h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

hi again Ami,

Since you are relatively new to h2g2 you are most likely unfamiliar with the very usual 'topic drift' that tends to happen on almost every thread of interest here.

It's nothing to worry about. If the person who started the thread (in the case of this thread - me!) - is particularly worried about the drift, said person can pop in and say - HEY YOU GUYS - and attempt to get things back on course.

But to be honest, I'm quite happy to see the thread revived (who did that anyhow - was it MasterB?) so I am not too concerned at this point about where the thread drifts because most people seem aware enough to at least say *something* about the original topic in their postings.

And in and amongst all of these opinions and interpretations we will somehow remember that we are actually discussing how children should be taught *about* religion and various alternatives.

Not that any one is more *true* than another.

Maybe.

az


ps
bad grammar on purpose, I'm off duty atm

At least part of the problem with teaching about religion is that religion itself is actually several related topics. There are theological aspects, psychological aspects, moral aspects and cultural aspects, all of which need to be treated differently.

Noggin

<<. Do you seriously mean that if you got on well with someone & then found out they were gay, you'd never speak to them again?>>

Of course not! All I meant, was, I don't *seek out* gay people.
I don't care if FB says that is disingenuous, and it doesn't mean I hate them... that would be silly.

<>

Please *do* read the links I posted, especially the Queer by Choice site.
I meant fundamentalist Christians of course, as did you! As FB said "disingenuous", Fathom...

people please, give peace a chance


I think that there is no such thing as "gay people". it's a strange generalisation of loads of people who only have 1 thing in common (they love the same gender) but further they have enormous differences! Every person is different and an individual! I don't judge people by their colour of hair or by how they talk; don't judge homosexuals by their sexual preferences.

I think that's what we're trying to point out to Adelaide.

In other words, Della, a person's sexual orientation is only a part of who they are.


az

<>

I agree with Atom-boy, the term "gay" groups a lot of very different people together unecessarily. Sort of like what the term "atheist" does?

There are so many people who have completely different ideas about gods: their existence, their relevance, their morality, yet for some reason we only use one of two words to describe them in a general way: religious or atheist.

Are humans even capable of giving peace a chance? Or does it depend on the person (as in some people are, some people just aren't?

Ami of zx

There will always be conflict of one kind or another, given human nature, but the whole (or at least a major) point of the education being proposed is to take some of the fear and ignorance out of some of those conflicts. This, I think, can only be a good thing.

Noggin

<>

But they can't stop being descriminated against because of it--as I recall, Hitler's policy was that a person with two Jewish parents was a Jew regaurdless of their religion and should be eliminated for the good of the Reich. I suspect he wasn't the only person to take that policy.

<>

But fundamentalists usually support capital punishment. If they *knew* a fetus would grow up to be gay and they considered that a major enough crime (I've known some fundamentalists who want gays executed), they might consider eliminating the foetus to be execution and not murder--their arguement against abortion is that they consider it murder.

Adelaide/Della/Adele/Debbie/Annie wrote:

"<>

Are we to take that literally, Hoo?"

If you missed the historical reference, then fine, take it literally.



H.

Athena, I don't know what American fundamentalists might be capable of thinking, and as I am not a fundamentalist (neither am I pro-death-penalty, despite someone here insisting I am) I don't know what *some* fundamentalists might do. But, I have known fundamentalists here, and not a one of them would support abortion if a test to discover a child could grow up gay was ever developed! (As I belive and have evidence for that belief) that sexual orientation is *not* genetic, I don't believe such a test could ever exist...
In my experience, Americans think differently about these things that people in other countries. On the whole, they believe in genetic determinism to an extent unparalleled elsewhere, and a majority of them take capital punishment for granted!
Are you sure most fundamentalists support the death penalty? I am not sure of that - and I have known fundamentalists (they weren't American ones, mind you.)

Hoo, of course I got the historical reference! But I thought it might also be a reference to your state of mind, given the constant level of simmering rage you show in your conversations with almost everyone...
(Especially in the other identities that you posted links to everywhere you think I am to be found.)

Adelaide/Della/Adele/Debbie/Annie:

Simmering rage? Moi?

This, children, is something psychologists call "projection". This is where the ill person "projects" - they pretend that *other* people have the illness they have themselves. It's a form of "denial". For another example of denial, see:

"I am not a fundamentalist (neither am I pro-death-penalty"

Have you ever seen a kid sticks its fingers in its ears and sing "la-la-la-I-can't-hear-you"? Have you ever seen a kid say "I didn't eat the chocolate ice-cream" with a mouth surrounded by the stuff?

Have you ever heard someone say "I'm not a racist, but..."?

Saying it's so don't make it so, Della/Adelaide/Adele/Debbie/Annie. And unfortunately for you, intelligent people don't judge a person by what they *say* they do, they judge them by what they *actually* do. And what you actually do leads myself - and others, I'm far from alone in this - to consider you a fundamentalist.

And as for not being in favour of the death penalty, well, you're simply lying. You were in favour of it for one of the users of this site, were you not? And if not, why did you post a death threat, and reiterate that it was "serious"? Just curious, you understand, because doing something like that, then claiming to be against the death penalty seems to me to be, oh I don't know... hypocritical?

H.

<>

Oh, this was Member's obsession, this whole issue, and you claim you're not him? Tut tut...
I have explained the whole thing over and over, until I am in the face, and if you won't accept it, that's your problem. Anyone who wishes to know what really happened, and has not had their mind up by Hoo/Member/Number or Blinky, is welcome to ask me. Otherwise, grow up (a strange thing to have to tell someone older than me ) and get over it!

Della/Adele/Adelaide/Debbie/Annie: I'm THIRTY FIVE. I've told you this before. I am NOT OLDER THAN YOU. In fact, as far as I can make out, I'm closer in age to your son than I am to you. There's a photo of me on azahar's photo album, taken two years ago. Do I LOOK older than you?

http://public.fotki.com/azahar/h2g2_friends/hoovooloo.html

And no, I'm not Member, or blicky, or Ferretbadger, or any of the other people who call you on your manifold hypocrisies. Do please try to get used to the fact that there is NOT a conspiracy.

"Anyone who wishes to know what really happened,...is welcome to ask me."



Oh, good one. Really. Excellent use of humour to lighten the mood. People who wish to know the truth should ask YOU! Priceless.

That's your best yet, it really is.

H.

I dont get the historical reference Della, can you tell me what it is.

If you do as a measure of my appreciation for you educating me I shall never call you on anything from the past.

my word is my bond.

one love

even though i'm not a moderator and very new here I kindly ask the 2 of you to stop this mud trowing contest! you both are very intolerant to each other, respect that the two of you have different opinions and try to have a intelligent debate!

Picking up from Noggin's posting (829), the point of education *is* about replacing ignorance with understanding and knowledge. And in this way one can also replace irrational fears with more rational thinking.

However, there is also the problem of 'fear of knowledge'. As in, for example, very religious parents who might not want their children learning about other options that exist in the world. This to me smacks of insecurity regarding their own beliefs. Especially as a well-rounded programme such as the one suggested in the original article would not be attempting to sway personal opinion.


az