FAther arrested for oppposing the indoctrination of his 6 year old at school

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: conjur
mago, this *isn't* about sex education!! Did you read the article??

Inside were books about foreign cultures and traditions, along with food recipes. There was also a copy of ''Who's In a Family?" by Robert Skutch, which depicts different kinds of families, including same-sex couples raising children.

The book's contents concerned Parker and prompted him to begin a series of e-mail exchanges with school officials on the subject that culminated in a meeting Wednesday night with Estabrook's principal and district director of instruction. The meeting ended with Parker's arrest after he refused to leave the school, and the Lexington man spent the night in jail.

how could you say its not about sex ed when its about homosexual couples? the whole point of the book is to expose and create a dialog. which is fine, for older children, not a 6yo, and at the parents discretion.

school is for learning basic education, not social indoctrination.

Acknowledging that gay families exist is social indoctrination? I don't think so.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: episodic
I think the problem here is the definition of reality. Reality is two people of the same sex cannot have a child naturally - together that is.

Reality is that you are equally bigoted pressing your agenda into other parent's lives and children.

Conservative Christian families' children are entitled to a free and APPROPRIATE education - just as your child is. However, it is not appropriate to teach children homesexual lifestyles are ethical.

Why do you consider those who want the schools to stick to reading, writing, and math bigoted? Leave morality to the family. If you want to teach your kids that gay lifestyles are fine - then I appluad you and your right to do that. If you believe whole-heartedly in freedom you would also celebrate my right to educate my children that those lifestyles are not ethical.

This nation has always been on a track toward being more socially liberal. Homosexuality is never going to go away and to discriminate against someone for being homosexual is a travesty and something Jesus would not have condoned. Fake Christians with their feigned indignation are what is rending this country into two social parts.

If a bigot wants to hide reality from their child, they can put them into a private school that condones bigotry.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: OS
I don't know enough to comment on the arrest, but god damn 6 is too damn young to be teaching kids about gay families and sh*t and I don't even think homosexuality is such an outrage.

Who's teaching 6 year-olds about gay families?


Does anybody actually do any reading on their own?


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de...88367266X/104-1273380-7837525?v=glance

Beginning with a traditional nuclear family and ending with blank spaces in which the child reader is instructed to "draw a picture of your family," this slight book catalogues multicultural contemporary family units, including those with single parents, lesbian and gay parents, mixed-race couples, grandparents and divorced parents. Kevin and his brother like their kimono-clad grandmother to help them with their jigsaw puzzles, while Ricky lives with two families. "Aunt Amanda and Uncle Stan," pictured riding in a blue convertible with their pets, "don't have any children at all" but are "still a family," says the narrator, because "they say Mouser and Fred are their 'babies.'" Because "animals have families, too," the text describes elephant, lion, chimpanzee and dog families as well as human families. (A human family headed by a mother is "like the chimpanzee family. Mama chimp raises the babies by herself, with the help of any older children she may have.") Nienhaus's lackluster illustrations, the schoolmarmish tone of the text and the comparisons with wild animals all tend to undercut the final definition of a family as "the people who love you the most!" Ages 3-7.

Thanks for agreeing with me. Now, do you see how ridiculous this whole situation is?

 

[RabidMongoose]

This is a strange situation. I guess some people feel that even having their children know that homosexual couples exist is troubling to them and I suppose then directly assume that it would introduce learning about homosexuality to understand a same-sex couple for a child. I guess I can understand the father's situation, even though I don't agree with his decisions and opinions. I would think that he should just have it so that his son is not in that particular class and I kind of understand his position.

Personally I'd want my child to live in today's modern world and understand it better. I'm not sure if 6 years old is an appropriate age, but it seems OK to me.

 

[conjur]

Seems to be the best time to teach tolerance. Hatred is something that is learned. I think what scares this father is that the child may not grow up with the same bigoted mindset.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: conjur
Seems to be the best time to teach tolerance. Hatred is something that is learned. I think what scares this father is that the child may not grow up with the same bigoted mindset.

Maybe he's just weird and thinks it'll somehow make his son homosexual or something. And then the father will freak out and not know what to do since he seems pretty hateful.

I would also suppose that starting at a young age is the best time to eliminate hate and intolerance...but I suppose it could also start questions about sexuality that some parents would be uncomfortable with, especially at six years of age. I'd say that the benefits outweigh any possible disadvantages.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: piasabird
You are either for the Gay agenda or for the family.

They oppose each other.

I've seen you say this on P&N before (5 or 6 times before actually). I've yet to see you explain the the reasoning behind this absurd assertion.

 

[conjur]

It's that old taboo...sex.


<gasp>


We mustn't talk about it lest little Jane and little Johnny start experimenting.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: conjur
It's that old taboo...sex.


<gasp>


We mustn't talk about it lest little Jane and little Johnny start experimenting.

A few of my gay male friends have neices, nephews in that age group (6-7 years). The kids seem to just accept simple explanations about why their uncle has a boyfriend instead of a girlfriend ("because we love each other"), and they don't seem inclined or interested to ask questions about sex or homosexuality. But 6 year old kids don't usually ask explicit questions about sex anyway (that I am aware of), and there's no need to bring up such topics of discussion. I think this a much bigger issue for adults, than it is for little kids, who tend to be accepting, and who probably find the topic boring anyway and would much rather be talking about their favorite TV show or whatever.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Are you suggesting that a father shouldn't be able to know when his 6-year old child is going to be taught something in the classroom that he's deems unacceptable so he can remove him from the class?

From your own article:

Parents received notice about the book bag at the beginning of the year and the date that it was scheduled to be sent home with their child. The bag's contents also were put on display at a back-to-school night earlier in the school year, she said,[...]

she said. ''Parents can either opt out entirely or use whatever materials they want."

Did you even READ the article you posted?

Originally posted by: Riprorin
I haven't heardof any allegation fron the school adminstrators that he did anything inappropriate except for refusing to leave until they granted his request.

and that is exactly what he was arrested for.

I love how Rip hasn't responded to this. 🙂

Mr. Parker wasn't arrested for "opposing the indoctrination of his 6 year old son", he was arrested for refusing to leave after the meeting.

 

[nineball9]

For what it's worth, Lexington has one of the best public school systems in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at least as measured by the state's standardized testing (MCAS).

I grew up in Winchester, a town adjacent to Lexington, and when the kids (my younger brother and I) left the nest my parents moved to Lexington. They lived there for 22 years - my father left Lexington in 1999, moving one town away.

In overall district ratings Lexington rated 8th in the state in the Spring-2004 MCAS tests.
http://www.boston.com/education/mcas/scores2004/overall_district_rankings.htm

I suspect the socio-political-economic opinions of the residents of Lexington run the full gamut like the residents of other cities and towns in the US. In general however, Lexington would be probably be considered a fairly "liberal" town, but then it has had that reputation for many years; those of you who took US history may remember learning about the activities of rebellious colonists which culminated in the Battle of Lexington and Concord in 1775.

<-- back to the regular thread ...

 

[Jhhnn]

The problem for anti-gay forces is that gays are a naturally occurring % of the population, worldwide- somewhere between 1 in 20 and 1 in 10. They're part and parcel of the human race, and likely have been so from the beginning. They constitute a greater % of the American population than Asians, or Jews.

The whole cry about "If you believe whole-heartedly in freedom you would also celebrate my right to educate my children that those lifestyles are not ethical." routine merely echoes the racist and ethnic prejudices of our past. Gay is no more a choice than skin color, and it's entirely appropriate for the State to attempt to eliminate such bigotry. Which will, of course, elicit some very virulent responses from "conservative" forces who exploit it as a means to achieve electoral supremacy, just as it did wrt jews, blacks, hispanics and asians in the past. "Us vs Them" won't work, if there's no "Them", now will it?

 

[shimsham]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: OS
I don't know enough to comment on the arrest, but god damn 6 is too damn young to be teaching kids about gay families and sh*t and I don't even think homosexuality is such an outrage.

Who's teaching 6 year-olds about gay families?


Does anybody actually do any reading on their own?


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de...88367266X/104-1273380-7837525?v=glance

Beginning with a traditional nuclear family and ending with blank spaces in which the child reader is instructed to "draw a picture of your family," this slight book catalogues multicultural contemporary family units, including those with single parents, lesbian and gay parents, mixed-race couples, grandparents and divorced parents. Kevin and his brother like their kimono-clad grandmother to help them with their jigsaw puzzles, while Ricky lives with two families. "Aunt Amanda and Uncle Stan," pictured riding in a blue convertible with their pets, "don't have any children at all" but are "still a family," says the narrator, because "they say Mouser and Fred are their 'babies.'" Because "animals have families, too," the text describes elephant, lion, chimpanzee and dog families as well as human families. (A human family headed by a mother is "like the chimpanzee family. Mama chimp raises the babies by herself, with the help of any older children she may have.") Nienhaus's lackluster illustrations, the schoolmarmish tone of the text and the comparisons with wild animals all tend to undercut the final definition of a family as "the people who love you the most!" Ages 3-7.

Thanks for agreeing with me. Now, do you see how ridiculous this whole situation is?

hardly. did i say it was only about same-sex couples? nope. but same-sex couples are covered in the book, so it is about them, and hetero couples, and mixed-race couples, etc. as i said in the other post explaining what i meant, that you of course dont take into consideration as it doesnt agree with you either, there is no need to teach what a family is to a 6yo. they already know.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: shimsham
for the record: i met my wife through her gay cousin, a man who i worked, went to college, lived, partied, and slept in the same bed with on numerous occasions. i also went to cheer him on at his drag shows, and those of his friends. hell, i even was slaughtered in a gay bar sponsored volley ball tournament by two of the most manly men ive seen in my life that were as queer as a football bat wearing nothing but loin cloths. so i may be the person that is the least narrow minded about anything dealing with human nature.

just for the record, I've never had a drag show. 🙂 I find your comments interesting, I've occasionally wondered if friendship (beyond a superificial aquaintance) between a gay man and a straight man is really possible. What are your thoughts on this?

 

[daniel1113]

daniel1113 walks in, shakes head, and returns to reading about the PS3.

 

[totalcommand]

Olielly's editorial is a travishamockary. He's being totally disingeneous. The real reason he opposes the teaching is not because he thinks 6 year old's should be having fun. It's because it teaches about homosexuality, that it exists.

The topic title should be:

FAther arrested for tressspassing on school grounds.