Parents Protest Gay Fairytale for 2nd Graders...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 29 2006, 10:28 PM) [snapback]247380[/snapback]</div>

What the hell do you think is in this book anyhow? Discussion of what various holes a penis might be inserted into? What is it about same-sex couples that makes you immediately think about gay sex? Is it just children's books about same-sex couples that start you thinking about sex, or do books like Cinderella and Beauty & The Beast set your mind to sexual thoughts as well as?

Well, in any case, I'll clear up the mystery for you. All that happens in this postmodern fractured fairy tale, is a worn-out and badly beleaguered Queen is ready for retirement. After many hours of nagging, the crown prince, who "never cared much for princesses," finally caves in and agrees to wed in order to ascend the throne. Their search for a suitable bride extends far and wide, but none of the eligible princesses strikes the Prince's fancy, until in a snap twist, Princess Madeleine shows up. The Prince is immediately smitten--with her brother, Prince Lee. The wedding of King & King is "very special," the page boy has a romance with the leftover princess, the Queen settles down on a chaise lounge in the sun, and everyone lives happily ever after.

Now I'm sorry that this particular book didn't end with the Queen disowning her son and the townspeople chasing King & King down with torches & pitchforms while screaming "fag!" and "homo!" at them and then dragging them by a rope behind horses until they are dead, but as you said, these were just 2nd graders. There will be plenty of time for these kids to learn such "family values" from their "Christian" parents, not to mention their peers in middle and high schools. Young kids learn hatred and intolerance exceptionally easily--even more quickly than they learn foreign languages.

 

What the hell do you think is in this book anyhow? Discussion of what various holes a penis might be inserted into?

Calm down Dude that’s not all they teach in Sex-Ed I don’t even think they call it that anymore. That’s what they used to call it in my day so I used it. Besides with your rather graphic description I’d say you had a fairly hefty dose of something on your mind. Since you mentioned Hell and if you like to know what I think of Hell please see this post, your opinion/answer would be appreciated.
http://priuschat.com/Is-Hell-Forever-t18843.html

What is it about same-sex couples that makes you immediately think about gay sex? Is it just children's books about same-sex couples that start you thinking about sex, or do books like Cinderella and Beauty & The Beast set your mind to sexual thoughts as well as?

Well no I don’t think they had any graphic descriptions such as yours but since you mentioned “Beauty & the Beast†I’m sure glad you didn’t give us a graphic description of bestiality such as in the paragraph preceding this one. I’d also venture that since they are talking about couples, relationships and marriage which generally contains some type of sexual consummation then indeed sex is a subject matter to consider. Since the children aren't stupid, they gotta figure daddy and daddy must want to start a family (see the sequel "King & King and Family" But this is something that their parents should be able to teach first or at least be made aware of before bringing this subject up before 2nd graders. Since quite a few were not made aware and objected to it, I think I stand on firm ground.

Now I'm sorry that this particular book didn't end with the Queen disowning her son and the townspeople chasing King & King down with torches & pitchforms while screaming "fag!" and "homo!" at them and then dragging them by a rope behind horses until they are dead, but as you said, these were just 2nd graders. There will be plenty of time for these kids to learn such "family values" from their "Christian" parents, not to mention their peers in middle and high schools. Young kids learn hatred and intolerance exceptionally easily--even more quickly than they learn foreign languages.

Dude you have some talent with creative writing just don't write any Kiddy Books please because that is kind of a sick and perverse outlook for a fairy tale. Besides if seven year old kids are mature enough to understand same sex partners why shouldn’t they be educated in the way some members of society would react to such a thing? A little bit more eloquently than you stated for the kiddies but it is a fact that they will meet some form of resistance to a gay relationship.

I would also like to point out that the way you use the word “Christian†and painted all Christians with the same broad paint brush smacks of that same type of unreasoning intolerance and hatred that you so abhor. I think you meant “some members of society†as I put it. Because your not so naive as to state that only “Christians†don’t agree with homosexuality are you? Remember that when you point your finger at someone there are three pointing back at you!

Wildkow

p.s. Here's a couple of things that reviewers pointed out.

Booklist said that "Adults will know what's coming early in the story, but many kids won't.â€

Trying to sneak it in the “Backdoor†so to speak. I thought you’d like that one and it shows that some Christians aren't so sexually repressed to crack and offcolor sexually tinged joke on occasion. Admit it you thought it was a little funny didn't you? :lol: Otherwise I might have to label you an uptight, sexually repressed character with no sense of humor and a rather perverse mind. <_<

Also

Children's Literature said "This story recognizes no differences between homosexual and heterosexual relationships..."

No difference?!? Don't turn around now but you got a surprise coming. :blink: Ha! I did it again! I kill myself! :lol: Not quite honest there eh?

And

Hornbook Guide to Children says "Silly but affectionate . . . the young audience will probably come to the conclusion that this prince likes boys better than girls, which, of course, he does."

Silly, I like that term. Lets use something silly to teach 7 year old children about a very serious subject. Besides should we be teaching children that it’s ok to like one gender “better†than the other shouldn’t we like all genders equally? Unless of course gender bias is OK?


Oh what the heck here’s one more but we have to address that thing called sex you’re so obsessed with. . .

Let’s go to the sequel shall we. . .

King & King & Family
by Linda De Haan and Stern Nijland

Join newlyweds King Lee and King Bertie on their journey into the noisy jungle. . . . King & King soon discover that there's no adventure more wonderful than starting a family of their own. http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/biblio?inkey=17-1582461139-3

Ha! I don’t know what kind of (forgive me) Sex-Ed they taught Linda and Stern in Europe but they might have a bit of difficulty in starting a family on their own. I also wonder if either of the books mentioned to the seven year old kids that if they decide on this type of relationship they can’t have children of their own? But hey their young they have plenty of time to learn that don’t they?

We as adults know that can't happen right, . . . right? {ATTENTION PLOT SPOILER}
So I hate to give the plot away but it seems a small girl stows away and the Kings joyfully adopt her and everyone lives happily ever after. But as one reviewer points out the kids might wonder why the Kings didn't try to find the parents or if any one was looking for her. What a tangled web we weave once we practice to decieve. It ain't the truth unless it's the whole truth.

There is nothing wrong with going to bed with someone of your own sex. People should be very free with sex, they should draw the line at goats. Elton John

Oh Johnny, say it ain't so cause if we keep it up like this goats ain't far behind, then kiddy's and maybe some incest after that. What? Hey back the Hell off! It's a family thing and so on and so on.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 30 2006, 06:01 AM) [snapback]247502[/snapback]</div>

Sorry, but I have no opinion about Hell. To me it's just an expression, the same way that in your post, "eternity" seems to be for you.

First off, you seem to be straddling both sides of a fence here. Which is it? And, personally, I'd rather see 2nd graders learn about love before they learn about hate.

I am well aware that there are progressive Christians out there that do not contain the same internal ugliness that fundamentalists do, and I'm sorry if I made it sound like those are the only kind of Christians there are. I am also aware Christianity is not the only religion infected with fundamentalism.

So is it your intention here to criticize all children that have been adopted, or just those children whose adoptive parents are in same-sex relationships?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Betelgeuse @ Apr 29 2006, 08:27 AM) [snapback]247174[/snapback]</div>

Are you trying to say scripture encites and fuels bigotry?

anyone who uses scripture to fuel bigotry doesn't know scripture.

Its not about your color on the outside, its about your color on the inside..... are you white or black?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(windstrings @ May 1 2006, 12:59 AM) [snapback]247824[/snapback]</div>

No, we are laughing because you say it is sad that people use scripture to justify bigotry. Then you use scripture to justify your bigotry towards homosexual people. It is incredibly funny to see laid out plain as day like that, yet it just passes you by.

 

I prefer to look at both sides of an issue instead of stubbornly insisting that my biased view is the only one.

I agree. Is your concept of love constrained to a homosexual relationship? What other concepts of love were being taught to these 7 year old children? Since love encompasses a rather broad area, i.e. emotional, mental and physical, etc. etc. when do you propose teaching them this? I propose that we let children have a childhood and not force them to grow up so quickly. In any case I believe they should learn the whole truth at the approipate time.

You may be aware of it but I don't think you know anything about Christians. Can you name another institution that does more for the sick and poor? So it’s just the fundamentalists that are ugly? You are a perfect example of the kettle calling the pot black when it comes to intolerance.

WTH!?! Where did that come from? I guess you have no counter-argument for my premise so you try to deflect this fact by launching a personal attack against me suggesting that I’m criticizing the adopted little girl? Pathetic. Your ad hominem is being ignored.

Wildkow

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ May 2 2006, 03:38 AM) [snapback]248449[/snapback]</div>

Of course not. And I think that homosexual relationships only make up about 5-10% of romantic relationships. And I suspect that the children's books featuring same-sex relationships that these second graders are exposed to are a percentage much smaller than that. Also, chances there will be kids at that school whose parents are gay or lesbian. If you don't think that other children should be taught that there are lots of dfifferent kinds of people and families in the world and they all have the right to be happy so long as it is not hurting others, and supposing that you also don't think the children of same-sex parents should be ridiculed and tormented by their peers as different, how do you propose addressing the problem? Perhaps you think the best solution would be to ban the children of same-sex relationships from attending public schools (the same way that pregnant teens are often booted out), so that schools never have to worry about finding a way to answer the questions that are so troubling for a tiny minority of fundamentalist parents?

Yes, they are the first group that comes to mind. Fundamentalists are disliked for the same reason that racist organizations, for example, are disliked. Everybody has likes and dislikes. But Klansman terrorize African-Americans and fundamentalists try to infect everyone's government with their twisted morality. Most everyone else, most gays and lesbians included, just wants to be left alone. People don't like fundamentalists because of who they are so much as it because of what they do. Were fundamentalists to go back to living in caves or whatever and stop bothering people, people would stop having such a negative reaction to you. The world would be a lot better off without fundamentalists, and I'm not just talking about Christian fundamentalists.

In suggesting that gays and lesbians could not have (real) families, you suggested the children they adopt, and in fact all children who are adopted, are not loved as much as other children are perhaps not as worthy of parental love. As far as you are concerned, I guess they are just a bunch of worthless bastard spawn. But if I have misunderstood here, I am hoping that you will please speak up. Do adopted children (at least potentially) become a part of a real family, just like biological children? Does this include the adopted little girl, who loves both of her same-sex-life-partner dads, Gary and Bill, with all her heart?

Why isn't it all right for it be suggested to her classmates indirectly through one of hundreds of children's book read to the class that there are all kinds of different families out there in the world, they all love their children just the same, and it's ok to be different?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Deaden @ May 1 2006, 07:43 AM) [snapback]247925[/snapback]</div>

Sounds like anytime someone doesn't approve of something, thats bigotry in your eyes... do you know the difference?

Do you feel the whole world hates you and are bigoted?.... you seem to have some funny colored glasses on.