Homosexuality taught in government schools?
“Anonymous said …
‘Public school employees have no right to use public money to undermine the philosophical, political, or moral beliefs of other people’s children. (Absolutely CORRECT!—my addition)’
Then I take it that you would be just as opposed if the public schools used public money to teach that homosexuality is wrong, since that could undermine the political, or moral beliefs of other people’s children. Or does that only apply when they are teaching something you personally don’t like.
This may surprise you and probably will since you asked the question, but you are absolutely CORRECT. Homosexuality, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, humanism, and a whole slew of other topics SHOULD NOT be taught in government schools. That is not the purpose and function of government schools.
In fact, when I was teaching at St. Charles High School, the fad was to increase the number of subjects offered to students to give students more “choices.” Thus, we had the absurdity of having a quarter course (9 weeks out of an 18 week semester) in American history on the American Indian. The project for the class was to construct an Indian village. We graduated people who couldn’t name the current President and Vice President, let alone five Presidents in our history, and we were using ¼ of the year allocated to teaching American history on American Indians.
Anyway, at a department meeting, one of our history teachers suggested that a course on “values” be taught. I responded by asking “Who would teach the class?” (The normal answer was that the teacher who made the suggestion was the one to teach the class if the suggestion was accepted.) I then stated, that since I knew some of his values, if I had children in the high school, I wouldn’t let them within 100 yards of his class. And that is the point, one person’s “values” is another person’s poison. And government schools have NO business undermining the authority of the parents.
Whose responsibility is it to teach values, morals, religion? It is the parents! One of our major problems in this nation is that a combination of a government power grab and an abdication of personal and parental responsibility has been occurring over much of the last 100+ years. It accelerated in the 1930’s, slowed down after World War II, increased again in the late 1960’s, slowed down in the 1980’s, and is now accelerating again. (My take on the issue, I don’t really care if you accept or reject the analysis.)
Consequently, we have reversed, to a large extent, the role of the government and parents and the role of responsibility and rights. The parents are the ones who should be teaching their own children the necessary values and morality that are important to them and that are important for their children to successfully function in society. Similarly and originally, responsibility was required to insure the adequate handling of rights. Now, far too many people expect rights without any corresponding responsibilities. In short, rights and responsibilities go hand in hand. They are intertwined if a democracy is going to survive and prosper. As the old song goes, “You can’t have one without the other.” Many have become adamant about demanding their perceived or created “rights” but have rejected and/or renounced any corresponding responsibility for their actions.
I have been both a government teacher and a government school board member. From what I have been reading and hearing in relation to many of our government schools—both in Illinois and the nation—if I had school-age children, I would home educate them before I would allow their minds to be polluted by the garbage that now too frequently comes from our government schools. I will repeat, government schools have NO business indoctrinating, propagandizing children under their care nor do they have any business in undermining the authority and teachings of the parents in these areas.
As a footnote: You should know and I certain do know, that if any government school was teaching that homosexuality was immoral and/or sinful, that school would almost immediately be sued by the ACLU and similar groups.
As a second footnote: I went through 12 years in government schools through high school and another 5 years in a government school to earn a Master’s degree. During those 17 years of school, I never heard or read anything about homosexuality either negatively or positively within the classrooms. I returned to school for a semester in 1999 at the University of Arizona to determine if I wanted to return to school full time to earn a degree in a different subject area. Since I was also finishing my book at the same time, I decided to audit a freshman English class.
The following quote is from an early reading assignment in the English class. The quote is from “A Student’s Guide to First Year Composition, 20th edition! 1999-2000.” The book was published through the University of Arizona and edited by three members of the English Department of the university. The quote is from pages 244-245.
“Here is a list of things this 101 instructor (a University of Arizona instructor—my addition) believes in:”
“I believe that the world is still drastically racist, sexist, and homophobic. I remember putting my husband’s picture on my desk and wondering about the ethics of that, because my lesbian friend could not put her lover’s picture on display, could not kiss her lover goodbye at the door of the office, could not marry her lover in a church without people shouting, ‘don’t force your loving on us!’ I wondered if I should force this display of my approved marriage on her.”
Want to earn a quick one hundred dollars? I’ll pay one hundred dollars to the first person who can show me a contrary argument to the above propaganda in any section of this university approved textbook.
“Anonymous said …
‘Public school employees have no right to use public money to undermine the philosophical, political, or moral beliefs of other people’s children. (Absolutely CORRECT!—my addition)’
Then I take it that you would be just as opposed if the public schools used public money to teach that homosexuality is wrong, since that could undermine the political, or moral beliefs of other people’s children. Or does that only apply when they are teaching something you personally don’t like.
This may surprise you and probably will since you asked the question, but you are absolutely CORRECT. Homosexuality, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, humanism, and a whole slew of other topics SHOULD NOT be taught in government schools. That is not the purpose and function of government schools.
In fact, when I was teaching at St. Charles High School, the fad was to increase the number of subjects offered to students to give students more “choices.” Thus, we had the absurdity of having a quarter course (9 weeks out of an 18 week semester) in American history on the American Indian. The project for the class was to construct an Indian village. We graduated people who couldn’t name the current President and Vice President, let alone five Presidents in our history, and we were using ¼ of the year allocated to teaching American history on American Indians.
Anyway, at a department meeting, one of our history teachers suggested that a course on “values” be taught. I responded by asking “Who would teach the class?” (The normal answer was that the teacher who made the suggestion was the one to teach the class if the suggestion was accepted.) I then stated, that since I knew some of his values, if I had children in the high school, I wouldn’t let them within 100 yards of his class. And that is the point, one person’s “values” is another person’s poison. And government schools have NO business undermining the authority of the parents.
Whose responsibility is it to teach values, morals, religion? It is the parents! One of our major problems in this nation is that a combination of a government power grab and an abdication of personal and parental responsibility has been occurring over much of the last 100+ years. It accelerated in the 1930’s, slowed down after World War II, increased again in the late 1960’s, slowed down in the 1980’s, and is now accelerating again. (My take on the issue, I don’t really care if you accept or reject the analysis.)
Consequently, we have reversed, to a large extent, the role of the government and parents and the role of responsibility and rights. The parents are the ones who should be teaching their own children the necessary values and morality that are important to them and that are important for their children to successfully function in society. Similarly and originally, responsibility was required to insure the adequate handling of rights. Now, far too many people expect rights without any corresponding responsibilities. In short, rights and responsibilities go hand in hand. They are intertwined if a democracy is going to survive and prosper. As the old song goes, “You can’t have one without the other.” Many have become adamant about demanding their perceived or created “rights” but have rejected and/or renounced any corresponding responsibility for their actions.
I have been both a government teacher and a government school board member. From what I have been reading and hearing in relation to many of our government schools—both in Illinois and the nation—if I had school-age children, I would home educate them before I would allow their minds to be polluted by the garbage that now too frequently comes from our government schools. I will repeat, government schools have NO business indoctrinating, propagandizing children under their care nor do they have any business in undermining the authority and teachings of the parents in these areas.
As a footnote: You should know and I certain do know, that if any government school was teaching that homosexuality was immoral and/or sinful, that school would almost immediately be sued by the ACLU and similar groups.
As a second footnote: I went through 12 years in government schools through high school and another 5 years in a government school to earn a Master’s degree. During those 17 years of school, I never heard or read anything about homosexuality either negatively or positively within the classrooms. I returned to school for a semester in 1999 at the University of Arizona to determine if I wanted to return to school full time to earn a degree in a different subject area. Since I was also finishing my book at the same time, I decided to audit a freshman English class.
The following quote is from an early reading assignment in the English class. The quote is from “A Student’s Guide to First Year Composition, 20th edition! 1999-2000.” The book was published through the University of Arizona and edited by three members of the English Department of the university. The quote is from pages 244-245.
“Here is a list of things this 101 instructor (a University of Arizona instructor—my addition) believes in:”
“I believe that the world is still drastically racist, sexist, and homophobic. I remember putting my husband’s picture on my desk and wondering about the ethics of that, because my lesbian friend could not put her lover’s picture on display, could not kiss her lover goodbye at the door of the office, could not marry her lover in a church without people shouting, ‘don’t force your loving on us!’ I wondered if I should force this display of my approved marriage on her.”
Want to earn a quick one hundred dollars? I’ll pay one hundred dollars to the first person who can show me a contrary argument to the above propaganda in any section of this university approved textbook.
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 3:26 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home