Posted on 10/25/2007 5:31:26 AM PDT by Ouderkirk
Pretty good piece.
This certainly explains the behavior of my junior high principal (never mind the teachers).
Pretty much Poppycock.
Hello, Mary Winkler jury.
“Liberals are tremendously attached to the idea that we are apes, but are unwilling to face the fact that we humans still retain an awful lot of our ape programming. This is what led to the Christian concept of Original Sin and the Jewish concept that we are all born with both the urge to good and the urge to evil.”
So our ape programming is what led to the biblical concept of original sin? I stopped reading this poorly written article right there.
There was also the woman from the Michael Jackson jury who proclaimed that she didn’t like the boy’s mother’s attitude so she wasn’t going to convict Jackson.
Stopped reading at sentence 2 . . . where the writer says that our “ape programming” explains the “concept of original sin” . . . 1) Stupid idea even on its own terms (what of cultures without the concept of original sin?) 2) Rejects God and the Bible out of hand.
Stopped reading at sentence 2 . . . where the writer says that our “ape programming” explains the “concept of original sin” . . . 1) Stupid idea even on its own terms (what of non-Christian cultures without the concept of original sin?) 2) Rejects God and the Bible out of hand.
The rot started with Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
How do the Nuns that terrorized the bullies at the Catholic run orphanages and schools of my youth fit into this theory?
To this very day, when I see an angry nun, I sit or stand up straighter, nervously check my zipper to make sure it’s up, and hope my hair is neatly combed.
And sneak away as quietly as possible.
It’s rhetorically ham-handed, but not entirely stupid. The Fathers of the Church, some of whom were very literalist in their approach to Scripture, some of whom weren’t, but all of whom very much believed in God and the Scriptures, nonethless taught that the Fall made us more like brute beasts.
Chalk the article’s rhetoric up as an attempt to explain to liberals (who unaccountably insist on neo-Darwinism as their creation myth, and fancy human beings are reprogammable computers rather than animals as their creation account would suggest) the concepts inherent in “male and female he created them” and in the doctrine of the Fall by appealing to their own creation myth, and their consequences and read the article.
Like any column that is opinion there are some ideas which are at odds with reality. I think the purpose of the two sentences was to point out that if one believes Darwin, then this is the next extension of that theory.
You need to get past such simpleton thought patterns as to stop reading after a couple of lines with which you disagree.
It was an interesting piece and there are several nuggets of truth later in the column. I’m not suggesting that the writer is 100% correct in all her assertions. However, the suggestions are as valid as any other when dealing with group dynamics.
Either teachers are waging war against conservative values by attempting to eradicate natural masulinity, and that's why our schools are no good, or we are caving to brute masculinity, and that's why our schools are no good. But I do not see how it can be both.
I don’t agree with the “ape stuff”, but it does explain a lot of what I’ve seen in the classroom. Females absolutely DO behave this way in a classroom setting. I have seen it over and over.
You need to get past such simpleton thought patterns as to stop reading after a couple of lines with which you disagree.
_____________________________
Time is fleeting . . . time is valuable . . .
No kidding. I think the government school system is an abject failure and that most school teachers are incompetent liberal morons (obviously, convervative teachers are excepted). But this article hardly explains anything.
I thought female school teachers were supposed to hate boys and hold them back to spite them? Pretty sure I’ve read that one. Or get them put on ritalin. Not reward bullies.
The logic here is just nonexistent.
Um, in the old days, nuns in the West undertook serious ascetic discipline to help overcome the effects of the Fall. Not so clear since Vatican II that applies any more, though now in the liberal orders that have dispensed with the habit, a distressingly high percentage look like absent the vow of celibaby they’d have been bull dyke lesbians.
I can see how it can be both.
Little kids playing kiss-chase or (as in one famous case) flicking each other on the butt as part of a game: - this kind of behaviour has been unnaturally oppressed by PC authority figures in schools for being some kind of “sexual harassment”. The hysterical over-reaction has included the turning of six-year olds into registered sex offenders.
Whereas one kid punching another kid is the kind of behaviour which should be always prohibited and controlled in a properly run school environment, not enabled or appeased.
Agree totally.
The article is great in it’s recognition of the problem regardless of the evolutionary/creationistic cause of it.
Societal training has created this “placating response” by the teachers... and this feminization has spread to the whole of the institution (male and female instructors). This is exacerbated by the lack of parental discipline.
Our PC system has eliminated any connection between cause and effect. There is no follow-through because the student knows that even if the teacher actually finds the testicular capacity to send them to the principal’s office, and even if the principal takes some kind of action, that there will be no follow through in the community or at home.
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.