May I ask, What is wrong with the left coast???

[1480]

Originally Posted by Frederf

Your post confuses me. You said it's right to explain why certain words are not allowed fully but you are enraged by a young kid would be given the definition?

You are right and I should have broken it down some more.

Why is it even brought up in the first place? Shouldn't this be taught at home? I do not expect my child to learn that hatred is wrong from a school. That is a parents job. If a child uses a word that is inappropriate, address it then through the definition system. My thing is why take a proactive approach to a problem that should be addressed at home?

Remember these are 4-6 year olds.

Then take your kid out of public school. That is your right. Just as it is my right to tell you that the age of hard headed age of hate has ended.

Ahhh Zach....

You are right, I do not have my child in public school. Yet 65% of my property tax bill goes to public school funding. So I'm penalized for wanting my child to have a private education. One who has to show a performance level, but does not get mandated by the nanny state to take out the pledge of allegience or offer condoms in grade school. Still I have to pay twice for this silliness. BTW, where are you going with the "age of hard headed age of hate?"

[Frederf]

Originally Posted by 1480

Why is it even brought up in the first place? Shouldn't this be taught at home? I do not expect my child to learn that hatred is wrong from a school. That is a parents job. If a child uses a word that is inappropriate, address it then through the definition system. My thing is why take a proactive approach to a problem that should be addressed at home?

Remember these are 4-6 year olds.

Ahhh Zach....

You are right, I do not have my child in public school. Yet 65% of my property tax bill goes to public school funding. So I'm penalized for wanting my child to have a private education. One who has to show a performance level, but does not get mandated by the nanny state to take out the pledge of allegiance or offer condoms in grade school. Still I have to pay twice for this silliness. BTW, where are you going with the "age of hard headed age of hate?"

It's brought up in school because there's a demonstrated need for the schools to address it. You should expect a school to teach hatred is wrong especially when hatred at school becomes an obstacle for schools to perform their primary task. The reasons to take a proactive approach are obvious:

1. By preventing the issue before it happens you avoid the emotional damage that such actions bring.
2. Using a punishment-based method has negative side effects.

The idea that "it's a parent's job" is irrelevant if a parent is not doing it. It needs to get done and if the parents don't do it then the schools must. Letting the behavior go unchecked is not practical. It is not the right of a parent to let either their wayward child damage others or to let their child be damaged by undo exposure to hate at school. If at any time you thought it was, you were misinformed.

Also your taxes going toward public education is not a punishment but rather the cost that you pay to live in a society surrounded by people who have had access to education. This is the benefit for the tax money you pay whether you have any direct use of public education or not. Make no mistake, adults with no children still benefit from the public education system.

[1480]

Originally Posted by Frederf

It's brought up in school because there's a demonstrated need for the schools to address it. You should expect a school to teach hatred is wrong especially when hatred at school becomes an obstacle for schools to perform their primary task. The reasons to take a proactive approach are obvious:

1. By preventing the issue before it happens you avoid the emotional damage that such actions bring.
2. Using a punishment-based method has negative side effects.

The idea that "it's a parent's job" is irrelevant if a parent is not doing it. It needs to get done and if the parents don't do it then the schools must. Letting the behavior go unchecked is not practical. It is not the right of a parent to let either their wayward child damage others or to let their child be damaged by undo exposure to hate at school. If at any time you thought it was, you were misinformed.

Also your taxes going toward public education is not a punishment but rather the cost that you pay to live in a society surrounded by people who have had access to education. This is the benefit for the tax money you pay whether you have any direct use of public education or not. Make no mistake, adults with no children still benefit from the public education system.

You know what, maybe if parents took a more active role in their child's life and did the right thing, maybe our juvenile court system would not be overburdened. It is a sad commentary of society today that valuable time is taken out of lessons to address hatred of any kind. I don't remember at any level of my educational experience that addressed treating others with respect and dignity. My mother and father took care of that, and I thank them still to this day.

Oh yeah, the benefits of tax money for public education: metal detectors in all entrances of Chicago public high schools. Off duty police for security. For terrorist attacks, no, because the little savages were never told right and wrong from their parents. Yet you argue that its the school's responsibility to address this. Obviously, its not working out too well.

I still lay the fault with the parents. The good ones get punished while the bad ones get free child care.

And I'm not sure where childless property owners benefit from the public education system, I thank you F, for the stimulating interlocution.

[Frederf]

If you wanted to argue that parenting should be better I'd be happy to join in but we're going to need someone to take up an opposing view While I would agree that some public education dollars are not used with 100% correctness, I can't say it's all a waste.

What I meant about education dollars helping people indirectly is that funding for schools is like an investment in the human infrastructure of our society which benefits all.

Likewise been good discussing it with you. I even had to look up interlocution. Realize that my viewpoints are not as extreme as my arguments laid out but I merely take up such a one sided viewpoint when engaging in these kind of 1 v 1 debates.