philologos wrote: » The main plot of King & King is an example of biased teaching on this. I object to biased teaching of all kinds on this issue. I think parents should teach their own children about relationship structures. If children come to their own conclusion that gay marriage is wrong, that's up to them. Why should anything happen?
philologos wrote: » Do you think books about romance at primary school age are appropriate?
Corkfeen wrote: » Yes, most children's films have romantic elements(The Lady and the Tramp etc.). But let's be realistic, the romance isn't the issue in your mind.
philologos wrote: » Its up to parents to decide what to show their children in this respect. I think parents should be primarily responsible to teach their kids about these kinds of subjects in accordance to their own philosophy.
philologos wrote: » I'm saying that glorifying this type of relationship in the curriculum instead of allowing children to come to their own conclusion on the basis of their own thought is much better. One doesn't need biased storybooks to teach a child how to read and I understand why many parents objected.
Morbert wrote: » I guess I was wrong. You do hold a reprehensible position. You are objecting to the fact that homosexual relationships are being legitimised in literature. That is as odious as objecting to any literature that legitimises equal rights for people of different races.
koth wrote: » But how are schools supposed to design a curriculum if they have to exclude any information that may raise complaints from parents? Religious studies + sex/relationship education would have to be removed from the classroom for a start.
philologos wrote: » It's not excluding information. Teach the legal standpoint on it. Teach the viewpoints of different religions. Story books with deep bias shouldn't have a place IMO.
philologos wrote: » The race argument has been dealt with already
koth wrote: » well King & King doesn't have a bias, yet you don't want it in the classroom due to the homosexual relationship. Human relationships are more than a legal standpoint, so why should homosexuality be reduced to a legal footnote while heterosexuality is catered for in the classroom?
28064212 wrote: » No it hasn't. You've repeatedly posted a link which doesn't address any of the issues raised. It has not been dealt with in the slightest, you just refuse to acknowledge its validity.
philologos wrote: » It does have a bias. That's the thing.
philologos wrote: » I've also said that there are clear differences between heterosexual and homosexual relationships that don't exist in the case of interracial couples. Perhaps you missed that.
lazygal wrote: » What bias does it have, can you give specific examples? Are books with heterosexual relationships biased?
koth wrote: » No literature would be allowed in schools under your proposed rule.
NuMarvel wrote: » But have you read the book? You're under no obligation to answer, but I'm baffled why you won't. It's a simple question. And it's a relevant question too. If you're going to characterise a book as having a "deep bias", as being "propaganda" and as "glorifying same sex marriage", we should at least be sure you're not basing your opinions on second or third hand information.
philologos wrote: » I've read the plot as described on Wikipedia. If you want to order the book for me I could read it in full
"On the tallest mountain above town," the young Prince Bertie still has not married, as is the custom in his kingdom. His mother, a grouchy Queen who is tired of ruling and wishes to pass on the responsibility to her son, insists he must find a princess to marry. The prince tells his mom "Very well, Mother.... I must say, though, I've never cared much for princesses." His mother marches princess after princess through the castle, from places ranging from Greenland to Mumbai, but in spite of their various talents — Princess Aria of Austria sings opera, Princess Dolly from Texas juggles and does magic tricks — they fail to interest the prince (though the prince's page falls in love with the princess from Greenland). After a while, along comes Princess Madeleine escorted by her brother Prince Lee. At the same time, both Bertie and Lee exclaim, "What a wonderful prince!" The princes immediately fall in love, and they begin marriage preparations at once. The wedding is attended by all the rejected princesses and their families; the two princes are declared King and King, and the Queen can finally relax, sunning herself in a lounge chair near the page and the princess from Greenland. The story ends with a kiss between the two kings.Link to wiki article
Further restrictions were added in November 2008, when the Commission added the requirement that such material must be placed at least 60 inches off the ground in order to be out of the reach of many children.
lazygal wrote: » How is it biased and what's it glorifying?
Benny_Cake wrote: » It's truly amazing how worked up people get about these things. According to Wiki, in Oklahoma: All over what sounds like a fairly run of the mill children's story, which would probably be largely unheard of if it wasn't for all the moral outrage. They never learn.
philologos wrote: » I've read the plot as described on Wikipedia.
Bannasidhe wrote: » It's biased as it is not condemning something Phil's biased Holy Book which exists only to glorify his God says is BAD. Simples.
