Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The article says that she wanted to opt out. Why would she want to opt out if she had no clue of what was being taught?
Did she just decide to randomly ask to opt out of the entire class or a specific part? Since it was a specific part, one would assume she knew what she wanted to opt out of.
The preschool is a parent cooperative private school. Parent co-op are generally require very heavy parental involvement in exchange for lower tuition rates.
The article says that she wanted to opt out. Why would she want to opt out if she had no clue of what was being taught?
Did she just decide to randomly ask to opt out of the entire class or a specific part? Since it was a specific part, one would assume she knew what she wanted to opt out of.
The preschool is a parent cooperative private school. Parent co-op are generally require very heavy parental involvement in exchange for lower tuition rates.
having a clue as to what was being taught via conversations with her daughter does not begin to imply that she had access to the curriculum, as you earlier claimed.
Is it indoctrination to say that gay couples exist? Is it indoctrination to say that transgendered people exist? Is it indoctrination to consider them people?
These are all objective facts. They aren't open for discussion, not at this point anyway. Maybe some study will show gay people are actually aliens from some far off planet, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for such a study to surface.
Progressives are all about self indulgent experimentation with society and sadly they experiment with out children. The go for change for the sake of change even if change is not needed. Progressives are NOT about useful and good progress. They are dangerous because they have no vision of the future. They toy with society and have no regard for what the long term effects will be 30 years from now. Progressives imagine that they are intelligent and all others are not.
Progressive teachers will state that they are co-parents. This is so intrusive. These teachers are supposed to be TEACHERS we are the parents...they should get out of our faces and concentrate on reading and writing and teaching kid how to count. Progressives are NOT about freedom. They are meddlers who seek to control others.
Conservatives keep tradition for the sake of tradition. See, it's really easy to stay stupid and false things. But let's keep going; there are conservatives who experiment with our children too. There are conservatives who home school their kids, telling them evolution is a lie from Satan, that the Earth is 6,000 years, and that they'll go to hell is they masturbate. These are all objectively false. At least the liberal 'experiments' happening in this topic are true. Gay people do exist.
A teacher's job is to teach. This does not mean only math or reading. A teacher's job is to educate, and education is not a narrow thing. Narrow education is bad, no, ****ing awful, education. Aristotle taught about the roles of men and women in society, as did Plato and Socrates, and they're often credited as the best thinkers and teachers who ever existed. Hell, to appeal to what I imagine your religion is, did Jesus say 'well, ask your parents what to believe.' No. He didn't. What do you have to say to that, I wonder?
The article says that she wanted to opt out. Why would she want to opt out if she had no clue of what was being taught?
Did she just decide to randomly ask to opt out of the entire class or a specific part? Since it was a specific part, one would assume she knew what she wanted to opt out of.
The preschool is a parent cooperative private school. Parent co-op are generally require very heavy parental involvement in exchange for lower tuition rates.
Since the school's letter to parents provides an ex post facto description of the incident (and the book), I would have to conclude the mom did not know what was being taught.
you really, truly think 4 year olds should be concerned about 'disrupting heteronormativity'?
please
what if a hetero group was was propagandizing a classroom agenda for 4 year old tykes called 'straight(en)ing the classroom' - would you be ok with that?
Does that 4 year old have gay parents? Is that 4 year old going to find that they're gay a few years down the road? This is why talking about this is important. It's relevant, even to a 4 year old. Yeah, it should be kept basic as there are issues dealing with human sexuality that are far too much for a 4 year old, but I have yet to see evidence that this line has actually been crossed.
As for a hetero group, that depends on the situation. If there's under representation and they just want to ensure that opposite sex/traditional couples are being talked about as well, then I'd support their actions. If they're trying to say that it's wrong to be anything other than straight, then I'd have a problem with it. Given that there is not under representation, I don't think I would support such a group at this time. Should a need arise, I shall support such an efforts. I however think it's best to deal with issues of human sexuality as they are, and not as how I think they should be. Gay people exist, regardless of if you or I or anyone likes it.
No, you asked about children understanding the concept of love first.
Did you provide any evidence of that yet? No.
You haven't demonstrated that they even have the capacity for what they're being taught, and that's the very definition of poor education. Your attempt to defend this is "I'm a parent, so I don't need to". Like willful ignorance is an acceptable answer?
And like you said, a 4 year old already knows the definition of "mommy" and "daddy". So why teach that over again? That's poor education too.
So either this curriculum is:
A) teaching something they already know (definitions) or
B) teaching something they don't yet know (relationships between family members)
Which is it? If it's A, that's poor education. Teach them something new.
If it's B, prove they have the capacity to understand different types of relationships (parent-child, parent-parent, sibling-sibling, etc).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
