Dagobahn Eagle Posted August 11, 2003 Share Posted August 11, 2003 I sat on my computer reading this article and was once again reminded that there actually are, in the year of 2003, schools in the US of A (and abroad) that teaches students to be prejudiced. If a school wants to teach children that all <Insert minority here>an Americans are bad, should it be allowed to? If a school wants to encourage obviously wrong things like divorce, should it be allowed to? IMO, no to all of the above. Schools should teach all religions, but not in a way that promotes prejudice (all schools), and in atheistic public schools, not in a way that promotes one of them. They should teach tolerance, acceptance, positive values, communication, and friendship, not racism and intolerance. Also, how independent should private schools be? Should religious schools have to go trough other religions than the one they advocate (in my opinion they should). Discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datheus Posted August 11, 2003 Share Posted August 11, 2003 There's a difference between simply not teaching a subject and promoting bigotry. I think that private schools *should* be separated. The Constitution declares a separation between Church and State. If the people decide they want to bigots and general jerks in their own home, well then that's up to them. If I have a right to say racism is wrong, the KKK has a right to say that black people are the devil. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. You'll just have to agree to disagree. If a private institution so chooses to preach the Bible and preach against homosexuality, that is there choosing. The problem is when they bring it from their back yard to the public arena. This kid however was going to a public school. There is supposed to be separation here. Preaching from the Bible was far out of line. Getting on this kid's case was far from Constitutional. They are allowed to think what they will, but they shouldn't harrass him about it. But that's eactly what they did. I'm also glad to see they didn't get much money. they probably could have gotten more. A lot more. But for once someone had some sence and said "Hey, taking money away from the defective system is only going to make it worse!" Thank god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted August 11, 2003 Share Posted August 11, 2003 Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle If a school wants to teach children that all <Insert minority here>an Americans are bad, should it be allowed to? No... they were definately wrong. Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle If a school wants to encourage obviously wrong things like divorce, should it be allowed to? Encourage... no. Declare it "obviously wrong," no. I'm not one that believes divorce is inherantly wrong. It is definately not preferable, but as an idea it can be good or bad. Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle IMO, no to all of the above. Schools should teach all religions, but not in a way that promotes prejudice (all schools), and in atheistic public schools, not in a way that promotes one of them. Here I actually disagree somewhat. I think better than teaching all religions, it would be better to expose students to the idea of religion, using contemporary examples... perhaps contrasting with less significant examples. Good critical thinking skills, however, would be a better subject to focus on. This way, regardless of whether religion is discussed in schools, the student will have the ability to think for his/her self. Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle They should teach tolerance, acceptance, positive values, communication, and friendship, not racism and intolerance. I think that there would be few schools in the U.S. that would disagree with that, but the problem is really ethnocentric perspective. From the points of view of some school administrators and faculty, intolerance to homosexuality is acceptable. I disagree with this sort of ethnocentric viewpoint, but it is something that must be considered when attempting to effect change. Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle Also, how independent should private schools be? Should religious schools have to go trough other religions than the one they advocate (in my opinion they should). I think religious private schools should be free to exclude all other religions. In fact, it may, perhaps, need to be mandatory.. since anything that they would discuss about oppossing religions would be from a religiocentric perspective and one-sided. A protestant denomination teaching that 'catholics aren't christian,' or a jehovah's witness school teaching that methodists, catholics, et al will burn in hades for instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elegy Posted August 11, 2003 Share Posted August 11, 2003 Honestly, I think schools need to leave some things entirely up to the parents. With subjects such as this, many people have many different viewpoints. And they'd rather have their children grow up to believe this or that, but the school is teaching them something else. I think that if anything at all, a school ought to just bring these issues up and let the students come to conclusions for themselves. It shouldn't go further than that, and the kids definately shouldn't be told what is right or wrong. A pretty good example of what I'm talking about is one of my history/social studies teachers back in my high school days. Every week he'd give us a current event in the news that would raise a political, moral, or ethnic question. We'd take the story home, be encouraged to talk to our parents about it, and the next day we'd come back with a page or so written about our viewpoint on the matter. Everyone would read theirs aloud in class. This was a pretty excellent way to go about things. That guy got us all to form our own opinions, and to consult our parents about these kinds of matters. Which is exactly how it ought to be done. It needs to be up to the parents to raise their kids to follow one beleif or another. It shouldn't be up to the schools to feed them opinions like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted August 11, 2003 Author Share Posted August 11, 2003 Encourage... no. Declare it "obviously wrong," no. I'm not one that believes divorce is inherantly wrong. It is definately not preferable, but as an idea it can be good or bad. I said it should not be encouraged, that's all. I do think there should be a Fam Dev class, but that's another topic. I just want to make something clear here: There's a difference between teaching about some evil and encouraging it. My teacher at my last school in Norway (Communal Scandinavian Protestant School) thaught us about christians hating homosexuals, but her words were that "some christians think homosexuals are bad". That's all. No quoting from the bible, 'no nothing'. Just that, which did nothing to sway or opinion of homosexuals for the better or for worse. Miss certainly had opinions, especially on the nazis, but on homosexuals she didn't tell us how to act. Sadly. This brings me to my next point: Should something be mandatory teaching to all schools by policy of state, regardless of affiliation (things that aren't mandatory today)? I'm thinking about education on things like STDs, etc (to give an example of what is mandatory). If a school wants their students not to learn about condoms, for example (some christian branches are against protection while having intercourse), should they be allowed to? I also don't think we're learning enough about homosexuality, neither in Norway or in the USA. I've been trough my own Hell because of my preference, or ex-preference, which implies that Norsemen simply don't know enough about this at middle school level. And regardless of what you say, people can't use the umbrella of "immaturity" and "acting my age" when being homophobic. You can't be racist at age 12, so you can't be homophobic at age 12. Simple as that. Other topics include, but are not limited to: First Aid, especially CPR, which I've learned 3(!) times; World Geography; Homemaking; and Family Development. I think religious private schools should be free to exclude all other religions. In fact, it may, perhaps, need to be mandatory.. since anything that they would discuss about oppossing religions would be from a religiocentric perspective and one-sided. A protestant denomination teaching that 'catholics aren't christian,' or a jehovah's witness school teaching that methodists, catholics, et al will burn in hades for instance I think education is a vital way of reducing racism and especially today, after 9/11, students just have to learn about at least the basics of other religions like Islam. But your points are all well-founded. I think that if anything at all, a school ought to just bring these issues up and let the students come to conclusions for themselves. My (Public Atheist) school in Houston has tons of debate. My teachers will sit down and say "so what do you all think about Iraq?", and we'll have a debate. I love those (which is why I'm here:)). I agree with that one too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainer511 Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 I think it should be said that the words "Seperation of Church and State" are NOT in our constitution. In comes from a letter by Thomas Jefferson that contains the phrase "wall of Seperation between Church and State". Someone was concerned that the government would eventually dictate the way he could worship God and he was writing saying that this would not happen because there would be a seperation of church and state. It wasn't in the context of protecting the government from the church but the church from the government. If anything, not being able to use the bible or pray in school is unconstitutional. "...legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainer511 Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Also I think that as far as Christians hating homosexuals. I have to say that I do not hate them. I don't feel that what their doing is right, and I think its against the word of God, BUT I don't hate them. You get no where hating everyone that thinks differntly than you do, and I think there are many Christians who have this same mindset. I have to say that it is kinda sad because half the time I see a discussion about Christianity I see someone saying that their Christian but being quick to call names and very immature and the only thing I can boil it down to is that either they are frustrated because they aren't prepared to defend themselves and act immaturely or they're just kids being kids. Either way when a Christian acts like that it must be something that unbelievers truely find unbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jubatus Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Schools should never touch a subject subjectively (pun?), nor should it leave out any major societal topic, for ignoring one side of a matter is akin to promoting the opposition. Regarding religious, political and historical issues a school should, nay ought, to only relate objectively, not impose oppinions. In relation to this, schools should encourage freedom of thought and the skill of criticism that the pupils may form their own oppinions based on the objective facts presented them. The school is for arming young minds with the tools for life, not finished products. Any school formed on the basis of a religion or a political view can only rarely allow for a truly open mind to emerge. Question everything but math. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldritch Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Originally posted by Jubatus Question everything but math. Depends on the math class. Calculus, for instance, often allows for many different ways to solve the same problem; my old professor even mentioned one example where the process was correct (meaning a right answer) but did not match with the standard textbook answer. To respond to the topic, though... I think that schools should have a wide and varied curriculum in order to expose students to as much as possible. I think Skin's point about Critical Thinking is excellent, and should defintely be taught as early as possible. In fact, if I can dig out my old critical thinking notes from earlier in my college career, I might type them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jubatus Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Originally posted by Eldritch Depends on the math class. Calculus, for instance, often allows for many different ways to solve the same problem; my old professor even mentioned one example where the process was correct (meaning a right answer) but did not match with the standard textbook answer. Math includes the concept of several roads to an answer; that was not the point of not questioning math, but rather that math is definite per definition. But let's not move too far off topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrackan Solo Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 I dont feel that public schools have a right to lecture kids on there "sexual preference" BUT I dont feel that the kid can walk around telling people he is gay and talking about it. There is prejudice at my school too, against straight kids. We arent alowwed to show "public signs of affection". But they allow gays to freely express there "affection" for each other in the lunch room. Is that right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldritch Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 A public display of affection goes either way, whether it's man/man or man/woman - it's not just a phrase reserved for heterosexuals. If a P.D.A. is not allowed, tell the lunch room monitor and they'll put a stop to it. But if it's allowed between homosexuals, protest that heterosexuals have a right to it as well. Is there a homosexual that walks around school talking about how gay he is? If so, that's baffling. How many straight people do you know walk around talking about how straight they are and all about being straight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted August 13, 2003 Author Share Posted August 13, 2003 BUT I dont feel that the kid can walk around telling people he is gay and talking about it. Why not? Shouldn't he have as much a right to talk about love as a person who's interested in the opposite gender is? Me: "Who do you like, Jack?". Jack: "That foxy redheaded girl". Me: "Who do you like, Pete?" Pete (likes a boy): "I can't tell you, it's against the school code". Huh? There is prejudice at my school too, against straight kids. We arent alowwed to show "public signs of affection". But they allow gays to freely express there "affection" for each other in the lunch room. They probably think it's politically incorrect to stop gays from making out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurgan Posted August 20, 2003 Share Posted August 20, 2003 That's the thing. Schools are always influenced by politics. In college I can learn about any religion I want, but in public schools (before college) it was a big no no. I never understood that really. And not everyone goes to college, so a lot of people don't understand the differences between faiths and with those who don't believe in anything. Maybe they think that people under age 17 can't think for themselves about these topics (but they can about sex and war and history and science and everything else??). ; p One thing though, and this might be a unique experience, but growing up in Iowa, I remember doing a section reading about "creation stories" in class (this was in elementary public school). It was about mythology, and we read the Biblical creation, alongside one from chinese mythology, various native american traditions, etc. When we studied plate tectonics and the development of the earth later on, the teacher let us do an exercise where we would make maps based on how we thought the world looked at the beginning. Then we learned read about plate tectonics and the latest scientific theory. But apart from that it was pretty much cut and dried. No religion, except to mention historically when such and such a religion was founded (and hard not to talk about the crusades without mentioning religion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.