Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame
This seems like an issue in which the LGBTQ2 community should be heavily consulted and let them decide what happens since it affects them the most. Nothing should be imposed on them without proper consultation in a collaborative manner. That should just be basic practice.
|
This is a terrible idea in this and every case. Not the consultation, of course, but the notion that any special interest group gets to "decide what happens" in an area that affects them. Especially when there is objective evidence to show that GSAs save lives and perfectly rational arguments that can be advanced about the fact that people will be less likely to avail themselves of GSAs if that activity might be discussed among administrators and parents. Evidence-based decision making is always the way to go, especially on policy items that people have an emotional stake in and are likely to produce clouded and biased reasoning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
That's not really the argument I got from Pepsi's post. I think he was just saying that maybe someone with no experience on the subject probably shouldn't speak to how the process of being outed to your parents feels like and whether it's a positive experience.
|
You don't need to have personally gone through something to be able to comment about it in policy terms. That's an absurd standard that I reject whenever it's applied. If your experience allows you to offer a perspective that others lack, you're encouraged to provide it and it may influence the debate and hopefully give others the benefit of that perspective in arriving at their own views, but others' lack of such experience does not mean they should keep their mouths shut on the subject. We'll never be able to have any conversations about anything, if that's the standard.
Incidentally, as none of us have never been NHL players as far as I'm aware, it would also result in this forum having to be immediately shut down...