What if public schools were taught by Conservatives?

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

What it boils down to is, you believe it takes a village to raise a child while many of us want to do the job ourselves.

Because some folks have abandoned their parental responsibilities, the state wants to take over as custodial parent and remove the responsibility from the responsible parents as well.

Well, it *does* take a village to raise a child! Don't believe me? Then try raising them in a world with no churches, police, government, parks, hospitals, schools, amusement parks, and all those other institutions that play some role in developing our young!

There's nothing wrong with parents having rightful control over their kids, so long as they don't do something horrible such as abusing or molesting them. But what on earth is so bad about some parents' asking for a helping hand? Are we so stubbornly individualistic as a society, that to fail at parenting is a lesser crime than to ask for help in parenting? Is it not ironically childish for someone in need of a hand to slap that hand away?

Anyway, PureX said it quite well:

The state doesn't WANT to do anything of the sort. It is, however, obliged to do it when parents neglect their obligations as parents. I can't think of a single example where the state wanted to take over parental responsibilities when the parents were fulfilling them, already.

 

[Willamena]

What if all the teachers were conservative and was instilling their conservative values in children who had Liberal parents?

I think that says it all.

 

[Scuba Pete]

I think that says it all.

It appears that Shrub has had a bigger impact than previously thought. Bwahahahahaha!

I would be FOR school vouchers should this ever occur!

 

[Reverend Rick]

Those who don't support the war in Iraq are traitors and cowards.

 

[MoonWater]

Those who don't support the war in Iraq are traitors and cowards.

:troll:

 

[Reverend Rick]

:troll:

Why am I the troll Moon Water? I am the OP. It is fine to be called a terrorist right?

 

[MoonWater]

Why am I the troll Moon Water? I am the OP. It is fine to be called a terrorist right?

How is it fine to be called a terrorist? And just because you started the thread doesn't mean you can't be a "troll". Your post is flame bait whether you meant it to be or not. First off it has nothing to do with the OP(but then little of this thread has), Second it is a highly bigotted, highly ignorant, and highly insulting statment to make especially since you clearly know nothing of the individuals who oppose the war. It's a blanket statement with nothing to back it up save your personal opinion. I could just as easily say that those who DO support the war in Iraq are Sadists and Terrorists. That doesn't mean it's true and all I would have to back up the statement is personal opinion. This is a debate forum and as a result blanket statements and stereotyping do not fly. You need to be able to back your statment up. Otherwise like I said it is just flame bait.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Did you read the post directly above mine that said anyone who supports the war in Iraq is a terrorist? That is not flame baiting? Who was baiting whom?

 

[Scuba Pete]

Your post is flame bait whether you meant it to be or not. First off it has nothing to do with the OP(but then little of this thread has), Second it is a highly bigotted, highly ignorant, and highly insulting statment to make especially since you clearly know nothing of the individuals who oppose the war.

Pssssssssssst... I'm not sure, but he seems to be upset with my sig line. He probably thinks it's part of the debate at hand! Some people just can't handle the truth.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Pssssssssssst... I'm not sure, but he seems to be upset with my sig line. He probably thinks it's part of the debate at hand! Some people just can't handle the truth.

It seems rather than propoganda is answered with propoganda.

 

[MoonWater]

Did you read the post directly above mine that said anyone who supports the war in Iraq is a terrorist? That is not flame baiting? Who was baiting whom?

What scuba pete said. That was his signature and is not part of the debate at hand. If you wish to debate whether or not those who support the war in Iraq are terrorists or whether or not those who don't support the war in iraq are traitors and cowards feel free to create a thread on the matter. But it has no bearing on this debate.

 

[anders]

What if a Liberal family had their children come home from school and say their parents needed to take more responsibility for themselves?

What if schools had assemblies that taught moral values, or better yet, gun safety?

What if all the teachers were conservative and was instilling their conservative values in children who had Liberal parents?

I quote the OP to remind you that the thread isn't restricted to USAians.

For the first sentence to be valid, the teacher(s) must have made a statement from their knowledge of all the parents' views and actions, and have thrown a judging argument to the pupils. I hope and think that would be illegal in my country, and anyway can't imagine it ever happening.

"taught moral values" sounds like one particular set were advocated as suprior. That would definitely be illegal. Critical thinking is what counts. Different valid views will be demonstrated and debated.

"What if all the teachers were conservative?" No problem. Teaching is by enforced definition politically neutral. Non-public schools advocating a political view, be it leftish or rightist or in between, will just be shut down. Religious schools may be allowed if they adhere to the national curriculum, and for example don't segregate boys and girls during recess.

"Gun safety" isn't even stupid in a school setting. In a class of some 30 pupils, statistically the one (1) kid who has a parent who has a rifle permit for hunting will know that you have to work hard and conscientiously (shooting tests, wildlife awareness, target species biology and whatever) to get that permit. The other 29 will probably never see a real life gun of any kind in their lives unless they do military service.

And that concludes, all fora combined, my 7000th post since finding 'net discussions in February 2004. (This place was my third, following one Sikh and one languages forum.)

 

[Reverend Rick]

It was never my intent to limit this thread to the U.S.A. I believe the whole world may just be dissatisfied with the caliber and integrity of their children's teachers.

Let's face it, teachers are grossly under paid and need to receive more money for their hard work. You have to ask yourself, why do some teachers teach?

Some teach to improve the world.
Some teach to give back to the world.
Some teachers are products of the Peter Principle.
Some teachers have an agenda they want to further by influencing youth.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

You know, I don't think we've properly defined the word "Liberal" yet....

 

[MoonWater]

You know, I don't think we've properly defined the word "Liberal" yet....

here you go:

Liberal

1. 1. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
   2. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
   3. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
   4. of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.

And just for the heck of it here's conservative.

Conservative

1. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
2. Traditional or restrained in style
3. Moderate; cautious
4. Of or relating to the political philosophy of conservatism.
5. Belonging to a conservative party, group, or movement.
6. One favoring traditional views and values.
7. A supporter of political conservatism.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

OK. But which, if any, of those will work here?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Let's face it, teachers are grossly under paid and need to receive more money for their hard work. You have to ask yourself, why do some teachers teach?

First, a better set of standards needs to be established before someone is allowed to be a teacher. I've had teachers who have skipped state required material, have gotten everything from homework to tests off the internet (and told us to search for answers online if they weren't in the book), I had one teacher who would frequently come to school hungover and wouldn't teach at all because she is an alcoholic, and some overall bad teachers.
If all a very high percentage of teachers actually taught there classes well, then I would see no problems with teachers being paid more.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

First, a better set of standards needs to be established before someone is allowed to be a teacher. I've had teachers who have skipped state required material, have gotten everything from homework to tests off the internet (and told us to search for answers online if they weren't in the book), I had one teacher who would frequently come to school hungover and wouldn't teach at all because she is an alcoholic, and some overall bad teachers.
If all a very high percentage of teachers actually taught there classes well, then I would see no problems with teachers being paid more.

So I wonder where all those "good teachers" are going, if our schools are indeed so infested by "bad teachers"?

 

[yossarian22]

So I wonder where all those "good teachers" are going, if our schools are indeed so infested by "bad teachers"?

Probably to better paying jobs

 

[nutshell]

What if a Liberal family had their children come home from school and say their parents needed to take more responsibility for themselves?

What if schools had assemblies that taught moral values, or better yet, gun safety?

What if all the teachers were conservative and was instilling their conservative values in children who had Liberal parents?

What if we quit painting people with a broad brush???