Virgins effort to indoctrinate the homosexual lifestyle at an early age

Virgin's effort to indoctrinate the homosexual lifestyle in kids from an early age.

https://www.virgin.com/virgin-unite...-discrimination-and-prejudice-educating-young

"We can prevent homophobia, discrimination and prejudice developing if we catch it early enough. This is why it’s vital to start educating children at primary and junior age, teaching them about equality and diversity, and introducing equality lessons which cover LGBT+ themes in an age appropriate way. We must teach new generations to respect one another, regardless of preferred identity or orientation."

 

They are not indoctrinating homosexuality, they are trying to eliminate bigotry and teaching respect for others.

A noble mission

 

They're blaming everyone else by saying they are discriminated against. This is not true. Most folks have bent over backward to accommodate their homosexual-mostly-leftist fringe life-style to the point of demands that we re-label our bathrooms!!! Then, we are asked to bend-over forward and take it when they try to shove their lifestyle on the rest of us.

 

Well equality was a founding principal of this nation. So we really already do that.

As far as homosexuals and transgender people. Is there any reason they shouldn't be equal?

 

Agreed.
I am 70.
I used to be homophobic (like Santorum and Pence) but then I GREW UP.
Now I don't care what other people do, it doesn't matter to me.

 

Well, the American people have been very accommodating. I wouldn't really want to live anywhere else. And the LGBT should acknowledge that. It's a shame they don't. But this isn't shoving anything on anybody. It's really quite pointless, most younger people already accept gay people. They likely know a couple.

 

That's not what I meant and I fully acknowledge that most of us are very accommodating. I was talking about SOME wanting to change the culture by trying to make us re-label our public, multi-stall bathrooms and claiming that what sex one is,is a matter of choice only.

I have always believed that sexuality runs the gamut for each sex. However the 'bell curve' is mostly heterosexual. I also believe that a child's environment can sway those at the outskirts of the curve however, hormones are (I believe) subject to change per environmental influences. We just need to admit that homosexuality and heterosexuality can be influenced and decide what's best.

 

I just wanted to speak up and say that yes Americans are accommodating and I may just be one voice. But I notice and am grateful for the freedoms we have.

I share your position with that. I don't think it's about accepting trans people, though I acknowledge that many people pushing this narrative insist that it is and hurl "blankophobia" terms at anybody making an argument against sex being a choice.

I disagree to a degree. I don't believe you can influence someone into homosexuality simply by saying that it's okay. I think there can be people that have a predisposition for homosexuality and there could be influences that help them realize that, but I don't think it's common. Most homosexuals know they are pretty early.

For the margin of error I'm allowing for that could be influenced, I think it takes a lot more than a teacher saying it's okay to influence them.

 

True that cd8ed. However sometimes we just can't fix the ignorance or the outright stupidity of others who try and twist the concept or meaning of a such a statement.

 

Parents and schools already do that. We don't (as parents and schools) need to - nor should we - pinpoint a particular version of 'oppressed people'. The minute you draw all eyes to one place on the vast map of human difference, you make mark it as nothing like the simple 'don't be unkind to people', and an actual positive reinforcement of the state itself.

We teach kids to be kind to others, period. Regardless of their circumstances. Regardless being the operative word here. Kids don't have to walk a mile in the thousand and one different pairs of shoes they'll encounter, to understand universal kindness. You do your children a disservice - and mark it for the lie it is - if you focus on the nature of the state, instead of the general oppression.

 

At what age would your personally allow a child to have a sex change operation paid for by our tax dollars?

 

I wouldn't allow my child to have a sex change operation. If they decided to on their own as an adult I wouldn't have a problem with it.

I don't think children should transition. I absolutely don't think tax dollars should ever pay for Medical procedures.

 

An "adult" at 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21????

 

Legally.

 

At what age Polydectes thinks it should be legal?

 

No at the age a parent or guardian no longer has culpability for the person in any means. If you want me to say a number, federal law says 18 years old.

 

Sex change operations are a poor idea to treat depressed, and mentally ill people, certainly an unwise option for an 18 year old with an undeveloped brain.

 

Well it may not effectively treat them statistically speaking. But as of yet there are no treatments. I believe Sex reassignment surgery is a coping mechanism.

But if you want to limit liberties of individuals, I can't go along with that.

 

If I were King, sex change surgeries would be done by private, occult centers, ran, and monitored by their own LGBT advocates. Never a tax dollar invested in any of it. As long as they did it on people 21 and up.

 

If I were kind nobody would be able to talk about going out and eating sushi.

I'm against government subsidizing many things outside of the military.

Then again I'm a small government advocate.

 

SRS is a very poor idea in a patient with a developing body, SRS at this time is not a completely functioning operational procedure.
Elective Surgery and should be privately funded as well as performed at the age of adulthood with informed consent to include education and health risks warnings as well as functional non permanent alternatives to SRS.

 

What about gays frightened you?

 

So, if a Patient needs an apendectomy, and is poor, Tax dollars should not pay for it ???
Or surgery to remove a malignant tumor ???
A heart transplant ?
Eliminate Medicaid / Medicare ?

 

Yes. The patient can pay off his debts. It takes simply taking responsibility.

 

They aren't indoctrinating, they are teaching acceptance. What is bad about that? You can't indoctrinate someone to be gay, it doesn't work like that. You're either into the same sex or not. Throughout high school and college I tried to date guys because that is what was normal and I was supposed to do. I never felt quite right and was just convinced something was wrong with me and I had walls up about love and relationships. Then out of college I had my first girlfriend and felt like an entirely different person. That was how it was supposed to feel, that was normal for me but it wasn't something I had ever considered. If I had been told a decade before that might be my normal, I could have been a lot happier throughout school. Oh well, I was a late learner but am now very happy with myself. I hope young people are able to recognize and accept this part of themselves earlier than I was. They will be happier and healthier people if they do