PDA

View Full Version : Mineapolis school takes pre-teens and teens to sex store for 'educational' trip..?



garhkal
06-03-2015, 07:44 PM
Read this on the GOP Usa site, but now am seeing it is elsewhere, but am surpised to heck it has not been on the actual TV news sites/shows.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/06/03/minneapolis-private-school-principal-takes-students-to-sex-shop/

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/minneapolis-sex-ed-teacher-takes-preteens-sex-toy-shop-article-1.2243850

http://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-private-school-takes-students-to-sex-toy-store-for-sex-education-lesson/305770831/

http://www.topix.net/forum/news/sex/TL8HC5HB18SQ44996

What i would love to know, is how this is NOT seen as something illegal.
A) iirc all school trips where students are taken off campus are required to have parental consent via permission slips.
B) adult stores are prohibited from allowing under 18s inside, even (iirc) with parental permission. And are also prohibited from selling goods TO those under age..

efmbman
06-03-2015, 09:07 PM
A small private school in Minnesota made headlines this week after its principal took some middle- and high-school students on a field trip to a sex shop.

Starri Hedges, director and sex education teacher at Gaia Democratic School in Minneapolis, ended a lesson late last week by taking a handful of students — as young as 11 — to Smitten Kitten, an adult novelty store nearby.

Oh, the irony...

Bos Mutus
06-03-2015, 09:35 PM
Oh, the irony...

I'm not sure I see the irony...




Gaia is a K-12 school with a motto promising academic freedom, youth empowerment and democratic education. Parents say the school has about 25 students, including several described by administrators as transgender. IRS records show the school, housed in a Unitarian church on Mount Curve Avenue, has an annual budget of about $100,000.


So, this school is some kind of a kooky, hippy, left-wing extremely small private school that is held at the Unitarian Church?

This is no more ironic than a Christian School taking kids to church.



While at Smitten Kitten, students sat in the front in a library section of the store, Hedges said. Everything deemed pornographic was off limits to the students, though sex toys and other products were visible, Hedges said.

The field trip offered students access to educators and products that could be used to practice safer sex, Hedges said. Some students bought condoms, she said.

Smitten Kitten, which bills itself as “a progressive sex toy store for everyone,” sells a range of toys and leather products as well as books and DVDs. The store also offers workshops, like the kind the students participated in.

...and this sounds like some kind of yuppie, peace love and orgasms sex book store...not the corner sleaze empire on Paradise Road.

Nevertheless...I wouldn't send my daughters to that teacher! She is definitely out of bounds and with or without parental permission, but the entire things is a bad idea and poor judgement...what a nut job. Glad the parents pulled their kids out.

Parents, send your kids to a real school.

garhkal
06-04-2015, 04:48 AM
Parents, send your kids to a real school.

Or home school them!

Bos Mutus
06-04-2015, 06:50 AM
Or home school them!

If you're qualified.

Absinthe Anecdote
06-04-2015, 01:41 PM
This is an excerpt from the linked Washington Post article above.

Starri Hedges, director and sex education teacher at Gaia Democratic School in Minneapolis, ended a lesson late last week by taking a handful of students — as young as 11 — to Smitten Kitten, an adult novelty store nearby. The idea angered some parents who were concerned that their children were able to see sex toys and buy condoms. But, Hedges told the Minneapolis Star Tribune, the purpose was to give the students a safe space to talk about sex.

The store has educational workshops — and the students went to one.

Their school isn't a safe space to have a sex education class?

Really? That is the only thing she could come up with to explain this?

Hedges's judgement and reasoning are seriously lacking for a school administrator. I wouldn't put her in charge of the cafeteria, much less the entire school.

While I agree that kids as young as 11 are old enough to start getting education on sex, especially from a health and biology perspective, taking them to Smitten Kitten was a horrible choice.

Even if we assume that Smitten Kitten is upscale, and not a sleazy porn shop, it still isn't age appropriate to take them there.

Rainmaker
06-04-2015, 04:38 PM
Parents, send your kids to a real school.

Agree. A solid public school liberal education with a strong emphasis in Intercultural- Multicultural, and Diversity Studies , The Freedom to experiment daily with which bathroom to use, and unlimited access to Ritalin is essential to your child's success in this completely retarded bullshit 21st century American society.

Rainmaker
06-04-2015, 05:40 PM
Or home school them!

Get your kids out of the Public schools.

https://www.johntaylorgatto.com/category/media/

garhkal
06-08-2015, 04:43 AM
If you're qualified.

What and whom determines if someone is or isn't qualified to home school your own kids?

Bos Mutus
06-08-2015, 05:35 AM
What and whom determines if someone is or isn't qualified to home school your own kids?

Im not sure who does...but I'm sure there should be some minimum standards

Mjölnir
06-08-2015, 05:44 AM
What and whom determines if someone is or isn't qualified to home school your own kids?

It varies from state to state, in California it is the state (I only know because my sister-in-law home schools her five kids and it was a topic of discussion when we visited there a couple months ago.) The basic rules:

-A school administrator has to judge the instructor to be 'competent to teach'.
-Instruction must be done in English.
-Must keep records on student progress.
-Must have health records on file.

My sister-in-law lives in Crescent City and had to do periodic updates with the local high school and had me go with her to get evaluated to be OK to talk to her kids and some from some other families about Civics etc. The process of the administrator finding me 'competent' was pretty basic; he asked me about my education & life experience. He told me if I was going to be in town longer he would ask me to talk to their civics class. Funny ... that is kind of my dream post-retirement job.

Rainmaker
06-08-2015, 02:51 PM
It varies from state to state, in California it is the state (I only know because my sister-in-law home schools her five kids and it was a topic of discussion when we visited there a couple months ago.) The basic rules:

-A school administrator has to judge the instructor to be 'competent to teach'.
-Instruction must be done in English.
-Must keep records on student progress.
-Must have health records on file.

My sister-in-law lives in Crescent City and had to do periodic updates with the local high school and had me go with her to get evaluated to be OK to talk to her kids and some from some other families about Civics etc. The process of the administrator finding me 'competent' was pretty basic; he asked me about my education & life experience. He told me if I was going to be in town longer he would ask me to talk to their civics class. Funny ... that is kind of my dream post-retirement job.

Rainmaker is shocked to learn that they actually still teach Civics in The People's Republic of Commiefornia.

garhkal
06-08-2015, 10:54 PM
Don't we already have too many 'restrictions' on what parents can/can't do when it comes to their own kids?

Bos Mutus
06-08-2015, 11:05 PM
Don't we already have too many 'restrictions' on what parents can/can't do when it comes to their own kids?

I don't know what you mean...what restrictions are you talking about?

...I'm guessing that you are arguing that some illiterate half-wit has the right to home-school their children...even if their school day involves just working the farm?

You don't think there should be standards for home schooling?

garhkal
06-09-2015, 05:16 AM
I don't know what you mean...what restrictions are you talking about?


Mostly to do with what 'discipline' a parent can issue out to his (or her) kid(s)..



You don't think there should be standards for home schooling?

In a way yes. BUT on the other hand, why should someone else get to tell me, that i can't take my kid(s) out of a school i feel is NOT giving them proper education and is just indoctrinating them, and school them at home?

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 05:34 AM
Mostly to do with what 'discipline' a parent can issue out to his (or her) kid(s)..



In a way yes. BUT on the other hand, why should someone else get to tell me, that i can't take my kid(s) out of a school i feel is NOT giving them proper education and is just indoctrinating them, and school them at home?

If you're qualified to give home schooling fine....if you're not your kids deserve better...send them to a private school then.

yes, I believe someone should get to tell you that. You don't actually "own" your kids...they are individuals and citizens entitled to an education

Absinthe Anecdote
06-09-2015, 01:05 PM
In a way yes. BUT on the other hand, why should someone else get to tell me, that i can't take my kid(s) out of a school i feel is NOT giving them proper education and is just indoctrinating them, and school them at home?

When you speak in real life, do you increase the volume of your voice when pronouncing conjunctions and adverbs?

Rollyn01
06-09-2015, 03:45 PM
When you speak in real life, do you increase the volume of your voice when pronouncing conjunctions and adverbs?

I would like to think that he enunciates every word in the most annoying tone possible.

TJMAC77SP
06-09-2015, 04:05 PM
When you speak in real life, do you increase the volume of your voice when pronouncing conjunctions and adverbs?

We all do at times. Read his post aloud with volume emphasis on his words in caps.

Rainmaker
06-09-2015, 05:05 PM
some illiterate half-wit has the right to home-school their children...even if their school day involves just working the farm?

You don't think there should be standards for home schooling?

This kind of elitist mentality could only come from someone who's never worked a day on a farm.

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 05:11 PM
This kind of elitist mentality could only come from someone who's never worked a day on a farm.

So, I'll mark you down as the second poster that is in favor of doing away with compulsory education?

Doesn't surprise me.

Nothing against working on a farm...good, honest living...but, I do think kids should learn some readin', ritin' and 'rithmetic. Evil elitist liberal that I am, you know.

Rainmaker
06-09-2015, 05:17 PM
If you're qualified to give home schooling fine....if you're not your kids deserve better...send them to a private school then.

yes, I believe someone should get to tell you that. You don't actually "own" your kids...they are individuals and citizens entitled to an education

so, would you support choice vouchers for poor parents that can't afford private schooling? or is that just for the rich white kids?

Rainmaker
06-09-2015, 05:23 PM
Most parents that would elect to home school their Children are responsible. The irresponsible one's are generally too lazy to parent them and would rather just send them off to get the free baby sitting services and breakfast, lunch, dinner and after school care in the pewblik skewlz. Not to mention the proper socialist indoctrination into learned dependency, helplessness and phony multi-culti history.

Rollyn01
06-09-2015, 05:48 PM
Most parents that would elect to home school their Children are responsible. The irresponsible one's are generally too lazy to parent them and would rather just send them off to get the free baby sitting services and breakfast, lunch, dinner and after school care in the pewblik skewlz. Not to mention the proper socialist indoctrination into learned dependency, helplessness and phony multi-culti history.

I would like to think that it's about teaching self-sufficiency, self-improvement and self-control. I mean, I understand the notion of teaching everyone to work together when the problem becomes too big, but it should never be at the expense of reducing the aforementioned goals. In fact, done right, working towards achieving these goals (in school, law, etc.) would actually do more to improve conditions in this country more than anything else.

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 05:54 PM
so, would you support choice vouchers for poor parents that can't afford private schooling? or is that just for the rich white kids?

What kind of Marxist commie are you? The reason I work hard and save my money is to live in a neighborhood with better schools for my kids, or to afford to send them to private school...that's the American way.

But seriously...I haven't thought about that one a lot.

On the surface, as an individual, I would like to have that option, I suppose. On the education system perspective...it ends up takingmore money away from schools that need it most...not only that, it takes the best students away from those schools, which makes them look moreso like they are under-performing...it would be better if those parents/students got involved in their local school and made it better. The issue requires more thought.

Overall, I think we suck at evaluating schools and teachers...rating them based on "test scores" says more about the kids than it does the teachers...and then we provide students from the "underperforming" schools the opportunity to move to "better performing" schools...which again, it's the parents of the better students that are the ones concerned enough to move them to an out of district/intradistrict school or private school etc...

We have this issue in our town...we have two high schools. One is in a better part of town, so does very well on test scores, etc. Ranks like an 8 out of 10 in the "great schools of America" website. The other school is like a 4 and does not meet minimum state standards. So, since that school is below standards, kids in that school area are allowed to do an intradistrict transfer and send their kids to the other HS, no questions asked.

Guess what, the ones who do that are parents/children who are concerned about education (i.e. high performing students)....so the "rich" school gets richer in terms of talent and resources, while the "poor" school gets poorer...the rich school continually maintains high scores..not only do they have the students from the better part of town, but they get the top 25% of students from the other side...while the other school who, as soon as they improve, those kids go off to the other school, so their test scores continually struggle.

The "poor" school does have a kick-ass better football team that routinely goes undefeated during the regular season and has several Div 1 recruits each year...I'm not sure if better athletes are allowed to transfer the other way, but the difference in football talent from kids that all grew up in the same relatively small town is amazing.

As a parent of two very bright kids, I get it...you want the best for your kids. This is why throughout my life often chose to pay higher rent, or pay more for a house based on the school district.

The answer to this question I think comes from one's philosophical perspective. In general, I believe "poor performing schools" are poor performing because of the students, not the teachers. That's not always true, of course, there are poor teachers...but, I think a solid principal/superintendent could weed them out more effectively than could test scores, were it not for the strength of the teacher unions, but in general, I think the local school can adequately evaluate teacher performance without high-consequence testing of the kids...a big problem with that is the test is much more important to the school than it is to the students...and has turned our schools into "teach the test" institutes of higher cheating.

...so the problem has many layers.

Choice vouchers are great for individual parents...but is tough on the system.

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 05:56 PM
Most parents that would elect to home school their Children are responsible. The irresponsible one's are generally too lazy to parent them and would rather just send them off to get the free baby sitting services..

This is, I'm sure, true as well.

Rainmaker
06-09-2015, 06:00 PM
I would like to think that it's about teaching self-sufficiency, self-improvement and self-control. I mean, I understand the notion of teaching everyone to work together when the problem becomes too big, but it should never be at the expense of reducing the aforementioned goals. In fact, done right, working towards achieving these goals (in school, law, etc.) would actually do more to improve conditions in this country more than anything else.

I have no problem with the Prussian means of instruction as utilized in the public schools for the last 150 years.. It works to instill social order..... It's the increasingly socialist subject matter. The collectivist idea that our kids are property of the state is un American. communism 101

Rainmaker
06-09-2015, 06:01 PM
don't cut out my hyperbole when you quote me Bos. it's the mustard on the hotdog. Nomsayin?

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 06:11 PM
don't cut out my hyperbole when you quote me Bos. it's the mustard on the hotdog. Nomsayin?

It's my duty to separate the wheat from the chaff

Rainmaker
06-09-2015, 06:20 PM
What kind of Marxist commie are you? The reason I work hard and save my money is to live in a neighborhood with better schools for my kids, or to afford to send them to private school...that's the American way.

But seriously...I haven't thought about that one a lot.

On the surface, as an individual, I would like to have that option, I suppose. On the education system perspective...it ends up takingmore money away from schools that need it most...not only that, it takes the best students away from those schools, which makes them look moreso like they are under-performing...it would be better if those parents/students got involved in their local school and made it better. The issue requires more thought.

Overall, I think we suck at evaluating schools and teachers...rating them based on "test scores" says more about the kids than it does the teachers...and then we provide students from the "underperforming" schools the opportunity to move to "better performing" schools...which again, it's the parents of the better students that are the ones concerned enough to move them to an out of district/intradistrict school or private school etc...

We have this issue in our town...we have two high schools. One is in a better part of town, so does very well on test scores, etc. Ranks like an 8 out of 10 in the "great schools of America" website. The other school is like a 4 and does not meet minimum state standards. So, since that school is below standards, kids in that school area are allowed to do an intradistrict transfer and send their kids to the other HS, no questions asked.

Guess what, the ones who do that are parents/children who are concerned about education (i.e. high performing students)....so the "rich" school gets richer in terms of talent and resources, while the "poor" school gets poorer...the rich school continually maintains high scores..not only do they have the students from the better part of town, but they get the top 25% of students from the other side...while the other school who, as soon as they improve, those kids go off to the other school, so their test scores continually struggle.

The "poor" school does have a kick-ass better football team that routinely goes undefeated during the regular season and has several Div 1 recruits each year...I'm not sure if better athletes are allowed to transfer the other way, but the difference in football talent from kids that all grew up in the same relatively small town is amazing.

As a parent of two very bright kids, I get it...you want the best for your kids. This is why throughout my life often chose to pay higher rent, or pay more for a house based on the school district.

The answer to this question I think comes from one's philosophical perspective. In general, I believe "poor performing schools" are poor performing because of the students, not the teachers. That's not always true, of course, there are poor teachers...but, I think a solid principal/superintendent could weed them out more effectively than could test scores, were it not for the strength of the teacher unions, but in general, I think the local school can adequately evaluate teacher performance without high-consequence testing of the kids...a big problem with that is the test is much more important to the school than it is to the students...and has turned our schools into "teach the test" institutes of higher cheating.

...so the problem has many layers.

Choice vouchers are great for individual parents...but is tough on the system.

Basically it comes down to this. you can't make Chicken Salad out of Chicken Shit...... No amount of money thrown into a government program to make things more "fair" will substitute for parental/community support.

Now, Actually My 2 oldest sons went to public school all the way through high school (in the 8th largest school district in the country) . Both graduated from college recently. One is currently playing Minor league baseball and the other just commissioned in the Army on 3 May. Their experience coupled by my wife who was middle school teacher for 15 years, led us to decide for her to homeschool our daughter until we could move to a smaller county. She's now a sophomore in a public High school. I have 5 year old twins that will be homeschooled till high school. Given the current state of things, to do otherwise when you have the resources is irresponsible in my opinion. But, either way it should be up to the parents and not the state to decide what to do with their kids.

Rainmaker
06-09-2015, 06:25 PM
It's my duty to separate the wheat from the chaff

Now, You're smellin' what I'm smokin!

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 06:44 PM
Basically it comes down to this. you can't make Chicken Salad out of Chicken Shit...... No amount of money thrown into a government program to make things more "fair" will substitute for parental/community support.

I would agree with that. I also don't think taking money away from schools who were given chicken shit to work with is a great answer.


Now, Actually My 2 oldest sons went to public school all the way through high school (in the 8th largest school district in the country) . Both graduated from college recently. One is currently playing Minor league baseball and the other just commissioned in the Army on 3 May. Their experience coupled by my wife who was middle school teacher for 15 years, led us to decide for her to homeschool our daughter until we could move to a smaller county. She's now a sophomore in a public High school. I have 5 year old twins that will be homeschooled till high school. Given the current state of things, to do otherwise when you have the resources is irresponsible in my opinion.

I think home-schooling is a great option for you.

My kids were both public school for their entire schooling...but, like I said, school district was always a major impact on where I chose to live. My oldest is 26 and working a great career....youngest just finished her sophomore year in college.


But, either way it should be up to the parents and not the state to decide what to do with their kids.

All I'm advocating for is that some minimum standards are in place for schools, be they private, public or home...and that kids below a certain age be compelled to attend one...to do otherwise is to discard compulsory education.

You can home-school your kids all you want...I'm sure you and the wife are more than qualified. I do think the school district and/or state, or whoever, should check in from time to time to ensure those kids are being schooled.

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 06:59 PM
Now, You're smellin' what I'm smokin!

Back on the dairy farm we called that Deja Moo

Deja Moo-- that strange feeling that somewhere, I've smelled this bullshit before.

Rainmaker
06-09-2015, 07:10 PM
I would agree with that. I also don't think taking money away from schools who were given chicken shit to work with is a great answer.



I think home-schooling is a great option for you.

My kids were both public school for their entire schooling...but, like I said, school district was always a major impact on where I chose to live. My oldest is 26 and working a great career....youngest just finished her sophomore year in college.



All I'm advocating for is that some minimum standards are in place for schools, be they private, public or home...and that kids below a certain age be compelled to attend one...to do otherwise is to discard compulsory education.

You can home-school your kids all you want...I'm sure you and the wife are more than qualified. I do think the school district and/or state, or whoever, should check in from time to time to ensure those kids are being schooled.

$10,608 is the average amount spent per public school student in the US. $1200 a month (based a 9 month school year). You could buy a pretty damn good private education for that. But, it's not really a money issue. some of the most dysfunctional schools are in districts with the highest spending. It's a demographics issue. The family is the basic building block of society. In communities where the family is broken, the community collapses. . Continuing to pour money into these failed school systems, or failed everything else, is counter productive because, you just continue to perpetuate the dysfunction by rewarding mediocrity.

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 07:20 PM
$10,608 is the average amount spent per public school student in the US. $1200 a month (based a 9 month school year). You could buy a pretty damn good private education for that. But, it's not really a money issue. some of the most dysfunctional schools are in districts with the highest spending. It's a demographics issue.

Well, that's what I said, it isn't the schools and teachers, it's the students.

The trouble with the voucher thing is then you take the best students out, as well. Leaving those schools even worse off.

We also need to look at how define "performing schools" vs. "dysfunctional schools"...you have to look at how they funciton within the context of their community,..what they have to work with. It don't take test scores to know a good teacher when you see one.


The family is the basic building block of society. In communities where the family is broken, the community collapses. Continuing to pour money into these failed school systems, is counter productive because, you continue to perpetuate the dysfunction.

So, you want to just close the school or what? I'm not saying pouring money into the school is the answer...but your idea of choice vouchers takes money away from the school...and perhaps worse yet, takes the best students away.

Hey...what about a $1200 choice voucher per student to home school? How do you think that might work out in these communities???

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 07:29 PM
$10,608 is the average amount spent per public school student in the US. $1200 a month (based a 9 month school year). You could buy a pretty damn good private education for that. But, it's not really a money issue. some of the most dysfunctional schools are in districts with the highest spending. It's a demographics issue. The family is the basic building block of society. In communities where the family is broken, the community collapses. . Continuing to pour money into these failed school systems, or failed everything else, is counter productive because, you just continue to perpetuate the dysfunction by rewarding mediocrity.

If the problem is the family...and the community...then the schools are not the cause of the dysfunction...and might be the best remedy for it.

...but when they "underperform" because of the dysfuncitonal community they reside it, we continue to kick them in the nuts, fire the principal, strip their resources...making an already difficult job, more difficult.

You seem to bit off the NCLB cowpie...that test scores equate to "failed schools"

Rainmaker
06-09-2015, 07:59 PM
If the problem is the family...and the community...then the schools are not the cause of the dysfunction...and might be the best remedy for it.

...but when they "underperform" because of the dysfuncitonal community they reside it, we continue to kick them in the nuts, fire the principal, strip their resources...making an already difficult job, more difficult.

You seem to bit off the NCLB cowpie...that test scores equate to "failed schools"

NCLB was started by W.....Now, Jeb (illegal immigration is an act of love) was governor of Florida and we have this implemented failure to the fullest. It's the model for common core. The Bush's and their "Compassionate conservatism" is thinly vieled "progressive" ideology. The bush's are not conservatives. They are not even Rinos. What they are is front men for Socialist, Internationalist, Evangelical Christian, Zionist ideologues. It's right there in plain site for everyone to see. but, they are paralyzed with the whole Red Team/Blue Team paradigm shit and this is why we see that nothing ever changes, a slow moving coup occurred after the cold war ended. You Bitchez can Stick your head in the sand or You can Stick your head up your ass, it makes no difference because, We quickly are approaching the time where that which can not be sustained will be discarded.

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 08:40 PM
NCLB was started by W.....

Yes, everyone knows this.


Now, Jeb (illegal immigration is an act of love) was governor of Florida and we have this implemented failure to the fullest. It's the model for common core.

I can believe that...I hear a lot of bitching about common core, but I don't really know much about it as my kids have moved on...


The Bush's and their "Compassionate conservatism" is thinly vieled "progressive" ideology. The bush's are not conservatives. They are not even Rinos. What they are is front men for Socialist, Internationalist, Evangelical Christian, Zionist ideologues. It's right there in plain site for everyone to see. but, they are paralyzed with the whole Red Team/Blue Team paradigm shit and this is why we see that nothing ever changes, a slow moving coup occurred after the cold war ended. You Bitchez can Stick your head in the sand or You can Stick your head up your ass, it makes no difference because, We quickly are approaching the time where that which can not be sustained will be discarded.

Was there a point in all this bullshit?

Rainmaker
06-09-2015, 08:44 PM
Was there a point in all this bullshit?

It's true. I read it on a blog

Rollyn01
06-09-2015, 08:49 PM
Yes, everyone knows this.



I can believe that...I hear a lot of bitching about common core, but I don't really know much about it as my kids have moved on...



Was there a point in all this bullshit?

I think he's trying to say that many of the programs out there are just a way to increase the rate of societal decline using methods that underscore and undermine the very nature of how a society is suppose to work.

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 08:51 PM
It's true. I read it on a blog

Gotta hand it to ya...you can really shovel some manure when you get some momentum going...

...socialist, internationalist, evangelical christian, zionist....whoa boy...lol

Rainmaker
06-09-2015, 08:56 PM
I think he's trying to say that many of the programs out there are just a way to increase the rate of societal decline using methods that underscore and undermine the very nature of how a society is suppose to work.

Winner winner chicken dinner!!!!

garhkal
06-09-2015, 10:27 PM
yes, I believe someone should get to tell you that. You don't actually "own" your kids...they are individuals and citizens entitled to an education


Sorry, but if i am legally, morally, medically and financially responsible for them from birth till 18 (21 in some cases), how do you not "own your kids" in relation to being able to discipline/teach them without having to have someone 'certify you'?

Bos Mutus
06-09-2015, 10:40 PM
Sorry, but if i am legally, morally, medically and financially responsible for them from birth till 18 (21 in some cases), how do you not "own your kids" in relation to being able to discipline/teach them without having to have someone 'certify you'?

How? Because, like I said...your children are individual citizens that have rights of their own. You are responsible for them, but you do not own them.

Are you saying if parents only wants to educate their child on selling drugs, they should be free to do that, wihout the state budding in?

If not, why not? Why should you get to tell that parent how to educate their child if drug-selling is the best job in their community?

Are you saying that, in the name of discipline, a parent is free to lock thier child in a cage, withhold food, water and medical care...if they sincerely believe this will teach the child a valuable lesson about talking back?

What are your limits for a parent being able to "discipline" their child...who gets to set that limit and why?

Absinthe Anecdote
06-10-2015, 12:09 AM
We all do at times. Read his post aloud with volume emphasis on his words in caps.

I don't talk that way, you might but not me.

TJMAC77SP
06-10-2015, 12:41 AM
I don't talk that way, you might but not me.

Oh come on. I was half kidding but I am serious when I say that I find it hard to believe that when you are engaged in a passionate discussion you don't emphasis certain words.

The alternatives are you yell every word or speak in a completely monotone voice.

Absinthe Anecdote
06-10-2015, 01:08 AM
Oh come on. I was half kidding but I am serious when I say that I find it hard to believe that when you are engaged in a passionate discussion you don't emphasis certain words.

The alternatives are you yell every word or speak in a completely monotone voice.

Modulating one's voice by altering stress, tone and pitch is not the same as yelling random words.

garhkal
06-10-2015, 06:36 AM
How? Because, like I said...your children are individual citizens that have rights of their own. You are responsible for them, but you do not own them.


But when they 'exercise' their rights in a way the parent gets held responsible for them i do feel the parent needs more ways to control their kid(s).



Are you saying if parents only wants to educate their child on selling drugs, they should be free to do that, wihout the state budding in?

Since selling drugs is illegal, that is imo a misnomer.



Are you saying that, in the name of discipline, a parent is free to lock thier child in a cage, withhold food, water and medical care...if they sincerely believe this will teach the child a valuable lesson about talking back?

What are your limits for a parent being able to "discipline" their child...who gets to set that limit and why?

Again, we already have rules in place preventing abuse like that. IMO there is a big difference between abuse (withholding food for a long time, vice sending the kid to his room with no supper) and discipline (spanking them right there and then when they screw up).

Mjölnir
06-10-2015, 08:14 AM
But when they 'exercise' their rights in a way the parent gets held responsible for them i do feel the parent needs more ways to control their kid(s).

Raising them to not get out of control is probably the first step.

Granted, some kids are going to get out of control regardless of how good the parenting. At the same time, as a kid whose dad was a bit more 'hands on' than I ever plan on being with my daughter ... I can say that an 'old school' wood shed ass whipping isn't the answer either. What do you get when you hit a dog, a dog that is afraid of its owner ... once you can communicate with a kid (use language) what do you get when you spank a kid, a kid who is afraid of their parent.

As far as education, there needs to be some basic / minimum standards of what a home schooled kid is going to get so that they can be functional in society

TJMAC77SP
06-10-2015, 09:26 AM
Modulating one's voice by altering stress, tone and pitch is not the same as yelling random words.

Aside from volume (which is pretty hard to determine in the written word) exactly where is the line between "modulating one's voice by altering stress, tone and pitch" and "yelling"

BTW: I think it more accurate to say 'selected words' although I see why you chose 'random words'.

Absinthe Anecdote
06-10-2015, 01:45 PM
Aside from volume (which is pretty hard to determine in the written word) exactly where is the line between "modulating one's voice by altering stress, tone and pitch" and "yelling"

BTW: I think it more accurate to say 'selected words' although I see why you chose 'random words'.

Look Professor Stickler, the whole point of me bringing this up is that in written communication on Internet forums and in chat rooms uppercase text denotes yelling.

In spoken communication one doesn't yell to place emphasis on selected words and the emphasis is unneeded in the way he is using it here. Conjunctions and adverbs as parts of speech already set apart, join, or place special meaning on the rest of the sentence.

Oh, before you wig-out over me calling you Professor Stickler, I'm being an asshole, not a stickler. So don't call me a hypocrite.

Bos Mutus
06-10-2015, 01:59 PM
But when they 'exercise' their rights in a way the parent gets held responsible for them i do feel the parent needs more ways to control their kid(s).

Since selling drugs is illegal, that is imo a misnomer.

A misnomer?

Okay, but this is a start...at least you think someone should tell those parents they can't teach their kids only to do illegal stuff.

What if the parent only wants to teach their child to work the farm and not reading, writing or math?

What if the parent only wants to teach their child to cook, clean and take care of babies? I know...pretend the parents are Muslim and they don't believe in educating girls to read and do math.

Use your imagination, man....we can what if a lot of things...what if the parent ain't so great at reading...or algebra themselves...maybe they don't speak English....still okay to homeschool through high school?

What if the parent is incapable of critical thought?


Again, we already have rules in place preventing abuse like that.

Yes...these are the rules we're talking about...these are the rules you are complaining about.


IMO there is a big difference between abuse (withholding food for a long time, vice sending the kid to his room with no supper) and discipline (spanking them right there and then when they screw up).

I see...so, you agree there should be rules, you just think they should be made according to your opinion.

Absinthe Anecdote
06-10-2015, 02:23 PM
But when they 'exercise' their rights in a way the parent gets held responsible for them i do feel the parent needs more ways to control their kid(s).


I'm curious about which discipline techniques you feel that parents should have that are being denied by big obtrusive government.

Could you give us an example?

garhkal
06-10-2015, 06:47 PM
Yes...these are the rules we're talking about...these are the rules you are complaining about.




From what it seems like we are wanting to add more rules.


I'm curious about which discipline techniques you feel that parents should have that are being denied by big obtrusive government.

Could you give us an example?

There was a recent case in the news where a woman locked her son outside after returning well after his curfue, so she had him stay out all night. IN mid spring on the patio. IMO not abusive, but she is now in hot water.
Also as mentioned, an occasional spanking to reign in the kids. i got spanked when i messed up and i am not maladjusted or a trouble maker. But it seems now a days everyone harps ON those who spank as if its cause OF the spankings, kids are getting messed up..

Bos Mutus
06-10-2015, 07:10 PM
From what it seems like we are wanting to add more rules.

Okay...but, Let's focus for a minute on the basic idea before we get into how many rules there should be:

Do you agree there should be rules/laws that protect kids from excessive discipline from their parents?

(Once we agree on this basic idea, then we can discuss who gets to make the rules and what is considered excessive...and what if you disagree with the rulemakers on what you consider excessive, etc. etc...all the non-points you like to bring up to dodge the real question...)

Do you agree that there should be some minimum standards on homeschooled education,

...or do you still think that a Muslim in Michigan doesn't have to teach his girl any more than cooking, laundry, and taking care of the house and babies, since he owns the girl?

TJMAC77SP
06-10-2015, 09:24 PM
Look Professor Stickler, the whole point of me bringing this up is that in written communication on Internet forums and in chat rooms uppercase text denotes yelling.

In spoken communication one doesn't yell to place emphasis on selected words and the emphasis is unneeded in the way he is using it here. Conjunctions and adverbs as parts of speech already set apart, join, or place special meaning on the rest of the sentence.

Oh, before you wig-out over me calling you Professor Stickler, I'm being an asshole, not a stickler. So don't call me a hypocrite.

Ok, ok.

(another win on the spreadsheet?)

garhkal
06-11-2015, 07:06 AM
Okay...but, Let's focus for a minute on the basic idea before we get into how many rules there should be:

Do you agree there should be rules/laws that protect kids from excessive discipline from their parents?

Yes. But just cause i agree on this does not then mean i agree there should be min standards on what 'qualifies' a parent to home school their kid.

Absinthe Anecdote
06-11-2015, 12:58 PM
Yes. But just cause i agree on this does not then mean i agree there should be min standards on what 'qualifies' a parent to home school their kid.

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140808184223/bloodbrothersgame/images/c/c7/Implied_facepalm.jpg