Religion and the LGBTQ community.

[NewLakotah]

Lying is a sin, Parkus :^].

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallace_v._Jaffree

I can state for a fact that I was allowed to pray in slient during my time in public high school. Parkus, and others seem to hold the belief if the school does not lead nor encourage the prayer, then it’s not vaild...

Technically speaking I was allowed to pray while say during lunch break. However, there was no special "moment of silence" before school. Its more about if the school simply allows for the function to continue regularly and ensuring that it can be protected, something that doesn't exist.

[Delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol]

I can state for a fact that I was allowed to pray in slient during my time in public high school. Parkus, and others seem to hold the belief if the school does not lead nor encourage the prayer, then it’s not vaild...

Technically speaking I was allowed to pray while say during lunch break. However, there was no special "moment of silence" before school. Its more about if the school simply allows for the function to continue regularly and ensuring that it can be protected, something that doesn't exist.

I only think there should be a “moment of silence” during a memorial event or something similar. I don’t think having them just for the sake of having them is a good use of school time. Plus, if students wish, they can organize their own prayer groups and pray before school. The school should permit such activities but they should not lead prayer nor should they encourage it.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I don't disagree with your take, you see, but the problem is that some aren't being that reasonable. Take Parkus, for example. He has stated, out right, that he doesn't want this education in public schools, period. And, at least in the US, the amount of kids that get bullied for being gay, or plain different, is alarming. I can't give numbers on suicides stemming from this because I don't have those but it has become a problem.

I'll admit there are some extreme points on "my" side, if you agree that there is on "your" side.

I can admit to that. Both side have some extreme ideas.

As for sex education, I already disagree with most of what is being taught and think it needs to be restricted, but am not opposed to having se education, simply because I know most teens are going to church, are not Christians and therefore don't hold to morality like I do. Also, kids in general, teens especially, are dumber than a sack of hammers. I know cause I was one. That being said, if you are attempting to truly stay "neutral", you have to integrate what a very large segment of the population believes. Either you avoid the subject and leave it to the parents, or you represent a broader picture rather than labeling those that oppose your views as either homophobic or backwards.

Ideally, the parents should be the ones doing this. But since many parents aren't taking p the torch and teaching their kids about sex education, many schools have had to step in.

If you have a student body that has students that are LGBTQ, and these students probably aren't getting any information from the parents, especially if they haven't come out or are still confused, to me it makes sense for the school to educate them there too.

As for bullying issues, I find very few points to disagree on. I don't like bullying as much as the next person, possibly more since I was a victim as much as anybody can be occasionally. However, simply stating that that is all the you want, that we teach kids not to bully other kids, no matter what. I feel that there is more to that, or at least, a vast majority of people want more than that and are getting a lot more than that.

I can only talk about myself, as someone who also was bullied in school, and a potential parent, what I want is for a potential child of mine not to be the victim of bullying just for being different. Like I said before, more so when that difference comes from something beyond his or her control.

[NewLakotah]

Technically speaking I was allowed to pray while say during lunch break. However, there was no special "moment of silence" before school. Its more about if the school simply allows for the function to continue regularly and ensuring that it can be protected, something that doesn't exist.

I only think there should be a “moment of silence” during a memorial event or something similar. I don’t think having them just for the sake of having them is a good use of school time. Plus, if students wish, they can organize their own prayer groups and pray before school. The school should permit such activities but they should not lead prayer nor should they encourage it.

Except stuff like that has been interfered with.

[Delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol]

I only think there should be a “moment of silence” during a memorial event or something similar. I don’t think having them just for the sake of having them is a good use of school time. Plus, if students wish, they can organize their own prayer groups and pray before school. The school should permit such activities but they should not lead prayer nor should they encourage it.

Except stuff like that has been interfered with.

Not in the United States. There are Christian student groups along with Muslim student groups. Also, there was a large population of Native Americans at my school, which they had a group for Natives and allowed them to pray also.

[NewLakotah]

I'll admit there are some extreme points on "my" side, if you agree that there is on "your" side.

I can admit to that. Both side have some extreme ideas.

As for sex education, I already disagree with most of what is being taught and think it needs to be restricted, but am not opposed to having se education, simply because I know most teens are going to church, are not Christians and therefore don't hold to morality like I do. Also, kids in general, teens especially, are dumber than a sack of hammers. I know cause I was one. That being said, if you are attempting to truly stay "neutral", you have to integrate what a very large segment of the population believes. Either you avoid the subject and leave it to the parents, or you represent a broader picture rather than labeling those that oppose your views as either homophobic or backwards.

Ideally, the parents should be the ones doing this. But since many parents aren't taking p the torch and teaching their kids about sex education, many schools have had to step in.

If you have a student body that has students that are LGBTQ, and these students probably aren't getting any information from the parents, especially if they haven't come out or are still confused, to me it makes sense for the school to educate them there too.

As for bullying issues, I find very few points to disagree on. I don't like bullying as much as the next person, possibly more since I was a victim as much as anybody can be occasionally. However, simply stating that that is all the you want, that we teach kids not to bully other kids, no matter what. I feel that there is more to that, or at least, a vast majority of people want more than that and are getting a lot more than that.

I can only talk about myself, as someone who also was bullied in school, and a potential parent, what I want is for a potential child of mine not to be the victim of bullying just for being different. Like I said before, more so when that difference comes from something beyond his or her control.

If the goal is either to be fair and/or neutral. Representation of different views should be allowed. If sex education is simply about informing children on the dangers and issues with unprotected pre-marital sex and the long lasting consequences of multiple partners and the issues with STDs, i see no issue with sex education. However, many want and are attempting to take things farther. More and more, especially in Canada, they are doing more "education" on transgenderism and accepting children who identify or want to identify as the opposite gender extremely early in age. At what point do you take issue and cross the line?

[NewLakotah]

Except stuff like that has been interfered with.

Not in the United States. There are Christian student groups along with Muslim student groups. Also, there was a large population of Native Americans at my school, which they had a group for Natives and allowed them to pray also.

I went to high school in the United States, so I can confirm many of the issues with schools. Flagpole prayer meets were cancelled in my district. Various schools across the country have outright banned bible studies and even Bibles within school classrooms.

yes, America is definitely better than Canada, but to make an statement that is not getting worse would be a blind one.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I can admit to that. Both side have some extreme ideas.



Ideally, the parents should be the ones doing this. But since many parents aren't taking p the torch and teaching their kids about sex education, many schools have had to step in.

If you have a student body that has students that are LGBTQ, and these students probably aren't getting any information from the parents, especially if they haven't come out or are still confused, to me it makes sense for the school to educate them there too.



I can only talk about myself, as someone who also was bullied in school, and a potential parent, what I want is for a potential child of mine not to be the victim of bullying just for being different. Like I said before, more so when that difference comes from something beyond his or her control.

If the goal is either to be fair and/or neutral. Representation of different views should be allowed. If sex education is simply about informing children on the dangers and issues with unprotected pre-marital sex and the long lasting consequences of multiple partners and the issues with STDs, i see no issue with sex education. However, many want and are attempting to take things farther. More and more, especially in Canada, they are doing more "education" on transgenderism and accepting children who identify or want to identify as the opposite gender extremely early in age. At what point do you take issue and cross the line?

As a transgender ally, I see no problem with educating about transgender issues or that not everyone identifies with their biological sex. My main focus there would be on how that information is conveyed. You're not going to be super explicit with an 8 year old, or even a 12-13 year old. But once the children are a bit older, by all means, educate them about these issues.

And they can object to these people if their religious precepts prompt them too. That's not a crime. But one can object without being an asshole. One can object without aggression. Mind you, I say this to both sides of the equation, not just to those who disagree with transgender people.

[Delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol]

Not in the United States. There are Christian student groups along with Muslim student groups. Also, there was a large population of Native Americans at my school, which they had a group for Natives and allowed them to pray also.

I went to high school in the United States, so I can confirm many of the issues with schools. Flagpole prayer meets were cancelled in my district. Various schools across the country have outright banned bible studies and even Bibles within school classrooms.

yes, America is definitely better than Canada, but to make an statement that is not getting worse would be a blind one.

And that’s unfortunate, but I can’t say that it was the case for me. Were the prayer meets lead by the school? That would be my first question. I would also like to say that I think comprehensive theology courses should be offered as an elective for high school students. And what I mean by this is the same type of theology course they would receive in a secular Higher education institution

[NewLakotah]

I went to high school in the United States, so I can confirm many of the issues with schools. Flagpole prayer meets were cancelled in my district. Various schools across the country have outright banned bible studies and even Bibles within school classrooms.

yes, America is definitely better than Canada, but to make an statement that is not getting worse would be a blind one.

And that’s unfortunate, but I can’t say that it was the case for me. Were the prayer meets lead by the school? That would be my first question. I would also like to say that I think comprehensive theology courses should be offered as an elective for high school students. And what I mean by this is the same type of theology course they would receive in a secular Higher education institution

Definitely didn't have a theology course at my school, too poor for chemistry books, certainly no money for religious conversations. But other schools in my district may or may not, but I've never actually heard of theology taught in HS, not in Florida anyways. The prayer meets were lead by students and youth groups from what I remember.

If the goal is either to be fair and/or neutral. Representation of different views should be allowed. If sex education is simply about informing children on the dangers and issues with unprotected pre-marital sex and the long lasting consequences of multiple partners and the issues with STDs, i see no issue with sex education. However, many want and are attempting to take things farther. More and more, especially in Canada, they are doing more "education" on transgenderism and accepting children who identify or want to identify as the opposite gender extremely early in age. At what point do you take issue and cross the line?

As a transgender ally, I see no problem with educating about transgender issues or that not everyone identifies with their biological sex. My main focus there would be on how that information is conveyed. You're not going to be super explicit with an 8 year old, or even a 12-13 year old. But once the children are a bit older, by all means, educate them about these issues.

And they can object to these people if their religious precepts prompt them too. That's not a crime. But one can object without being an asshole. One can object without aggression. Mind you, I say this to both sides of the equation, not just to those who disagree with transgender people.

Ontario's new sex education is very explict. Not that I know first hand, but from relatives who have had their kids go through it, as Christians, and be subjected to intense forcing of the idea that sex and gender are two sepeate things, and the opposite beliefs that they themselves hold. Meaning that they are the ones having their beliefs taken away and another one forced unto them at a very young age.

Yet, that is not actually allowed. Schools are not actually allowed to present an opposing view if that view is rooted in religon.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

And that’s unfortunate, but I can’t say that it was the case for me. Were the prayer meets lead by the school? That would be my first question. I would also like to say that I think comprehensive theology courses should be offered as an elective for high school students. And what I mean by this is the same type of theology course they would receive in a secular Higher education institution

Definitely didn't have a theology course at my school, too poor for chemistry books, certainly no money for religious conversations. But other schools in my district may or may not, but I've never actually heard of theology taught in HS, not in Florida anyways. The prayer meets were lead by students and youth groups from what I remember.

As a transgender ally, I see no problem with educating about transgender issues or that not everyone identifies with their biological sex. My main focus there would be on how that information is conveyed. You're not going to be super explicit with an 8 year old, or even a 12-13 year old. But once the children are a bit older, by all means, educate them about these issues.

And they can object to these people if their religious precepts prompt them too. That's not a crime. But one can object without being an asshole. One can object without aggression. Mind you, I say this to both sides of the equation, not just to those who disagree with transgender people.

Ontario's new sex education is very explict. Not that I know first hand, but from relatives who have had their kids go through it, as Christians, and be subjected to intense forcing of the idea that sex and gender are two sepeate things, and the opposite beliefs that they themselves hold. Meaning that they are the ones having their beliefs taken away and another one forced unto them at a very young age.

Yet, that is not actually allowed. Schools are not actually allowed to present an opposing view if that view is rooted in religon.

In that case, then Canada is doing it wrong. The same way I seek to be treated with respect, those who believe in a higher power or what have you, should also be treated with respect. If the idea is to promote inclusion and respect, doing it this way will just cause the opposite.

[NewLakotah]

Definitely didn't have a theology course at my school, too poor for chemistry books, certainly no money for religious conversations. But other schools in my district may or may not, but I've never actually heard of theology taught in HS, not in Florida anyways. The prayer meets were lead by students and youth groups from what I remember.


Ontario's new sex education is very explict. Not that I know first hand, but from relatives who have had their kids go through it, as Christians, and be subjected to intense forcing of the idea that sex and gender are two sepeate things, and the opposite beliefs that they themselves hold. Meaning that they are the ones having their beliefs taken away and another one forced unto them at a very young age.

Yet, that is not actually allowed. Schools are not actually allowed to present an opposing view if that view is rooted in religon.

In that case, then Canada is doing it wrong. The same way I seek to be treated with respect, those who believe in a higher power or what have you, should also be treated with respect. If the idea is to promote inclusion and respect, doing it this way will just cause the opposite.

Its not just Canada. As you talked about earlier. Schools cannot directly express support for religious beliefs. Period.

All public schools have to sponsor programs only that:
Have a secular purpose;
Must neither advance nor inhibit religion; and
Must not result in an excessive entanglement between government and religion.

With this, it is impossible for the school to make any sort of positive input from a differing view, even if they wanted to. If they were to say that marriage is between one man and one woman, they would clearly be advancing a religious belief. It is, therefore, impossible by current standards to actually educate kids on both sides of any issue that involves religious/personal beliefs. Education in America is clearly heading towards the same path as Canada is, considering it wasn't that long ago that Canada was right about where America is now, and America is certainly heading the same direction.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

In that case, then Canada is doing it wrong. The same way I seek to be treated with respect, those who believe in a higher power or what have you, should also be treated with respect. If the idea is to promote inclusion and respect, doing it this way will just cause the opposite.

Its not just Canada. As you talked about earlier. Schools cannot directly express support for religious beliefs. Period.

All public schools have to sponsor programs only that:
Have a secular purpose;
Must neither advance nor inhibit religion; and
Must not result in an excessive entanglement between government and religion.

With this, it is impossible for the school to make any sort of positive input from a differing view, even if they wanted to. If they were to say that marriage is between one man and one woman, they would clearly be advancing a religious belief. It is, therefore, impossible by current standards to actually educate kids on both sides of any issue that involves religious/personal beliefs. Education in America is clearly heading towards the same path as Canada is, considering it wasn't that long ago that Canada was right about where America is now, and America is certainly heading the same direction.

And there's nothing wrong with any of that. The United States was established as a secular nation and that's how things are.

[The Alma Mater]

If they were to say that marriage is between one man and one woman, they would clearly be advancing a religious belief.

And hindering religious beliefs that allow polygamy, gay marriages, marriage to a deity etc.
Still, they cannot even mention that those views exist ? Why ?

[NewLakotah]

Its not just Canada. As you talked about earlier. Schools cannot directly express support for religious beliefs. Period.

All public schools have to sponsor programs only that:
Have a secular purpose;
Must neither advance nor inhibit religion; and
Must not result in an excessive entanglement between government and religion.

With this, it is impossible for the school to make any sort of positive input from a differing view, even if they wanted to. If they were to say that marriage is between one man and one woman, they would clearly be advancing a religious belief. It is, therefore, impossible by current standards to actually educate kids on both sides of any issue that involves religious/personal beliefs. Education in America is clearly heading towards the same path as Canada is, considering it wasn't that long ago that Canada was right about where America is now, and America is certainly heading the same direction.

And there's nothing wrong with any of that. The United States was established as a secular nation and that's how things are.

So secular nation means that all people have to be secular and all nonsecular beliefs and speech should be silenced and forced out of the public view?

[NewLakotah]

If they were to say that marriage is between one man and one woman, they would clearly be advancing a religious belief.

And hindering religious beliefs that allow polygamy, gay marriages, marriage to a deity etc.
Still, they cannot even mention that those views exist ? Why ?

As far as I know, they aren't going to be advocating a one man one woman marriage on religious beliefs, they certainly won't for one man many women religious beliefs.

Not within that realm. Maybe a history class, if you have a good enough teacher

[The Free Joy State]

In that case, then Canada is doing it wrong. The same way I seek to be treated with respect, those who believe in a higher power or what have you, should also be treated with respect. If the idea is to promote inclusion and respect, doing it this way will just cause the opposite.

Its not just Canada. As you talked about earlier. Schools cannot directly express support for religious beliefs. Period.

All public schools have to sponsor programs only that:
Have a secular purpose;
Must neither advance nor inhibit religion; and
Must not result in an excessive entanglement between government and religion.

With this, it is impossible for the school to make any sort of positive input from a differing view, even if they wanted to. If they were to say that marriage is between one man and one woman, they would clearly be advancing a religious belief. It is, therefore, impossible by current standards to actually educate kids on both sides of any issue that involves religious/personal beliefs. Education in America is clearly heading towards the same path as Canada is, considering it wasn't that long ago that Canada was right about where America is now, and America is certainly heading the same direction.

In the UK, religious education is compulsory in state-funded schools. I remember learning that there were different religious groups that disapproved of sex before marriage and about different faiths' attitudes to LGBTQ relationships and abortion and so on (and how they varied by denomination and interpretation).

Science and sex education was always secular, however. I remember it beginning in around year six (age 10), with the basic biology ("your body is changing"), and getting to sex and relationships a year later. It's pretty comprehensive (covering contraception and abortion, STIs, LGBTQ issues, and so on from a strictly scientific viewpoint), which I think is how it should be. I think, now, they also cover good relationships and sexual harassment.

But -- I don't know how it is in other countries -- parents can withdraw their children from both subjects, if they want.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

And there's nothing wrong with any of that. The United States was established as a secular nation and that's how things are.

So secular nation means that all people have to be secular and all nonsecular beliefs and speech should be silenced and forced out of the public view?

Nope, that's literally not what a secular nations means at all unless you're a devoutly religious person with a severe persecution complex. It means religion needs to remain out of the government and public education sphere.

[NewLakotah]

So secular nation means that all people have to be secular and all nonsecular beliefs and speech should be silenced and forced out of the public view?

Nope, that's literally not what a secular nations means at all unless you're a devoutly religious person with a severe persecution complex. It means religion needs to remain out of the government and public education sphere.

You mean like in France where they banned the hijab in 2010. 6 years earlier, they banned all obvious religious dress or items in public schools. In the name of secularism.

I don't actually don't believe persecution is happening in America at all. Just a suppression of the rights of all people, not only Christians, to have their views expressed

[NewLakotah]

Its not just Canada. As you talked about earlier. Schools cannot directly express support for religious beliefs. Period.

All public schools have to sponsor programs only that:
Have a secular purpose;
Must neither advance nor inhibit religion; and
Must not result in an excessive entanglement between government and religion.

With this, it is impossible for the school to make any sort of positive input from a differing view, even if they wanted to. If they were to say that marriage is between one man and one woman, they would clearly be advancing a religious belief. It is, therefore, impossible by current standards to actually educate kids on both sides of any issue that involves religious/personal beliefs. Education in America is clearly heading towards the same path as Canada is, considering it wasn't that long ago that Canada was right about where America is now, and America is certainly heading the same direction.

In the UK, religious education is compulsory in state-funded schools. I remember learning that there were different religious groups that disapproved of sex before marriage and about different faiths' attitudes to LGBTQ relationships and abortion and so on (and how they varied by denomination and interpretation).

Science and sex education was always secular, however. I remember it beginning in around year six (age 10), with the basic biology ("your body is changing"), and getting to sex and relationships a year later. It's pretty comprehensive (covering contraception and abortion, STIs, LGBTQ issues, and so on from a strictly scientific viewpoint), which I think is how it should be. I think, now, they also cover good relationships and sexual harassment.

But -- I don't know how it is in other countries -- parents can withdraw their children from both subjects, if they want.

There is no religious education like that in America, as far as I know not in Canada either. I find that good, as long as its presented properly and on an equal footing as all else.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Nope, that's literally not what a secular nations means at all unless you're a devoutly religious person with a severe persecution complex. It means religion needs to remain out of the government and public education sphere.

You mean like in France where they banned the hijab in 2010. 6 years earlier, they banned all obvious religious dress or items in public schools. In the name of secularism.

I don't actually don't believe persecution is happening in America at all. Just a suppression of the rights of all people, not only Christians, to have their views expressed

That's absolutely not how secularism in America works at all, religious influence, teachings and edicts are to remain out of the government and education. People can still have their religious garb and items, nobody's rights are being suppressed like that here and ensuring we aren't run as a theocracy is not suppression.

[The Free Joy State]

In the UK, religious education is compulsory in state-funded schools. I remember learning that there were different religious groups that disapproved of sex before marriage and about different faiths' attitudes to LGBTQ relationships and abortion and so on (and how they varied by denomination and interpretation).

Science and sex education was always secular, however. I remember it beginning in around year six (age 10), with the basic biology ("your body is changing"), and getting to sex and relationships a year later. It's pretty comprehensive (covering contraception and abortion, STIs, LGBTQ issues, and so on from a strictly scientific viewpoint), which I think is how it should be. I think, now, they also cover good relationships and sexual harassment.

But -- I don't know how it is in other countries -- parents can withdraw their children from both subjects, if they want.

There is no religious education like that in America, as far as I know not in Canada either. I find that good, as long as its presented properly and on an equal footing as all else.

Schools vary IIRC, but I remember averaging (this was before I chose my electives, so was the compulsory curriculum) two hours a week. That's less than English, Maths and Science, but the same as the other non-core subjects (like History, Geography and D&T).

It was pretty thorough; we studied several denominations of Christianity, as well as Islam, Judaism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Humanism (over the years). The teachers were, at least my later primary school years and high school, very neutral. Not remotely denigrating of religion (or especially promoting, even of their own faiths). They explained beliefs, and the texts that were used to support it. Then they presented opposite views, and asked what we thought. It was a very thought-provoking class.

Although, years later, when I was working in a secular primary school (with little five year olds) they used every religious festival to teach about the religious origins, of all religions -- I remember them covering Easter, Diwali, Sukkot, Christmas of course (there were more, but I can't remember right now). So comprehensive religious education is still alive and well.

[NewLakotah]

You mean like in France where they banned the hijab in 2010. 6 years earlier, they banned all obvious religious dress or items in public schools. In the name of secularism.

I don't actually don't believe persecution is happening in America at all. Just a suppression of the rights of all people, not only Christians, to have their views expressed

That's absolutely not how secularism in America works at all, religious influence, teachings and edicts are to remain out of the government and education. People can still have their religious garb and items, nobody's rights are being suppressed like that here and ensuring we aren't run as a theocracy is not suppression.

No? Why do we all of a sudden have to talk about America as if its the only country in the world that matters, lol?

I'm simply giving you real world examples of secularization that is happening in other countries that are far more down the road of secularism that the United States, and where certain groups in America want to head towards. America is hardly a good example of a secular nation. It would be much better to look at nations like France or Canada, who embarked far stronger towards secularism then that of the United States.

But what about schools? Can kids force their religious beliefs on others in public schools? Or should stuff like that be banned, like in France.