 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in World Affairs/Debate. |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Gay Fairy Tale... |
New poll |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| User | Post | ||
Tommathy                 Since: 11-17-05 From: Cloud Nine, Turn Left and I'm There~ Last post: 6295 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
| Even if you think they aren't hateful, it is how it comes across.
Atleast that's how I felt in the fourth grade... And initially, I thought that perhaps, you know, your stance was right, and maybe they just *didn't* know what they were doing. Then I came out in the seventh grade. Mistake of un-godly proportions. |
|||
Young Guru Snifit   Since: 11-18-05 From: Notre Dame, IN Last post: 6302 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Silvershield I will agree with you on that, it is a difficult thing to determine where we can and cannot draw the line on limiting parents and their responsibilities of raising their children, I guess I just don't see the reading of the story as that dramatic of an infringement on the rights of the parents. I understand your points, but I guess my fundamental opinion on it is different and I think that the fairytale is completely within bounds of being taught, but this is coming from someone growing up in the bay area outside of san francisco with a handful of homosexual relatives, so I guess my feelings about the issue are a little different and I grew up always thinking the homosexuality was a normal thing, kinda like the difference between the people that were art people and people that were engineering people, nothing wrong or right about it, just the way you were. And I agree with Tommathy, even if most of the children don't know what the words mean, if one of the children do, then it means a whole lot more, and I would think it to be especially difficult for the child if they were homosexual. (edited by Young Guru on 05-10-06 04:37 PM) (edited by Young Guru on 05-12-06 02:37 PM) |
|||
Silvershield   580    Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6308 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Young GuruSorry that this reply is a long time in coming. What my argument really boils down to is this: whether gay marriage is or is not, should or should not, be such a hotbutton issue is irrelevant. Ideally, sure, it wouldn't be such a problem. But also, whether you think it is right or wrong is irrelevant. If any parent takes issue with it, for any reason or for no reason at all, that parent has the right to prevent his child from exposure to it. Imagine it were the Christian religion that were being taught, instead of gay marriage. Surely Christianity is not a damaging topic - at its purest, it is an ethos of love and respect, just like homosexuality at its purest is not the disgusting deviancy it is often hyped up as - but I have no doubt you (that's a general "you," not necessarily you specifically) would want to exercise your right to determine whether or not your child has to sit in a classroom in which it is taught. In the eyes of any rational, open-minded person, there is nothing wrong with the essentials of Christian thought, but those who perceive it as a religion of hate or stupidity will certainly keep their children from it; likewise, there is nothing wrong with the essentials of homosexuality or its culture, but those who perceive it as that hyped up image will want it to remain absent in schools. Put simply, if you want homosexality to be taught in schools in any capacity, from simple gay marriage to full-blown idiosyncratic gay fetishes, I want those same schools to institute a curriculum that emphasizes my religion. |
|||
mattp Red Paratroopa Since: 03-04-06 Last post: 6560 days Last view: 6560 days |
| ||
| My kids will be self taught. | |||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6308 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by mattpIs that an attempt at sarcasm? |
|||
windwaker Ninji i'm not judgemental, i'm cynical Lonely People of the World, Unite! Since: 12-27-05 Last post: 6325 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
| Teachers all over America "teach Christianity" in World History. As long as they don't state that it's "correct" or give Christianity an unfair amount of the class time vs. the other religions being taught, it should be fine.
I was taught - in a public school - (or, should I say, re-taught) some stories from the Bible about Abraham and Sarah, and stuff like that. They were presented as "Christians believe that...". That's fine. Same goes for homosexuality. No one's having any ideal forced upon them, they're just learning of one. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6308 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by rekawdniwIf you were younger than x years of age, and your parents did not approve of you learning about religion, you shouldn't have been learning about it. If it is at all objectionable, and a child's parents have any reason to keep their child from it, it is their right to do so. Like I've said, this applies just as much to essentially harmless teachings - Christianity and homosexuality, as two examples - as it does to obviously harmful or biased content. The reason I make that point is that there can be no single arbiter for what is objectionable and what isn't; to different observers, Christianity might be objectionable, or homosexuality might be, or both, or neither, or whatever. But who's to say which person is correct? |
|||
|
Reshaper256 190 Since: 11-17-05 From: United States Last post: 6338 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
| You keep referring to homosexuality as though it were a religion - and of course it's not, it's a sexual orientation. What you mean when you say "teaching homosexuality" is actually teaching tolerance of other sexual orientations, which should definitely be allowed in schools. Teachers are not supposed to endorse any religion, but they *can* endorse the secular concept of tolerating other sexual orientations, which is what the teacher in question was doing when he read this book to his class. I have to admit that I, myself, would feel uncomfortable upon hearing that my child had been read this book, but that is because of my own, Christian *religious* beliefs. I would not have those beliefs imposed on the teacher or the students in the classroom. Teaching the tolerance of homosexuality or homosexuals (or simply tolerance of anyone who believes something you don't) isn't teaching religion - it may fly in the face of some religions, but there's nothing wrong with that.
And there's also nothing wrong with mentioning that "Christians believe this..." or "Muslims believe that..." as long as it's done on a purely factual basis, without religious motive. It's part of a teacher's role to teach children about other cultures, including their religions, and to rid children of their ignorance and intolerance without actually imposing other religions on them. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6308 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Reshaper256No, I'm hardly representing homosexuality as if it's a religion. You're missing the crux of my argument. I'm only placing sexual orientation in parallel with religious preference inasmuch as, regardless of the specifics of either, there are people who are opposed to them. And if those people have kids, they have the right as parents to prevent their kids from exposure to things that they find objectionable (until those children are of a certain age). I'm not trying to promote either homosexuality or Christianity as right or wrong - in fact, you can substitute any two other belief systems or behaviors in their places and it would change nothing - but am instead using them as examples to point out that neither is evil yet a parent still needs the personal right to choose what is taught in schools. Because if you allow one but prevent the other, you are making the statement that one is somehow tolerable while the other is not, even if that's not the intention. |
|||
|
Reshaper256 190 Since: 11-17-05 From: United States Last post: 6338 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
| So, in your opinion, should we...?
1. Disallow any discussion concerning sexual orientation/religion in schools. 2. Allow discussion of such in schools, promoting tolerance toward the beliefs and orientations, and those who believe or are oriented in such a way. or... 3. (something else) |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6308 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Reshaper2563. (something else) Specifically, allow any subject matter that student's parents do not object to. If a parent does not want his kid to learn about homosexuality, the child should not learn about homosexuality. If the parent does not want his child to learn about Christianity, that shouldn't be mentioned either. Kids are in school to be educated in academic matters - the basic science, math, history, English deal - not to learn "life skills." Those are the parents' domain, and include any sort of beliefs, whether for better or worse. |
|||
drjayphd Torosu OW! BURNY!  Since: 11-18-05 From: CT Last post: 6298 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
Originally posted by SilvershieldOriginally posted by Reshaper2563. (something else) Only problem with the "allow any subject matter that student's parents do not object to" approach is then it gets to the point where you can't really teach much of anything. That'd rule out plenty of books which, say, the wingnuttier types might regard as dark-sided, so you're not getting the full English spectrum. And besides, kids may not necessarily have the same beliefs as their parents. Probably not at that age, but down the line, they might very well have formed their own opinions on those subjects. |
|||
|
Reshaper256 190 Since: 11-17-05 From: United States Last post: 6338 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Silvershield You see - that's where I have to disagree. It's impossible to please every parent, or even a majority of them. If we only allowed subject matter that parents didn't object to, we could teach no science, because many parents feel that the world is only, what was it... 6000 years old? What you run into is religions/beliefs begin to overlap and add up, and eventually you can't teach anything, or if you don't teach a certain thing a certain way, you're not going to please a certain group of parents. And it *is* the role of a teacher, to some extent, to teach "life skills" as long as they don't go into the realm of promoting a religion - which is why I pointed out that teaching tolerance toward homosexuality isn't the same as teaching religion. Teaching tolerance of those different than you is one of the primary goals of a teacher, especially in areas of the country where the entire class is largely mainstream, and doesn't have much contact with people different than themselves. Ask yourself what it's saying about what the school promotes, if tolerance toward homosexuality, or mere *facts* about religions can't even be mentioned in the classroom. It would be hard to teach a lot of history, if you couldn't even *mention* Christianity. Why did the pilgrims come over on the Mayflower? It is not the right of a group of parents to govern what is taught in the public school system according to their beliefs. The government already has laws in place to prevent the promotion of religion in schools, which is good enough. I hate to say it this way, but the usual solution for a parent who doesn't agree with what the school is teaching their child is for them to home school the child. I know that sounds harsh, but the entire school - and the law - shouldn't bend to suit which facts some parents do or do not want their children to hear. (edited by Reshaper256 on 05-17-06 02:35 PM) (edited by Reshaper256 on 05-17-06 03:36 PM) |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6308 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by drjayphd[Also in response to Reshaper256] There's a difference between removing utterly subjective content and removing content that has objective value. Evolution, while rejected by many extreme rightists, has scientific academic value. Huck Finn (and similar literature), while objectionable due to racial issues, has literary academic value. Christianity as a reason for Pilgrims to emmigrate to America has historical academic value. Homosexuality as an impetus for legislation has academic value in regards to civil law. Teaching tolerance, while unnecessarily "good," has no academic value; it does not belong in schools. You shouldn't have the right to force parents to teach their kids specific values - such as tolerance of homosexuals - even though those values are virtually unquestionable. Because, unquestionable as it may be when framed in the context of our society, it is impossible to draw the line at which values should be allowed and which shouldn't. And if I were more familiar with human child development, I'd propose an age at which this whole system should fall apart - once students are of a certain stage of maturity, there's nothing wrong with introducing material that is open to interpretation rather than sticking to the hard facts. But not for seven-year-old kids. |
|||
|
Reshaper256 190 Since: 11-17-05 From: United States Last post: 6338 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by SilvershieldAnd this is where I suppose we will continue to disagree. I believe that we should teach tolerance of people's beliefs in schools regardless of the "values" of any group of parents. For me it's not even a question of how "questionable" the beliefs are, the issue I'm more concerned with is the teaching of tolerance. I believe that the obligations of a teacher go beyond that of teaching academics - and that the teaching of tolerance *belongs* in schools. You believe that every parent should have the right to choose what their child is not exposed to in school, and to you this supercedes the importance of teaching tolerance to students in schools. This is a view I can understand. You do not believe that the teaching of tolerance belongs in schools, but is rather the sole responsibility of the parents, which I can also understand, but don't agree with. Although I doubt we'll ever agree on this, I hope you can see where I'm coming from. (edited by Reshaper256 on 05-17-06 05:27 PM) |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6308 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Reshaper256No doubt. I wish I were on your side, because intolerance is a sad reality of modern society, but I can't bring myself to disregard the definite interest that other groups have in this issue. Namely, those who are anti-homosexual: to play Devil's advocate for a moment, why do you and I have the right to teach children that their point of view is wrong? According to their (extreme view of) religion, God certainly disapproves of homosexuals, so we are essentially discarding their religion by allowing this material. And there's a difference between not promoting a specific religion and outright forcing children to deny its precepts. To frame it differently, is it the right of the school system to teach children the character of medical procedures such as blood transfusions, even if the parents of those children are Mormon (I think that's the one) and do not believe in such things? Is it right for a young child to be exposed to birth control as a necessary and desirable thing if his parents are strict Catholics? Both blood transfusions and birth control save lives, but are each religions' reasons for rejecting them actually "wrong?" |
|||
geeogree Red Cheep-cheep Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6310 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
| I'll jump in here only to point out that it is the Jehovah Witness religion that is against transfutions not mormons. | |||
Randy53215 Melon Bug Since: 11-17-05 From: Greenfield, Wisconsin (U.S.A) Last post: 6296 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by rekawdniw Heh, now if only all schools were like that. My school wouldnt dare attempt. Then again.... I am like the only republican and hardcore Christian there. |
|||
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 6297 days Last view: 6297 days |
| ||
| God, some of you people are anal about what should and shouldn't be taught. Lighten up... education isn't about indoctrination and people aren't automatons. Education's about teaching ways of thinking and giving people mental tools for dealing successfully with life. It's not about carefully choosing what people do and don't get expoed to.
Whatever happened to the concept of a comprehensive liberal education? Maybe we should just turn everything back over to the fucking Jesuits. (edited by Arwon on 05-19-06 02:29 PM) |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6308 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by ArwonFine, my religion will be taught to our nation's seven-year-old kids too. And if you object, then you're being anal about it. I'm all for a comprehensive liberal arts education - I attend a liberal arts college, in fact - but I'm eighteen. You're overlooking the age of the students in question. |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Gay Fairy Tale... |
| |
