All schools must allow ‘gay-straight alliances’ under new anti-bullying bill

[AxeGrrl]

Because the kids aren't grown up yet, and are not yet thinking beyond the level of that thing between Homo-Erectus and Homo-Neandertalis.

`
But seriously folks.....puberty is precisely when one's sexual orientation uh 'asserts itself' and sexual orientation is the issue here, If the kids want to start a "gay straight alliance", i haven't heard any argument of substance explaining why they shouldn't be allowed to.

`

I have not found one person who
defends those shrill voices opposed to the anti bullying bill, even my conservative friends.

`
Ditto. Even among my Catholic friends. The ones up in arms about this can't, with any intellectual or ethical integrity, claim to represent all Catholics.

Not that that really matters, since we're talking about publicly-funded schools with tons of non-Catholic students attending them.

`

 

[Omicron]

I am so sick and tired of this impositional debate about who another is attracted to that I might as well be a jerk and tell you what I think...

http://tunes.digitalock.com/Will.I.Am-AlexOnTheSpot.mp3

I think that guys attracted to women with narrow hips are cruel insensitive bastards of the type to have their DNA weeded out by mother nature in a generation.

Women with narrow hips are not fit to have kids, and will die without cesarian sections, therefore if you're a guy attracted to women with narrow hips you are a disgusting embarrasment to the species.

Aww... did I confuse a lot of you?

*sigh*... and people wonder why I go to church.

http://tunes.digitalock.com/fromsmallthingsonedaybigthingscome.mp3

What happened was that about 7-5 million years ago the evolutionary advantage for humans shifted from growing up as fast as possible to be as smart as possible.

It used to be it was good to pop out and stand up right away like a pony, but when tool-use kicked in, it was better to be smart, to figure out the most clever way to use the tools.

Smart tool-use comes from playing with them, with means spending more time as a kid in the mammalian learning-stage of growing up while fiddling with the things. Those who spent more time in the growing-up stage of fiddling (playing) with tools grew up to be the best tool users.

That lead to a sort of perversion, based upon how some people aged slower than others.

Pervert guys attracted to young girls at that time didn't know that the younglings they were attracted to were actually older than they looked, and nobody back then knew that all the hairy goof was doing was spawning a kid who would grow up slower because he got from his mother... tadda... slow-aging genes, and it's called "neotanization"... the genetic tendency to age slow, enabling a kid to spend more time as a kid in the tool learning stage, enabling him to finally grow up being a better tool user, with the byproduct of outliving their cousing apes by 40 years.

So... hmm... strait guys hate fags for not being attracted to people who don't grow beards and who look years younger than they are compared to the guys.

Whatever guys... now tell me where in the Bible it explains why guys have nipples.

 

[JLM]

`
But seriously folks.....puberty is precisely when one's sexual orientation uh 'asserts itself' and sexual orientation is the issue here, If the kids want to start a "gay straight alliance", i haven't heard any argument of substance explaining why they shouldn't be allowed to.

`


`

`

As far as I'm concerned anyone should be able to start any kind of a club they want to as long as no non members are affected.

 

[MapleDog]

I hear sometime on the news or from people who were or have their kids being bullied,that its always the bullied ones who are told to stay home or change school,why don't they discipline or talk with the parents of the bullies?

 

[JLM]

I hear sometime on the news or from people who were or have their kids being bullied,that its always the bullied ones who are told to stay home or change school,why don't they discipline or talk with the parents of the bullies?

There's two problems - one: teachers don't want to get involved and two: the parents of the bullier don't give a sh*t, their mentality dictates that their kid is just being "macho"- the strange part is the more macho a person tries to be the less macho he actually is. A "real man" is quiet and minds his own business.

 

[MapleDog]

There's two problems - one: teachers don't want to get involved and two: the parents of the bullier don't give a sh*t, their mentality dictates that their kid is just being "macho"- the strange part is the more macho a person tries to be the less macho he actually is. A "real man" is quiet and minds his own business.

Also it doesn't help when other kids gather around and yell kick his ass,kill him,and film it then ZOOM on youtube.

 

[karrie]

I like gerry's viewpoint on it. Especially given the current environment where kids have no f-ing clue what bullying IS. They think any conflict, any disagreement, anyone who doesn't like them and want to be around them, is 'bullying'. Any kid gets mad for any reason.... 'bully'. It's become, ironically, the newest form of bullying. I really wish there was a club at my kids' school to teach them what bullying actually is, and how to actually prevent it, not perpetuate it. Instead, they have this half cooked notion that boys who get mad, are bullies, and proceed to harass the **** out of them, never once realizing they're the epitomy of bullies.

A gay/straight alliance wouldn't necessarily be any better, and would do little to help the ugly girl, the fat kid, the smelly kid whose parents never buy him new clothes.


The whole thing has become the witch hunt of our kids' time, and from what I'm seeing, it actually is making the issue of teen depression, suicide, worse, by convincing kids that they're victims if someone doesn't get along with them.

 

[JLM]

I like gerry's viewpoint on it. Especially given the current environment where kids have no f-ing clue what bullying IS.

I question that, I think any kid who has been made to feel badly, knows damn well what bullying is! :smile:

 

[MapleDog]

We know there is a difference between bullying and the occasional fight,but apparently some do not,some of them think everything as to do with bullying,others minimise the cases where it is clearly bullying done by one or a group of kids ganging up on their target,target which they now can harass at school on the street and even online,by sending hate mails hatefull comments on twitter or facebook,to the point that some of the victims of bullying do not see other options than suicide.

 

[Spade]

Religions do not trump human rights, whether religions' spokesmen are imams, rabbis, or archbishops.

 

[karrie]

I question that, I think any kid who has been made to feel badly, knows damn well what bullying is! :smile:

You're proving my point.... EVERY kid has been made to feel badly. You don't get out of life without having been made to feel badly. Feeling bad doesn't mean you've been bullied. You are going to step on someone's toes and get yelled at. You're going to try to make a friend who doesn't want to be your friend. You're going to trip and people are going to laugh. And the fun part is.... you're going to do all the same things right back to someone else, without it being 'bullying'. Bullying is a repetitive act, meant only to hurt. There's a difference between that and the regular, everyday conflicts of life.

 

[TenPenny]

You're proving my point.... EVERY kid has been made to feel badly. You don't get out of life without having been made to feel badly. Feeling bad doesn't mean you've been bullied. You are going to step on someone's toes and get yelled at. You're going to try to make a friend who doesn't want to be your friend. You're going to trip and people are going to laugh. And the fun part is.... you're going to do all the same things right back to someone else, without it being 'bullying'. Bullying is a repetitive act, meant only to hurt. There's a difference between that and the regular, everyday conflicts of life.

If only those in charge of our education systems understood what you've said so clearly.

 

[karrie]

If only those in charge of our education systems understood what you've said so clearly.

I have a son in grade five with a bad temper. He's never sought out trouble with a kid. He's never singled anyone out. He's just always reacted inappropriately to stuff like getting hit, even accidentaly. The result has been the 'bully' label, which, once applied, gives the students a sense of justification to, you guessed it, bully him. This year is the first time in six years of schooling that a teacher has finally caught on to the cycle. There were some terribly disgruntled moms when little Suzy, Sally, and Sarah all got in-school detention for bullying the big bad bully.

It's a cycle I've seen repeated over and over with almost every elementary aged boy I know. If they push, if they're loud, they're a bully, and we don't tolerate bullying, so we can attack them as we see fit.

It's a witch hunt.

If you want to prevent bullying and teen suicide, the BEST thing to do, is not allow text messaging, e-mailing, or social media, between your children and classmates. If twenty people decide to harass your child via your home phone line, you'll notice really quickly.

 

[JLM]

You're proving my point.... EVERY kid has been made to feel badly. You don't get out of life without having been made to feel badly. Feeling bad doesn't mean you've been bullied. You are going to step on someone's toes and get yelled at. You're going to try to make a friend who doesn't want to be your friend. You're going to trip and people are going to laugh. And the fun part is.... you're going to do all the same things right back to someone else, without it being 'bullying'. Bullying is a repetitive act, meant only to hurt. There's a difference between that and the regular, everyday conflicts of life.

Yeah, I got to thinking later I didn't explain it too well. I should have said "made to feel badly, deliberately, out of meanness". Sorry for the confusion!

 

[karrie]

Yeah, I got to thinking later I didn't explain it too well. I should have said "made to feel badly, deliberately, out of meanness". Sorry for the confusion!

Okay, fair enough, but youre still wrong about everyone understanding it. My kids' swim club once threatened to phone the police in over 'bullying' because two kids pushed eachother in line waiting for instruction. 7 and 8 year old boys. A singular pushing match and they were threatening criminal action.

 

[TenPenny]

I have a son in grade five with a bad temper. He's never sought out trouble with a kid. He's never singled anyone out. He's just always reacted inappropriately to stuff like getting hit, even accidentaly. The result has been the 'bully' label, which, once applied, gives the students a sense of justification to, you guessed it, bully him. This year is the first time in six years of schooling that a teacher has finally caught on to the cycle. There were some terribly disgruntled moms when little Suzy, Sally, and Sarah all got in-school detention for bullying the big bad bully.

reminds me of my daughter in kindergarten. background - she was about at the 5 percentile range for height, and with a november birthday, she was 4 when she started kindergarten. when a 6 year old and his buddy picked her up and carried her across the schoolyard, against her will, she asked her 7 year old sister what to do, since she didn't see a teacher around, and upon that advice she decked the 6 year old, leaving a red mark where his glasses hit his face.

Of course, she got detention, and we had to meet with the teacher. I suggested to the teacher that if I carried her across the room against her will, she'd very likely punch me in the face, and things just kinda went nowhere after that.

She wasn't a bully, she was fighting back against physical assault.

But zero tolerance usually means zero thought into the whole situation.

 

[lone wolf]

I think the word "bully" has come to mean the same thing as rape, genocide, promise etc for dramatic impact. It does nothing to focus on the problem and even less to combat it.

 

[Machjo]

I do not see a conflict- all schools have to follow a curriculum- included in that would be that clubs that prevent bullying- such as Gay Straight - Make them all equal under the law- Do we not have laws for equal treatment.

I also believe that schools should have courses on the major religions- from the differences to the similarities- how else do the majority of students learn about another religion unless taught in a positive and neutral environment.

Certainly.

But that's still different from the question of, let's say, a private Jewish school that wants to be open on Christmas but closed on Passover. Or a private Muslim school that wants to work the break and lunch shcedules around prayer times.

As for a compulsory world religions course, I'm all for that, even for private schools.

As for friendship clubs like gay-straight alliances, I'm for that too. However, to pass a lw specifically about gay-straight alliance seems inefficient since that would mean that each time there is such a controversy the government will have to pass umpteen laws each for a differently-named group.

One would think the government would have thought of a law defining the conditions under which a club can be formed, without naming any specific club. That way, it won't have to pass another law for a different club every 5 years.

 

[JLM]

Okay, fair enough, but youre still wrong about everyone understanding it. My kids' swim club once threatened to phone the police in over 'bullying' because two kids pushed eachother in line waiting for instruction. 7 and 8 year old boys. A singular pushing match and they were threatening criminal action.

Actually Karrie, not bad for 7 and 8, they recognized what it is or fairly close, just didn't understand the parameters of a policeman's role.

 

[Machjo]

Let me clarify on the anti bullying in case someone thinks I am back tracking. I do NOT agree with clubs refered to as "gay-straight" alliances or any other variation on that title. More than just "gays" are bullied in schools and there is no reason at all to spot light just one form of bullying.

Agreed. And I think that's why I'm ambivalent about this.

As an example, would it make more sense for the government to pass one law against distracted driving, full stop, or:

pass a law against driving and talking on a cell phone one year, then driving and eating lunch another year, then driving and putting make-up another year.

Clearly it would make more sense to word the law in such a way as to deal with the root isse in it (distracted driving), rather than 1001 confusing laws each dealing with a specific example thereof. In the first instance, the law is clear; in the second the multiple laws would eventually get so convoluted that people would then just ignore them.

Same here. They should have worded the laws in such a way as to deal with the core issue (bullying, or perhaps something even more core than that if bullying itself is merely an example of some other more fundamental issue), rather than start on the path of passing another law each year dealing with one example after another.

Otherwise we're just creating jobs for lawyers.

In your opinion would Gay Teens be at the high end of a list of persons that are bullied-

Regardless. Is it better to have 1001 narrow laws, or one overarching one?

Cell-phones might be on the high end of distractions (ignoring intoxication which is not a distraction but an altered state of consciousness), but it would still make more sense to have one overarching laws against distractions rather than 1001 laws one for cell phones, one for lipstick, one for eating french fries, one for drinking Coca Cola, etc.

This is giving me a headache on so many levels I dont know where to begin.

Where to begin... hmm... in the first place, how about this:

What if a bunch of gay students want to form a club with no strait members?

I see no problem with that. What if a group of Jews want to create a club with no non-Jewish members? And bicycle enthusiats, and blacks, and Muslims, and Etheopieans, etc.

Are we to pass a separate law each year for the next 50 years to cover all possibilities?

Maybe we could do so in alphabetical order? Zimbabweans will have to wait a while!

Or howabout passing an overarching law worded to cover them all?

Our politicians need to use their time more efficiently here.