This guys in the news quite a lot recently.
This seems a bit too far. Is primary a bit too young for this ideology? Certainly “endocrine supports” for young kids seems a bit scary as the changes can be irreversible.
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/transgender-issues-should-be-part-of-primary-curriculum-says-childrens-minister-roderic-ogorman-42256827.html
Threadbans
The Orb
irishfreeview
RobbieTheRobber
I agree on history, historical facts can be true, but there's lot of theory surrounding said facts. Arts being the product of creativity/emotions isn't really comparable to people being told that they can be the opposite gender, is it?
If you interpret every factual word as some sort of derogatory slur, then go right ahead, but it makes conversation rather difficult.
Its akin to playing Monopoly with a Risk board.
Its very dangerous to talk to young, impressionable minds about such things. Its guaranteed to result in tomboys thinking they are "trans-men" and vice versa. Its ripe for kids to start bullying other kids that they are trans because they like/enjoy/whatever things that are stereotypically associated with the opposite sex.
If it was really about “telling children trans people exist” I’d be fine with it. But it isn’t.
Who are boards childless old men who are posting here, can you list them out?
Have we any childless young men.
Have we any childless old women or childless young women posting?
What makes you think anyone who disagrees with you is a man, old and childless?
Does someone need to have a child to discuss this matter?
There could be people posting here who can't have children and your insult I am sure would not be nice to read.
Have you anything to back up your statement or is it just an insult to posters who have a different view to you?
Not sure if serious but if so 😯
Normal is the range of difference you would expect to find within a otherwise healthy population
I really, really think we should be separating LGB from T+AZ#@
They are totally unrelated and bundling them together is wrong and giving false acceptability to something that is very much still up in the air.
Normal: conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected.
Normal: nor·mal ˈnȯr-məl. : conforming to a type, standard, or regular pattern characterized by that which is considered usual, typical, or routine
Not all parents are good parents. Some are downright evil.
Edit: To clarify. Being a parent doesn’t make someone right or good anymore than not been a parent makes someone wrong or evil.
Peoples feelings about and expression of their own identity is defiantly comparable to artistic expression. Talk to any artist and they will tell you the expression of their art forms a key component of their identify.
I’m afraid you’re about 40 years too late with the suggestion that it be kept away from children of all ages for the moment. Especially too late when the Gender Recognition Act has been enacted in Irish law for the last 7 years, and definitely too late when parents are advocating for their children to be treated as equals in Irish schools, and parents who are themselves transgender are starting families and their children are being enrolled in Irish schools.
As far as they’re concerned, they’re right, and they have the weight of Irish law behind them. That means that it is imperative that children be taught about gender and sexuality and so on at primary school level. It doesn’t mean there needs to be any sort of a deep dive level of understanding given to the subject, it simply means imparting the knowledge in an age appropriate way in which children gain an understanding of the basics.
It’s up to each school to decide how they wish to proceed in integrating these ideas into their school’s policies in accordance with Irish law. That’s why for example Wilson’s Hospital School which is a Church of Ireland school has a policy of treating all students with respect, and when Enoch ran afoul of that policy, he gave the school Board of Management little choice but to suspend him pending an investigation because Enoch couldn’t behave himself.
It’d be exactly the same in any school where a teacher imagined they were entitled to flout the school’s policies and procedures, because it is the school that decides what is or isn’t taught in schools or what is or isn’t acceptable in a school environment, again in accordance with Irish law. Irish law also recognises that parents are not obligated to enrol their children in any school or any particular type of school, so if parents were of the opinion that a particular school was unsuitable for their children, that’s entirely their own business.
It doesn’t mean the school is obligated to provide an education in accordance with any individual parent’s wishes for their children, and certainly it doesn’t mean that any individual is entitled to dictate what should or shouldn’t be taught to other parent’s children in the classroom.
Basic stuff like, rather than getting bogged down in the nitty gritty.
Religion has permeated through history as a means for mankind to fill in gaps in knowledge.
As knowledge progresses, those gaps have gotten smaller.
Yes, it had aided in getting civilization to where it is today, in the way an evolutionary appendage that is no longer needed has.
Nobody knows if there is a god or not in the same way nobody knows if there are aliens or not. Ultimately meaningless unless we were ever to come into contact with either.
An artist expressing themselves is art, it comes from within and is driven almost solely by them. A teacher guiding the views of their pupils in regard to biology is not. One is organic, one is force. They are not the same. The only way it could be compared is if the teacher forced students to create something that was out of sync with their own creativity/expression.
There is really no need for sex education in schools any longer outside of the biological aspect which can be covered in science classes.
Informing children about things like transgenderism, homosexuality etc can be dealt with by the childrens parents and they can tell them as much or as little as they wish.
Same applies to religion , leave it to parents to teach to their children if they wish and the societal aspect of religion can be dealt with as part of history classes where it crops up all the time as part of various historical events.No need to be reading stories from the bible to kids anymore like there was when I was in school.
The collapse in fertility among non-religious suggests that it *is* needed.
Biologically, atheist societies are apparently self-destroying - over a span of generations.
This will be clearer in a few decades I believe.
For instance if you live long enough you will see the US become mainly populated by Mormons, Mexican Pentecostals, Mexican Catholics, other Hispanic Catholics, Evangelicals, Hindus, Muslims and a few other groups.
I’m certain there’s plenty of parents who don’t want their kids learning about this stuff too.
if Irish parents feel that their kids need to learn about transgender stuff then maybe they themselves should teach it.
Can’t believe anybody wants the state to get involved in this.
Not all clowns wear a wig and put on makeup either.
All parents are not good or bad but all parents have children. That is in fact why we use the word parent to describe them and by definition a parent is more likely to have a lot more at stake in the development of our children than a non parent.
I think it is obvious why you posted this and quoted me and I would take strong objection to any suggestion that I am an evil parent!
We don't know if there is an actual Santa Claus or Easter Bunny out there either.
What do you think we should replace religion with?
Yes we do.
I didn’t suggest that at all. Don’t accuse me of saying something I didn’t say and wind your neck in and don’t PM me again
What I said was because anyone who is a parent doesn’t mean they’re right or good and doesn’t mean they’ve the best intentions for children in mind. What part of that do you dispute?
You said boards childless old men shrieking, so I don't need to think I know what you meant, anyone who read your post knows what you meant.
Ironic you telling people to not focus on feelings while insulting anyone who disagrees with you as childless old men.
I am asking you to back up your statement that boards childless old men are shrieking, who are these old men that you are referring to, please list them out for us or was the post just to say anyone who disagrees with you is a childless old man?
That's not a very nice thing to say to people.
Absolute definitions of words are indeed handy.
Parent, man, woman etc.
Also....
"What makes you think you know what I think? "Can you please focus on my posts and not your feelings!"
which was followed by
"I think it is obvious why you posted this and quoted me and I would take strong objection to any suggestion that I am an evil parent!"
is a little ironic.
Cant disprove the flying spaghetti monster either and all his wonderfully noodly appendage.
Its quite telling in this thread (and all the other threads on similar subjects) that when a voice of actual reason, making valid, well thought out and factual points posts, nobody on the other side of the divide engages with or replies to them other than to throw some sad little attempts at insults.
Red Haircrow said it best
“You don't have to disrespect and insult others simply to hold your own ground. If you do, that shows how shaky your own position is"
Irony: a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often wryly amusing as a result.
In this case, you portrayed yourself as someone who tells others they don't know what you think, and then immediately believed you knew what another person thought, and you told people to focus on the posts instead of their feelings, and your feelings were hurt to such an extent that you sent a private message! I found that wryly amusing.
It's quite ironic that you suggested that I didn't understand irony when I did.
But you did have a point about definitions.
By that logic, old, childless Roderic should butt out?? No??
Old childless Roderic has a role in child development in this state as the minister with responsibility for that portfolio.
So no the minister with actual responsibility for an area should not bow out.
That would be ludicrous logic who would even suggest such a thing.
What are his actual “child development” qualifications?? Nothing on his CV to suggest he’d have even a basic knowledge of child development.
But based on your posts, he is a childless old man who should no input because he is not a parent.
So by your admissions and beliefs he should not be involved in this.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/0ea8e70e5a44cd99b1246a07a9460706.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/20f4606d019ca0b240328ff30d91e82b.svg)
