In the first year of a pilot program on single-sex classes, teachers are figuring out how boys and girls learn
So, boys and girls are different?
Common sense and an easy concept to any intelligent person.
But wait, I thought we have been told since the 1960's that boys and girls were EXACTLY the same...we can't treat them different, that would be sexist.
Well, as do all liberal theories, after enough time we see that they are all wrong.
Yes, boys and girls are different...
On average they learn in different ways
On average women are more emotional
On average women are better caregivers than males
On average males are stronger and more factual...
Back when hippie crap was being eaten up by the liberal media (lets be honest, it still is) it was wrong to say that men and women were different...
Bottom line, even though we KNOW all PC liberal theories are wrong, we are forced to be quiet and not talk about them because the only way for these theories to continue is if we censor the American public from expressing their thoughts...happens all the time...
Right now the topic is global warming...
Monday, April 09, 2007
Gender differences
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
48 comments:
That reminds me of a brilliant essay by who I believe is the 20th century's greatest philosopher, David Stove.
Please site some kind of evidence that liberals have ever said that boys and girls "were EXACTLY the same." I've never seen any, never thought they were, never read any material anywhere to support your assertion. Please provide SOME kind of evidence. Please link to some information on this "liberal" theory.
Otherwise, I suggest you admit that you are simply reading an informative article and then turning it into a liberal bash by pulling absurdities out of your ass.
This post is misleading.
When we say boys and girls are equal, we all know what it means!! It was to address gender bias and discrimination ! Nobody believes that they are EXACTLY same! How can they be?
I will have to agree with Jim here. This is clearly a liberal bashing for no reason!
When we say ‘all men are equal’ - It doesn’t mean all of us are EXACTLY the same!! Of course, we have different physical features and different levels of health risks depending on the ethnicity! It has nothing to do with the notion of equality!
I think Game's rhetoric overstates the case and anyone who's been here long enough should know what he means. I'm not by any means the most veteran commenter here and I think I've a good handle on his meanin'.
But to say that the liberal educators have NOT asserted that there's a benefit to neutering children to some extent requires not paying attention. Sure, it may have been an attempt to lessen any discriminatory attitudes toward girls, but it has resulted in a false assumption that women and men ARE equal in every sense. (It's another example of unintended consequences from liberal policies)
I didn't read the attendant article, so if it touched on the following, forgive the redundantcy. But to separate boys from girls and teach them according to their respective differences should allow better instruction for raising up men and women, rather than wimpy dudes and pushy broads. This is not to say that the women won't be strong, but strong women, not women trying to be men. And the boys will be better trained to be men, especially if taught by men.
Actually, there's a school of thought that states that you can divide kids even more according difference ways kids learn. Some learn by more hands on work, where other learn by reading, etc.
BTW, if I had a dollar for every time Jim's said he's never heard or read or seen something that was stated by a conservative on this site, I could buy a Caddie. Do you just stay in your basement Jim?
Hey, Marshall...just a Caddie?
okay Jim...if I change the sentence to "TREATED exactly the same" then I could find hundreds of quotes
Oh, Game, don't give in so easy to Jim. Remember TIME magazine made a front page story out of Boys and Girls learn different. They were going off the PC Lib dogma that people learn the same no matter the gender or transgender.
vittal, jim,
Another point in this equality debate is that liberals see a bias in anything that doesn't create "equal outcomes" for different types of people.
In other words an attempt at giving all equal opportunity, is not sufficient, and must be inherently biased if the “attempt” doesn’t create equal outcomes.
How could one come to such an obviously flawed conclusion? And, what are Lefties’ solutions for what they “assume” are biased attempts? Why, they just create “actual” bias in the “attempts” and try to create equal outcomes.
F’d up, isn’t it?
Blamin,
As I clearly mentioned in my earlier comment, my objection is to unnecessary liberal bashing and misrepresentation! There is nothing wrong in equality debate. There is nothing wrong in equal treatment and opportunities. Only morons expect equal outcomes – I don’t care if it is liberal or conservative. Let’s not generalize any particular group here. What next? Are we going to call all conservatives a racist group? Give me a break.
I agree with you – World is f’d up due to people that are blinded by ideologies!
And just to clear up something that should be obvious. Jim - Vittal, I don't believe all libleftyweenies support the particular views that we on the right find so ludicrous. You just support the party whose leaders champion and pass policies supporting said ludicrousness.
And you support the Bush Administration. Go figure!
Blamin,
I don’t think you deserve any response since you are making way too many assumptions like a real partisan guy! However, I can’t let your ignorance continue here either. So here it is...
How do you know which party I support? Libleftyweenies – because I can’t point out empty rhetoric?
And, ‘we on the right’? WOW – interesting! Are there any leaders out there who “champion and pass policies supporting said ludicrousness”?? How about the recent comprehensive immigration reform? (hint, hint).
You clearly sound like a fake conservative who can’t debate the real issues and think beyond the party lines.
Good luck!
Mr. vittal,
I welcome any debate you may consider worthwile, most especially if you think I've misrepresented the position on the left. Ya, Ya, I know that you don't consider yourself leftist, just because you occasionally/always support the Lefty position, hell, I like to play devils's advocate on occasion.
Come on! Most of what "your" people support, can't be supported! Ya, ya, I know, you're not going to support anything contreversial, (or easily shot down). So give it your best shot!-
Did you want to talk about the fine public education being offered to today's youth?
Do you want to debate the system of punishment of todays crinimals?
OK - that's not fair -
Let's change to Lefty subjects
Do you think that our current Pres is overstepping his bounds and listening in on "unauthorized "stuff"?"
Do you think that crazy "Army Dudes" are expanding beyond their parimeter?
Do you think that rouge policeman are "harrasing" innocent citizens for no reason?
What is your concern?
Come on! Give me the "real" vs the "fake", I can't wait.
Just so know, I've never supported the Prez (or ANYbody in the Dem party) on their illegal alien policies. Of course, I shouldn't have to point that out to such an observant person such as yourself.
Yo Blamin,
Interesting to see another bunch of assumptions based on your blind ideology! Well, what else I can expect from a ‘smart’ person like you?
If you call an independent mind a “liberal playing devil’s advocate”, it only shows the political garbage you are raised on!
Sure – I am game for any subject. Public education, health care, crime, army, Iraq, Police, public spending, national debt, outsourcing, family values, divorce rate, religion!
Come on, bring it on, dude! Let’s see who is real and who is fake!!
I can’t wait too...to clear up the clog in your mind!!
Yawn,
Mere posturing on your part. Since I threw down the gauntlet, and you refuse to pick it up, let me help. Let’s talk about a “current” subject.
Why do you suppose the state of public education is in such shambles? I admit, I’m loading the answer, but “back in the day” you could count on a civilized atmosphere, a little instruction on critical thinking, and the three R’s. Hmmm… I wonder what is different now-a-days???? (come on vittal, it ain't that hard to figure out).
Or maybe you’d like to debate the current push to classify all those that think homosexuality is wrong, as purveyors of hate speech?
Or maybe you think that screaming (screeching) defeatism, while our troops are in harms way is a good thing.
Or maybe you think its cruel and unusual punishment to lock up child molesters for life.
Or maybe you think that nappy-headed pimps, taking up for nappy-headed hoes is constructive. (Remember, Marshall has already pointed out how nappy-head is a term of endearment).
Maybe you’d like to discuss how a man and his gun shouldn’t confront strangers wandering around his property.
I could go on and on and on, the examples are never ending! We shouldn’t test mice in order to save countless lives. We should rely on junk science and ban substances (DDT) (with no solid proof its harmful) that save millions (that’s right millions) of lives
All the world’s a stage – dude. We see nothing that hasn’t been scripted. So you’ve got a couple choices. You can throw up your hands and say, “F-it, it doesn’t matter”, or you can support those whom are closest to your beliefs. It just so happens that I believe capitalism in a democratic/republic society is the best way to offer the most to most people. Go ahead and accuse me of jingoism, if that makes you feel better about yourself.
Ya, ya, I know – my blind assumptions are clogging my mind. Please enlighten. Why should I not hold you responsible for those you support, even if “they” don’t necessarily hold the same opinions as yourself? Again – abandon the perverted party and start another if you find it hard to support their policies.
vittal,
let me make something clear, just in case you haven't figured it out.
There is no such thing as "unnecessary liberal bashing". The reason being, socialistic policies are just too damn destructive. It’s been shown, time and time again. And no, I don’t believe for one second that this time they might get it right. It’s this little thing some call history, that forces my hand on this subject.
I'd be happy to pick a topic for you guys. However, one of you may have to start your own blog, unless Game wouldn't mind starting a thread to let you guys go at it. It could be great reading for the rest of us to comment on later. What say you, Game?
Blamin boy,
Let me help you – you definitely need some!
First - Calm down, think with a clear mind. It would help you to articulate yourself better. That way, you won’t be so confused and you can avoid posting twice for every post of mine! (Smiles…)
Second – In any debate/discussions, don’t make any assumptions! It makes you look stupid. Perhaps, more stupid!
Public Education – I did go to a public school. If I am earning three times the national average and have a degree in Engineering and MBA, it’s because of the culture at home. Strong focus on education and performance has to start at home. Parents need to demand better results and behavior from their children. When parents ask for better performance, school system will automatically be fixed. Broken families, single moms and lack of role models (read ‘parents’) are the root causes.
What say you, boy?
Homosexuality? I think science has the answer here. If science can prove that homosexuality is natural to some individuals, we need to accept it. Do you believe in science, kid?
Defeatism? You need to be little more clear here. Are you talking about re-deployment? Or, Iraq war in general? Or, Afghanistan? Again, take a deep breath and ask a clear question. Follow me?
Child molesters – It’s wrong thing to molest a kid. So, they need to be punished. No doubt.
Gun control – Nobody is questioning a man’s right to defend himself. Question is – Do guns increase the level of violence OR decrease? Sounds logical, boy?
You feel enlightened now?
Marshall art,
Thanks for volunteering!
'Blamin boy' has already given me a list of questions. So, we would take it from there! ;)
By the way, I have my own blog though it has slightly different format and style.
Vittal
Gosh, I tremble before thee, your rapier like wit is truley astonishing, a virtual legend in your own mind aren't you? (I'm guessing you weren't president of the debate club, were ya Spanky?) I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers so, I wasn't purposely being a meany.
Public Education - Your grasp of the obvious is simply amazing. I think everyone who's commented on this blog agree that parents are the single most important ingredient in a childs education. But let's go beyond the obvious and peel a few layers into the onion shall we. We could go off on a tangent and discuss the reasons parents seem to be disconnecting from their children, or how the poor tend to be less involved with their childrens education than the middle class and upper middle class, and we could look at how the respective classes tend to align themselves politically, but thats a whole new debate. You know there's always been broken families, single moms, poor families, etc. (granted, not as prevalent) but what's different about the modern public education system compared with 25, 35, 105, years ago? Do I really need to spell it out? And it all started with an insideous little peckerwood by the name of John Dewey (no he's not the guy that invented the "Dewey Decimal system" - but don't get discouraged Spanky). Considered the father or modern education and hero of the N.E.A. An unabashed socialist who was a champion of relativism and positivism, (yes the same philosophies followed by Joseph Stalin and Carl Marx) a rejecter of absolutism, and a signer of the the Humanist Manifesto, some claim the author. He was instrumental in helping China and Turkey establish state schools to indoctrinate the children as wards of the state instead of their parents. His philosophy (again, adopted by the "higher ups" in the N.E.A.) is that there is a battle raging for the hearts and minds of children and who better to properly shape these future voters than the state (which should be controlled by like minded people of course). Have you ever heard the various conservative commentators lamenting the dumbing down of our children/society? That's right, thank Mr. Dewey.
He sought to disconnect children from the values and customs as taught to them by their parents!!! That's right! We all agree parents are the most important factor, but our school system is controlled by people that believe our views are archaic, sophmoric, and counter productive to society.
So you see - the upper echolons of the public ed system are controlled by Dewey wannabees, who share a belief that is contridictory to what this country was founded upon. Yes parents are the most important (hopefully non-brainwashed parents), but there is a disease in the system that needs to be lanced like a putrid, malignant tumor. And unfortunately this same disease permeates our society (could this have something to do with parents disconnecting from kids?).
So Spanky, other than your fixation on the obvious, and lack of depth, you didn't do to bad for a pseudo intellectual.
Well that's enough for now, I'll address the rest of your special little statements latter, really, you make it too easy.
We could agree to dispense with the sophmoric little barbs, in an attempt to save space and get to the crux of the matter, but it's your call Spanky.
Blamin boy,
Good to see only one post from you – Good sign! Shows that clog is slowly getting cleared. Not too bad! After all - all those years of political garbage – hey, it takes some time!
Public education –Your lack of common sense is beyond disgusting. I thought only liberals blame everything on others! Ohh – I forgot – even fake conservatives like you complain a lot!!
Hey kid, listen here – It’s not the lack of depth, it’s the lack of common sense. We are NOT living in China. This is democracy. You get what you deserve, alright? (Probably you forget the ‘obvious’ ones since you are more interested in ‘blamin’ the other side!!) When parents get involved and demand better performance from their kids and schools, it would naturally change our school system for better. See, you prove my point so well –The main issues here are the breakdown of families and (lack of) parental supervision. Instead, you go on tangent blaming everybody!! Boy, I don’t know why you wrote 30+ lines of garbage instead of giving a few ideas on how to restore strong families and family values!!
So, what happened to other issues that you so proudly listed in your earlier post? How come you backed off? Do you have to refer to your party ‘talking points’ before you can give your opinion? Sure – take your time, I can wait. I don’t want to stress your little brain.
Remember, Kid - I am here to help you so you can see the reality and stop hating and ‘blamin’ the other side for every single reason. Ok?
Spanky,
you're a card aren't you? So you're giving up on the education debate becaue you have nothing more to add other than the obvious. OK We're all agreed on the parent thing, I guess you want to ignore the rest, because you obviously have no clue as to the accuracy of my statments (hint research, research, research, no, KOS is not going to help you, so skip it) But just go right ahead and "assume" I'm wrong if it helps you sleep at night. After all assuming is a damn site easier than addressing.
Come on Spanky!, you didn't even attempt to address the issues (evading the issue or red herring fallacy) you just spewed ad hominems. You actually consider John Deweys influence on education and the teachers union as "blaming everyone else?!" Get real! History is a good thing, try it, you'll like it. Maybe you subconciously admit the accuracy of my suppostion, but the sophmore in you insist on arguing, seems how you didn't even attempt to debate the points I made.
Let's talk about my "second" response to your original post, since it obviously makes you so uncomfortable. You've certainly mentioned it enough. (and since you've obviously given up on the education issue) Gosh I'm starting to think I hit a nerve or something.
There is no such thing as "unnecessary liberal bashing".
Care to object?
BTW your little "stop the hating" comment really touched me. Sooo typical. I know you invision your self as some kind of therapist, a little hint, get a day job. Or take a long hard look in the mirror.
As far as your "other issues" question - I've backed off on nothing. You see most of these issues require a little depth of thought - hell they wouldn't be an "issue" if it were cut and dried. Golley gee Spanky, it must be nice to touch on the surface of so many issues, while portraying yourself as so informed.
I really love your ...if science... argument. We can tackle that little ludicrousness next if you want.
I'm sorry Spanky, I know more than one post at a time overloads your senses, but I couldn't resist. Besides, my schedule is such that I respond when I can.
Since you so obviously gave up on the education issue lets discuss something that's close to your heart. (a little psychosexual attack on your internal emotional security) "If" science can prove mo's are natural, is a pretty big
supposition. In other words I'm not going to blindly accept any prononcement that goes against my established position without looking at the underlying facts. Obviously we can't be an "every subject expert" so we have to somewhat rely on said experts.
If a psycoanalyst comes to me and states "there are certain nuerons that flow more freely between the left and right cerebreal portions of the brain in 'mos" I'm more than likely going to accept what she says, since I have no expertise in the subject. Of course I'd want to make sure it was a proaction and not a reaction. BUT if the same Dr. comes to me and says "we've just determined that mo's are mo's because our psycomodel say's it's so" I may question their assumptions.
And here's the kicker, the current belief as to weather mo's are natural or not comes down to a vote at the latest convention. Damn, I'm no expert, but that sounds kind of subjective to me.
Don't get me wrong, I could care less, what someones sexual preference may be. And anyone who would harm another for any reason needs to be locked up in a cold dark place.
Just don't tell me it's wrong to inform my child that I think same sex relationships are a perversion.
Are you going to count the lines in this post also? You must have a lot of free time on your hands.
Blamin boy,
Two posts again? WOW – your poor little brain couldn’t articulate everything in one, uh? Awww…It’s alright! I knew that it was going to be a long road. You won’t be a stubborn kid, would you?
Education – No, I am not giving up until I clear your clog. So you are stuck with your little research paper on John Deweys, uh? Let me guess – next you are going to write 40 plus lines on Noam Chomsky? Listen kid – we live in an open society and there would ALWAYS be individuals with different ideas and philosophies. We may or may not agree with them. At the end of the day, majority rules in this model. So, the question is how to get the majority reject the bad apples and accept the good ones. When it comes to the performance of kids and discipline at schools, it is largely driven by its participants. They are kids, their family and school. When families demand better results, kids and school will automatically fall in line. That’s the crux of the matter.
That’s why you have some of the best performing public schools in Cupertino / Sunnyvale/ Santa Clara area! There is no John Dewys, there is no Chomsky – But there are very stable families and very strong focus on education.
Why don’t you go there and study it for a while instead of eating garbage and getting high?
Let’s see your take on homosexuality. So your point is – Even if an expert tells you that homosexuality is natural to some individuals, you want to question their model. That’s fair enough – nothing wrong in validating the model. (Though I have doubts on how much your little brain can take!!) Let me ask you this clearly – What if it is clearly established that homosexuality is natural to some individuals? Do you still want a vote on this? Let me tell you my position – I too want a vote on this subject!! Though I strongly believe in scientific facts, I think feelings of majority should also be respected in a democratic society. Remember, in countries like Saudi Arabia, majority thinks that women should have no rights including a driving license!
Now, Do you want a vote to decide if earth is flat or not? Just curious! Hope you have fully validated the scientists’ work on that subject!!
No kid, I don’t have a lot of free time. It only takes a few seconds to count the number of lines; it’s not a big task! Ohhh – sorry I forgot that you had a little brain!!
Mmmm...four days and no reply. There goes the fake conservative!! Uh?
Spanky
Don't want to bust your bubble, but I've only so much time on my hands, and debating a one-dimensional kind of guy/girl bores me and it isn't at the top of the list.
I think your words speak for themselves, there for all to see, not a whole lot I can add.
According to you, parents are the only problem in the PudEd system today. Even if I were shallow enough to agree, we could talk about why parents are so disconnected know versus a few years ago. Or we could talk about the game plan of socialist to slowly erode in an unnoticeable way. After all, just because it's their stated plan and seems to be working, is no reason to address the issue. Golly Gee Whiz.
But I don't want to overload your limited senses - there's only so much a black/white kind of fella can converse about. And I certainly would hate to be responsible for shattering any illusions you've based your world view upon.
Spankster - you're much like a minnow in the lake of life, living in the shallows, never daring to venture into the deep (after all, you may be eaten). There, there, I know it's not easy and it must be awfully scary! It's a curse, this not wanting to look on naked realities. Life is never more real to you than a shadow show on a curtain. And you prefer it so. You don’t like the outline of things to be too sharp; you prefer things to be gently blurred, a little hazy.
Too each his own.
Blamin boy,
It’s really sad to see you go belly up! It must be too much for your little brain to debate based on facts, uh?
I can’t really blame you, kid. Most of the world seems to be following your way...especially those mullahs with long beard and a turban! Personal attack and hatred towards the ‘other side’ – are easy way out in today’s world!
Hey kid - keep eating garbage from the gutter where you live – good for your little retarded brain!!
May be, you never received your party talking points by mail even after four days...May be, you never had any parents or family...May be, you never understood anything in your life except hatred, blaming and attacking the ‘other side’.
Otherwise... how can I explain your mental disorder and such a little brain incapable of comprehending even the hard facts?
Uh!
blah, blah, blah, was there a point in that disjointed rambling? You're like one of those little yappy dogs that won't shut up.
It seems equal parts ludicrous and ridiculous. Here's a hint: when you make assumptions based on unfounded suppositions, you're made to look foolish. Madison Avenue must rub their hands with glee when they see you coming. (YES! the poster boy for subliminal advertising - or not so subliminal.)
Again, your words stand alone for all to see, nothing needs adding
.
Run along, now, mommy's calling, it's time for your microwave chicken pot pie dinner.
Vittal,
A little clarification please. Public education---do you mean to suggest that the education system bears absolutely no responsibility for today's situation? Parental involvement is all fine and good. As stated, none here would argue that. But parents can only hold kids to learning that which they are required to know for graduating. When it comes to affecting WHAT is taught, it's a different story. Here in Illinois, HS Dist 214 had a controversy regarding books on a mandatory reading list. About six of them are blatantly pornographic with graphic descriptions of sexual situations of several varieties. One woman on that school board protested and was ostracized as some Christian looney. Parents who agreed with her were given the suggestion to take their kids out and place them in parochial schools or to home school them. Nice, huh? Other examples have to do with teaching techniques, poor replacements for the Judeo-Christian ethic, a liberal view of right and wrong, both in behavior and public policy. So what say you to these points? They are at the heart of those like Blamin, Game, me and others who have a problem with the current educational system.
Homosexuality---Assume for the sake of argument that there is a verifiable cause for it. Does this mean they are entitled to their demands? Would it not be reasonable to assume other behaviors or predilictions have biological causes, and shouldn't they be given the same considerations? I think the argument is whether this behavior will benefit or harm our culture in the long run for it to have state sanctioning considered. Thus far it seems harm is more prevalent. What say you?
Blamin,
You ain't done yet, are ya?
marshall Art
I gave him ample opportunity to tone done the vindictiveness and actually debate a point. He choose not to, so I played along, just to see what he/she would eventually put forth. Nadadamnthing, as expected. Anyone can pontificate about the obvious and what should be, apparently he/she is anyone.
Damn, but don't I feel special!!!
Blamin boy,
Aww...Are you getting more and more agitated, kid? Your mommy gave you too many pills, uh? Since you live in gutter with your rat family, no chicken pie for you sweety! You eat the garbage for dinner and go to bed, ok?
Are you still crying? Don’t worry –may be too much molestation by other rats...your mommy can help u...Awww...
Marhsall Art,
Good to see the real questions on the issue rather than attack and hatred like a 'mentally retarded' balmin boy!
Alright here it is.
Please note that my earlier comments were focused on kid’s performance, school performance and civilized atmospheres at school. Like any other issues in our society, we all know that there are multiple factors contributing to the problem. Question is – what is the best tool to address the challenge?
When it comes to affecting WHAT is being taught – Let’s take the example of your HS Dist 214, Illinois. I haven’t read any of these books. However, I agree that as a parent I would be very careful about what my children learn at school or home. I wouldn’t characterize the woman who objected as a fanatic either. Question is – when it happens what is the ‘best’ way to address it? Again, answer is parental involvement. As a parent, we need to see if we can call the teacher and request an alternative. If not, parents can challenge the material and request to be removed. That’s how in the past books were removed from the reading list. Remember, schools can not run without students. They can’t ignore you if you have enough support from most of the parents. In your case, it sounds like majority of the parents either agreed with the material or simply chose not to get ‘involved’.
So the next questions are - How come only one woman in the board objected to this? How many parents actually agreed with this lady and protested against the new books? My point is – Blaming or hating doesn’t help. A little bit of action (involvement) helps! When it comes to education, parents (family) have a big role! Also, in a democratic set up, majority wins. We need to be aware of this. We may not agree with everything out there - What say you?
Homosexuality: I have already answered this in my earlier posts. As I stated earlier, I would like to know what science has to say on this subject. However, I want to see a vote on this subject so the voice of majority is heard. What say you?
Vittal,
There were local elections all over the state (I believe) today with many school board vacancies to be filled. I cast my vote. The problem is, these elections are those that are the most poorly attended. Though everything is extremely local, the candidates, as well as the whole of each school board, might as well be in Tierra del Fuego for all people know about them. Even the local press doesn't keep up. So what to do? Two of the three for whom I cast my votes for the elementary district school board were regular attendees of the board meetings. But they are stay-at-home moms with a little more time on their hands for such things. However, the Dist 214 issue has me geeked to attend at least as often as possible.
Regarding that district, (I'm not in it, but it's close by) the lone dissenter is one who spent big dough, an unheard of $20k to get her name out and win her seat. She ran on a platform of bringing her Christian values to bear on board debates. She looked at the reading list and checked out the books (I don't recall how she reviewed them, if it was the whole list or these books were brought to her attention somehow) and made her case. It was a big deal. A special meeting was held and there were huge crowds of people showing up for each to say his piece. The board went with a system to allot numbers for those who wanted to speak, and they began by giving first a large portion of numbers to students. There were more students able to speak than parents.
So dig this now. A large group of hormonal kids speaking on the decision to allow sexually graphic novels on a mandated reading list. How do you think they leaned? By the time the parents were able to speak their minds, there were few opportunities after the board stacked the deck as they did. Oh, there were also teachers who approved of the books and parents who approved and were previously alerted who got those early numbers. One board member suggested those who didn't like it could opt their kids out. Imagine being one of those kids. And as I said, another option suggested was to put the kid in a different school.
This is one incident in one school district in the country, but it's typical of the weight of liberal influence that has tilted the scales so far to their side that it's a bitch to overcome quickly. The NEA is incredibly left leaning and it's only in recent years that their agenda has manifested in so many varied incidents and troubles that drastic measures are in order. Game often speaks of different problems he's encountered due to goofy educational ideas, and these people DON'T think parents have a say. I just read of some California judge saying as much.
It'll be a long row to hoe (can I say "hoe"?), but it will take a ton of pissed off parents, and a ton of conservative voters to turn it around.
As to the homo issue...
I don't think the science matters. I believe that all of our desires and urges and predilictions have a biological component. I really don't see how it can't. We are all prone to one thing or another. My wife is prone to taking care of business. I'm prone to lying in a hammock. She might be neurotic. I'm definitely allergic to work. (We're a happy couple.) So the question is really about what society tolerates...no, I hate that word now. It's about what society values or sees as beneficial. Traditional marriage has proven benefits in that it is the essence of our society. A couple breeds and forms a family. The family becomes a clan. The clan becomes a community, and on and on. Studies have shown the traditional family unit to be the most beneficial to the kids, and to the well being of the parents. Society flows from this traditional family unit. Alternate versions pale by comparison. To grow, alternates need outside assistance or adoption.
As for voting, in the last presidential election, eleven states had referenda surrounding the issue of homo/lez unions. The closest I've heard was over 60% against such unions. Usually it's around 70%. I've recently read where Massachusetts, after an ambivalent electorate allowed such marriages to be made legal, polls now run around 70% to overturn that decision. I've heard the same about Canada. Most of these statutes and policies that support the homo/lez agenda are not the result of a citizen vote, but are judicially mandated or pushed through by a Democratic majority. And the losers are forced to accept this without further debate or risk legal action or arrest under hate crimes laws. Personally, I think the behavior is sinful under God, and harmful to society in general. But since Christians no longer have a voice in this country, I suggest we have a moratorium on any such legislation for at least another generation and see just how much more fucked up the Netherlands gets after THEY legalized it. So far, it hasn't looked good.
BTW, easy on my man Blamin. I don't know how you guys came to blows (probably the same way Jim and I have) but we all should cool it a bit. I'm just gonna take one more moment to call Jim a butthead, and then I'm startin' over.
BUTTHEAD!!!
There.
Attack and hatred?
Whatever you have to tell yourself.
Seems to me you're the attacker, but that's all subjective, I guess.
Ya see, there's an actual RECORD of all that's been posted, ya I know it sucks to be you.
Again, If you have an acutal point about the PubEd system (other than the obvious), please, by all means, enlighten us. (ya see, I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt).
You have a chance to make a salient point.
What is it - or are you afraid I might actually answer you?
old computer, slow connection, and an insane "verification" process had me overwriting Marshall’s comment.
Vittal
On to bizzniss - "...re. Homosexuality...I would like to know what science has to say on this subject.”
Well, hard science has very little of significant value to say about the subject. On the other hand, the pseudo-science of psychology has decided that homosexuality is an uncontrollable condition. How was this important decision arrived at? Why, the self-appointed experts in the field voted on it, and I assure you, politics had nothing to do with it ;-).
There you go, another case of self-confirmation for ya.
@ Marshall Art:
You are right – You said...”these elections are poorly attended.” That's the problem! I see that many parents are upset about the system, but they go missing when it comes to showing their real support to those who want to correct the system. If parents are truly serious about their kids, they won’t just complain about the system – Instead, they will get actively involved to make a difference. And, this lack of involvement is what I was highlighting all along. When parents wake up, things can change for good.
If liberals are dominating today, it’s because they played the game well. Conservatives need to step up and play the game better if they want change. After all, this is democracy and majority decides the policies.
As far as homosexuality, I guess we disagree. Science has successfully explained many things in the past. And, I believe the science holds the key here. However, as I mentioned earlier twice, in a democratic society majority should decide on this matter since this is a very sensitive subject.
As far as your man blamin - sure, I won’t be too harsh on him though he has been a very stubborn kid lately.
@ Blamin: Too hyper, uh? Go to bed now - Good nite! ;-)
Vittal,
Yes, we do disagree. But there really is nowhere that science has successfully explained anything about homosexuality. The best they've been able to come up with could be termed as "suggestions of possibilities" for explaining the causes. In other words, a given piece of research will have "suggested the possibility" that such & such causes homosexuality. Yet, the sampling is always small, and others have never been able to duplicate the results. However, it's never so bad that the proponents and supporters won't use those studies as if they are of a higher quality of proof. Hardly good enough to use as a basis for legislating away thousands of years of tradition and culture.
Still, I have no doubt that homosexuality has it's biological components. As I've said, how can it not? So where we do agree is that the matter should be decided by voting, and as I've shown, it doesn't look good for the homo/lez crowd.
To education once more, we agree on the forms parental involvement should take, though at first you did not articulate it in a manner that suggested more than making the kids do their homework. However, the fact that the state of education in America has been adversely impacted by liberal decisions and philosophies is without question. How it got that way, or what it will take to change it doesn't refute that fact.
For example: As I'm currently re-reading a book about America's Christian heritage, it reminded me how it's likely to see being taught in the schools a version of the Mayflower Compact that is void of all Christian references, of which there were many. This was a decision by the liberal elites in the educational system. Now it really doesn't matter if one abides the lie of separation of church and state, but in this case, they are willfully teaching a lie if they present such things in an altered version. It gives the sense of a secular beginning which affects the worldview of the kids being taught. To me, that's not only a historical heresy, but child abuse. One would hope that constant supervision by parents would not be required to stem the tide that washed THIS kind of crap to our shores. But apparently that's not the case.
Marshall Art,
As I said, I believe in science for obvious reasons. However, majority decides the cultural aspects of it. If it doesn’t look good for lez/homo crowds – too bad! They have to accept it.
Regarding education: Please understand that parental involvement doesn’t mean only ‘home work’ monitoring!! As I have said in the past, it means – demanding better performance and standards from kids and schools. And as you very well know, good education means a lot more than mere ‘homework’ to those parents who are really serious about their kids and their future.
I am more interested in solutions than finger pointing. There are many reasons why one might feel the education system is in chaos. Bad apples come from all groups.
As far as your example is concerned, it’s hard to comment without really knowing the book or material you are referring to. Let me say this – I am for secular system. I firmly believe in it. However, I understand that there are cases where ‘secularism’ has gone overboard trying to wipe out some of the historical facts due to their reference to religion. I am against such decisions. I am all for facts and science. I am NOT for teaching religion at schools. If the book you refer to (‘American Christian heritage’) comes more from the historical point of view, I am all for it. If it is for promoting a religion, I am not.
But what if you get both? In other words, stating facts about our Christian heritage can easily lead to inquiries about Christianity. The mere mention of how the first to our shores were motivated by their faith and the desire to spread it to indigenous peoples can motivate an interest in understanding what it was about their faith that so compelled them. This is where the secualar left has a big problem, and a good explanation for their fear of relating the whole truth about our history. It is also why the Constitution prohibits the FEDS from promoting a specific religion, but no one else. Or I should say, that speaking about religion, specific or otherwise by anyone other than the feds was not a concern for the founders. But the secular left demands that no mention of religion by anyone or thing even remotely connected with government, such as public schools in Bohunk USA, should be the rule. And this attitude has an adverse effect on the level of understanding by our kids of the beginnings or our country. They have HURT the process to the detriment of the kids.
So no matter how they got the power to make educational decisions, they ARE in power and bear the responsibility for the state of the system. The blame is justified. It's part of understanding how to improve the system. You can't dismiss assigning the blame or cause of the problems. Just as we can assign blame to the parents of unruly or lazy kids, we can do as much to those on the other end of the equation.
So even though you prefer a secular bent to the system, you have to admit the secular people who have been in charge have had a hand in the worsening situation. Can we find secular people who understand objectivity in teaching only the hard, cold facts? Is it the best option when we consider the facts need to be interpreted and explained to the kids? They need to know why the facts are worth knowing. Can they teach why it mattered that the original visitors to America were people of strong devote faith?
Also, I believe that with the removal of religion and religious references from the public school system, a void was left behind that hasn't been close to adequately filled by an alternative philosophy. How do you get a kid to understand the importance of certain behaviors without eternity to consider? How do you teach the value of character and honor and selflessness? At some point, without Judgement, a kid will understand that rules are for suckers and weaklings and those too timid to grab for the gusto. I think it's easy to see that since the time religion was removed, things have worsened in our culture. Another point for which it's easy to see who's responsible.
The point is, the best solutions would be vociferously obstructed by the very people who have brought the system to it's current sorry state. And I don't think you can easily dispute that.
Marshall Art,
Your previous post shows we have a bigger difference than I initially thought!
I can totally understand how a curious mind can get questions on Christianity. Nothing wrong with it. However, it’s not different from the questions one might get on Judaism or Islam or other religions while studying different historical events. In other words, if you open the door for one religion, it will open the door for all other religions as well. Also, as you know, religion had both good and bad influences on our societies. This is true with all the religions – No religion is an exception. Religion has given and continues to give tremendous amount of inspiration and positive influence to millions. At the same time, some of the atrocious crimes have been committed in the name of religion as well. What if a curious mind wants to know what in their faiths compelled them to do such horrific acts. This can lead to material offending to specific religion followers!!
I guess you might be opening a Pandora ’s Box here! None of your questions are wrong. However, they are best left to those curious minds to study and read outside the school system. Remember, nobody stops us from reading / writing a book or doing research on these very valid topics. Nobody should stop us from practicing our religion either. Teaching religion in a school would not be a good idea.
Vittal
I think you're wrong in your "...some of the atrocious crimes have been committed in the name of religion as well..." argument.
Well, to a certain extent, I think you're wrong. Maybe wrong in your insinuation.
Most of the "atrocious crimes" were done by evil people who were using religion as a tool to acheve their goals. ie - they weren't truley "religious" people, just evil people using the most convient tool at the moment.
Now, you can argue that religion may have caused people to turn a blind eye to their charasmatic leaders, but I would suggest it doesn't take religion to achive that goal. Greed and envy have been catylist for atrocities many more times in history than religion. And after all, the religious are just a group of human beings, subject to the same biases and shortcomings as any other group.
As a matter of fact, do the research...you wan't to talk about atrocities? The biggest atrocities commited in mankind wasn't done by religion. They were commited by communist, fascist, and greedy MF's. Go ahead, do a search on "mass loss of life" and see what comes up. You see, this "religion" causing atrocity argument has been over stated. I'm not saying there's never been evil done in religions name, I'm just saying there are forces in this world that tend to "push" to the forefront (relish) any crime that remotely would suggest a religous context. While at the same time "white-washing" the causes of other atrocities.
Of course, there's a reason for this "push".
Blamin,
It’s all in the way you look at it. Using your logic, I can also argue that religions don’t do good things. It’s the good people who do the good things!! So, we need to be careful here. For example, when I look at 9/11 incident and all those who carried it out – they all came from the same religion. They all were very religious too. No doubt – they are evil people. But, what aspects of their religion influence them to commit such a heinous attack? Most of the times, the ‘values’ that you believe in are largely influenced by your religious teachings. I understand that bad people use ‘religion’ as a justification. But, what was their justification? What part of their religion gave them the room to find those justifications? These are the question a curious mind would get.
And, I never said religion is entirely responsible for all the atrocities in the past. Second World War or Khmer Rogue or the Stalin - they had nothing to do with religion. Unlike religion, these were ideologies resulted in massive destruction. Religions are still a sensitive subject and practiced at almost every home.
"Religions are still a sensitive subject and practiced at almost every home."
Of course they are. But there's a big difference between an "open" society that allows us to question our upbringings, attempt to find the answers for ourselves, and grow as a maturing human being. Versus living in an oppresive society, that will basically shove anything down your throat, religion or what have you.
So why is there such a fear of religion in an open society? Ya, ya, I know the answer. But if you take away the bug-a-boo of religion, you just replace it with a different type of "core beliefs".
Whether it be environmintalism, political correctness, MTV, the Oscars, atheistic socialism, or any other of the countles ism's.
But they all have there dangers, they all attempt to manipulate the masses, and so we've come full circle.
Now, who has been responsible for the biggest attrocities in the history of man?
Nobody is afraid of religion in an open society!! Nobody is stopping you from practicing your religion. Only oppressive societies stop you from practicing your religion! Look at some of the Middle East countries, where they won’t allow you to build the houses of worship for non-Islamic religions. Only oppressive societies will have zero tolerance for other religions. We all know that.
Here, the question is – do we want to teach religion at school – a common place where people of all faiths send their kids to. If so, it simply opens up doors for all other religions of interest.
Non-tolerant, close minded ideas have resulted in the biggest massacres in history. It’s quite clear from the history how much destruction has taken place due to religion, communism, racism, Nazism, colonialism or any other ‘ism’ that lacked the ‘open mind’ to acknowledge the other views/systems/cultures.
Post a Comment