Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan The whole kindergarten teaches communism thing is what talk radio shovels out day after day. I used to listen to a lot of talk radio. It really affected how I viewed the world, and not in a good way.
Originally Posted By dshyates I love where they cite an article from Latawata, OR where a 3rd grade teacher read "You've got 2 Mommies?" And then go off for 2 hrs on how the entire public school system is pushing the "gay agenda".
Originally Posted By RC Collins Regarding being forced to endure Leftist preaching in schools and the workplace: You already know that I think business owners should be free to run their businesses as they please, as long as they do not assault people or damage their property. As long as customers and employees are free to leave, employment and patronage remain voluntary exchanges, and they don’t have to be subjected to anything on an ongoing basis unless they choose to be. Yet business must teach and enforce certain principles regarding interpersonal interaction, and must hire and serve people - even if the owner would prefer not to - or risk fines and lawsuits. Certain classes of people are “protected†and therefore treated with extra deference, while others are not. Conservatives believe in treating people as individuals. Leftists put people in groups and then deal with the groups. I also think is way past time to get government out of academia, except perhaps in partnership for training for certain government professions (such as the military). I once saw a graphic that pretty much summed it up. It had two cycles. One cycle went “Union Bosses => Public Schools => Failing Students => Union Jobs => Union Dues => Union Bossesâ€. The Union Bosses are the nexus, as the attached cycle is “Union Bosses => Campaign Contributions => Democrats => Political Power => Union Bossesâ€. Of course, union have lost ground in the private sectors, but the union bosses were smart and organized government employees. Now, the unions have even more reason to grow government and never ever let any government program or agency be cut back, at least as far as the number of employees. They’d rather have more lower paid employees than fewer higher paid employees, because it is volume that brings in the cash. Both of these things would eliminate the need to quibble about every little thing as public policy. I know both of these (getting government out of the employer-employee relationship, and out of the classroom) are not going to happen, though. Instead, what we often have is government-mandated Leftist indoctrination. One of the big things in California now is the push by the Left to eliminate references to “mother and fathers†in the classroom and the whole idea that the genders are different. Yes, I know – there are a few kids with male genitalia who like to dress like girls, and there are many, many kids with just one parent in their lives, and a few whose mothers are with another women, or whose fathers are with another man, but this kind of Leftist attack on gender roles and the natural – YES, natural – family is going too far. Should kids be bullied? No – everyone should be protected from harassment and assault. But this isn’t the way to go about it. Treating children like wards of the state/subverting parental authority. Some of sex ed curriculum. Distributing condoms in school. Taking underage girls out of school (even across state lines) for abortions without parental *notification* - let alone permission. But then it is convenient to let the parents deal with any medical/psychological repercussions, especially if the parents have no idea that surgery was performed on their child. I love the excuse of “what if the parents are abusive – what if the daughter is pregnant by her father?†So the Left’s solution is to get her an abortion… and send her right back into that home! If the girl has to explain to the authorities why she can’t go to her parents, they can then take steps to protect her. Keeping unwed pregnant girls in regular class, and then having on-site daycare. I have personally observed (and did my best to avoid active participation in) school activities that employed New Age and pagan practices/philosophy. It sure was fun watching the school try to instill “motivation†and “self-esteem†and “realize your potential†and “treat everyone nice†things into everyone when they had removed the foundation from which most of the students derived those things. Can’t appeal to God or the Bible or God’s love for us, so they had to try to tell the students to do this stuff “just becauseâ€. There’s the “blame American firstâ€, “look to the government for solutionsâ€, secular humanist, philosophical naturalist, moral relativism, postmodernism, and all of the like. The very idea that students should not be able to physically defend themselves without getting in trouble is Leftist crap. At the college level, there are things like admissions quotas/targets/different standards based on sex or “raceâ€, dorms segregated by “race†but not by sex, and speech codes. In the workplace, sensitivity and diversity training, and sexual harassment training and restrictions quite often have a Leftist bent. Then there’s caving in to agreeing to force all employees to join the same union, or at least pay money to that one union, which almost without fail supports Leftist politics. Again, the non-Leftist thing to do would be to treat people as individuals, not members of special groups, and to allow people to have their own personal moral standards, freedom of speech, and voluntary association/interaction. I suppose a some of you will sneeze at a lot of this, because you think these things are just fine. But there's the rub. In some of these areas, it is impossible to be "neutral", and that's exactly why it should be up to people to make their own decisions instead of having government interference in schools and the workplace. You should be able to send your kid to a school that is run the way you like, and not support a school that is run the way I'd like. You should be able to run a business they way you want. And I should have that same freedom. Getting back to the original topic - you can turn off your radio or change the channel and not support the sponsors. With public schools, we're all paying for them, like it or not.
Originally Posted By jonvn "I also think is way past time to get government out of academia" Then send your kid to a private school. "One of the big things in California now is the push by the Left to eliminate references to “mother and fathers†" Where do you get this stuff from? I have a kid in school and this is not true. You need to stop listening to talk radio.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Yet business must teach and enforce certain principles regarding interpersonal interaction, and must hire and serve people - even if the owner would prefer not to - or risk fines and lawsuits.<< Sadly, history has shown that left on their own, businesses would discriminate in hiring and in the customers they serve. You would like to roll back the clock to some imagined time when basic civil rights were unnecessary? No thanks.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I suppose a some of you will sneeze at a lot of this, because<< it isn't based on any reality, just a lot of imagined talk radio nonsense.
Originally Posted By jonvn Of course it's nonsense. Taking a minor child anywhere without parental authority is called kidnapping. Be it for abortion or any other reason. Taking a child across state lines? Um...right. These sorts of crazy accusations does little but undermine the espoused position.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan This is the stuff you hear on talk radio every day. All kinds of bizarre stuff, everything's a conspiracy by "secular humanists" or the dreaded LIBERALS. And the listeners clearly absorb it and believe every word of it. I'll give the talk show hosts this much: They know their audience.
Originally Posted By DAR As someone whose sister teaches in the Milwaukee Public School system, the number of school supplies isn't her most pressing issue. It's making sure she has enough students during the day. She has a total of ten kids. She teaches 3 4 and 5 year old special needs kids. On a good day so far this school year she's had 8 kids. She hasn't a full class yet this year. The items that RC Collins talks about aren't taught in my sister's class because they're too young. And these are kids still in diapers or have certain speech needs.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Certain classes of people are “protected†and therefore treated with extra deference, while others are not. > Um, no. I know that when some straight white men like to play at being "oppressed," that they can convince themselves of this. But no. The law does not say "can not discriminate in hiring against black people." It says "can not discriminate in hiring on the basis of race." Therefore, we're all protected. A black-owned business can not fire a white person just because he's white, either, and in fact there have been numerous so-called "reverse discrimination" cases brought. The rest of the post is just about as accurate. When you're that far to the right, everything LOOKS left(ist). <With public schools, we're all paying for them, like it or not.> Public schools also have these things called "school boards." Perhaps you've heard of them. If you like, you can join them and influence policy. In fact, right-wingers do so. I have southern cousins and it's hard for me to believe sometimes how right-wing their school systems are. The conservatives there impose their viewpoints on the schools, make no mistake. But to RC, that probably seems "normal." And I still remember the big stink in New York when they wanted to make "Heather has Two Mommies" available in the library. Not required reading. Just AVAILABLE if a kid asked for it, because (certainly in New York), he or she might HAVE a friend with two mommies. And that was the whole outrage - that it was available in the library at all. Conservatives here (and yes, we have some) made a big stink and even ran "stealth" candidates for school board (i.e. didn't have kids in the system and gave no indication why they were running) just to take this book out of the library. In some districts (especially Queens and Staten Island) they succeeded. (jonvn): <These sorts of crazy accusations does little but undermine the espoused position.> Boy howdy.
Originally Posted By DAR <<Public schools also have these things called "school boards." Perhaps you've heard of them. If you like, you can join them and influence policy.>> Well the school board here in Milwaukee is made up of "yes" people for the Superintendent.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Are they elected members? That could be replaced? Like any elected body, school boards can become surprisingly unresponsive to the people who elect them. However, it is usually easier to replace someone if you really think he/she is doing a bad job than replacing a congressman, say, as there isn't the big money involved. It takes focus and time commitment, though. I imagine in a lot of locales, the school boards are made up mostly of the people who have the time and inclination to do it.
Originally Posted By DAR No they're elected it's just that the right people don't get elected(which is pretty much par for the course in politics). A friend of my dad's ran one year but lost by a significant margin.
Originally Posted By RC Collins jonvn >>Then send your kid to a private school.<< That still leaves me paying for the government schools and still leaves the government schools teaching things to which I object – with my money. >>"One of the big things in California now is the push by the Left to eliminate references to “mother and fathers†" Where do you get this stuff from? I have a kid in school and this is not true.<< Under SB 777, the following could be eliminated from California public schools because they are deemed to have a "discriminatory bias": Textbooks and other instruction that portray marriage as only between a man and a woman Textbooks and other instruction that say people are born male or female (and not in between) Textbooks and other instruction that leave out transsexual, bisexual, and homosexual historical figures Sex education and school assemblies that omit the option of hormone injections or sex changes Homecoming king and queen contests that allow only boys to run for king and only girls to run for queen Boys' and girls' bathrooms that separate biological boys from biological girls. Kar2oonMan >>Sadly, history has shown that left on their own, businesses would discriminate in hiring and in the customers they serve.<< And I have the option of boycotting and not investing in and not working for such businesses, and you do to. That way, everyone has the freedom to do with themselves and their own property what they want. jonvn >>Of course it's nonsense. Taking a minor child anywhere without parental authority is called kidnapping. Be it for abortion or any other reason. Taking a child across state lines? Um...right.<< It happens, and it is legal. Attempts to outlaw it have been shot down. Abortion automatically gets certain protections and work-arounds that other medical procedures don’t. A pregnant minor magically is emancipated. Until they aren’t pregnant anymore. Kar2oonMan >>This is the stuff you hear on talk radio every day. All kinds of bizarre stuff, everything's a conspiracy by "secular humanists" or the dreaded LIBERALS. And the listeners clearly absorb it and believe every word of it.<< Who needs conspiracy? This stuff is done proudly in the open. Knock talk radio all you want – it doesn’t meant that these things aren’t true. Don’t like it? Stop using coercion and force to push your side. As long as that is going on, conservatives will ridicule it. Dabob2 >>The law does not say "can not discriminate in hiring against black people." It says "can not discriminate in hiring on the basis of race." Therefore, we're all protected.<< But you can be fired for having a big nose. Nose size isn’t a protected class. >>Public schools also have these things called "school boards." Perhaps you've heard of them. If you like, you can join them and influence policy.<< Great. Let’s go to public meetings to endlessly argue over curriculum, class sizes, discipline, uniforms, school health clinics, zero tolerance policies, which sports will be funded, etc. etc. Or we could get the government out of schooling and let people really make their own choices. School boards can be easily be packed by those aligned with the unions, since the unions use compulsory dues money for political purposes and can fund their own candidates well. The unions serve the union bosses, while pretending to serve the teachers. The parents? Ha! >>The conservatives there impose their viewpoints on the schools, make no mistake.<< I think Leftist parents should be able to send their kids to schools in line with their own wishes. >>Conservatives here (and yes, we have some) made a big stink and even ran "stealth" candidates for school board (i.e. didn't have kids in the system and gave no indication why they were running) just to take this book out of the library.<< We all pay for government schools, so we all have an interest in them, parents or not. That is part of the problem. We spend thousands of dollars – in some cases, something like $12,000 per student - and how much of that is seen in the classroom? We tie the hands of teachers and then ask them do the near impossible.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Gosh! California is attempting to (gasp) get rid of discrimination! What a horrible goal. These things should be left to sort themselves out. History shows us that over time, the governemtn doesn't need to get involved in ending discrimination of any kind. Ending discrimination against gays will destroy families, marriages will crumble, and soon goats will be marrying chickens. Evil!!! Boy, it hurts when I jam my tongue that far into my cheek.
Originally Posted By jonvn "That still leaves me paying for the government schools " That's just too bad. There are a lot of government programs I pay for that I get no direct benefit from. That's how government works. "Under SB 777, the following could be eliminated from California public schools because they are deemed to have a "discriminatory bias":" Ah, so now we are talking about some random senate bill, and then one extreme way as to how it can be interpreted. Right. "It happens, and it is legal." One example, please. Show me where a school teacher escorted a minor child without parental permission across state lines as you said happened.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Dabob2 >>The law does not say "can not discriminate in hiring against black people." It says "can not discriminate in hiring on the basis of race." Therefore, we're all protected.<< <But you can be fired for having a big nose. Nose size isn’t a protected class.> If you could find evidence of people actually GETTING fired for big noses, you'd have a real-world argument. >>Public schools also have these things called "school boards." Perhaps you've heard of them. If you like, you can join them and influence policy.<< <Great. Let’s go to public meetings to endlessly argue over curriculum, class sizes, discipline, uniforms, school health clinics, zero tolerance policies, which sports will be funded, etc. etc. Or we could get the government out of schooling and let people really make their own choices.> Democracy ain't perfect. But it's the best we've got. If it wasn't elected people sitting on school boards, it would have to be someone. Better they should be accountable people than unaccountable, no? <School boards can be easily be packed by those aligned with the unions, since the unions use compulsory dues money for political purposes and can fund their own candidates well. The unions serve the union bosses, while pretending to serve the teachers. The parents? Ha!> School boards can also be packed with pro-"intelligent design" people or whathaveyou. Who care nothing but for their own little narrow reason for being on the school board to begin with. Again, democracy ain't perfect, but it beats the alternative. >>The conservatives there impose their viewpoints on the schools, make no mistake.<< <I think Leftist parents should be able to send their kids to schools in line with their own wishes.> Newsflash: in most American communities, liberals live next door to conservatives, who live next door to moderates. How would your system work, exactly? In the real world, I mean. Liberal parents get together and create liberal private schools (since we're "getting government out of the education business") to teach liberal philosophy along with the 3 R's, while conservative parents get together and create conservative private schools to teach conservative philosophy along with the 3 R's? Great. Hard to think of a better way to create permanent divisiveness. >>Conservatives here (and yes, we have some) made a big stink and even ran "stealth" candidates for school board (i.e. didn't have kids in the system and gave no indication why they were running) just to take this book out of the library.<< <We all pay for government schools, so we all have an interest in them, parents or not. That is part of the problem.> We all have an interest in educating the young generation. Yes. In the broad sense, that's in everyone's interest. On this narrow subject, do you really feel you have an interest in making sure that a kid who has a friend with gay parents and wants to learn more CAN NOT read a particular book? That's a strange "interest." <We spend thousands of dollars – in some cases, something like $12,000 per student - and how much of that is seen in the classroom? We tie the hands of teachers and then ask them do the near impossible.> "No Child Left Behind" certainly does. At any rate, you tipped your hand with this one: <Under SB 777, the following could be eliminated from California public schools...>(and then a list of paranoid ramblings) "Could be??" Please. You stated that as though it were fact, but the law doesn't say anything about any of those things. What you wrote was fear-mongering, plain and simple. Here's the actual bill: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/yv8vse" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/yv8vse</a> "Existing law prohibits a teacher from giving instruction, and a school district from sponsoring any activity, that reflects adversely upon persons because of their race, sex, color, creed, handicap, national origin, or ancestry." ...and then they added sexual orientation to this list. Nothing about any of that laundry list of irrational fear. It prohibits negativity, or "reflecting adversely." So, with national origin, for instance, you couldn't have a teacher teaching, say, "Every European group has had an interesting, constructive history. Except the Poles. The stupid Pollacks have never created anything of value." You couldn't teach THAT. That doesn't mean you couldn't teach that the Irish or the Italians HAVE created good things. This new addition to the law would say to me that you couldn't have an idiot Jr. High history teacher (like I did) making fun of a sort of obviously gay kid, lisping and mincing and making him feel like dirt, while making the un-obviously gay kid (me) terrified that I'd be found out one day and treated like dirt too. Doesn't mean you couldn't mention "mom and dad" or anything ridiculous like that. A quick google search, however, did bring up the wacko right-wing site WorldNetDaily. <a href="http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58130" target="_blank">http://www.worldnetdaily.com/n ews/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58130</a> This shows that RC's post, if not blatantly plagiarized, at least hits most of the right-wing talking points. This is what they'd have us believe about this law. It's all ridiculous, of course, but that won't keep them from being spread about. A telling link on that site, by the way: "The Gay Agenda: It's Dividing the Family, the Church, and a Nation" OMG!!!! Lock up your sons and daughters! And whatever you do, don't send them to public school!!
