Learning about LGBT rights
One of your reporters wrote that “… many educators have received complaints from parents who fear that their children would become gay if they are taught about LGBT rights...” (“Pro-LGBT rights groups promote gender education,” June 29, page 3).
Scientists tell us that a person’s predominant sexual orientation is something that each person has at birth. That predominant orientation might be strengthened or weakened by experiences that the young child has during the first few years of their life, but it is there from birth, so a school-age child — or anyone else — does not “become gay.”
Predominant sexual orientation in a human being, then, is not chosen or the result of any kind of experience.
However, the timing of a person becoming aware of their orientation can be affected by experience.
As mentioned in the article, many young people do become aware of their orientation around the onset of or during puberty.
Yet others come to that awareness earlier in their lives or even much later. There are many external and/or internal factors that can influence the timing of this awareness, so it varies greatly from person to person.
It must be emphasized that it is the awareness that could be provoked, not the predominant orientation itself.
In educating young people about LGBT rights, as with any subject, from pre-K through post-grad, the teacher and how they present the material is a crucial factor in how a student reacts to it, whether it is accepted as practical and relevant to their life, or up in the clouds and only to be remembered — or, unfortunately, memorized.
Finally, homosexual orientation is not something to be feared — such an attitude only makes it harder for a person who discovers themselves to be gay.
Ideally, it simply ought to be recognized and accepted as a minority variation to the majority, and as such, something that is “normal” for the LGBT person.
Many LGBT folks who accept themselves as they find themselves even see the LGBT orientation as a great gift.
MT Young
Nantou
‘One China’ is not a reality
The “one China “ principle is a millstone around Taiwan’s neck.
It weakens the nation on the international stage and facilitates Beijing’s belligerence in the region.
Taiwan’s diplomatic allies will be reluctant to stay when the nations of the democratic West, which should be supporting Taiwan diplomatically — including the US — do not.
The “one China” principle does not represent reality. It is plain to see that China and Taiwan are two distinct political and social entities and never the twain shall meet.
As a former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) president said in Okinawa last week, the government could bring some reality to the situation by facilitating a name change to the Republic of Taiwan.
Gavan Duffy
Queensland, Australia
For three years and three months, Taiwan’s bid to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) has remained stalled. On Nov. 29, members meeting in Vancouver agreed to establish a working group for Costa Rica’s entry — the fifth applicant in line — but not for Taiwan. As Taiwan’s prospects for CPTPP membership fade due to “politically sensitive issues,” what strategy should it adopt to overcome this politically motivated economic exclusion? The situation is not entirely dim; these challenges offer an opportunity to reimagine the export-driven country’s international trade strategy. Following the US’ withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership
Two major Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-People’s Liberation Army (PLA) power demonstrations in November 2024 highlight the urgency for Taiwan to pursue a military buildup and deterrence agenda that can take back control of its destiny. First, the CCP-PLA’s planned future for Taiwan of war, bloody suppression, and use as a base for regional aggression was foreshadowed by the 9th and largest PLA-Russia Joint Bomber Exercise of Nov. 29 and 30. It was double that of previous bomber exercises, with both days featuring combined combat strike groups of PLA Air Force and Russian bombers escorted by PLAAF and Russian fighters, airborne early warning
Since the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration, the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation has taken Taiwanese students to visit China and invited Chinese students to Taiwan. Ma calls those activities “cross-strait exchanges,” yet the trips completely avoid topics prohibited by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), such as democracy, freedom and human rights — all of which are universal values. During the foundation’s most recent Chinese student tour group, a Fudan University student used terms such as “China, Taipei” and “the motherland” when discussing Taiwan’s recent baseball victory. The group’s visit to Zhongshan Girls’ High School also received prominent coverage in
India and China have taken a significant step toward disengagement of their military troops after reaching an agreement on the long-standing disputes in the Galwan Valley. For government officials and policy experts, this move is welcome, signaling the potential resolution of the enduring border issues between the two countries. However, it is crucial to consider the potential impact of this disengagement on India’s relationship with Taiwan. Over the past few years, there have been important developments in India-Taiwan relations, including exchanges between heads of state soon after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s third electoral victory. This raises the pressing question:
RSS