Why is it everyone thinks children should be exposed to what they feel is acceptable and the parents have no say in the matter?

Bitch about parents not parenting, ignoring their kids, just using the school for a baby sitter, but when a parent gets involved he gets shouted down. :confused:

Erm...I happen to *be* a parent.

If somebody thinks their kids shouldn't be exposed to the public, maybe they shouldn't be in a public school. There's plenty of "Christian" "academies" founded on creationism, homophobia and other equally wholesome precepts.

Just don't ask me to pay for it.

(For a minute there I thought a "gay book flap" was a new kind of centerfold... :-) )

I think the parents should get involved. The teachers should teach about the real world.

If the christian parent has a bias against islam let them talk about it
... will they?
Fuck no. The parent has an agenda... MY WAY or the HIWAY.


Education is to open your minds and if ya can't handle the future, or maybe the way things are in the 21st century...

the children might save the total shit that our previous/present governments have left your potential great great great grandchildren with...

(and, we're not even talking about ecosystems that big biznezz govtments exploit... this is just about two human beings within this topic that might find love and support with each other)

Yes, but not that kid's parent. Would you want your kid taught "creationism, homophobia and other equally wholesome precepts", ie, Kansas? And have to pay for it.

Why can't we stick to the 3-Rs and leave social graces to the parents, churches and the real world? :confused:

good point,....

the reason they would fire me in a heart beat, is that I would want YOU're kid to think...


AND then at the dinner table... he/she might bring up a question or discussion... (That is if you as a parent COULD even draw a response from them about what they learned at school)

BUT then again,,,, does anybody even sit at the dinner table and talk to each other?

And if happened, could you put on csny "teach your parents well" song, and listen to both?

NOPE> Parents are factory/assembled workers,
ie:"do what I say, don't break the rules, and don't think aloud about stuff I haven't in my mighty significant brought forth"

(fortunately most "parents" grow up when they get out of their Nazi stage, they become grandparents)

It reeks of self-loathing that the worst insult gays can hurl at their critics is to accuse them of being one of them.:biglaugha

The first resort of any criticism being to brand the person as a homophobe, although few straight people have anything resembling fear of them.

hahahahah, Objection your honor,

A "fact" does not preclude "self-loathing" or that it is even an "insult"

Facts is facts.

and no, you fuckface bigots, it doesn't mean Im gay.


I am a lesbian trapped in a mans body.

From where I sit, teaching creationism and homophobia (regardless of whether it's the Christian flavor or the Islamic brand) is teaching religion..fine in a private school, but no business of the government.

You can't teach reading (one of your R's) without books. I was taught to read from textbooks that had no black people in them...in the 1950's that was the norm. It did not serve me well in the "real world". (Actually I learned to read before I got to grade school, but that's another story)

Uh...if I thought accusing you of being queer was an insult, I'd be a homophobe too. I just conclude that somone who wants to erase me (and then wants me to help pay the bill for it) is an enemy...I don't particularly give a crap what their orientation is; that's their problem.

You think it's an insult?

Teaching bias and other social graces is not the same as teaching OF creationism, homophobia, etc. We were taught Darwinism. We were also taught of other theories such as creationism and spontaneous reproduction. Schools must introduce the concepts - which is not same a teaching the agenda.

I am an anti-communist. Therefore I don't want my kid to be taught about the USSR? That is nonsense. But that failed logic can easily be promoted by not defining a difference. Responsible schools must teach of what exists. That does not mean schools need teach how to murder. Just that murder does exist and what it is. Today, some could hype that into schools teaching how to commit Columbine. Therefore kids should never be taught what murder is?

Its unacceptable for a parent to deny children knowledge of what does exist. Denying that knowledge so can even make society ripe for hate crimes. There is a major difference between teaching how to and teaching of basic society realities. Some so fear that knowledge as to not know the difference.

That depends of what they're teaching. There's no reason for Dick & Jane to be escorted by Jamal. History books are quite another matter, however. :cool:

I disagree. I bet Jamal does too. Black people aren't just historical, I understand there actually are some still alive today.

I'd prefer black kids to not get a message that reading is only for white kids.

Do you have kids? There's no way you can educate them in literacy without exposing them to culture.
http://www.juliascollectibles.com/hj1587.jpg
http://www.juliascollectibles.com/hj970.jpg

There's no reason for Dick and Jane NOT to be escorted by Jamal, either. Jamal exists. Jamal Jr. may be sitting in that very classroom. Jamal is as human as everyone else.

So, I read Cinderella at age 7. I didn't run right out to find what she and Prince Charming did on their wedding night. And I might equally make the case that exposing children to the story of Cinderella encourages women to have an unhealthy dependency on men to come rescue them and for men to view themselves as rescuers.

If children are given a solid emotional and moral foundation at home, reading about Jamal or Cinderella or the two kings is not going to drive them into a life of depravity.