California Governor Signs Landmark Bill Requiring Teaching of Gay History

[Ektar]

he's not making good points. he's trolling :P white males are advantaged? yes. white-male supremacy? no.

wording matters.


and he just goes around trolling so I don;'t give him the benefit of the doubt..

[Feachie]

to make that a true statement, need to be more specific imo. white males are advantaged everywhere there is a white majority. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Slathar]

Yea. It was the black men who used whites to build the largest economy in history.

[Slathar]

Furthermore, we stole this country from Native Americans and what used to be Mexico. Manifest destiny for real.

[Harrison]

You're slacking on the trolling boy.

It's too obvious.

[Beauregard]

I'd support this bill nationally. I view it as a huge victory in the culture wars for my secular brethren. Teaching that lbgt's aren't immorals, shitheads, prostitutes, and other miscreants they are grouped with in the bible could encourage more young religious students to examine the bible more closely or consider its sources.

I listen to AFR pretty often when in my car and today a caller made it on the air who, after rambling about the 2nd Amendment and taking back "our" white house, declared that he would take his shotgun and blow the brains out of anyone who told his boy that its ok to have sex with another boy. The far right in America is really going apeshit over this bill and I fucking love it.

[Ektar]

if it's worthy of being taught, let it be taught. I'm not saying don't teach it; nor am I saying it's not worthy of being taught.

I'm far from being in a position to say what's worthy of being taught, but civil rights movement? a significant piece of history. gay rights movement (we'll call it)? could be.

But to mandate that gay people from the past be shoved into the curriculum once they've already been deemed not important enough to make the cut? no.

[Stormhowl]

Originally Posted by Ektar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm far from being in a position to say what's worthy of being taught, but civil rights movement? a significant piece of history. gay rights movement (we'll call it)? could be.

If the civil rights movement was a significant piece of history that's taught in schools, then the gay rights movement should also be given the same attention. Either all of it is okay, or none of it is okay.

I suppose my only issue is with your "could be", honestly. /shrug

But to mandate that gay people from the past be shoved into the curriculum once they've already been deemed not important enough to make the cut? no.

If I may ask, what do you base this off of? The article linked in the original post spent 2 paragraphs talking about the decision, and the rest of the article detailing various reactions from the conservative religions that think teaching history is indoctrinating children to be gay (a laughable claim, to be sure).

I wish to know where you've gleamed this information. :/

[Ektar]

however, it's already been brought up that cali may be better off than nyc and actually have more than history classes, so putting gay stuff into a sociology class or whatever I can see. sociology is a bit more tangible than history.

but I'd still argue to the death about the other thing I mentioned with forcing extra women figures into history.

[Prince]

naez raped by fat girl in hot tub while tripping on acid