It's not lame. I would want kids to know about that idea, as a part of history, as a part of how ideas and approaches change, and so they at least have some idea how to shoot it down when someone attempts to assert it as truth (with those facts on how to do that coming from sciences classes).
If someone can't handle it being taught, yes, whatever their reasons, their mind and beliefs are horribly weak. Practically to the point of "sin" in my views.
The problem here is the assertion that "removal" translates as "weak" -- an erroneous position.
We wouldn't teach 11 year olds to drive a car because they aren't mature enough to handle a car. Why would I want strangers to teach my kindergarten grandchild about gender identity? Is that teaching or manipulating? Or why would I want to teach my nine year old about having sex if all they are interested in is enjoying his baseball/basketball game?
Is it because I or they are weak? No. It is because it is the right information but at the wrong time. You are giving a car, so to speak, to an eleven year old who isn't mature enough to handle it.
So your point isn't valid.
I just basically said I wouldn't have any objections to it being taught (though it would depend on the class, when I had it in a class it was philosophy, an appropriate class for the idea), and added what response would make me a proud mom, because it means they are thinking.
I have no problem with people thinking. I would assume that it wasn't a philosophy class in 4th grade. I think this is apples and oranges.
The "Religious Right" refers to a specific ideology that asserts individual religious rights and political agendas above all else (specifically from a Conservative Protestant Christian position). I was saying I oppose religion believing it has the right to pick and chose what topics and subjects are not only taught in school, but in individual subjects. They are a part of the religious right, but certainly I never implied all religious people. Indeed, such as this forum which is heavily left-leaning in member base, meaning that there are many left-wing religious members here.
I think a parent has every right. This isn't a "governmental-child-rearing" nation. Communists did and do that. When they use to teach in public schools relevant material, that was great. But they have deviated from the original purpose and that is why there is a push-back.
It remains a parental right whether you agree or not.
My objections to the general idea of "home school" is there are, last I knew, no state standards to ensure children are taught real facts about a subject (such as science), and adequately prepared for college.
.
They take ACT and SAT just like everyone else. As noted:
Homeschool vs Public School Test Scores 2014
Brian Ray looked into the test scores from differently schooled populations in 2016, using a 2014 study. He said:
The SAT 2014 test scores of college-bound homeschool students were higher than the national average of all college-bound seniors that same year. Some 13,549 homeschool seniors had the following mean scores: 567 in critical reading, 521 in mathematics, and 535 in writing (College Board, 2014a). The mean SAT scores for all college-bound seniors in 2014 were 497 in critical reading, 513 in mathematics, and 487 in writing (College Board, 2014b). The homeschool students’ SAT scores were 0.61 standard deviation higher in reading, 0.26 standard deviation higher in mathematics, and 0.42 standard deviation higher in writing than those of all college-bound seniors taking the SAT, and these are notably large differences
…the test scores of homeschool students are higher than the national average for all students. [NHERI, Ray, B, 2016]
This isn't one segment of home-schoolers but homeschoolers in general.
Again... this makes your point mute.
In my case, probably the worst example of how poor the cirriculum could be wasn't actually anything religious based, but the fact I was doing addition and subtraction with money. Which is something I learned first in kindergarten or first grade, and had it periodically enforced with new ideas (such as interest) throughout elementary school. The math I did in fifth grade, my first year of middle school and last year of public school until I went back, I was doing again at 7-8th grade. I got to high school, and algebra kicked my ***, because I had only had basic arithmetic at an elementary level and nothing resembling a pre-algebra course (I had better in elementary with "find the blank" math problems). My transition from high school to college, the second time around, was much smoother though as several years later I still remembered enough from high school to make community college rather simple.
And after the poor math standards comes a mountain of the religious-based complaints, promotion of racist and misogynist views, and teaching outright lies and fabrications to suit their very Conservative views. And, clearly there came an issue with it when it came to teaching how to use your brain logically.
Yes... yours was a poor experience.
Then again, there are thousands of people who said they had a poor experience in public schools. We just can't throw out a baby because of the dirty water.
Do we need public schools? Absolutely. Is home-schooling a great options? Certainly. Should parents still have the right to opt out of those classes that are contrary to their standards of ethics? indubitably!!! We don't want government to raise our children, we want parents to raise their children and schools to teach them, ready, writing, math, history, biology etc... not what they believe morality should be in the 21st century.
Anyway, I don't find that developing a persecution complex in regard to the matter or being perpetually outraged by my digressions with Christianity are healthy mental traits.
