Was this ever going to be suitable for a primary school?

[R1Geezer]

Even if Gay references where to be removed how could this ever be suitable for young children?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/...gland-humber-14013982

[pa___ul3]

so a character admits to being gay so the show is pulled?

[hc4361]

Children are not present when the offending line is said.
Children and young people act in a lot of productions that are unsuitable for children and even Oliver! can be castigated as it exposes young people to pick pocketing.

I can't see anything wrong with it.

[pa___ul3]

I wouldn't even call 'the offending line' and offending line, it's hardly explicit in anyway, he just says he prefers lads to lasses, I can't see any problem with that!

[jno]

I don't suppose it matters whether the kids are on stage - they may be backstage, and what are they supposed to do, cover their ears?

A fine line. I wouldn't have objected to jno jnr being in this production, but I can see other parents might. It's not the gayness, it's the age of the kids. I'm all for parents having some input into what their children see and hear, even if I disagree with their responses.

[Ankou]

"...the story of a single father trying and failing to have a quiet day at the beach..."

sounds thrilling. i agree with jno.

[rojash]

"It's not the gayness, it's the age of the kids."
Don't you mean "It's the age of the kids AND the gayness". Or do you mean that kids of that age shouldn't participate in any operas, whether gay or straight?

[I.Don No]

I do not see the problem. Young children regularly refer to Michael Hestletine as a 'winker'....not the correct word......lol....in the musical of Billy Elliot.

The yogurt knitters strike again!

[Kromovaracun]

Personally I don't see why young children have to be protected from any reference to homosexuality*. But there again I suppose I wouldn't. If anybody wants to prove to me why it should be so, I'm willing to listen. I notice that nobody has tried to explain it so far.

*I mean obviously you can't go into graphic detail about the actual physical sex aspect - you can't do that with heterosexuality either. But surely any idiot can see that there's a distinction, right?

[jno]

a bit of both, rojash. Some things are just unsuitable for, say, seven-year-olds - or at any rate, their parents may reasonably think they're unsuitable. That doesn't just mean homosexuality; I'd include violence too, or the Holocaust, or any other adult topic that needs a lot of explaining.

[Kromovaracun]

"That doesn't just mean homosexuality; I'd include violence too, or the Holocaust, or any other adult topic that needs a lot of explaining. "

Does homosexuality need a lot of explaining? Really?

We tell our children about love, don't we? Surely that's as complex and 'adult' a topic as any that you've listed.

"'m all for parents having some input into what their children see and hear, even if I disagree with their responses. "

'Some input', yes. But what we teach our children isn't a private matter - it effects the world for generations to come and I don't see why parents shouldn't be held accountable for it, and I think we as a society need to have the courage to stand up to people when they are wrong. To take an extreme/wildly disproportional example, I sincerely believe that parents who raise their children on fundamentalist/extremist values (of a religious or political nature) which are not substantially supported by fact are committing an indirect form of child abuse. Obviously I'm not accusing the parents in this case of anything like the same thing, but I do think their actions need to be seriously questioned.

[starone]

Seems to me this is a lot of fuss about nothing. The young people around here know far more than I do about sex of all kinds.

[DrFilth]

kromovaracum don't think you will get anyone disagreeing with what you have posted as they will only get labeled as homophobic nazis
the only way i can see that gays will be openly accepted is when all religions are banned or they rewrite the bible
quick look on the internet and found this on yahoo

What does the Bible say about homosexuality?


There are those who like to say that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. Various verses are cited (out of context) and the verses that people use to show that homosexuality is wrong are explained away. The world wants to change God's words and meanings into something more suitable to its sinful desires. Nevertheless, the truth stands: The Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin. Let's look at what it says.

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. It goes against the created order of God. He created Adam and then made a woman. This is what God has ordained and it is what is right. Unlike other sins, homosexuality has a severe judgment administered by God Himself. This judgment is simple: They are given over to their passions. That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:18ff). As a result, they can no longer see the error of what they are doing. Without an awareness of their sinfulness, there will be no repentance and trusting in Jesus. Without Jesus, they will have no forgiveness. Without forgiveness, there is no salvation.

What should be the Christian's Response to the Homosexual?

Just because someone is a homosexual does not mean that we cannot love him (or her) or pray for him (her). Homosexuality is a sin and like any other sin, it needs to be dealt with in the only way possible. It needs to be laid at the cross, repented of, and never done again.
As a Christian, you should pray for the salvation of the homosexual the same you would any other person in sin. The homosexual is still made in the image of God -- even though he is in grave sin. Therefore, you should show him same dignity as anyone else you come in contact with. However, this does not mean that you are to approve of their sin. Don't compromise your witness for a socially acceptable opinion that is void of godliness.

[sophie_1003]

DrFilth; I think you'll find homosexuality is already openly accepted by many. With regards to the original article; from the context given it seems to be a big fuss over nothing; it should have been the parent's decision for children to be included or not in the play anyway!

[DrFilth]

accepted by many sophie but it is also hated by many hence the word homophobic which gays and their supporters like to call anyone who does not agree 100% with what they say

[sophie_1003]

Ah I see what you mean; I thought you were saying that no-one openly accepts it! I may be wrong but isn't there a lot of stuff in the Bible that many Christians accept as outdated advice? Saying that though I imagine that it is institutionally old fashioned and therein lies the problem?

[DrFilth]

we have the old testament
and the new testament
is it time for the modern testament

[sophie_1003]

it being the Church by the way!

[DrFilth]

if they stuck a fireblade on the cover do you think more people would read it

[Kromovaracun]

DrFilth.

I'm well aware of the attitude most religious texts hold towards homosexuality. Personally, I agree with the maker of the video - I think the Bible's pretty unambiguously homophobic. The question is why we should agree with it or take what is in it as true. Why does biblical support for homophobia make it right? This is a question I have openly asked before on AB, and people don't seem willing to answer me. But as an aside, I don't really see how it's relevant to this thread either.

Your explanation for this is highlighted in the first line of your post.

"hey will only get labeled as homophobic nazis"

Meaning no disrespect, this is a somewhat tedious argument and it's also not a little cowardly. Nobody's going to come and get you for disagreeing with me or for engaging in dialogue with me. If that's the case, then it shouldn't be very hard for you to prove it. Frankly, it comes across like you're using some abstract and improvable notion of a liberal conspiracy as an excuse to stonewall when you're challenged.

[DrFilth]

Kromovaracun i think you know that some members would reply but i have seen the cra p they have had in the past.

>> Nobody's going to come and get you for disagreeing with me <<

when i want to disagree with you or anyone else please be sure that i will speak out and as for people coming to get me don't worry i have never given a broccoli in the past and don't think i will for the future

seeing that you are in such a good mood for answering a question why not go back to the thread the other day when i asked you a question.