Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (216593)	8/22/2007 3:11:14 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793754

2. I should move (Personally, I would move- since I don't want to live where extremists are in charge- not ANY kind of extremist). I think you have no right to try to change the laws of the land via the machinery of the school. Change them in the legislature, or take your lumps. Precisely what Christian parents are saying about THEIR children being taught that gay marriage is an acceptable and admirable lifestyle. You have noticed, haven't you, that very few of the pushes to legalize gay marriage have gone through the state legislatures? The effort is going through the schools and the courts, where the going is easier. So no, I'm not "brushing it aside- I'm looking at the problem differently than you do, and you can't even acknowledge that as valid. That's fine, but not particularly constructive as far as dialog is concerned. No you aren't. You are setting up a smokescreen called "religious vs non-religious" and putting ethical issues of importance and weight behind the "non-religious" smokescreen, where they are not allowed to be discussed or disapproved. And of course none of this has anything to do with honor killings being per se religious, which was the original question... No, it wasn't the original question. The original question had to do with children being taught things in school that their parents objected to, which includes but is not limited to, religious beliefs foreign to the parents. It was your doing to put up a sharp dividing line that forbids only "religion" and yet excludes from religion concepts of marriage, ritual, honor - in short, the exact set of issues that touched off this discussion in the first place.