility of there being a baby in that relationship either. Those groups of people can't have a baby either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 07:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC