DR. JIM CRASHES THE CHRISTIAN HERITAGE (HOMO)SEXY PARTY!

First, Capp’s original letter from June 11.

Parents deserve right to shield kids from liberal curriculum

So long as our schools are going to teach on moral issues and do so using only what is considered “politically correct,” parents must have the right to exclude their children from segments of the school curriculum.

I don’t mind the schools teaching the children how to do mathematics, spell, write, read, understand geography, know the basic history of the world, learn physics, chemistry and biology, learn about nutrition and the vital body functions, etc. But if the schools are going to teach about sexuality and reproduction, I draw the line.

Modern schooling is somewhat biased to begin with, biased by teachers trained in liberal-minded universities. The bias becomes acute when it comes to sex education. They teach about homosexuality and teach only the implication that people might be “born that way,” but they don’t teach the alternative belief that it is socially caused, possibly by, for example, the absence of a father positively involved in his children’s upbringing.

They teach about homosexuality as an “optional lifestyle” but they don’t teach about the negative aspects of it such as health issues, clinical depression, the high frequency of substance abuse and the substantially shortened life expectancy. They teach about methods of contraception but they don’t promote abstinence until marriage. They teach about abortion but they don’t teach about the health risks of abortion such as an increased risk of breast cancer.

As long as the schools are biased and don’t give the proper emphasis on the hazardous aspects, parents should have every right to exclude their children from an educational arrangement that may put their children at risk of hurting themselves or others. We teach our children the Great Commandment, which includes a commandment that they must love everyone, including homosexuals.

My preference is that schools provide impartial information to parents and encourage them to teach the children at home. My wife and I have a fine set of books, the first of which is designed for children as young as five, and in fact we have used them when the children were younger but asking. We are not shy about discussing it, and that is the best any parent can do for their children.

Thank you, Alberta PCs, for being willing to let us, if it is our preference, keep our children out of the liberal-minded curricula.
Geoffrey Capp

The Herald is usually pretty slow in printing letters, it often takes over a week. One good thing, however, is that they do not mind long letters. They seem to have an upper limit of about 400 words, which is way longer than a lot of other papers. Even so, I couldn’t write everything I wanted to say. I did come up with a great first paragraph, though.

My response (June 25).

Writer’s views on origins of homosexuality ‘troubling’

Yours truly with baby, Spike.

Geoffrey Capp doesn’t mind students being educated in biology and “vital body functions” but not sexuality and reproduction. I wonder where Capp thinks babies come from, if not from “bodily functions.” Perhaps he thinks schools should “teach the controversy” and propose a stork theory.

More troubling is Capp’s view on the biological origins of homosexuality. He favours the “alternative belief” that it is determined by social factors, such as the absence of a father figure, be taught. What studies have linked homosexuality to absentee fathers? “Beliefs” do not cut it as the basis of a formal education. That diseases are caused by demons is a religious belief that won’t go away, but it is hardly the basis for teaching students about health.

The “health issues, clinical depression, the high frequency of substance abuse and the substantially shortened life expectancy” Capp associates with homosexuality are more likely to be the result of the social stigma against it, a stigma Capp is only perpetuating. Massive social problems of this sort can be found in any marginalized and persecuted population. Capp’s boast that he teaches his children to love everyone while demanding the right to excuse his children from hearing about people who make him squeamish is a self righteous hypocrisy we can do without. If students do not learn that homosexuality exists and does not interfere with people leading lives beneficial to society as a whole, where will they learn it? From the Bible that teaches universal love while equating same sex relations with murder and that homosexuals should be executed?

A final point: the idiocy of Bill 44 cuts both ways: I don’t imagine Capp would be too pleased if atheist parents pulled their children from classes on Canadian politics lest the youngsters learned about the Christian Heritage Party, for whom Capp ran in the last election.

AND FINALLY, the STUPID GETS STUPIDER! Here is Aris Slingerland, who was Capp’s campaign manager in a letter on a somewhat related topic, the Pridefest held June 9. My comments are in bold italics.

Re: Article on Pride Fest, June 9.

It is not something for Lethbridge to be proud of. Instead it should make us weep and mourn for several reasons.

1. That we live in a society where the Bible and prayer is banned from most schools so young people are no longer taught about responsibility. A picture of all of us is found in Psalms 81:11-16. Our hearts are desperately wicked. Mine, too, but that does not mean we can do what we like.

Ok, so the only way “responsibility” can be taught is through teaching the bible and praying in school? How the hell does preaching “Original Sin” (a doctrine completely foreign to the Old Testament Psalms) teach responsibility? Heaping any hope of doing right on some deity’s intervention is not responsibility, it is passing the buck. Sure, people do some desperately wicked things. Judging them harshly for things they are not responsible for (like being homosexual) is one of them.

2. That this group of people distorts the truth of the Bible to their own purpose. God gave His law by Moses, specifically the 10 Commandments. The seventh commandment reads “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” Read Leviticus 18 and 19 for an explanation of what that means.

And to write as if we do not have to pay attention to what Paul wrote is very wrong. It is also part of the inspired Word of God.

Who are “this group of people”?  Is there any church anywhere that bases its doctrine solely on unbiased analysis of the what the Bible actually says? I doubt it. Hell, even “St.” Paul could be accused of cooking the books to his own ends. Remember, the New Testament is a tendentious interpretation of the varied documents comprising the Old Testament. Reinventing the what the “word of God” says has been going on ever since, and probably even before, the Bible itself was invented.

Even though they claim the government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation, the government is still responsible to uphold the Law of God in public life.

Really? Where the hell does it say that the government is supposed to uphold the law of “God”? Whose god is that? And whose version of this deity’s laws? Here Slingerland is mixing up the agenda of his theocratic party with the function of a government of a pluralistic society. The government is bound by law to uphold the constitution which guarantees freedom of religion. The CHP want to change the fundamental basis of what government is about.  And notice how the first two of Slingerland’s “several reasons” are numbered while the remainder are not. Maybe he couldn’t count higher.

What we see today, though, is people are not willing to heed what the Bible teaches. Neither are they satisfied with the freedom to do evil in their bedrooms, but they try to justify themselves by demanding public recognition. How sad.

“Freedom to do evil”? Consenting adults playing with each other is “evil?” What about all the child molestation that churches cover up? Why no uproar about that?

Another reason to mourn is city council so readily gave their consent. For by their consent, they have scorned the feelings of the majority of citizens, and become partakers of the evil. How sad!

What part of the old democratic live and let live does this guy not quite understand? Regardless of what the majority might want, freedoms must be extended to minorities, too.

Since I had a letter in only a few weeks ago, I don’t see them publishing me again, so this will have to be my response. In any case, Slingerland’s letter got posted to the LDS email list, so it went around some of the most liberal, skeptical, clever, mischievious and down right twisted minds at the university. Ah, yes, the Lethbridge District Skeptics. WHO DID YOU THINK I WAS TALKING ABOUT???

Anyway, some of the folks at LDS were pretty offended, although I don’t think Slingerland’s letter constitutes “hate literature”, as some on the list suggested. I’m hardly the one to champion censorship unless there is a call for violence or outright dehumanization of someone. Still, it will be nice to read the responses, I’m sure they are coming!

I have decided to end the tradition of adding a gratuitous and entirely sexist babe photo, not that there have been any complaints, mind you (no one reads this crap I write).

Oh, what the hell!!

Anti-gay marriage pageantess Carrie Prejean reads her Bible.
(AP Photo/Denis Poroy, April 26, 2009)

Yup, that’d be Carrie, again. Don’t know where her Bible is.