Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site watmath.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!dmcanzi
From: dmcanzi@watmath.UUCP (David Canzi)
Newsgroups: net.singles,net.politics,net.motss
Subject: Re: Homosexual teachers- a serious question
Message-ID: <8424@watmath.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Jul-84 17:41:32 EDT
Article-I.D.: watmath.8424
Posted: Mon Jul 23 17:41:32 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 24-Jul-84 03:49:13 EDT
References: <2023@hplabsc.UUCP>, <634@opus.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 11

> >Kids at this age are extremely impres-
> >sionable and the teacher at this level should as neutral as possible as to
> > chosen life styles which will come later in life.
> This statement is a good one - the "neutrality" is the main point.  It's
> the same as the point I was tryin to make in the preceding paragraph.

Bullfeathers!  I doubt that the word "neutrality" means the same thing to
the original poster that it does to me.  It's probably perfectly okay for
a [male] teacher to mention to the kiddies that he has a wife, maybe even a 
mistress, but let him mention that he has a male lover and sh*t will fly.  
This is not neutrality.  I think I smell a hypocrite.