Schools continue to take rights from parents.

Baldimo,

You seem to feel that kids should learn to read from Leave it to Beaver and Father Knows Best scripts.

Get a grip. The world has moved on.

Should we remove To Kill a Mockingbird from the curriculum because it depicts injustice to Blacks?

You sound like a reactionary bigot.

I've been coaching gymnastics for the last sixteen years (I started when I was 14), tomorrow is my last day. I'm going to tell part of the story of why, and explain how it applies.

I have an extremely talented athlete in my team program, for the sake of the story lets call her Sally. Like I said Sally is extremely talented, she's progressed in a year what it takes most students 2 1/2 to 3 years. Last year she also missed 12% of her practices. I schedule practices to be as convenient as possible and allow my athletes and their families to make decisions on their attendance, so that they can make their own decisions to balance school, gymnastics, and their family lives, according to their individual beliefs on the importance and value of each. The only thing I ask in return is that they understand that the amount of practice they miss is going to have a direct result on their progression and their performance at meets.

Last year Sally's mother came and talked to me, about her (I believe she was refereing to both herself; the mother, and Sally) disappointment in Sally's performance at meets last season. This surprised me because even with all the practice she missed she still managed to place 12th and above on each event she competed and within the top 20 in the all-around at state.

Sally came back from gymnastics camp a couple of weeks ago, and we started the process of mid-season evaluations, which involve a few pages of Q&A's that are to be completed by the gymnast with the input of the parent, and a parent, coach, athlete meeting afterwards. During this meeting Sally's mother told me that some of the coaches at camp had marvelled over Sally's skills and technique (as I said she is a very talented athlete) and commented that she should be competing a level up from where I currently have her sloted as. I decided to have her compete at this level due to her mothers input about their concern about meet performance, and her frequent absence from practice. Her mother also brought up the possibility of "Going Elite" (reaching International Competition Status, and therefore ensuring her eligibility for a Division I college scholarship upon Graduation).

The problem that Sally and her parents are running into is a conflict of realities. They think that Sally can become an Elite Gymnasts and take two weeks off for Christmas, two weeks off for her annual Ski Trip and two weeks off for her summer cruise a year, stay in public school, and still have time to have dinner every night with the family. And that just ain't gonna happen. In reality an Elite Gymnasts takes very minimal vacations, one day off a week, a couple (2) days off for major holidays, They "home school" usually in a program provided by the gym they represent, in which they spend a few hours in the morning working out, 4-5 hours a day in classes, have lunch, work out for 4-6 hours in the evening then go home for homework and sleep, they do this 5-6 days a week depending on that particular gyms schedule. It's gruelling, and some kids thrive in it.

Sally is trying to survive between both of these realities her parents have created for her. She's a great kid who is intelligent, hard working and driven. She's a great kid for whom I foresee years and years of counselling in her future. She's a great kid whom I see becoming progressively more neurotic (* Disclaimer: I am not a psychologist or a psychiatrist so I am not able to claim what constitutes neurotic behavior) as she tries to survive within both of these realities her parents have conceived for her. She could survive very happily I think in either of the realities but can't possibly live in both.

This is also the battlefield of todays educators only to a much worse degree, because they have to deal with not only the dual realities set up by the parent referred to in your article (the reality of the parent wanting the educator to give this child a well rounded education: which must include an accurate picture of the world around them{knowing 2+2=4 is no good if you can't understand 2 apples + 2 oranges does not equal 4 apples} and the reality that this parent wants to create for his child{which doesn't include families with gay parents}), but also the realities of the 30+ kids that we've given this educator stewardship over (including the ones with gay parents).

I know this isn't on the razor edge of this topic; whether this parent has the right to be notified when sexuality is being discussed within the classroom, but in this particular case the educators are stuck in the position of having to face all of these dueling realities, and to vilify them under these circumstances, for political gain, is far more disgusting than anything that has happened to this man. Whether he was simply standing up for his right to be notified, or milking it for name recognition and the support of the, now powerful, extreme right christian fundamentalists.




That said; I also don't believe that sexuality is something that should be discussed in Kindergarten. I also don't believe that accurately depicting families that are becoming more and more common within our society points to a discussion of sexuality unless that depiction shows the parents of the child (MF, FF, MM, MMF, FFM+komodo lizard, and the player pieces form the boardgame "SORRY!"[size=7]tm[/size]) doing the horizontal mambo.

Ry

(edited to add *disclaimer)

The problem I see with all of this is the fact that before the big launch of the big gay agenda to force everyone to accept them there was no class on families with parents of different races. There were no classes on single parent families.

This has only just started as a part of the gay agenda to force society to accept them.

That's a quaint notion, however, parents--gay, straight, transgendered, all kinds--generally don't stay at home and, thus, are part of the social landscape, and that makes them something to be addressed.


Since nearly the beginning of public education as we know it.


You certainly did. When you enrolled your child you empowered the school to act in loco parentis. If you don't like it, petition the school board, run for school board, or explore your private or home schooling options.



Whether you like it or not, the role of schools is to help make our children responsible and competent citizens; part of this is educating them about the variety within our society. You asked if I thought diversity was above the heads of most 6 year olds? Not when we're merely showing them the diversity of our society. The way this discussion has been going, you'd think these kindergartners were learning about fellatio, cunnilingus, and anal sex (now children, today we're going to learn about proper lubrication...). And one more time--it's NOT an either/or proposition; educating students about diversity is typically incorporated into other objectives (If Suzy's mom gave her $5.43, and her other mom gave her $2.47, how much money does she have?). Now, I know what you're worried about, but there's no need; your children will probably absorb most of your values and prejudices. Sociologically and psychologically speaking, the influence of school is no match for the influence of parents.

And "social engineering" is a term used by right-wing nuts in the militias and other anti-government organizations to describe anything that doesn't fit within their limited world view. It's a nonsense term that implies some sort of conspiracy. While you're obviously right-leaning, I doubt you're a nut (though the fact that I'm an X-Phile may have biased my judgement). Use a more respectable conservative term like "liberal agenda."

And the only "Gay Agenda" is to be able to live and enjoy the same rights enjoyed by heterosexuals.

P.S.: 'Welfare' is still misspelled. (You're going to slap yourself when you figure it out.)

I've pointed out to him several times that he's misspelled welfare, but the nickle hasn't dropped for him yet . . . i see the realization as a sort of litmus . . .

I feel this poor man is being used by some antigay groups. People who are nitwits are susceptible to being influenced. It's a shame that these anti-gay groups are acting the way they are by using a stupid father to further their aims of hatred. I hope he realizes this sooner than later when these people start to leave him because they can't get accomplished what they want. I wonder how he will feel then? I'm sure they don't care.

Ain't it just hell when people stand up for their rights?

The Civil Rights Movement, the Women's Movement, women's sufferage....

Too bad Richard Coeur de Lion is not still with us--anyone who would have refused to accept him would have seen his two-handed broad sword about to crash into their skull as their last sight on this earth . . . that boy was one mean faggot.

Baldimo, remember that god loves you and shares your hatred of homosexuals.

Does that mean that god hated James Stuart I . . . and if that is so, does that mean the King James Bible and all who rely thereupon are works of Satan . . . or at least of David Bowie?

It means that god hates Jesus.

Really interesting post, coachryan.

People of the "Black agenda" had to go through a whole lot of crap to get you folks to accept them. Do you remember Martin Luther King, marches, sitins being attacked by police dogs and fire hoses.

Before that people of the "womens agenda" faced abuse to force you folks to let them vote.

Every group except white straight males had had to force society to accept them.

I think using education is preferable to facing police dogs and fire hoses.

Plus I think there were classes that had precisely the same kind of "many different kinds of families" aspect that included interracial families. That didn't start with the gay rights movement. Teaching tolerance has a long history -- which I'm happy about.

When I started in public school, deaf kids in my province were sent to one school - they lived away from home - behind a barbed wire fence. Blind kids went to a different school as well. Kids with cerebral palsy simply didn't go to school.

It was a shock, sometimes, to find out about classmates who had brothers and sisters who didn't live with them because of a variety of challenges/differences.

Whatever the family composition, I think it's much better to talk about it at home AND in the school than to pretend all families have one mom and one dad and that everyone is healthy, wealthy and one race.

<and if kids are learning about these differences in family composition in kindergarten - it's too late - unless they're being raised by wolves>

It's a public school, nobody ever said that those children had to go there, if those parents don't like it then they need to take their children out (change to private schools or home school). Homosexuality shouldn't be such a big issue! You people need to stop obsessing over things like this that don't even involve you, and focus on the things that matter like teaching your children not to be bigots. It's not like the school is telling then that they should go out and have unprotected anal sex with strangers, the only thing the school was trying to do was teach the next generation of our leaders not to discriminate against people that are different! If people stay in this close-minded state then our country will never change and the hate and violence is going to ruin everything that our country preaches about! Personally I think that our government needs a little makeover because there are quite a few thing wrong with our lifestyles and homosexuality is not one of them!