There have been several good discussions of whether or not it is OK to be gay or not, etc..
But the issue with the California law ‘requiring gay history in their textbooks’ is the problem.
As a parent, I want my kids to learn History. I do not care if it is white, black, brown, gay, left-handed, or right-handed. It is critical that we learn all the important lessons on the success and failures of our soceity, period. Seperating American History into Black History, Gay History, Womens’ History is fundamentally wrong and anti- American, and basically driven by various groups’ political objectives. We, as Americans are everything, good and bad. We need to learn the eternal truths and lessons that come from our past. It is not all positive, and that is why we all must learn from it, as one group-Americans.
The purpose of the subject of History in Educational programs is to make our children smarter. It is an effective method of experiential learning – that man-kind has always used to teach our youth important lessons. Teaching our youth important lessons about life (History) and the world we live in- before they become our leaders and possibly repeat a tragic mistakes from the past-.
The ‘gay’ issue has always been around, and always will be. And in our educational system, (of which I am a product) we teach lessons about history. Up until about high school, the focus is really on the basics information about our nation, society, and the world. As you progress beyond that you get into much more focused detail. The American Civil War is allotted about 2-3 weeks in a high school American History curricilum. In college, I took 4 seperate semester long classes on the subject. That is where the real details were revealed about the people, their dirty habits, and tastes.
The California bill is serving someone’s agenda to push the idea of "gay is OK" into the mainstream. And they are,in my opinion, potentially taking away from the valuable opportunity (school days) to teach our youth more important lessons about how to be successful in life. -not that "gay is OK"
By the way- I do not care if someone is gay or not, as an American Patriot, I care if our educational system is producing the best and brightest Americans it can. --Because we are in a struggle here-with external movements that will take away our our freedoms and way of life. Whether someone is gay or not is a distractor, and wastes time.
And if anyone argues with me, I will call you names!!!!
The Poeple we are missing the point, here comment is mine.
I dorked it up somehow, so please reply to me on this one. I aint no sissy who hides behind anonymity?
Just so you know, this comment would have received more than a score:2, had it not been anonymous.
Very well said. School’s purpose isn’t to teach morals, it’s to teach facts. Of course, the problem comes when people start concentrating on things like "subliminal" teaching; people worry that because a certain lifestyle or type of person isn’t portrayed in examples used in schools, that students will be subliminally "taught" that those people are different and therefore bad.
I have problems with this on a couple of levels. First, why are there no handicapped people in school stories? Why are people with Tourette’s syndrome neglected? Those with lots of tattoos and odd piercings are rare, as are strippers and prostitutes. Where are the amputees and paraplegics? How have polydactyls been forsaken? Shouldn’t our education system reflect the "reality" of all of these kinds of people?
Of course not! That’s not the point of education. Going to lengths to ensure an even distribution of all kinds and types of people is, as kyle44 said, a distraction and a waste of time.
Second, the argument that under-representation of a certain group would subconsciously cause a person to persecute is unjustified and, frankly, silly. Of course, I’m not denying the effect that the presentation of persistent and early certain-group related stimulus would have on a person. It might be able to partially counter the bias of someone who was already taught otherwise – and I think this is telling. The purpose of the intentionally placed "diverse" stimulus is not to educate, but to re-educate. In this case, the teacher feared (or knew?) that many of the children were probably taught (or going to be taught) that homosexuality was wrong. She took it upon herself not to educate the children, but to counter the moral education she thought they were getting at home. That, in my opinion, is overstepping the bounds of public schooling.
There is place for discussing moral issues in school, places like philosophy or current events classes. However, even where moral issues are the very item being studied, educators should give their all to leave morality to be taught at home.
Welcome! OmniNerd's content is generated by nerds like you. Learn more.