The Instigator
Kals
Pro (for)
Winning
27 Points
The Contender
clsmooth
Con (against)
Losing
21 Points

Should LGBTQYI issues be discussed in Elementary Schools?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/6/2008 Category: Education
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,711 times Debate No: 2444
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (49)
Votes (16)

 

Kals

Pro

Our children develop their habits when they are attending Elementary Schools and they learn from the get go that certain things are okay and not okay. I think that it would be a perfect idea if our children weren't so sheltered and should be exposed to the world around them. Including LGBTQYI issues, people, and media. The sooner they realize where they stand on the issue the better chance there will be more free thinking without the influence of peer pressure.
clsmooth

Con

This debate is a perfect example of why their should be no public schools.

There are some people believe homosexuality to be immoral. There are many others who believe exposure to homosexuality can confuse children and potentially influence their own developing sexuality. These are opinions with which my opponent probably disagrees, but they are opinions, nonetheless. It is typical of the liberal-statist Left to think it has all the answers and that anyone that disagrees with them is somehow less-than human.

Point being: Parents should decide how and when children are exposed to homosexuality and other alternative lifestyles, and to what degree. The idea that the state should provide the collectivized rearing of children is a tenant of Marxism, and should be rejected. Children should not be imprisoned in involuntarily funded concentration camps for seven hours a day, thirteen years of their lives. It is torture.
Debate Round No. 1
Kals

Pro

LGBTQYI means Lesbian, GAy, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning, YOUTH, and Intersex. As my opponent said some believe that if we include these issues in schools that it will influence our children's views or choices in their sexuality. My question is why would that be so bad? Even if they end up apart of that community why should that change our views on them? They are human beings just the same as the rest of us. Enough of that though. What I'm trying to say is that I've been taught about Black History and Women's History since I was old enough to read like most of us. Those are huge parts of our history are they not? We go into our Constitution and about our founding fathers. Almost none of us know that one of our foudning fathers Alexander Hamilton was a homosexual male. But we are not taught that at all. We can learn how George Washington had a lovely wife and family but we don't even come close to saying that Mr. Hamilton was gay. HE is a part of our history. HE helped construct the Constitution. Michelangelo, a painter, sculptor, architect, poet, engineer, and a homosexual male. We learn he painted beautiful portraits such as The Sistine Chapel in Rome. Still, nothing is said that he was gay. Alexander the Great conquered the ancient world, overthrew the Persian Empire, and extended his rule from Greece to Egypt and all the way to India. Including he spread his Christianity through his world. They even wrote about his in the New Testament, but what they forgot to mention was that he was gay. Hmm, let's see if this person strikes any memories. Tchajkovsky, the leading Russian composer of the 19th century. We listen to his music during Christmas time especially, he composed "The Nutcracker". We learn he was a magnificent composer, a true artist, but we don't learn he was gay. Do you see where we fault our children? Don't we tell them it's wrong to not tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? How can we set these standards for our children when we don't meet them as well? You cannot teach a child one part of history and leave out another. I'm sorry but that's hypocrisy.
clsmooth

Con

You make the point that there are many great historical figures who were gay. You then assert that children should be taught that they were in fact gay. Why? What is gayness other than a sexual preference? If Alexander the Great was instead heterosexual, but he liked to engage in anal sex with women, would that fact be relevant, particularly to children? What if the great inventor Benjamin Franklin invented a primitive strap-on that he liked his many French mistresses to use on him? Are these relevant facts?

I do not believe that gayness is an overarching element of an individual's identity. I think such an assertion is in fact homophobic and limiting. I am heterosexual. If I'm a figure of historic significance, do I think children need to be told this? Do they need to learn intimate details about my specific sexual proclivities? I don't think so.

You and I may think homosexuality is a valid lifestyle choice, and/or genetic. You and I may see no immorality associated with homosexuality. I don't. Nor do I see immorality with heterosexual anal sex, male-receptive anal sex in a heterosexual setting, or other common and uncommon sexual activities and fetishes. You and I may be very open-minded about sex acts in which we engage in and those in which we have no desire to engage in. But others have different sets of values. Who are WE to say that our values are correct and there's aren't? Who are WE to USE THE GOVERNMENT'S GUNS to extract tax dollars from our neighbors and use the money to teach our neighbor's children OUR values? It is entirely immoral.
Debate Round No. 2
Kals

Pro

How can you talk about things being immoral when it's unpractical to LIE to our children. I sit in that classroom every day and get told one thing and only one side. There are multiple sides to a fact, if one of those sides includes orientation then yes, I would like to know it. How DARE you rob our children of common knowledge from the get go. The new generations of today need knowledge because they crave it. They crave to know the TRUTH. The whole damn truth and nothing but the truth. What's immoral is trying to deny them that truth. When I give birth to my children and they grow before my eyes I will give them EVERY opportunity to ask questions and find that truth. I will allow my children to THINK FOR THEMSELVES and become the people THEY wish to be. But how can they do this if you do not provide them with options. How are they to make some of the most critical decisions of their life if they don't know all the information? Answer me that sir. Homophobia is not built into our DNA, it is grown from a place we call home, or the media, or television. The way we shelter our children shows how limited our own minds are. Limiting our children limits the society of which they are created to live in. You can call me immoral. You can call me an idiot for thinking this way. Shi*, you can call me a b*tch but one thing I can promise you is that things are going to change. As I speak, I am on a committee who is setting up LGBTQYI curriculum in my own city. We have set it out through out elementary schools and even though the parents don't like it, the children are more understanding, ask more questions, and comprehend what is being taught to them and they accept it. Thank you for the debate but I will never change my stance.
clsmooth

Con

I am not advocating lying to children. I'm suggesting that elementary-school children probably don't need to know that President Clinton performed analingus on Monica and manually penetrated her with a cigar. Do you think otherwise?

I do not advocate lying to children because I do not advocate any one entity (i.e. the government through its compulsory-education sweat shops) having the authority to teach "the children." I will teach my own child, and I will teach her the truth. I will teach her from my values which include open-mindedness toward people who choose to live alternative lifestyles. But that's my prerogative, not the state's.

You say you want children to "think for themselves" and then you admit you actively work to harness the power of the coercive state to indoctrinate children through mandatory state education. If children are to think for themselves, then they need to have freedom from government tyranny. You are part of the problem, sir. You trust the government -- the same government that practiced apartheid for more than one hundred years; the same government that to this day passes laws that discriminate against homosexuals. And yet you trust it to do what's right?

You, sir, are a moron.

What we need is the complete and total separation of education and state.
Debate Round No. 3
49 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Kals 9 years ago
Kals
I'm so glad somebody else caught onto that one. Thank you.
Posted by mrmazoo 9 years ago
mrmazoo
clsmooth, I don't think you ever actually addressed the issue.

The issue was not whether elementary school children should be FORCED to learn about LGBTQYI issues. This wasn't a debate for or against state-controlled education.

This was a debate about whether or not certain ideas should be taught in school.

The question you should ask yourself is not "Should the state dictate what my children are taught?" The question should be "Do I want my children to be taught about LGBTQYI issues in school?"

All of your arguments were aimed at answering the former question, which was not what the debate was about.

Lets say the government totally got out of the education business and every school was privately owned and run. It would STILL make sense to have this debate.

It isn't necessary to interpret Pro as insisting that everyone be taught about LGBTQYI issues. They could simply be trying to convince everyone to CHOOSE to have those issues taught to their children.

Do you see the difference?

I agree with you about wanting the government out of peoples' lives. However, it still might be consistent for me to believe that certain things be taught to school-age children. I would never FORCE it upon them, but I would hope and try to convince other parents to have those things taught to their children as well.

For example, I believe the theory of Evolution ought to be taught to kids. Many people disagree. I wouldn't try to force it upon their children by having laws passed. Instead, I would try to convince them to CHOOSE to have their children educated in the theory of evolution.

Don't turn everything into an argument for/against Libertarianism dude. You may end up missing valid points like you did here, in my opinion.
Posted by Alp 9 years ago
Alp
I'm not trying to be offensive but it seems Clsmooth's arguement was more about the states control of education than if LGBTQYI issues be discussed in Elementary Schools?
"This debate is a perfect example of why their should be no public schools." Even his first sentence is about the schools and not LGBTQYI.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
"Parents should decide how and when children are exposed to homosexuality and other alternative lifestyles, and to what degree."

That's hardly individualist. :D

Maybe at age 0-7 or so, but beyond that the children themselves should do a lot of the deciding, and all of it if they can manage to formulate the reasoned argument as to why and secure the funding for doing so.
Posted by MoonDragon613 9 years ago
MoonDragon613
Actually we're might be born racist. It makes biological sense to mistrust everything which looks different.
Posted by Kals 9 years ago
Kals
Cobjob, I believe that I was born with a mind of my own and a lot of my resentment to men comes from my grandfather and my own father. Nobody is borned a bigot, racist, sexist, or just plain a**hole. It's NATURAL to be different but the way we see situations are due to prior NUTURE. I'm in school as we speak so I will rant about this later.
Posted by 08tsuchiyar 9 years ago
08tsuchiyar
I don't think the vatican really counts....if you know what i mean.
Posted by Yraelz 9 years ago
Yraelz
Then why bother putting the parents in charge of the child's education, thats the same as the teacher in your view.
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
But the parents were "educated" by statist teachers as well.

And beyond the statist bias, even in fields such as math and science, the main thing a student encounters is incompetence (and indifference). We need a free market in education just like we have in cell phones.
16 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Danielle 9 years ago
Danielle
KalsclsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
KalsclsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by mrmazoo 9 years ago
mrmazoo
KalsclsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by The_Silent_Consensus 9 years ago
The_Silent_Consensus
KalsclsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Alp 9 years ago
Alp
KalsclsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Jesse110011 9 years ago
Jesse110011
KalsclsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by 08tsuchiyar 9 years ago
08tsuchiyar
KalsclsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by ComradeJon1 9 years ago
ComradeJon1
KalsclsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
KalsclsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by sadolite 9 years ago
sadolite
KalsclsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03