rcd@opus.UUCP (Dick Dunn) (07/21/84)
(I added motss to the groups. I think it's time for a comment from over there on this matter.) It's sort of feeling like flame-time: > What about the "inalienable rights" of the parents to raise their children > according to their own standards? Where on earth did that one come from? If you want to teach them to be thieves, that's ok??? I suppose you also think that you have the right to punish them according to your own standards? Look, they're your children, not your property! > I pay for my school, I should have some say in who teaches there! Sure, but that's not the same as running the school, either yourself or by a mob of parents. For one, you're probably not qualified; for another, that's not your job and it is someone else's. (Hey, since I don't have any kids, can I get out of paying for schools???) > What should be taught in grammar is the > 3 R's not morals, religion, OR GAY LIFE! If you've got a teacher teaching sexual mores to gradeschool kids, then yes, work to get rid of the teacher. Homosexuality doesn't have anything to do with it. That seems to be the point you've missed, both in the original and in your followup. The issue is not related to the private life of the teacher. That isn't any of your damn business. If the teacher is teaching (or otherwise promoting in the classroom) sensitive topics not relevant to what is supposed to be taught, the teacher is wrong. PLEASE NOTE that I did not say "sensitive viewpoints" - I said "sensitive topics" and I mean "regardless of what view is expressed on those topics..." >Kids at this age are extremely impres- >sionable and the teacher at this level should as neutral as possible as to > chosen life styles which will come later in life. This statement is a good one - the "neutrality" is the main point. It's the same as the point I was tryin to make in the preceding paragraph. Again - if you've got a teacher who is teaching sexual attitudes in a gradeschool, you've got a valid complaint - but homosexuality is a red herring. -- Dick Dunn {hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd (303)444-5710 x3086 ...A friend of the devil is a friend of mine.
dmcanzi@watmath.UUCP (David Canzi) (07/24/84)
> >Kids at this age are extremely impres- > >sionable and the teacher at this level should as neutral as possible as to > > chosen life styles which will come later in life. > This statement is a good one - the "neutrality" is the main point. It's > the same as the point I was tryin to make in the preceding paragraph. Bullfeathers! I doubt that the word "neutrality" means the same thing to the original poster that it does to me. It's probably perfectly okay for a [male] teacher to mention to the kiddies that he has a wife, maybe even a mistress, but let him mention that he has a male lover and sh*t will fly. This is not neutrality. I think I smell a hypocrite.