If your child came home and told you his teacher was promoting religion and told them to not tell your parents about it

[PotimusWillie]

Would it concern you?

Why?

Let’s break this down.

Religions exist. There is no denying the “religions” have been a major part of the fabric of mankind since we were created. The specifics of particular religions notwithstanding, “religions” exist.

So why should we have a problem with teachers advising our children on a topic we don’t agree with? And why would we have a problem doing it without parental notice?

Not talking about a state religion or a specific religion, just religion in general. Creator, rules for salvation, daily accepted behavior and how we are to interact with others.

Of course, the term “religion” could mean anything. Much like gender fluidity discussions with our children by teachers who aren’t trained in sexual studies, but have an opinion. And that opinion could vary.

So why would it be OK for a teacher to speak to my child about their personal opinion on sexual behavior, yet not on religion?

It’s no on both accounts for me, with this caveat. A parent can choose a religious school and enroll their child, but has no control over the opinion of a teacher in a public school who speaks to my child. Where are the standards?

Teach math, science, English and history. Leave virtue signaling to parents. The child is legally their responsibility, not the schools, teacher, state, or Fed.

 

[Dawg 'n IT]

Would it concern you?

Why?

Let’s break this down.

Religions exist. There is no denying the “religions” have been a major part of the fabric of mankind since we were created. The specifics of particular religions notwithstanding, “religions” exist.

So why should we have a problem with teachers advising our children on a topic we don’t agree with? And why would we have a problem doing it without parental notice?

Not talking about a state religion or a specific religion, just religion in general. Creator, rules for salvation, daily accepted behavior and how we are to interact with others.

Of course, the term “religion” could mean anything. Much like gender fluidity discussions with our children by teachers who aren’t trained in sexual studies, but have an opinion. And that opinion could vary.

So why would it be OK for a teacher to speak to my child about their personal opinion on sexual behavior, yet not on religion?

It’s no on both accounts for me, with this caveat. A parent can choose a religious school and enroll their child, but has no control over the opinion of a teacher in a public school who speaks to my child. Where are the standards?

Teach math, science, English and history. Leave virtue signaling to parents. The child is legally their responsibility, not the schools, teacher, state, or Fed.

Religion was in my public schooling from almost the beginning including I believe my 2nd grade teacher reading a bible verse to the class before lunch each day. Right or wrong based on policy, I don't recall her mentioning any religion other than Christianity and don't recall her making any comments about any group of people. She strictly stuck to the idea that children should be taught right from wrong so it was never heavy outside of reading the verse or the day then her basically telling us to be thankful and good people.

I took a religious studies elective at some point during my undergrad which mainly focused on comparing the 3 major Abrahamic religions while giving passing mention to others.

Religion is a significant part of human history so in that context it should absolutely be taught in public schools in a historical context, not preachy.

That said, no teacher should ever tell students to not tell their parents about what's being taught or discussed at school. Teachers should follow the rules, especially if they expect students to do the same. So promoting religion is a no-no.

 

[shonuff253]

Would it concern you?

Why?

Let’s break this down.

Religions exist. There is no denying that “religions” have been a major part of the fabric of mankind since we were created. The specifics of particular religions notwithstanding, “religions” exist.

So why should we have a problem with teachers advising our children on a topic we don’t agree with? And why would we have a problem doing it without parental notice?

Not talking about a state religion or a specific religion, just religion in general. Creator, rules for salvation, daily accepted behavior, and how we are to interact with others.

Of course, the term “religion” could mean anything. Much like gender fluidity discussions with our children by teachers who aren’t trained in sexual studies, but have an opinion. And that opinion could vary.

So why would it be OK for a teacher to speak to my child about their personal opinion on sexual behavior, yet not on religion?

It’s no on both accounts for me, with this caveat. A parent can choose a religious school and enroll their child but has no control over the opinion of a teacher in a public school who speaks to their child. Where are the standards?

Teach math, science, English, and history. Leave virtue signaling to parents. The child is legally their responsibility, not the schools, teacher, state, or Fed.

I have over a dozen family and friends who have been or are currently in the classroom teaching and none of them want to get involved with personal issues such as these. Teachers would much rather stick to their lesson plans and let parents parent. The issue is the last part, let parents parent. I see way more adults with kids who would rather be their child's friend than their parents. If parents had a strong relationship with their children kids wouldn't feel the need to have these discussion with anyone other than their parents.

 

[New Coach HC]

The thing that bothers me the most in your hypothetical is the "don't tell your parents" part.

 

[ugaboz]

libs will have an excuse

 

[PotimusWillie]

I have over a dozen family and friends who have been or are currently in the classroom teaching and none of them want to get involved with personal issues such as these. Teachers would much rather stick to their lesson plans and let parents parent. The issue is the last part, let parents parent. I see way more adults with kids who would rather be their child's friend than their parents. If parents had a strong relationship with their children kids wouldn't feel the need to have these discussion with anyone other than their parents.

At no point is a stranger, who has not been vetted in their beliefs, be left to teach students their beliefs. Math equation formulas to discuss or the significance of the Battle of Midway yes, but sexual norms, no.

I have an idea. Spend tax dollars on encouraging parents to be married and a part of their children’s lives.

Or spend the tax dollars in pushing trans acceptance.

I do appreciate those teachers who want to stay away from it. How about when the school system forces it because the unions and federal funding mandate it.

 

[Bells76]

Here’s what I think about it.

 

[kckd]

Would it concern you?

Why?

Let’s break this down.

Religions exist. There is no denying the “religions” have been a major part of the fabric of mankind since we were created. The specifics of particular religions notwithstanding, “religions” exist.

So why should we have a problem with teachers advising our children on a topic we don’t agree with? And why would we have a problem doing it without parental notice?

Not talking about a state religion or a specific religion, just religion in general. Creator, rules for salvation, daily accepted behavior and how we are to interact with others.

Of course, the term “religion” could mean anything. Much like gender fluidity discussions with our children by teachers who aren’t trained in sexual studies, but have an opinion. And that opinion could vary.

So why would it be OK for a teacher to speak to my child about their personal opinion on sexual behavior, yet not on religion?

It’s no on both accounts for me, with this caveat. A parent can choose a religious school and enroll their child, but has no control over the opinion of a teacher in a public school who speaks to my child. Where are the standards?

Teach math, science, English and history. Leave virtue signaling to parents. The child is legally their responsibility, not the schools, teacher, state, or Fed.

Sexual behavior is something that can be studied scientifically.
You're very vague on this, so I don't know exactly what you mean by teaching sexual behavior. You can teach religion also without proselytizing. Just lay out what the major world religions believe. This is different than actually praying in class and telling your students to bow their heads and pray with you.

 

[PotimusWillie]

Sexual behavior is something that can be studied scientifically.
You're very vague on this, so I don't know exactly what you mean by teaching sexual behavior. You can teach religion also without proselytizing. Just lay out what the major world religions believe. This is different than actually praying in class and telling your students to bow their heads and pray with you.

My point. Should an unvetted teacher, a stranger to your family, a person who has no liability in your child’s life, speaking only from personal sexual preference, be permitted to explain verbally and provide books that advise on sexual positions, acts, and preference regarding choice of genders?

And at what level do you, as a parent, have control over that narrative?

My children are not lab rats and should not be subjected to “scientific theory” that we realize years later was a mistake.

Many teachers are proselytizing their sexual beliefs on our children and being applauded for it.

Proselytizing comes in many shapes and sizes. Seems as long as God isn’t involved, it is encouraged.

 

[kckd]

My point. Should an unvetted teacher, a stranger to your family, a person who has no liability in your child’s life, speaking only from personal sexual preference, be permitted to explain verbally and provide books that advise on sexual positions, acts, and preference regarding choice of genders?

And at what level do you, as a parent, have control over that narrative?

My children are not lab rats and should not be subjected to “scientific theory” that we realize years later was a mistake.

Many teachers are proselytizing their sexual beliefs on our children and being applauded for it.

Proselytizing comes in many shapes and sizes. Seems as long as God isn’t involved, it is encouraged.

From what you've posted on here, I'd say make the sacrifices you need to make and send your kids to a private school. You'll be happier and you'll only be complaining then because you just want to.

 

[PotimusWillie]

From what you've posted on here, I'd say make the sacrifices you need to make and send your kids to a private school. You'll be happier and you'll only be complaining then because you just want to.

I spoke in generalizations, you make it a personal attack. I assume I am narrow minded because we don’t agree? Is that it?

Is that the script? Insult the person your are discussing a topic with instead of discussing the topic? Is that to diminish and shut down my opinion?

Why would a private school be better? And why would I be happier? Are public schools the only schools promoting gender fluidity to young children? Then yes, private school it is. My children did graduate from private schools, so I guess we chose correctly.

You owe me an apology. From there, we can be BFF and maybe agree on a few issues down the road. And that is the beauty, we can be friends and disagree.

 

[kckd]

I spoke in generalizations, you make it a personal attack. I assume I am narrow minded because we don’t agree? Is that it?

Is that the script? Insult the person your are discussing a topic with instead of discussing the topic? Is that to diminish and shut down my opinion?

Why would a private school be better? And why would I be happier? Are public schools the only schools promoting gender fluidity to young children? Then yes, private school it is. My children did graduate from private schools, so I guess we chose correctly.

You owe me an apology. From there, we can be BFF and maybe agree on a few issues down the road. And that is the beauty, we can be friends and disagree.

A personal attack? All I said was put your kids in private school. Have friends who have your same views. They did it and I don't think they have any regrets. Sorry, bro.
A private school would be better because depending on the one you choose, you wouldn't have to worry about this stuff.
I'm sorry I recommended you send your kids to private school. Didn't know that would be a touchy subject.

 

[PotimusWillie]

A personal attack? All I said was put your kids in private school. Have friends who have your same views. They did it and I don't think they have any regrets. Sorry, bro.
A private school would be better because depending on the one you choose, you wouldn't have to worry about this stuff.
I'm sorry I recommended you send your kids to private school. Didn't know that would be a touchy subject.

Having to hide your children in a private school to bypass ideology that has not been determined to be factual AND that flys in the face of religious beliefs of over half our citizens is criminal.

Because a group wants something so bad to be true doesn’t make it true and we shouldn’t have to even discuss it as an issue in our schools. Teach basic life needs such as math, science, history and English…….along with other languages.

School should be teaching those skills.

That was my point. Sorry it got sideways. I just think we are making life so much more complicated for our children. Adults push motives and agenda, right and left. Children left to be children would just all get along.

Good day to you kckd.

 

[poochpup]

I have over a dozen family and friends who have been or are currently in the classroom teaching and none of them want to get involved with personal issues such as these. Teachers would much rather stick to their lesson plans and let parents parent. The issue is the last part, let parents parent. I see way more adults with kids who would rather be their child's friend than their parents. If parents had a strong relationship with their children kids wouldn't feel the need to have these discussion with anyone other than their parents.

there are times you make sense. this is one of those times. ))

 

[PotimusWillie]

Religion was in my public schooling from almost the beginning including I believe my 2nd grade teacher reading a bible verse to the class before lunch each day. Right or wrong based on policy, I don't recall her mentioning any religion other than Christianity and don't recall her making any comments about any group of people. She strictly stuck to the idea that children should be taught right from wrong so it was never heavy outside of reading the verse or the day then her basically telling us to be thankful and good people.

I took a religious studies elective at some point during my undergrad which mainly focused on comparing the 3 major Abrahamic religions while giving passing mention to others.

Religion is a significant part of human history so in that context it should absolutely be taught in public schools in a historical context, not preachy.

That said, no teacher should ever tell students to not tell their parents about what's being taught or discussed at school. Teachers should follow the rules, especially if they expect students to do the same. So promoting religion is a no-no.

We agree in much there.

 

[cherrydawg]

From what you've posted on here, I'd say make the sacrifices you need to make and send your kids to a private school. You'll be happier and you'll only be complaining then because you just want to.

Typical lib mantra. We will take your tax dollars and do our best to turn your children into America hating perverts or you can spend the money and send your kids to private school.

I have a better idea. All you libs that want your kids sexualized by someone else take your kids to a private school where drag shows and live homo sex shows and genital mutilation are the norm. They can major in gender studies. For a lib that could take the remainder of their life since there are an unlimited number per those brainiacs.

All the so called “enlightened” libs are nuts.

 

[kckd]

Having to hide your children in a private school to bypass ideology that has not been determined to be factual AND that flys in the face of religious beliefs of over half our citizens is criminal.

Because a group wants something so bad to be true doesn’t make it true and we shouldn’t have to even discuss it as an issue in our schools. Teach basic life needs such as math, science, history and English…….along with other languages.

School should be teaching those skills.

That was my point. Sorry it got sideways. I just think we are making life so much more complicated for our children. Adults push motives and agenda, right and left. Children left to be children would just all get along.

Good day to you kckd.

I don't disagree with you on some of this stuff. I'm concerned that we're making kids who are tomboys or more effeminate males think they are something they are not. I read an article on this the other day where an elementary school teacher in Illinois was saying he has two to three kids per class whose gender doesn't fit their sex. I don't believe him. That does not track with the amount of people who say they have this as adults.
I try not to listen to conservative/fundamentalist Christians on this topic (transgender/gender dysphoria) because I don't think I'm gonna get a straight answer. They start with "this is wrong" and then try to find the evidence to back it up. Likewise, I don't care to listen to an ultra liberal on this either.
Found the people who make the most sense to me are Dr. Debra Soh and Debbie Hayton. I don't agree with them on everything they say, but they do (especially Soh) back up their research with real data and they don't seem to have any hate for LGBTQ+ people. Hayton is trans.

Typical lib mantra. We will take your tax dollars and do our best to turn your children into America hating perverts or you can spend the money and send your kids to private school.

I have a better idea. All you libs that want your kids sexualized by someone else take your kids to a private school where drag shows and live homo sex shows and genital mutilation are the norm. They can major in gender studies. For a lib that could take the remainder of their life since there are an unlimited number per those brainiacs.

All the so called “enlightened” libs are nothing but sexually depraved pedophile nit wits.

Hi, Cherry. How are you today?

 

[cherrydawg]

I don't disagree with you on some of this stuff. I'm concerned that we're making kids who are tomboys or more effeminate males think they are something they are not. I read an article on this the other day where an elementary school teacher in Illinois was saying he has two to three kids per class whose gender doesn't fit their sex. I don't believe him. That does not track with the amount of people who say they have this as adults.
I try not to listen to conservative/fundamentalist Christians on this topic (transgender/gender dysphoria) because I don't think I'm gonna get a straight answer. They start with "this is wrong" and then try to find the evidence to back it up. Likewise, I don't care to listen to an ultra liberals on this either.
Found the people who make the most sense to me are Dr. Debra Soh and Debbie Hayton. I don't agree with them on everything they say, but they do (especially Soh) back up their research with real data and they don't seem to have any hate for LGBTQ+ people. Hayton is trans.

Hi, Cherry. How are you today?

I’m great other than having to point out how crazy libs are. Trans have mental illness they need treatment. Plain and simple. Treatment for mental illness. Not mutilation.

So you are another person that thinks there is no God or at a minimum man is smarter than God? Is that what we are supposed to take from your statement above that you will take the advise of a mentally ill person but try not to listen to a Christen?

 

[kckd]

I’m great other than having to point out how crazy libs are. Trans have mental illness they need treatment. Plain and simple. Treatment for mental illness. Not mutilation.

So you are another person that thinks there is no God or at a minimum man is smarter than God? Is that what we are supposed to take from your statement above that you will take the advise of a mentally ill person but try not to listen to a Christen?

How's your family? Did you have a good Fourth?

 

[cherrydawg]

How's your family? Did you have a good Fourth?

My family is outstanding. I see you ignored my questions to you. Not surprisingly. Were you part of this poll?

https://www.axios.com/2023/07/03/americans-down-on-god-family-country-patriotism-polling

 

[PotimusWillie]

I don't disagree with you on some of this stuff. I'm concerned that we're making kids who are tomboys or more effeminate males think they are something they are not. I read an article on this the other day where an elementary school teacher in Illinois was saying he has two to three kids per class whose gender doesn't fit their sex. I don't believe him. That does not track with the amount of people who say they have this as adults.
I try not to listen to conservative/fundamentalist Christians on this topic (transgender/gender dysphoria) because I don't think I'm gonna get a straight answer. They start with "this is wrong" and then try to find the evidence to back it up. Likewise, I don't care to listen to an ultra liberal on this either.
Found the people who make the most sense to me are Dr. Debra Soh and Debbie Hayton. I don't agree with them on everything they say, but they do (especially Soh) back up their research with real data and they don't seem to have any hate for LGBTQ+ people. Hayton is trans.

Hi, Cherry. How are you today?

From my perspective as a Christian and a man who believes that our existence is not by chance, some random act of nothing that became something, I just want to clarify my base point in this conversation.

And I say it only to be fair so there is no miscommunication.

I do think it is wrong and is Biblically stated as wrong. I don’t believe I had to search for evidence as it is clearly stated in God’s Word. The creation of man and woman and their roles in marriage and procreation are clear. As creator of the universe, He had a plan for His creation.

So there, my view. What is interesting is that for all those who position the Bible as just a bunch of rules, God gave us free will. We aren’t goldfish in a bowl.

The creator of the universe gave His creation free will. He desired to be worshipped by His creation, but didn’t demand worship from His creation. He gave us choice. And I find that amazing.

Now, with choice comes consequence. And that is the rub. We can play the game anyway we want, but we will be accountable to God for our actions. We can’t tell God what he meant or how we are going to do it.

Just wanted to be clear on my base in this. Any perversion of a child is an abomination. That is God’s Word. So I hold to that.

I don’t hate those who flip off God, but I hate they flip God off. I hate the decisions of man that conflict with God’s creation and His desire for us. We all sin in some form or the other. But a man or woman of God has a repentive heart towards the sin, not a defiant heart promoting the sin as normal.

Moving from that, why do we feel, all of a sudden it seems, even in a purely secular view, that surgical mutilation of our bodies, and especially the mutilation of children is even a wholesome thing to do? Or even a natural thing to do? This whole issue is more spiritual than physical, mental, or emotional.

Again, it seems to directly flip God off. The question is why, and what drives that?

Sorry for being long winded. But didn’t want to hide or mislead.

Yep, I am one that just says it’s wrong.

Thanks!

 

[kckd]

My family is outstanding. I see you ignored my questions to you. Not surprisingly. Were you part of this poll?

https://www.axios.com/2023/07/03/americans-down-on-god-family-country-patriotism-polling

Did you set off any firecrackers? Eat barbecue? Anything special?

 

[doerunn]

I’m great other than having to point out how crazy libs are. Trans have mental illness they need treatment. Plain and simple. Treatment for mental illness. Not mutilation.

So you are another person that thinks there is no God or at a minimum man is smarter than God? Is that what we are supposed to take from your statement above that you will take the advise of a mentally ill person but try not to listen to a Christen?

Trans have mental illness they need treatment. Plain and simple. Treatment for mental illness. Not mutilation.​

Report: Alleged Philadelphia Gunman a Cross-Dresser, BLM Supporter!!!​

 

[doerunn]

Would it concern you?

Why?

Let’s break this down.

Religions exist. There is no denying the “religions” have been a major part of the fabric of mankind since we were created. The specifics of particular religions notwithstanding, “religions” exist.

So why should we have a problem with teachers advising our children on a topic we don’t agree with? And why would we have a problem doing it without parental notice?

Not talking about a state religion or a specific religion, just religion in general. Creator, rules for salvation, daily accepted behavior and how we are to interact with others.

Of course, the term “religion” could mean anything. Much like gender fluidity discussions with our children by teachers who aren’t trained in sexual studies, but have an opinion. And that opinion could vary.

So why would it be OK for a teacher to speak to my child about their personal opinion on sexual behavior, yet not on religion?

It’s no on both accounts for me, with this caveat. A parent can choose a religious school and enroll their child, but has no control over the opinion of a teacher in a public school who speaks to my child. Where are the standards?

Teach math, science, English and history. Leave virtue signaling to parents. The child is legally their responsibility, not the schools, teacher, state, or Fed.

Now lets have the NRA come in and teach them how to shoot a gun. The Left would go crazy...

 

[PotimusWillie]

Now lets have the NRA come in and teach them how to shoot a gun. The Left would go crazy...

They should teach gun safety.

And teach if you kill another person with malice 1) it is wrong, 2) you will be hung within 72 hours

 

[rjpdawg11]

Sorry but religion has no place in the school system. Parents should teach religion by way of action and also take their children to a church of their choosing for religious teachings.

 

[PotimusWillie]

Sorry but religion has no place in the school system. Parents should teach religion by way of action and also take their children to a church of their choosing for religious teachings.

Is that Old or New Testament philosophy?

Just digging a little, but what exactly has a place in the school system?

 

[ugaboz]

Sorry but religion has no place in the school system. Parents should teach religion by way of action and also take their children to a church of their choosing for religious teachings.

same with trans and pro nouns I agree

 

[MCinATL]

From what you've posted on here, I'd say make the sacrifices you need to make and send your kids to a private school. You'll be happier and you'll only be complaining then because you just want to.

A few honest questions for you:

why Should someone be subject to a “sacrificed” solution (your words) if they believe in the parents right of determination for their children?

accepting your premise as to that being the answer - what Do you believe about parents right to choose a school for their children: private or public, Without having to physically relocate??

finally: accepting your premise: if a parent chooses private school, what is the government’s responsibility to ensure that these citizens “sacrifices” are mitigated because of their choice? Specifically, do you support parents of private schooled children being exempt from all taxes that directly or indirectly fund public education?

 

[kckd]

A few honest questions for you:

why Should someone be subject to a “sacrificed” solution (your words) if they believe in the parents right of determination for their children?

accepting your premise as to that being the answer - what Do you believe about parents right to choose a school for their children: private or public, Without having to physically relocate??

finally: accepting your premise: if a parent chooses private school, what is the government’s responsibility to ensure that these citizens “sacrifices” are mitigated because of their choice? Specifically, do you support parents of private schooled children being exempt from all taxes that directly or indirectly fund public education?

State decides what goes into education. He's welcome to lead the charge to fight it in the courts and through politicians, but the state will make that decision until it's changed or a court says it's unconstitutional in a public school. Them's the rules.
As far as private schools, don't think they should have to relocate. That's weird.
As far as public schools, probably should have to relocate. State's providing the school for that area. You live in that area, go to that school.
No. Public education is a good thing. Everyone pays for it. If they have children or they don't have children. If they use it or not. If their children have graduated or not. If they have 11 children using it or just one. Do you only pay taxes for the making or upkeep of interstates, roads and highways you actually use?

 

[PotimusWillie]

State decides what goes into education. He's welcome to lead the charge to fight it in the courts and through politicians, but the state will make that decision until it's changed or a court says it's unconstitutional in a public school. Them's the rules.
As far as private schools, don't think they should have to relocate. That's weird.
As far as public schools, probably should have to relocate. State's providing the school for that area. You live in that area, go to that school.
No. Public education is a good thing. Everyone pays for it. If they have children or they don't have children. If they use it or not. If their children have graduated or not. If they have 11 children using it or just one. Do you only pay taxes for the making or upkeep of interstates, roads and highways you actually use?

Fair. But the citizens own the money and the decisions what is taught. That is a constitutionally protected right.

The citizen controls the gov through representation. That is why state sovereignty is so important. The constitution provides the rules, not the Fed.

In a state, local representation must have the authority to set educational standards in what is taught and parents should have a choice. Teachers unions become a threat to representation of the citizen. That is wrong.

We home schooled for 13 years and paid school taxes the entire time that we got no personal benefit from.

We opted to go on one income and struggle financially. Our choice.

Public education in theory is great. In practice, it bastardizes my legal right to my children. I am not a fan. It is poorly run, inefficient, and becomes a tool of the government. All in the name of virtue as our children become more ignorant in the area of life skills.

If the parent cannot set the standard for their children, who is qualified to do that? Standards are easily concocted when no liability exists.

If parents were given a choice and schools had to earn their business, many schools would close.

 

[kckd]

Fair. But the citizens own the money and the decisions what is taught. That is a constitutionally protected right.

The citizen controls the gov through representation. That is why state sovereignty is so important. The constitution provides the rules, not the Fed.

In a state, local representation must have the authority to set educational standards in what is taught and parents should have a choice. Teachers unions become a threat to representation of the citizen. That is wrong.

We home schooled for 13 years and paid school taxes the entire time that we got no personal benefit from.

We opted to go on one income and struggle financially. Our choice.

Public education in theory is great. In practice, it bastardizes my legal right to my children. I am not a fan. It is poorly run, inefficient, and becomes a tool of the government. All in the name of virtue as our children become more ignorant in the area of life skills.

If the parent cannot set the standard for their children, who is qualified to do that? Standards are easily concocted when no liability exists.

If parents were given a choice and schools had to earn their business, many schools would close.

The citizens can elect politicians who see eye to eye with them. If they elect enough of them, then they can change it. Most of the stuff you mention here is your opinion about how things should work. The way to change that is through your representation in government.
Public education has shown to be a great advancement for society historically. If it were not so, it would not have been copied almost worldwide. There is not an advanced country anywhere that doesn't have it. And now, most of the third world does as well.
Parents can set the standard for their kids. Evolution was taught in my school. Creation was not taught. My parents did not believe in evolution. I personally don't find them mutually exclusive.
If you are a good parent, you will more than likely have more influence on your child than anything else in their life by a wide margin.

My parents and I don't agree on a lot of things, but they raised me well. We have a great relationship. If I need to talk to someone, they are usually my first call. Sometimes we worry too much.

 

[poorpreacher]

If a teacher was promoting just about any serious idea and telling my child, "Don't tell your parents", I would be concerned. Very slippery slope, in my opinion.

 

[MCinATL]

State decides what goes into education. He's welcome to lead the charge to fight it in the courts and through politicians, but the state will make that decision until it's changed or a court says it's unconstitutional in a public school. Them's the rules.
As far as private schools, don't think they should have to relocate. That's weird.
As far as public schools, probably should have to relocate. State's providing the school for that area. You live in that area, go to that school.
No. Public education is a good thing. Everyone pays for it. If they have children or they don't have children. If they use it or not. If their children have graduated or not. If they have 11 children using it or just one. Do you only pay taxes for the making or upkeep of interstates, roads and highways you actually use?

Fair responses,, thank you. a couple comments:

• Your last statement is not entirely accurate, nor your example.
  • Many counties and states do allow a tax abatement for citizens over X years of age, without school age children. Forsyth County, Metro Atlanta, is one of them.
  • As to "road usage" tax - we in effect do pay this way now. the majority of road funds are funded via the gasoline tax. while not specific to particular roads, and not really taking into account fuel economy (or more recently EV's), the gas tax is a pro-rata way of paying for what you use. one of the initial arguments against EV's is that they essentially did not pay a road usage tax, because they weren't stopping at the pump. many states (including Georgia) addressed this via new flat rate taxes on EV's. you could actually argue that EV's are now not treated fairly, because its not pro-rata, the way a gas tax is.

• agree about relocation on private schools - I was more asking about public schools. that said:
  • our school systems in Georgia already fund this: but on the basis of race, not income, religion, or other measures. Majority-to-Minority school choice exemptions are already legal, and in some cases, transport is paid for.
  • so, the question to you: should we be consistent across diverse demographics? if its ok, based on race, should we allow it based on religious belief? or conversely, eliminate it based on race?

• correct me if I am wrong, but I THINK you came down against government subsidization of private school education (IE: a school voucher program, or a tax abatement), which kind of leaves it up to being an "economic privileged" activity (those that are able to "make the sacrifice" - as Willie described his own choices). Would you or would you not agree then, that by not allowing people to pull their education tax dollars out, that the government is actually practicing institutional discrimination and/or systemic racism - since those with the least ability to send their kids to private schools will typically be from underserved communities and/or communities of color or economic impoverishment?

 

[PotimusWillie]

The citizens can elect politicians who see eye to eye with them. If they elect enough of them, then they can change it. Most of the stuff you mention here is your opinion about how things should work. The way to change that is through your representation in government.
Public education has shown to be a great advancement for society historically. If it were not so, it would not have been copied almost worldwide. There is not an advanced country anywhere that doesn't have it. And now, most of the third world does as well.
Parents can set the standard for their kids. Evolution was taught in my school. Creation was not taught. My parents did not believe in evolution. I personally don't find them mutually exclusive.
If you are a good parent, you will more than likely have more influence on your child than anything else in their life by a wide margin.

My parents and I don't agree on a lot of things, but they raised me well. We have a great relationship. If I need to talk to someone, they are usually my first call. Sometimes we worry too much.

Fair enough. And yeah, I have an opinion.

Sounds like you were raised by great folks who were involved. Many don’t.

With you on how good public education can be. I just never felt adult human beings, who have been placed in positions of authority, would be making the decisions they are making now. So with that, public education can become a dangerous creature. Governmental Agenda cannot be placed as a cornerstone.

Good conversation. I am out of this other than reading any other comments you have. Been fun.