Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

[PW2]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

The schools have your children for 180 days a year, for maybe 6 hours a day. That's about 12 percent of the total time available.<br /><br />Most time in the schools is devoted to standard school subjects--reading math social studies and the like. No more than 5 % of the time can be devoted to "controversial" topics like this.<br /><br />So that equates to about 0.6 % of the time available for your child to learn. And 99.4 % of the time for parents to teach their children their prejudices, sexual hangups, and the like.<br /><br />If you can't "Git 'r Done" with that kind of time, you aren't trying hard enough.

 

[hayhauler]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

In Alabama the teacher's union is the most powerful state institution. PTOs can help schools raise money, and can do a few things on site. As far as being involved in decisions, they may make some difference, but it is nothing like the teacher's union.<br /><br />Of course, Alabama, as far as I know, isn't dealing with those books in the class room, certainly not as a rule. There may be some teachers that bring them in, but I'm pretty sure the school systems aren't mandating that they be used here. We're behind the times again, and sometimes that's not a bad thing.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

A lot of truth in what you say PW. However, what I've noticed with my son and even recall from my own experience, is teachers are taken very seriously by young minds - they have an extra-authoritative position. Children don't seem to challenge them like they do their parents.<br /><br />I run into it with my son all the time. The school has one way of doing things and if I suggest it can be done another way, you'd think I committed some heresy. I'm sure others know exactly what I mean. Especially with kids my son's age (now 6).

 

[demsvmejm]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

Originally posted by PW2:<br /> The schools have your children for 180 days a year, for maybe 6 hours a day. That's about 12 percent of the total time available.<br /><br />Most time in the schools is devoted to standard school subjects--reading math social studies and the like. No more than 5 % of the time can be devoted to "controversial" topics like this.<br /><br />So that equates to about 0.6 % of the time available for your child to learn. And 99.4 % of the time for parents to teach their children their prejudices, sexual hangups, and the like.<br /><br />If you can't "Git 'r Done" with that kind of time, you aren't trying hard enough.

PW2, I'm usually right on with your opinion. But, in this case I must disagree. Your percentages are a little off based on my assumptions and calculations. There are 168 hours in a week. Of that time, during the school year, the school has these darling little minds approx. 32.5 hours a week. After sleep (70hrs), daycare/time parents still at work (15hrs) that leaves only 50.5 hours each week for parents to help with homework, do parent things, give bathes, prepare dinner, get ready for work, fight with kids about bedtime, etc, and love their kids by giving them their attention. So if you subtract all the mandatory things that the parents must do with their kids, the time to unindoctrinate the liberal views is less than the schools have to cram this cr*p into the munchkins' brains. Even if the parents can accomplish this while cooking dinner or saying bedtime prayers (can I say that here?) they have 30% of their kids awake lives, the schools have 19.3%. A far cry form the .6% and 99.4%. I am sorry PW, like I said, I'm normally in your corner.<br />As for the time allowed to cover the "controversial" issues. That may be true, but the environment created by this attitude in schools is ever present. Meaning that if **** & Tom are teaching the kids to read, that is not part of the controversial time period. Now because George & Fred are covering homosexuality, this counts. Lucy and Angela are selling driving in opposite directions at different speeds, now how far apart are they after two hours. This does not count because it is a "Story Problem" in mathematics. So you see, the attitude underlies all of the conventional topics, not just the controversial ones.<br /><br />As for covering homosexuality, lesbianism (isn't homosexuality too?), celibacy, menstruation, I believe all these "controversial" topics should be covered. I think this because the ignorant can't exercise tolerance of that which they are ignorant of. That is why I spoke of these when I talked to my son about the birds and the bees. Now I think these topics should be covered during Sex Ed, not throughout the school experience. Maybe spend 1-2 weeks on each topic as required during a HIGH SCHOOL course, NOT during elementary school.<br /><br />As for the parents being asleep or controlling the subject matter, I think you all are partially correct. In my little corner of this world, the parents are largely apathetic. The school boards have become complacent to this, and don't expect parental involvement. At the same time they are taking advantage of the same complacency. As for the PTA/PTO, can we say "Well-connected, elitist, self-interested, exclusive, and disinterested individuals"? This is not the case in every PTA. But I dare you to try and get involved and be a "Member", not just a parent. It won't work, unless you are one of them[/]. So do they control the school boards? Maybe, but certainly not for the will of the masses of parents, or for society, but for their own agenda. In the cases where the PTA doesn't have much clout, the school boards do what they please, with disregard to what the community, society as a whole or the parents want.<br /><br />But IMHO this father was completely correct to stand up for the morals and values that he believes in. And the school was wrong, first for teaching this cr*p, and then for not listening to the parent, the person that they are there working for.<br /><br />Thank you for allowing me the time to rant. And for giving my diatribe consideration.

 

[Bondo]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

Thank you for allowing me the time to rant. And for giving my diatribe consideration.

Wow,........... Dave,... I Never Agree with Your point of View,......... This is a Shock ........<br /><br />I think You have Latent Conservative tendencies........... <br /><br />All Your Liberal Friends are going to Demand that you submit to Intensive Therapy................

 

[PW2]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

What I will never understand is why some feel so threatened confronting a different point of view?<br />Are your beliefs so fragile or undefendable that they will crumble under the slightest scrutiny?<br /><br />It is, after all, an education you are after, and you only get that by exploring many points of view--not just one.<br /><br />And, I am curious, how do you want your kids to do in the likely event of coming into contact with some kid in school that has like gendered parents? You want your kids to make fun of them, or ostracize them. Or what exactly? Or simply deny they exist?<br /><br />Where does this fear of homosexuality come from anyway. Do you really fear your kids, given the slighest chance, will become gay?? I don't understand it.<br /><br />Years ago, I recall getting a frantic phone call from my mother. After my dad died, she had to take care of a bunch of rental properties. She rented a house to a couple of single guys, and apparently they only needed one of the bedrooms.<br /><br />Well, the rental neighbors were up in arms, and wanted her to act to get rid of these guys, and she asked me what to do..<br /><br />well, I asked her if they paid the rent on time--yep, exactly on time every time<br />Did they keep the place up? Spotless, she told me..<br /><br />Then if they invite you to a sex orgy, politely turn them down, I told her. Otherwise, take their check, and tell those fine neighbors to mind their own sweet business.<br /><br />That's what she did, and later encouraged other gay couples to rent her places--they always kept the places so clean and were so dependable...

 

[PW2]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

As far as teachers having special authority with children--I guess if that is the case, I feel sorry for your relationship with your children.<br /><br />I recall when my daughter was in high school, she came home telling me that she was being taught that somehow loggers were out raping the environment and murdering trees.<br /><br />And as I happen to be a part of an industry group that is proud of their forest and environmental management (as most are) we had a slide presentation already put together, and I requested from the school an opportunity to present it. I did, and maybe some actual learning took place through an exchange of ideas<br /><br />Our web page is: www.algomaforest.com if any are interested. We even added a feature offering lesson plans to teachers, after my little experience.<br /><br />Simply complaining that you are powerless with teachers is boring, and complaining to your kids their teachers are wrong without showing them why they are wrong is confusing and ineffective with your kids.<br /><br />Differences of opinion are always learning opportunities, for all involved.

 

[DJ]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

The "flood gates" are really in effect.

 

[DJ]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

Snapper,<br /><br />A few points.<br /> <br />1. We home educated our children-through high school. From third grade.<br /><br />2. I/we made a HUGE sacrifice (wife not working) to do so.<br /><br />3. They a are well adjusted, no substance abuse issues, etc.<br /><br />I realized a LONG time ago that the GOVERNMENT schools were just that, GOVERNMENT schools=lowest common denominator.<br /><br />I made the sacifice-still am, to send them the best way I know how.<br /><br />If you think the government has the answers, get ready to give up EVERYTHING!

 

[JB]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

I don't think that teaching tolerance is a bad idea.<br /><br />Having lived in the South in the thirties and forties I have seen the consequences of intolerance and myth-based hatred, and in succeeding decades the bitter defense of indefensable practices and laws.<br /><br />Respecting persons "of color" and tolerating their culture has made no white person black, respecting women's rights has turned no man into a woman.<br /><br />Our (straight) bedroom behavior is private. . .NObody's business. . . yet we, as a society, seem to focus on this tiny area in the lives of homosexual people and demonize them for it with no regard for anything else about them.<br /><br />Future generations will feel the same guilt for our gay bashing that we feel for the lynchings our ancestors perpetrated "to defend GOD's word".

 

[NOSLEEP]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

Sorry but I dont see a connection between tolerance<br />and teaching young children sexual preference propaganda.<br />Demonizing a race or any person of color, or any person<br />for their sexual preference is wrong. And should not<br />be tolerated.<br />However teaching children that are young enough to be<br />extremely impressionable and have little or no understanding<br />about their own sexuality and purposefully targeting them<br />in hopes of legitimizing and securing a future generation<br />before they have the concept of their own sexuality<br />is extremely predatory.<br />I wouldn't like it if drug users had the same emerging<br />protection of tolerance either. And God or religion<br />doesn't have to even be brought into this discussion to give either view credibility.

 

[wilkin250r]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

Originally posted by NOSLEEP:<br /> Sorry but I dont see a connection between tolerance<br />and teaching young children sexual preference propaganda.<br />Demonizing a race or any person of color, or any person<br />for their sexual preference is wrong. And should not<br />be tolerated.<br />However teaching children that are young enough to be<br />extremely impressionable and have little or no understanding<br />about their own sexuality and purposefully targeting them<br />in hopes of legitimizing and securing a future generation<br />before they have the concept of their own sexuality<br />is extremely predatory.<br />

Terrific arguement. <br /><br />I would never advocate demonizing homosexuality. However, to specifically target young children BECAUSE they are impressionable, and assault them with subjet matter that they are incabable of fully understanding is just as wrong, if not worse.

 

[90skichallenger]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

Parents should stay involved. If I had a problem with it I would have a sit-down discussion at home on the book and what it is about and what my opinion is. The book itself is fine, It is all in the contextual references and working with your child as a parent to ensure understanding.<br />Later,

 

[JB]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

Sorry, NoSleep.<br /><br />Your arguments might bear some weight except that they are based on motives you invented, that have no basis in fact.

 

[S.Lee]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

My opinion on this, even though I'm new here, is that if we break it down, it is just a short circuit in a homosexual's synapses that makes them that way. A right or wrong short circuit is for all of us to decide and is on a personal level. My point is, do we teach kids about people who are mentally handicapped? or do we ignore that? How about people of different color, or beliefs? I have 2 young impressionable children, and I try to instill upon them my morals and beliefs and know that at the end of the day I am doing my best. I don't agree with the lifestyle these people lead, but I feel they can't help it.

 

[NOSLEEP]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

Ya..ya Jb.<br /> It's Dr NOSLEEP: Discusses sexual orientation<br />theories. Here's a short take on what some <br />doctors I've been influencing have to say.<br /><br /> http://www.narth.com/docs/levay.html <br /><br /> http://www.narth.com/menus/born.html <br /><br />Dr. Simon LeVay Discusses Sexual Orientation Theories At Middle Tennessee State University<br />April 18, 2005 - Neuroscientist and gay activist Simon LeVay gave a lecture on sexual orientation to students at Middle Tennessee State University on April 11.<br />LeVay's speech was sponsored by the Middle Tennessee State University Lambda Association.<br /><br />LeVay discussed various theories on sexual orientation, including the view of Plato that an angry god could determine the origin of gay and straight people. He noted that Plato recognized that sexual orientation could be traced to genetics. "A much more common idea, traditionally, [is that] human sexuality was influenced by Christian religion tradition," said LeVay.<br /><br />LeVay told the students that St. Thomas Acquinas was wrong when he said that animals do not engage in homosexual behavior. According to LeVay, "Homosexuality is thought of as a behavior that anyone might be tempted to engage in, not a distinguishing attribute of a particular class of people."<br /><br />In an online article dealing with sexual orientation, LeVay says that sexual orientation emerges from a conscious or unconscious "training regimen" imposed by parents, teachers, peers, and society in general. He noted that a girl who is raped by a man may become turned off to men and become a lesbian; while a boy who is seduced by a man and who derives sexual pleasure from the experience, might become gay.<br /><br />He said that a person's identity as gay, straight or bisexual is a label imposed by society and internalized by the individual, rather than rising from within. "Homosexuality is not just a lifestyle, it's a deep attribute within us."<br /><br />LeVay has expressed support in the past for the right of individuals with unwanted same-sex attractions to seek help from reorientation therapists: Some Gay Advocates Acknowledge Reorientation Therapy as a Legitimate Option--Simon LeVay Joins Douglas Haldeman in Qualified Support.

 

[JB]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

What does that have to do with you inventing motives for others, then bashing them for it, NoSleep?<br /><br />It is very common for those who hate without basis to think up motives for the hated, then demonize them for those very invented motives.<br /><br />Classics are the, "They think. . . . " and "They want to. . . and that's why I am against them."<br /><br />For what it is worth, I am also legally entitled to call myself "Doctor".

 

[NOSLEEP]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

Alright Doctor JB. <br /><br />Quote.<br />What does that have to do with you inventing motives for others, then bashing them for it, NoSleep?<br /><br />Not my invention JB.<br />It's one view of this topic. And their are many!<br /><br />You seem to find hate readily in print in this<br />discussion. I've looked more than twice and I cant<br />find it. Perhaps you have invented it?<br /><br />Anyhow, this topic has expired. The controversy<br />that gives this topic its meat and potatoes will<br />wage on. <br /><br />Peace.

 

[tony779]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

When did schools become moral and ethics learning centers? I thought that schools were supposed to teach readin, 'ritin, 'rithmitic. Morals and ethics are the parents realm. Social studies shouldnt even cover sexual orientation unless you include religious teachings too. Sexual orientation is a choice not an attribute, genetic flaw, or pre-disposition. It is a learned behavior just like alcholism and over eating. People are born with a color and a sexual organ. Those things cannot be changed. Where you put that sexual organ can be. That is why it is a choice. I dont have to teach my kids to hate and still teach them it is wrong. Tolerance is not the same as acceptance. I dont "gay bash" and I dont hang out with gays. I tolerate their existance. Being in the military means that I defend the rights of straights and gays alike. I dont agree with the lifestyle but God will judge them, not me or you.

 

[DJ]

Re: Don't Kid Around in the Classroom

When did schools become moral and ethics learning centers? I thought that schools were supposed to teach readin, 'ritin, 'rithmitic. Morals and ethics are the parents realm.

Well said-DITTO!