Posted on 12/02/2004 3:56:16 PM PST by reportgirl73
GRAND ISLAND, N.Y. (AP) - An elementary school bus driver was fired after sharing a statistic she had read about embryonic stem cell research with students, then encouraging them to tell their parents about it.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
I don't think she was trying to convert a child to a particular religion.
Is it proselytizing for a driver to tell kids to treat others with respect, if the driver mentions it at some point when there is no bullying going on?
You know, some folks seem to be implying that the driver is not allowed to talk about anything in which she believes strongly.
Wouldn't it be a strange world, if we were only allowed to talk about things we didn't care about?
If Democrats have deep beliefs about helping people and then talk earnestly about those beliefs, are they proselytizing? Are Democrats restricted to talking about issues they feel lukewarm about?
We don't dismiss Democrats' arguments merely because they believe something strongly or deeply. That would be dishonest and underhanded. Methods like that are usually employed to win an argument that is being lost.
Don't you find it ironic that Democrats like to label Conservatives as cold-hearted at the same time that they tell the Conservatives that they shouldn't believe anything too strongly.
Some of them may have heard about Christopher Reeve. Or Michael J Fox. Perhaps the parents watch the news at 6:30.
This discussion is not going on behind closed doors, by any means.
The pro-ESCR folks have made sure their side of the argument is the one being pushed.
Again, it is not the school bus driver's job to educate, but drive the school bus safely. Firing was too harsh, but I don't see anything wrong with reminding the bus driver what his/her job actually is.
One of our daughters has such a driver, and our daughter is very well grounded so I don't worry about such. She comes home and tells us what the bus driver has said, and we talk about it. The students are not swayed by the bus driver's opinions. They tend to believe the same things as their parents. We have not complained about the bus driver because she is adequately transporting our child to and from school. There are liberals everywhere. Our children must learn to cope. I've never considered reporting the bus driver for having a political opinion.
Don't you read the news? I believe that it was 4th-8th grades, and they were teaching all the basics of islam. Check the archives of Worldnetdaily for the details.
I viewed the clip. Mrs. Mayor was excellent.
No this isn't what happened here. You use the word "Parent" like it is a single all encompassing entity, (lazy thinking, shame on you). Not all the parents complained. But the resulting policy effectivly censors all the children from any facts (not opinions, facts) that happen to be inconvient to not just the complaining parent's own prejudices, but any prejudices that any parent might have in the future no matter how unreasonable. As I infered above, some parents are fallable, thus it is ridiculous to allow every parent the right to censor all discussions in schools. Thus the need for reasonable limits.
Are you infering that Mrs Mayor did not drive the bus safely? If not why the perverse desire to remind her that she is supposed too?
Now that we have determined the school bus driving is a seperate issue, let us turn to the education of the children. You seem to be accepting my assertion that it was indeed education (whether or not it is just as a premis).
If so then why would you object to school children being educated on a bus? Are you afraid your kids will come back from school too smart? Do you feel she is scab who is likely to displace some teachers? What?
Not all of it. Lately, arguing on this thread has become a full time profession for me. (I think Diana at least should have to pay me for critical thinking lessons).
You mean are you implying, you dolt.
The year is 2004 A.D. There's no way to get away from it.
No, I'm saying that is the job of a bus driver - to drive the bus safely. I was not commenting on any particular driver.
" If not why the perverse desire to remind her that she is supposed too?"
Perverse desire? ROFL My original statement that firing was too harsh. At most, she should be told "Just drive the bus and keep your ideas to yourself." How did that somehow evolve into a perverse desire to do anything?
"us turn to the education of the children. You seem to be accepting my assertion that it was indeed education (whether or not it is just as a premis). If so then why would you object to school children being educated on a bus? "
Shall I reiterate again that it is not the job of a school bus driver to educate children? If it is the position of that particular district that bus drivers shouldn't be 'teaching' the riders of their buses, then so be it.
The firing was too harsh, certainly (unless this individual has done this repeatedly and been warned several times). But a bit of counseling from her superivsor would not be out of line if the type of policy I mentioned earlier is in place.
Isn't there a scripture that says in the last days evil will be called good, and good will be called evil?
A school bus ride is just not the same without some good stem-cell talk.
Perhaps the parents prefer to introduce the subject according to their own schedule, and not that of the bus driver.
The pro-ESCR folks have made sure their side of the argument is the one being pushed.
When the thread about a pro-ESCR schoolbus driver gets posted, I trust you'll ping me.
Your right about this. The children are comming in as neutral, usually aloof, parties. Some will want to educate them to their potential. Some will want to fool them. Some will want to protect them from vulgarity, and some will want them to accept and practice vulgarity.
Was the bus driver tying to fool them? Was she trying to get them to accept or practice vulgarity?
A foolish post is just not the same without an idiotic straw man argument.
By what authority does she decide how and when those children will learn such things, and thereby usurp the role of parent. By what right does she presume to know better than the parent how to raise those children?
Great. I bet you look forward to having government agents grab Hindu kids from the arms of their parents at gunpoint.
Wonderful.
Reiterate it as much as you like, even if its not part of your job title. And feel free to be helpful to people, and even friendly.
Take a deep breath...let your emotions calm a little...now meditate...and now I shall try to explain what you have seemed unwilling to comprehend yet again:
It is OK to do good things when driving a bus. It is not OK to do bad things when driving a bus. Some of the good things bus drivers do when driving a bus (hold on to your hat) are not necessarily related to the driving of the bus (oh my gosh, how radical--but its not their job--but its not their job--oh my gosh, AAAAHHH--calmly now, calmly now).
Another lighting bolt revelation for you: not all the good things people do are required by their job description (oh my, now don't hyperventalate--calmly now, calmly now).
And now, something a little advanced, we are going to put it together (don't be scared now...just calmly concentrate): If you accept the bus driver was doing a good thing (educating) and not a bad thing (indoctrinating), and you accept that her responsibilities as a bus driver were being fulfilled, then you should conclude what she was doing was ok.
Now don't blame me if I am a little, (a lot (no a whole heck of a lot)) patronizing. Its just part of my job, and sense it isn't part of yours, you don't get to be patronizing back (though firing you would be a little harsh).
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.