Posted on 04/04/2006 1:35:55 PM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past
Whatever happened to reading, writing, and arithmetic?
Whatever happened to reading, writing, and arithmetic?
Amen................
"Whatever happened to reading, writing, and arithmetic?"
Exactly. Having teachers try to teach our kids about sex is not a good idea. Why isn't that left to the parents? I have never understood who started this "sex ed" crap anyway. Our kids can't write a complete paragraph, figure change in a grocery store, or fill out a job application, but let's make sure they know how to put a condom on a cucumber. Homeschool, homeschool, homeschool!
This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows. To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49543 Saturday, April 1, 2006 Christian education group caves to homosexuals Posted: April 1, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Linda Harvey
A recent agreement between several national groups on how to handle "sexual orientation" in schools is unacceptable, misleading and may actually cause more problems than it purports to solve. The document, "Public Schools and Sexual Orientation" was released by the First Amendment Center in conjunction with the Christian Educators Association International and GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network.Since I have researched and reported on homosexuality in the schools for more than a decade through the organization I head, Mission America of Columbus, Ohio, I read this announcement with shock and dismay. My first reaction was, "GLSEN? How could a group of genuine Christian believers sit down at any table with that organization?" And reviewing the document itself has only heightened my concern. Throughout the document, homosexuality is treated as an alternate viewpoint which Christians are now supposed to treat with respect and civility. We are to "agree to disagree" when it comes to students, and to view this as just an "alternate viewpoint." This presents a problem for a committed Christian, when we know from both God's standards and from public-health statistics that homosexuality has grave, life-changing consequences and should never be advocated to youth.
School administrators are empowered to act on behalf of children to eliminate any obstacle to student safety. Yet through the efforts of aggressive advocacy groups like GLSEN, the American Civil Liberties Union and others, many school officials have been persuaded that homosexuality can somehow be presented "safely" to students. It's apparent that this erroneous assumption was the starting point in drafting this agreement. Homosexuality is not a viewpoint it's an array of high-risk, abnormal behaviors. We pay millions of dollars as taxpayers to fund HIV-prevention efforts and treatment for AIDS. The most common way HIV is spread in the United States is still through male-to-male anal sex, or through bisexual sex. Some teens will engage in homosexual or bisexual behavior before they leave high school, and more will surely do so when it's treated with "respect" at their public school. How can responsible educators particularly those who are Christians in any way encourage or enable practices that are verifiably dangerous? For example, according to Dr. Jeffery Satinover, in testimony before the Massachusetts Senate Judiciary Committee in 2003:
I contacted my friend, E. Ray Moore, director of Exodus Mandate for an opinion. Here's his reaction to the agreement:
Moore points out the track record of GLSEN. I've spent a lot of time reviewing books and curricula GLSEN recommends to students and teachers. The assumptions, ideas, and behaviors the group supports are, by and large, appalling. Based on the information I have, when I even hear this group's name, my first instinct as a mother, a Christian and a former teacher, is to say, "Run in the opposite direction as fast as you can." Never in a million years should any concerned groups of parents, educators and certainly not Christians sit down trustfully at a table to make an agreement with them. The likelihood of GLSEN honoring such an agreement is slim and none. This is group that helped organize the infamous "Fistgate" workshops in Massachusetts several years ago, that taught students from area homosexual clubs as young as 14 the life-threatening practice of anal "fisting." GLSEN has pledged to establish "gay" clubs in every U.S. school, even at the grade-school level, and has already led a nationwide effort that has resulted in 3,000 such clubs being started in middle and high schools. Their book and curricular recommendations present the following in a positive light:
Anyone who wants to check this out should go to GLSEN's Book Link-curricular selections on its website, and get some of the books and start reading. A tremendous amount of compromise on the part of Christians is revealed by the document itself, which echoes many of the current errors in homosexual advocacy by putting traditional moral views on the defensive. The document asserts the need to promptly punish bullying and name-calling. Yet administrators have always had the power to do that. This topic is GLSEN's calling card. They've promoted so-called "safe schools" programs and "anti-harassment" policies in schools by making exaggerated and misleading associations between opposition to homosexuality and bullying. Both types of policies often include acceptance of homosexual behavior as a way to "solve" the bullying issue, which is classic propaganda. We don't need to sign on to the unwarranted implication that Christians and the Christian faith are somehow to blame for unfortunate incidents of bullying. GLSEN has built an entire school week in January "No Name-Calling Week" by building up the victim status of homosexual students. The reason so many school boards have been sold on the notion of a need for "gay" clubs is by being told that homosexual students are at higher risk than other students. While no one doubts that some bullying of students who believe they are homosexual does occur, these are sad, yet isolated incidents with no uniform characteristics. They are not the fault of Christian values. Yet this agreement seems to lay any bullying that does occur at the feet of Christians. This does an incredible disservice to the millions of good-hearted and peaceful Christian kids and families out there. The vast, vast majority are neighborly, civil people who would never physically or even verbally harass someone, even when they differ with them strongly. But by highlighting this issue for special prominence, it seems to imply once again that Christians provoke violence. This same dishonest manipulation is being used by homosexual advocacy groups to push "hate crimes" laws through our legislatures and Congress, based on false information and the trend toward the criminalization of Christianity. How could these Christian educators be so gullible as to lend another building block to reinforce this false impression? Do they realize how this puts Christian kids in our schools in a continually defensive posture when it comes to standing firmly for Christian sexual morality and even sharing their faith and expressing their views? The "silence" in many school climates is the absence of Christian views our children are too intimidated already by the overwhelming hostility. The agreement recommends that school officials not "discriminate against student clubs." This essentially gives a green light to "gay-straight alliances." Not only is the accommodation by a Christian group on this point appalling, but it ties the hands of what Christian parents and educators ought to be doing fighting the existence of these clubs every step of the way. Their very existence on a school campus says to every student that homosexuality is a credible option. Homosexual clubs also undermine the truth of the Gospel. When adults who claim to be Christians stand by and allow these clubs without protest, this silence communicates one more time to kids that maybe Scripture isn't entirely correct in calling homosexuality an "abomination." No wonder Christian kids are falling away from the faith. Not only should parents, teachers and other students reserve the right to object to such clubs, they have a spiritual obligation to do so. And, lest one should object that one religious view can't be forced on public schools, this behavior has been condemned by most cultures and most religions since time began. There remains plenty of agreement about this among people who hold a wide variety of beliefs. Supporting such consensus are the gruesome health statistics about homosexuality, which no responsible school official should ignore. Another provision in the agreement recommends that school districts do "not have to define family in the broader culture" in order to be fair to all parents. This must please GLSEN greatly, because its recommended books like "My Two Uncles," ""Molly's Family," "Who's in a Family?" and "Daddy's Roommate" can now be available to small children without Christian objections. Among the tips for parents in this agreement are to refrain from jumping to conclusions; to take complaints directly to school officials; and to refrain from lawsuits and informing the media. While it's always advisable for parents to meet with teachers and administrators on any concerns, parents often have little recourse when the school greets their concerns with suspicion or dismissal, or will not give them the information they ask for, or refuses to change objectionable curricula, book selections or policies. The resources available to all citizens in a democratic society should still remain at the disposal of Christian parents, including enlisting the aid of the court system, and if necessary, alerting the media.
One phrase in this agreement is particularly troubling. It says, "... it is important to reaffirm that public schools belong to all Americans. The role of school officials, therefore, is to be fair, honest brokers of a dialogue that ... seeks the common good." Yet consider what such a "common good" will involve. We would not sit down at the table with those advocating the benefits of anorexia, child abuse or binge drinking as alternate "viewpoints." Why is any school official sitting down with GLSEN, advocates of child homosexuality and gender change? And why are Christians agreeing to refrain from warning children about a behavior our faith teaches is wrong? But these Christians have done just that, and in so doing, are literally abandoning the welfare of all students in public schools. Because of such poisonous nonsense, I have come to the conclusion that Christians who are at all able to do so should remove their children from public schools and that committed Christian educators should teach elsewhere. There's almost no way to ensure an education that even remotely resembles truth, in an atmosphere of such compromised leadership and moral confusion.
|
I have a better idea. Get mental help for these confused kids and they will then behave normally and not have to worry about "abuse and ridicule".
It bothers me how so many people are making this a "Christian" issue. Educating people about the truth of Homosexuality, that it is dangerouse for men and yes that people can change... is neither Christian nor non-Christian. It's the truth plain and simple. When we catagorise actual facts as "Christian" they lose credential because they're used to support a spiritual agenda rather than the general betterment of society.
I agree. As long as it is framed as the Christian view (and the legitimate Christian view is to call sin what it is, proclaim that God condemns it, and call the sinner to repentance) we will be denounced for proselytizing. But the issue can stand up outside of that context. Clearly it is an abnormal desire.
As George Washington said, a good moral character is the first essential in a man. He should seek to not only be learned, but virtuous. If we can no longer agree on something as basic as the obvious abnormal act of homosexuality, then no view at all should be taugh. Just teach the kids to read, write and do their math without ridiculous commentary on these contentious subjects. That means "don't hit" means just that. No further explanation about homsexuals should be given.
The teaching of any type of sexuality certainly does not belong in the elementary school. Health classes in junior high should take care of the birds and the bees if the parents haven't already had this type of talk. Informing as to sexual practices should not be the bailiwick of teachers. They are far too biased toward the peripheral rather than the norm. Whatever happens, we should protect young children from indoctrination by the politically correct.
I really question whether the schools are even qualified to speak about the birds and bees any longer. The schools have become a marketplace for fringe groups to sell their wares. Each of these pro-gay or even ex-gay videos, books and other materials has a price tag. When you go to the websites that peddle this material you will see what I am talking about. Someone is making a lot of money off this nonsense. And I would guess a chunk of the profits gets used to fund the activism, which promotes the materials, which funds the activism....and some gets back to the politicians who promote the policies that use the materials, that fund the activism....etc.
There are approximately 27,000 high schools in the United States (public and private). I would guess just as many middle schools and twice the number of elementary schools. So for the sake of argument, let's say we are talking about approximately 100,000 public schools. Sell one $20 video to each school and you gross $2,000,000. Sell a $10 book and you get a quick mil. Some schools buy more copies and some none, and while some of the materials cost signifcantly more, none probably cost less. So this is just rounding for the sake of argument. There's a lot of money in this propaganda business.
To call into question the motives or purpose of an organization who made the video is worse than silly. What, should the video be distributed free of charge?
One if you want it!
Yes. It should be distributed at the makers cost or not distributed at all. That goes for all sides. If you want free speech fine. Let it be free. But don't make me pay for your nonsense.
You can say it is silly to question this if you like. I just want the facts. Who is making money off of this and exactly how much. I want the answer from all sides of this so-called agreement.
Why don't you email Dr. Throckmorton and ask him?
I do not have his e-mail address, and since this article is posted at Townhall.com, I think it is plenty public enough to deserve this public scrutiny. Besides, he is not the only one who needs to answer the question. How much does GLSEN make off of the public schools? Our side has only just begun to get a piece of this action. I want to know exactly who is profiting off of this stuff, and how much.
Throckmorton is always good reading...
Are history texts free?
Honestly, you're conflating two issues here. One is whether anyone should make money selling to the education system. I don't think anyone's going to turn out Prentice Hall anytime soon, or forbid McGraw-Hill to do business with the State of Texas because they're for-profit.
Related to the charge of making a profit is your imputation of greed, i.e. of outsize or disproportionate profits, and also of dishonesty of some kind.
You need to separate out the issues when you limn what you're complaining about.
And for what it's worth, I don't think it's profiteering if groups that produce classroom materials try to recover their cost, if the material is accepted as course materials and appropriated for by the school board or its agents.
If someone just brings a PowerPoint show with him, that would be different, but you're in a gray area, and I don't think it helps to jump on someone who basically agrees with you that homosexuality is a Bad Thing per se.
There are gradations of disagreement. A disagreement over the appropriateness of cost recovery isn't as big a deal as disagreement over whether GLSEN's adult homosexuals should be in schools, laying out their laundry for impressionable teenaged students who are not yet equipped to deal with determined, Delphi-trained advocates on these topics.
Ping to my last.
That's a fair question, and I think there's a website where you can run down who supports what. It was my impression that NGO's like GLSEN and its parents get their money from foundation grants mostly, and from contributions by gays.
The amount of liberal-controlled foundation money is like the Mississippi River, comparable to the budgets of civilized governments -- it's huge. I stumbled across the budget of a liberal foundation out West that I'd never heard of before and began reading what they were paying out and to whom (unilateral disarmament seemed to be their "thing," that and spreading negative PR for companies that worked on weapons programs), and I was amazed and appalled. These guys had their hands on real money and were handing it out like quarters in a videogame arcade to Left NGO's.
And they complain about Richard Mellon Scaife.
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.