First of all, if you're looking for blanket condemnation of all gays, you're not going to find it with me. The truth as usual is more nuanced and subtle.
Second, someone's sexuality does not matter so long as that person is in control of him- or herself, knows appropriate boundaries, and is not a predator. Not all gay people are predators, obviously. Just because a few are, there is no need to condemn everyone. That's stereotyping, and it's unfairly tarring and feathering everyone with one big brush.
Third, there is a need always to make sure that all leaders everywhere are ethical and appropriate, no matter what age group they serve. But how do you go about this? You cannot legally or morally ask someone if he or she is gay, and the EEOC is right to prohibit this. Sexuality does not matter; competency matters. And competency has no bearing on age, marital status, sexual orientation, skin color, gender, religion, etc.
This is a scare-tactic question, and the homophobia is easy to spot. And it's pointless. Ultimately we all have to trust each other to a certain extent, but that also means having safeguards in place and keeping open the lines of communication with everyone. And ideally, if those lines of communication are open, then hopefully no one will be abused or trumatized, and sexual predators can be investigated and put behind bars IF they did anything illegal.
Remember, homophobes are ultimately scared that they are gay, which is why they displace their own sexual frustrations and ambiguities off on others. Really secure people accept their own sexuality even if they are not a "Kinsey 1". Such is life; human beings and their sexuality are all over the spectrum. I'm sorry that this sometimes involves children, but we must do what we can to keep children safe AND maintain the rights of individuals as well. You cannot sacrifice safety for security.
Cheers, K
2006-10-13 04:49:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Kate 4
·
0⤊
0⤋