Gay indoctrination...

[SamSpade]

...should always be about ideals.

Good thing I'm not a government. And I disagree. I do think high ideals that are worth pursuing do "pay off" in some form of currency. "Freedom" is a great ideal, but I wouldn't be in favor of it if it had zero practicality.

I don't care much for when a government throws money and resources behind an idea that say, after 40 years still doesn't work, but still "believes" it's an ideal that must be upheld and that the process must still be pursued.

At the very LEAST, it needs a new idea to solve the problem.

A good example would be DC public schools, which at different points in the last twenty years have cost anywhere from twice to three times the national average in cost per pupil - but they keep throwing money at it.

But to get back to the point - I would NOT be in favor of school vouchers if it could be demonstrated that they just simply didn't work. It might be a great ideal - but like Communism, it'd be one of those "ideals" that never actually works in real life.

 

[awpitt]

Missed the point entirely. Unruly - expelled. Not "how long can they be put in in-school suspension?". Or, are you saying the No Child Left Behind Act says that if a student brings a knife to school the third time, she can't be expelled?

Kids can be expelled from the school system but they practically have to commit murder in order for that to happen. Also, NCLB puts additional restrictions on how and when schools can kick kids out.

 

[kmw1123]

I still have yet to see a valid reason for having the curriculum change.

Would you see a state's interest value in an opt-in course on Intelligent Design? On Respect and Empathy for Persecuted Christians? On Virginity, Your Only Safe Option?

One of the huge problems with how this course is being presented is the lack of alternative views. Yes, I know, people deny the Holocaust, but I don't think this is quite that black and white, do you?

Since it is required that public schools stay secular, religious courses cannot be offered. Prayer groups and things of that nature are allowed on school property, and they can discuss persecution and things of that nature, but it cannot be included in the curriculum. As far as the virginity thing goes, one of the options for those that don't want to take the homosexual portion is extra lessons on abstinence.

 

[This_person]

That's a good point. I hadn't thought of it that way. I guess the main difference would be that grocery chains aren't involved with teaching. What is a Catholic or other religious school receives public funding in the form of vouchers? Does that constitute public funding of religion? I just wonder how this will be looked at if it ends up in court some day.

Just my opinion, but if the money is provided to the parents, the government isn't endorsing anything but educational options for the parent. The "separation of church and state" mantra is not the constitutional one. The government would have to be specifically establish that the money would only be used for religious schools, or maybe even a particular-religion school, to have it be outside the first amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

 

[SamSpade]

That's a good point. I hadn't thought of it that way. I guess the main difference would be that grocery chains aren't involved with teaching. What is a Catholic or other religious school receives public funding in the form of vouchers? Does that constitute public funding of religion? I just wonder how this will be looked at if it ends up in court some day.

Well you've just hit on one of the biggest complaints, because the overwhelming number of private schools for kids are Catholic parochial schools, and they'd be the biggest beneficiaries of such an effort.

Of course, my argument would still be that it is NOT government funding of religion any more than it previously was government funding of private schools, since to my knowledge, parents are free to use the vouchers for the private schools they choose.

A similar argument was brought up back when the idea for allowing faith based charities to be on the same playing field with other ones.

I think the weirdest thing about the knee-jerk reaction against religion is that is almost always directed against Christian institutions. No one complains when the organization in question is, say, Muslim or even Jewish. I suspect it has something to do with the prevalence of fundies in major Christian religions.

 

[This_person]

Since it is required that public schools stay secular, religious courses cannot be offered.

But, I didn't say a religious course, I said Intelligent Design. That theory offers as much proof as Evolution, and espouses no particular religion.

Prayer groups and things of that nature are allowed on school property, and they can discuss persecution and things of that nature, but it cannot be included in the curriculum.

Thank you for making my point!

As far as the virginity thing goes, one of the options for those that don't want to take the homosexual portion is extra lessons on abstinence.

Is it taught to respect the virgin's point of view, the harassment they receive from their peers and how that's simply not tolerable, the constant bombardament socially the virgin receives from societal "norms" like movies, government payouts of welfare to unwed parents, etc? Or, is it more along the lines of "hey, if you don't have it, you won't get the diseases and children from it, but - here, let me show how to protect yourself from those things"?

 

[awpitt]

So, the parents are allowed to pick and choose the standards of their private school, but not their public school. Okay.

Actually, whoever owns the private school picks and chooses the standards of their private school. In the public schools it's done via the elected school board on the county level. If you really want to get involved, run for board of ed next year. If that's a bit much, get on the SIT team at your kids school or get involved with the PTSA. I was on the PTSA exec board at my kids' school and it was very productive. Had regular meetings with the principal and staff and helped make local decisions for the school.

 

[awpitt]

No, the parents are receiving the dollars for the education that would be provided by the school system, and using that money for the same educational requirements elsewhere. It's not semantics, but an important distinction.

But the money is public tax dollars.

 

[kmw1123]

Missed the point entirely. Unruly - expelled. Not "how long can they be put in in-school suspension?". Or, are you saying the No Child Left Behind Act says that if a student brings a knife to school the third time, she can't be expelled?

Students can be taken out of their normal public schools and placed in alternative public schools, like the White Oak Center in St. Mary's if they get totally out of hand and bring weapons to school. Or, the parents can opt for a home teacher to come to their house. That happened in a case last year. The school system is still obligated to figure out a way to teach the kid and they are eventually put back in regular public school.

 

[This_person]

Actually, whoever owns the private school picks and chooses the standards of their private school. In the public schools it's done via the elected school board on the county level. If you really want to get involved, run for board of ed next year. If that's a bit much, get on the SIT team at your kids school or get involved with the PTSA. I was on the PTSA exec board at my kids' school and it was very productive. Had regular meetings with the principal and staff and helped make local decisions for the school.

I was in the PTA before it became the PTSA

The whole argument in this thread is that the school board at the county level fought against the citizens that elected it. The citizens took their fight to the state level, which basically said, "shut up, we'll do what we want with the kids. If you don't like it, go to the private schools at your own expense. Same money, less kids for us!" Really, that's the fight here - who gets to say what the kids need to learn.

 

[This_person]

But the money is public tax dollars.

I really liked the analogy SamSpade had on this... Would that mean that the local grocery store is a publicly funded grocery store because the money spent on food stamps/etc., are public tax dollars? It's a good way of looking at it, because the money is very much the same - it WAS the tax dollars when given, but it was the PARENT's money when spent, keeping the institutions private. As long as they have to meet the same educational requirements (standardized test to prove, or audits, or what-have-you), I can't personally see the downside.

 

[itsbob]

Actually, whoever owns the private school picks and chooses the standards of their private school. In the public schools it's done via the elected school board on the county level. If you really want to get involved, run for board of ed next year. If that's a bit much, get on the SIT team at your kids school or get involved with the PTSA. I was on the PTSA exec board at my kids' school and it was very productive. Had regular meetings with the principal and staff and helped make local decisions for the school.

If you work for the government (a good portion of the people in this area) it's against the law to seek any public office. If most of the good and decent people in your community are gov't employee's, who's left to run the community?

 

[kmw1123]

I'm just really curious about what will happen if it goes to court and the decision is upheld. If its not, I don't care, but I'm wondering how many people will actually put their kids in private school instead of taking 2 seconds to sign a piece of paper.

 

[awpitt]

If you work for the government (a good portion of the people in this area) it's against the law to seek any public office. If most of the good and decent people in your community are gov't employee's, who's left to run the community?

The majority of folks are in the contractor community who aren't covered by the Hatch Act. For civil service folks, does Hatch prevent them from running for local office or just Federal office or both?

 

[awpitt]

I really liked the analogy SamSpade had on this... Would that mean that the local grocery store is a publicly funded grocery store because the money spent on food stamps/etc., are public tax dollars? It's a good way of looking at it, because the money is very much the same - it WAS the tax dollars when given, but it was the PARENT's money when spent, keeping the institutions private. As long as they have to meet the same educational requirements (standardized test to prove, or audits, or what-have-you), I can't personally see the downside.

Yes, that was an excellent analogy. My other concern is if, in order to accept voucher money, private schools have to meet the same educational requirements does that mean they still get to pick and choose who get s to go there? Do they get to turn away that child with special needs who has a voucher in hand? I would think not if they're going to meet the same educational requirements in order to be able to accept voucher money.

 

[itsbob]

The majority of folks are in the contractor community who aren't covered by the Hatch Act. For civil service folks, does Hatch prevent them from running for local office or just Federal office or both?

... a covered employee may not be a candidate for public office in a partisan election, i.e., an election in which any candidate represents, for example, the Democratic or Republican party. A partisan election is an election in which any of the candidates are running as representatives of a political party.

As an employee of ... are covered by the provisions of the Hatch Act and are prohibited by the Act from running for public office in a partisan election. Because a partisan election is an election in which any of the candidates are running with party affiliation, you would not be permitted to run, even as an independent candidate, if any of your opponents are running with party affiliation.

 

[This_person]

If the Intelligent Design course, included aspects from all religions and not just Christianity, there would be no problem. Same goes for anything religion related in the schools.

On Respect and Empathy for persecuted Christians? You are crazy, them nasty Jews have been persecuted for over 2000 years, you make that a course first, then you can discuss the FEW years Christians have percieved to be persecutted.

I, in no way, meant to imply that there aren't persecutions of every religion at some point in time (usually, always!), nor did I mean to imply that Christians were the most persecuted. It was just a single example of many potentials.

I would submit that Jews have been persecuted for much more than 2000 years.

What kind of Alternative view? There are Gays in our society, its a fact. Teaching that others are uncomfortable with them, because some archaic book tells them its "icky", isnt an alternative view, its preaching how to be a bigot.

I haven't seen the archaic book that tells people it's "icky", but I've read the lines in the Bible that are, shall we say, uncomfortable with the concept.

However, I wasn't speaking of (only) religious objections, nor the debates on choice vs. genetics, nor any other specific alternative view. I was speaking of the lack of tolerance towards ANY view other than the one taught.

Homosexuality is a fact in nature, not just with mankind

As is being born with six toes, being born blind, being born an albino....

 

[This_person]

Students can be taken out of their normal public schools and placed in alternative public schools, like the White Oak Center in St. Mary's if they get totally out of hand and bring weapons to school. Or, the parents can opt for a home teacher to come to their house. That happened in a case last year. The school system is still obligated to figure out a way to teach the kid and they are eventually put back in regular public school.

STUDENT SUSPENSION AND EXPULSION
St. Mary's County Public Schools makes many efforts to provide students a safe and orderly school environment. Disruption of school activities is considered a violation of school policies, rules, and regulations and may result in a student's in-school suspension, out-of-school suspension, or expulsion. A
principal may suspend for cause, for not more than 10 school days, any student in the school who is under the direction of the principal. (See Appendix 1.) At the request of a principal, the superintendent's designee may
suspend students for more than 10 school days or expel them. (See Appendix 1.) The suspension and expulsion of students with disabilities will be reviewed by the Individualized Education Program (IEP) Team with respect to their disability and individualized education program. The school administrator must also follow the guidelines that pertain to the suspension and expulsion of students with a 504 Plan


Seems as though kids can be expelled, even with plans :shrug:

 

[awpitt]

... a covered employee may not be a candidate for public office in a partisan election, i.e., an election in which any candidate represents, for example, the Democratic or Republican party. A partisan election is an election in which any of the candidates are running as representatives of a political party.

As an employee of ... are covered by the provisions of the Hatch Act and are prohibited by the Act from running for public office in a partisan election. Because a partisan election is an election in which any of the candidates are running with party affiliation, you would not be permitted to run, even as an independent candidate, if any of your opponents are running with party affiliation.

So basically civil service personnel can't run for partisan office. Since the St. Mary’s <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comffice:smarttags" /><st1lace w:st="on"><st1laceType w:st="on">County</st1laceType> <st1laceName w:st="on">Board</st1laceName></st1lace> of Ed is non-partisan, it should be open to civil service personnel to be candidates.

 

[PsyOps]

...you haven't read the posts of people who are upset about homosexuals?

I'm also gonna guess you didn't bother reading my posts in opposition to the school boards handling of this in the first place and my opposition to events like the Colorado deal where someone promoted kids having sex and using drugs. I'll also guess, as one finally observation, you didn't read my full support for people raising hell over curriculums they disagree with?

Seems to be a pattern with you of late.

Here's some more for you to ignore; gays make up some 10% of the US population. That's almost as much as the black population of this country. I haven't advocated a 'gay' history month. So, I'll ask you the same question;

What is the Samspade approved gay curriculum? Many folks want none.

MLK, suffrage, slavery, the Victorian era, Apartheid, the rise and fall is world cultures are all historically significant events taught in our history classes. If we had prominent gay people in our society, and as a result there was an historical gay movement in this country that could count for a change in direction of our country then this should be taught in our history classes.

That’s not what this is about. This is about “indoctrinating” our kids into accepting certain lifestyles. Another point to this is… you and I appear to be about the same age. Were you ever taught in your schools (when growing up) about how to understand and tolerate gays? I wasn’t. Does that mean we also need to take these courses in order for us to develop this tolerance? Why are they just targeting our kids? Perhaps that’s why you used the word “indoctrinate”. What better captive audience than our kids?