Posted on 03/05/2005 6:00:24 PM PST by emil
You're living in a world of delusion. This country grows more liberal by the day and political correctness strengthens its choke-hold on our society by the day, even WITH the GOP controlling the White House and both houses of Congress. The only effect has been a POSSIBLE slowing of the GROWTH of liberalism, but even that's not verifiable. Nothing has been turned back, or even remotely close.
It's also wishful thinking to the extreme to equate our current GOP with conservatism.
MM
Uh, so? For one thing, George Bush is a moderate, not a conservative -- CFR, prescription drug plan, etc. Secondly, John Kerry, who is essentially a Communist traitor, received the second-highest vote total in our nation's history.
Not at all. I feel as parents it is OUR responsibility to make sure our children have the best, safest, most thorough education possible. If you can get that at a public school in your area, fabulous. But not all public schools are good. We homeschool after elementary school, but I don't advocate it to everyone. It takes a lot of time, patience and serious research to make sure the kids are getting a good, well-rounded education that will follow them into college.
I believe in homeschooling, but not for reason you so crudely stated.
It should occur to some of you that most teachers do not have a "political agenda" for little children. Please realize that most people in the world are not as focused on politics as most of the bloggers here.
-Future Teacher who stumbled upon this site while doing some online research about the teaching profession.
First, I had to go back and look at my post you were responding to, since I made it over a year ago.
Second, a serious question: If you're a future teacher, the natural assumption is that you're a student teacher now? That being the case, I'm curious as to how you know what "most teachers" do or do not have?
Third, you are certainly correct in that only a small percentage of people are as focused on politics as the people you'll find online in places like this. That said, if you think teacherdom of today doesn't have a political agenda, I strongly suggest you do some reading up on the NEA. It is without a doubt one of the most far-left, agenda-driven organizations on the planet. I don't know how many teachers actually buy into that agenda, but it's certainly enough that they're able to execute that agenda in school after school after school across this country.
MM
Okay, I am ignorant of NEA's political agenda, and I really should only speak for myself. I am going into this field for reasons that have nothing to do with a political agenda. I may have many ideas that you do not agree with (politically and socially, as I agree with many liberal ideas AND many other conservative ideas), but I am not going to try to teach the children in my "future" classroom anything that I think even the people on this site would object to. I am going to be a moral role-model and I will emphasize tolerance and compassion for all in my classroom. So, there you go, one "conservative" ideal and one "liberal." I'm just really annoyed that people who are so politically extreme and prone to overgeneralizing/pigeonholing are targeting the profession (yes, profession) I am entering into. I can't help it if there is some "conspiracy agenda" enveloping the higher-ups in education, or even if many teachers are extreme in this sense. What irks me is that this site is filled with hateful language and ignorance targeted toward teachers in a very personal way. I'm sure even Laura Bush might back me up on that one, at least privately.
There may be some isolated posts like that, but you'll have to show me "filled" in order for me to buy into that statement. Any site this large and this active is guaranteed to have isolated incidents of those who take extreme positions, but that's not representative of the whole. Kinda like you say the teachers who shove their political agendas down the throats of children aren't the norm.
BTW, here's an illustrative example:
Premise: Johnny is in fourth grade and it becomes known that he's the adopted son of two women.
The right thing to do if Johnny isn't having any problem is nothing. If he is catching grief over the issue, the right thing to do is insist that Johnny be treated like everyone else and leave it at that.
There are in fact plenty of liberal teachers who would take it upon themselves to tell all the kids how Johnny's family is normal, how wonderful their family arrangement is, and how there's nothing at all wrong with boys liking boys in that way and girls liking girls.
I have a serious problem with the latter. It's not education. It's indoctrination, and it is most certainly taking place in this country. That's why you find some hostility directed at teachers here.
MM
Well, you're right, actually, that is what alot of teachers would say, I think. What I'm thinking is that children do not blindly follow directions. They need to know WHY they shouldn't pick on someone because of a family arrangement. And I suppose opinions differ on the reasons. Teachers always have and always will impart some of their own beliefs onto students, if for no other reason than they are human beings, not robots, and if they truly believe something (religion is an exception, as it has historically proven to be harmful when mixed into curricula) regarding society/secular ethics, etc., they are probably going to at least subconsciously teach some of the values. I believe that most teachers, regardless of the particular ideology they've adopted, are doing these things out of a sincere motivation to teach children in a positive way. Whether you agree or disagree with the ideas is beside my point for the moment; I'm saying they are not secretly scheming to make the children of the world "liberal democrats," but rather, what they percieve to be people guided by good values. They have a sincere and good MOTIVATION. The second thing I'd like to say is that instead of merely complaining about the politics of teachers, conservatives should TEACH if they wish to make changes. I personally hope they don't. =) I believe in the social progress our society is making for the most part. I disagree with some liberal ideas, namely, and strongly, abortion...so I could never label myself liberal. But I align myself with many philosophies that happen to be politically "liberal" in America. So, I think you are right in your assessment of the poilitcs of education, but I believe you are wrong in your judgment of it. Thanks for listening.
See, this is one of the major problems with liberalism, a belief that good intentions are enough. Now I know you didn't say that exactly, but I think you'll agree that that was the tone of what you were trying to say. And good intentions, a belief that they're teaching "good" values, does NOT justify intrusion into areas that should be left to parents. I assure you most Christian teachers wholeheartedly believe that telling kids about Christ would be the ULTIMATE good thing to do, but it's not allowed. So why is it okay for one side but not the other?
Finally, thanks for the dialog. I'm assuming you're young, which brings to mind one of the greatest mortal quotes in history. Winston Churchill said that a 20-year-old who wasn't liberal didn't have a heart, and that a 40-year-old who wasn't conservative didn't have a brain. If you're 20ish now, I confidently predict that you'll be a hardcore conservative when you're 40. :-)
MM
I'll be a hardcore moderate for life. I'm 25.
Motivation is not enough by itself. I was just making the point that teachers aren't out to do harm. I'm sick of angry liberals and tired of angry conservatives. It seems that people aren't caring as much about solving problems in productive ways than they are "winning" with their political "team."
Religion in education or in government in general has already proven to be a bad thing. We can always revisit history to remind ourselves how and why. Need we?
Teachers have a responsibility to teach the whole child, which means more than just essential academics. In order to create productive classrooms, they have to address other issues. We won't always agree with one another's politics, but that doesn't mean that we should shelter our children from opposing ideas. A good teacher presents opposing viewpoints. I can't defend one who only presents one viewpoint, either way. Here little "Johnny" is an interesting example, but not to prove that exact point. Let me digress. A good teacher could say that families come in many varieties these days. I'm sure no reasonable person would object to the teacher also adding that people deserve to be treated with kindness and respect regardless of their family situation. But would they add that some adults strongly oppose homosexual parenting, or homosexuality in general? No, because it would be against the best interests of the student who is already suffering, Johnny. That stems from the psychology aspect of teaching. I can bring all these ideas together by saying that this teacher would not be a "good" teacher by not explainging WHY the students should treat Johnny the same, and by merely explaining it in the simplistic manner you first suggested. A good teacher is one that can make the children think about important issues in a way that gives them the facts behind the issues and lets them debate and conclude. I believe that most children would easily conclude that Johnny's situation is respectable (and many conservative adults are conveying the message that it is not, so how in the world could we expect their kids to treat him respectfully? It's so hypocritical that it's pathetic). A good teacher also espouses the secular ethics that are relevant to the childrens' lives. Anything outside of academics could be labeled "indoctrination." But the truth is that it's only a crappy teacher who spouts nothing but dry facts and expects the students to merely regurgitate for the test. That's not a teacher, that's a robot. We are human beings in a community and until we can be more tolerant we will remain lost and bitter. I'll get off my soapbox, but I really feel this way...my own school experience was this: none of my teachers espoused strong ideologies until I got into 11th grade. At this point, I was plenty old enough to start to develop my own ideas using theirs. I was exposed to very conservative teachers as well as liberals. I actually had a very conservative sociology professor in college. I often disagreed with classmates on issues. I wasn't brainwashed--I had the cognitive capability of objectivity with regard to subjective social issues. Never once do I remember any teacher imposing ideas that somehow "made me" think like a liberal. I do not believe I'm an exception. I actually attended schools in three states--FL, NY, and NC.
Teachers happen to be in the middle of a storm, but they are not the winds. All this despite whatever the majority happen to believe politically.
To my previous statement: "A good teacher [always] presents opposing viewpoints."
...I guess my take on the johnny example seems to negate that idea. But the teacher could say that the issue is controversial. Still, tolerance should be stressed. If it seems obvious that tolerance is important for kids to learn to get along in the classroom, why can't conservatives in general see its importance in greater society? Please don't answer with comments based out of fear. The truth is that homosexuality is feared, period, and its ignorance. But like it or not, we are moving toward positive progress in this area, just as we did racial equality. It's happening, and it's going to continue to happen. The same people who are afraid of it are the same that fought integration, suffrage, abolitionism, and ultimately, they were the same people who fought with England against the "radicals" who wanted to create this nation. It's the same parallel set of ideologies, only today they are played out like little children fighting on the playground.
And that's nothing a teacher drilled into me. It's what I concluded from a variety of historical facts and political ideas. It's what I believe is true.
I'm not sure about your equation, but I do know that EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH has shown that children can be either positively or negatively affected by their society. This includes school. They NEED a strong community, yes. A strong community is a GOOD thing, regardless of your political affiliation.
I think the fact that you reply with a catchy little pot-shot demonstrates, at least so far, that you don't have a substantial debate to offer. If you, I'd be interested!
Read up on Educational Psychology. It's not politics.
If you DO, I'd be interested! Er, that's what I meant...=)
Ooh, I'm sorry. I'm not sure you were even addressing me. Whoops. Sorry, if you were not. I'm not blog-savvy, I guess. But I do stand by what I said about the "Commune" comment. Thx. (bye!)
The writer is NOT an idiot, and I have many years of raising 7 children and dealing with idiotic educrats to support his contentions. Bully for you that the wife is a teacher..and she may be a good one; an exception to the rule.
Don't EVEN try to tell me on this forum that this s**t doesn't take place in every school in America. It does.
Sorry, but we disagree on many things here, like your assumptions and declarations that all things you deem "social progress" are automatically good and worthy.
One thing that really raises my hackles, though, is this continuing attempt to label disapproval of homosexual behavior as "fear" or "ignorance." Please understand this: Just because you say something does not make it so. And just because the word "homophobic" has been parroted ad nauseum does not afford it one iota of validity. I do not fear homosexual behavior. I disapprove of it, and there's a huge difference between the two. Nor is my position based on ignorance. What exactly is there to be ignorant of? I know exactly what it is.
In reality, quite the opposite is true: Anyone who supports homosexual behavior is irrefutably either ignorant of, or willfully chooses to ignore, the fact that it's an incredibly destructive and unhealthy behavior. That's a scientific, medical fact, that stands apart from any moral considerations.
BTW, opposition to the homosexual agenda is something that crosses both parties. Even people who are liberal on many issues are opposed to gay marriage; in 2004, 45% of KERRY voters voted for the various and sundry no-gay-marriage referenda. You may find that your "progress" isn't quite the sure thing you seem to think it to be.
This is where your ability to engage in meaningful dialog breaks down: You make statements that are nothing more than your own opinions, and declare them as fact, as if saying something over and over automatically makes it so. If someone disagrees with you, they're automatically "afraid" or "ignorant." It's as if it never occurred to you that someone on the other side of an issue is just as informed as you, just as smart as you. To equate someone's disapproval of the homosexual agenda with racism and such is both delusional and offensive.
MM
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.