Should children learn to tolerate gays?  

Absolutely! I agree with everythign you said and as i mentioned in my response, I dont care for the whole "tolerate" thing either....

My opinion isn't important in this discussion,I just started it,I'm asking the question. By normal people I meant that I can accept them the way I accept everyone else,I didn't say they are mad or sick.Many people wondered what I mean by tolerance.Well in my country we're not tolerant that's the main problem.I knew it wouldn't be the same in yours but at least I tried to show what's the 'weather' like here.Do we tolerate their behaviour in public places and the effect they have on others - this is the idea.

This post contains content of a mature nature. You must be Signed in or Registered to have the option to view this content.

there is no meaning to blue or purple just that no matter how people look or what s3x preference they have, people always deserve respect. And that is what we should teach our children

When you say not normal & not the norm, do you just mean in the sense that they are not the majority? That's accurate & I don't have an issue with that; but if what you mean is abnormal as in they have a disorder or something along those lines, that doesn't seem right at all. Midgets are not the norm, blue eyes are not the norm, etc- but they're all valid & normal enough variations of the norm- kwim?
Why wouldn't mixed race marriages be normal & respectable? It should be a non-issue, no different than an exceptionally tall person marrying an exceptionally short person. Perhaps note-worthy in identifying the couple, but just not a big deal.

I'm with Eden. Which definition of 'normal' are we using? Yours? Mine? Eden's? God's? My sister's?

You may not think that eating purple grapes is normal. I do.

I don't think anyone who eats seafood is normal. Come on....they poo where they and millions of other sea life creatures sleep! Nasty!

Look, first of all, I made it clear that I'm not against homosexuality or mixed-race marriage. Now, the definition of normal is pretty simple here (at leat I thought so): sexuality was given to men and to creatures in order to procreate. Two men or two women do not procreate. I don't care about political correctness, let's just call things by their name.

"sexuality was given to men and to creatures in order to procreate"

Guess I'm not "normal." I'm not going to procreate. Ever. I dislike kids.

Look, I'm not normal, I'm 1.96 (or 6 foot 5). People point me out in the street and ask me stupid questions. But that's a different thing. I'm not normal because MOST people are smaller, the same as most people like kids. Why don't we take away the emotional conotation of 'normal'? That's what I did in my original response to that post, I talked about the 'norm', Is it the subject of homosexuality that makes people get worked up? Isn't it possible just to talk about it?

Look, I was asking which definition of 'normal' to use.

To me, normal is child-free and free to do as I please, when I please.

To my sister, normal is two kids, diapers, formula, daycare and spaghetti O's.

To an engineer, normal is building construction, blue prints and suits.

THAT was my point. Which definition of 'normal' were you using that homosexuals are not 'normal.' I'm sure if you ask them, they are normal, I'm normal and yes, even you are normal by their standards.

Let me make this clear.Using 'normal' I pointed out that we may (the question was should we do this) shut our eyes and never see the difference between us.Is it that difficult?!The main point here is not why I used this word, which for me doesn't matter, but what should we tell children about homosexuals.How can we explain what types of people they are.

Why don't we all cool it a little bit (including myself) This is supposed to be fun, I guess we are here to meet new people,learn new things and, again, have some fun. There might be some homosexuals out there right now, reading this and having a ball, saying to themselves: What do THEY know. And they are probably right.

I don't have a problem with your response. I was just looking for clarity.

I was looking for whose definition of 'normal' is right. Is it yours, mine or the next person's?

As I said, what is normal for me might not be normal for you or your neighbor. We all have our different definition of normal and your post made it sound like we should all be using YOUR definition of normal. THAT was what I was implying.

Someone didn't take his medicine yesterday...

normality is not subjective as you seem to infer..it is objective....there is no other definition of normal other than what is expected to be normal in any given population i.e. the majority in any given population have one head so having one head is normal.....it doesnt matter how many times or how loud you shout....homosexuality is NOT normal...by telling your children homosexuality is normal you are PERVERTING them you are telling them it is acceptable behaviour....it is only acceptable in private between consenting adults...public displays of homosexuality (not love) are disgusting and abhorrent and my children will be taught that...by the way normal and not normal doesnt necessarilly mean good or bad and here is the problem for most people..

This post contains content of a mature nature. You must be Signed in or Registered to have the option to view this content.

Teacher = child.

Sorry for the typo.

it is not hypocritical at all.. we are talking about decency now...it is no more decent for a heterosexual couple to make out in public..again this should be in the privacy of their own homes ...in educating our children we should be able to explain in our and their good time not be put in a situation becasue of a public display of emotions etc...Daddy why are those men kissing?....it is normal and natural for people to defecate and urinate.....would you like to see it in public?? of course not..as i said before it is a question of decency and good behaviour..unfortunately todays sick society has the attitude of living for today and not giving a damn about other peoples feelings or opinions....

This post contains content of a mature nature. You must be Signed in or Registered to have the option to view this content.

BOTTOM LINE: There is no clear definition of NORMAL. Normal is a dangerous word to describe the majority. So save a headache and just use majority. :)

That's the smartest idea I´ve read in that thread, I'll do that in the future to save myself (and others, I guess) some headaches. Thanks

sorry ..you are much too generalistic..respect all elders...nonsense...there are all sorts of horrible and nasty people out there in the real world ..just becasue they are older does not command respect..teach your children to be tolerant and to beware at the same time..and give respect where it is due...

That's essentially what I meant when I said, "unless they attempt to harm them". I suppose I could have been more detailed. I do think that we (child or adult) should first treat others with respect until they show that they don't deserve our respect. Most people, even if we don't agree with them in general, should be treated with respect.

looks like we agree here..so there is some hope after all..lol...the problem we have in educating our children is all the outside influences on them that colur their development..peer pressure, tv, movies,books, pc games,mobile phones,music etc...we can only try our best but i fear we are fighting a losing battle..todays society is sick and getting sicker by the minute.....i really do fear for the moral fibre of our future generations.....