For our children?

[lukster]

Originally posted by Thud
I don't have the slightest intention to force my view upon those of other opinion, I merely advocate keeping those books there. Forcing the contents upon others is not a motive or consideration in the matter.

We aren't talking about adults, if we were I would be in complete agreement.

I find the argument that morals and values should be taught only at home to be dishonest or ignorant, invalid at best. Kids never stop learning and are influenced by everything they see and hear. They need to be guided and protected all of the time. Parents should be the ultimate authority in this respect. The school should not be at odds with the parents. Every children's library should have a parental approval section. How hard would it be to establish guidelines for book placement? Like I said, they do it with movies, why should books be any different?

[lazs2]

goomba... sorry...gotta disagree with you.

While I am glad that you were able to work it so that the public school your kids attended was a good one...

Most are not so fortunate.   They have no choice whatsoever.   If there were vouchers and everyone could choose then there would be many schools to choose from... You might still feel that the public school you managed to get your kids into is the best bet.... you would be welcome to stay.  even so... competion would only make your school more "responsive" eh?

The family that lives half a mile away from you might not like the sleazy school infested with illegals that their kids have to attend tho.    They could take their vocher money and give their kids (and American taxpayers) a choice that would increase their chances to learn.

lazs

[Skuzzy]

Originally posted by Curval


You just need to add something about hotrods now lazs.

Actually, our high school mechanic's shop class built a hot rod each year.  It was a class project.  The body shop class would do the body and paint work.

EDIT:  Vouchers.  It is one thing you and I will never agree on Lazs.  You say it allows you to put your kid in another school with a potentially better demographic.  Well, it also allows all those other kids you are trying to get your kid away from to there as well.
There are solutions to public school problems, but they will never be tried nor done.

[wrag]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Lukster, help me out: Which specific civil liberties are the ones that say one parent can restrict another parent's child from reading something?  I'm flipping through my bill of rights here and just not seeing it.

Chairboy help me out here: where exactly do you see one parent restricting any other parents right here??????   If the book is placed in the parental control section THEN A PARENT CAN ALLOW THEIR CHILD access to the books.

[wrag]

Originally posted by Thud
That's some convenient reasoning you've got there.
If there are any people who feel that their children should not be exposed to a certain medium, it should be restricted immediately?
Hell, if that view is adopted nothing would ever be available to children anymore...

 Again the forcing upon others is perpetrated by those restricting, not those allowing...

Please someone save this!  Save it for the next liberal attempt to.... let's restrict something for their own good ..... thing that comes along!

[Horn]

Originally posted by lukster
We aren't talking about adults, if we were I would be in complete agreement.

I find the argument that morals and values should be taught only at home to be dishonest or ignorant, invalid at best. Kids never stop learning and are influenced by everything they see and hear. They need to be guided and protected all of the time. Parents should be the ultimate authority in this respect. The school should not be at odds with the parents. Every children's library should have a parental approval section. How hard would it be to establish guidelines for book placement? Like I said, they do it with movies, why should books be any different?

Did you even read the article? At first it begins talking about books in a high school library --these are young adults--not six year olds--and then goes on to say that a method of tracking books the kids read is needed.

Frankly if by high school you have not established solid morals and values within your children then I submit you have failed horribly as a parent.  

Parenting and active involvement in child raising is what is needed here, NOT censorship under the guise of "oh my God the children!"

Chairboy help me out here: where exactly do you see one parent restricting any other parents right here?????? If the book is placed in the parental control section THEN A PARENT CAN ALLOW THEIR CHILD access to the books.

Might want to read the article you posted, champ:

"A federal judge in Fayettteville has recently ruled in a similar case that restricting access of library books only to students who have obtained parental permission infringes upon the First Amendment rights of the students."

[wrag]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Lukster, with respect, since the group you support is the one that's trying to restrict access to these books, wouldn't _they_ be the ones pushing the agenda?

BTW, lukster, are you a parent?  I ask because I am, and I'm curious about the origin of your viewpoint.

I see something here.  Trying to aim it at the parents that want control over their children.

So are you then anit-parental control over what sexual material will be shown to the children of all other parents here Chairboy?

Waiting for the classic dem-lib claim of others being "mean spirited" here.

[tedrbr]

Allllllllrightyyyy  then!

Soooosss...... When are the majority of parents actually going to raise their own childen then?  

The little beasties I keep seeing running the streets at all hours seem to be raised by wolves.

Then there are all those parents using the VCR/DVD/Internet as a babysitter, or in some cases an au pair.  And those folks with little round hypertensive beach balls that are bribed to be good with candy oh so often.

Yet another theoretical argument that falls short in the face of reality..... like defending marriage as being sacrosanct.... how can in institution that fails more than half the time be argued thus?  Maddness...utter maddness.

[wrag]

Originally posted by Thud
I don't have the slightest intention to force my view upon those of other opinion, I merely advocate keeping those books there. Forcing the contents upon others is not a motive or consideration in the matter.

The books are there.  The books can, with parental permission, still be accessed.  So.......................

[Horn]

Originally posted by wrag
The books are there.  The books can, with parental permission, still be accessed.  So.......................

I guess you missed it: What you are proposing has been ruled to be against the First Amendment by a Federal judge.

[wrag]

Originally posted by Horn
Did you even read the article? At first it begins talking about books in a high school library --these are young adults--not six year olds--and then goes on to say that a method of tracking books the kids read is needed.

Frankly if by high school you have not established solid morals and values within your children then I submit you have failed horribly as a parent.  

Parenting and active involvement in child raising is what is needed here, NOT censorship under the guise of "oh my God the children!"



Might want to read the article you posted, champ:

"A federal judge in Fayettteville has recently ruled in a similar case that restricting access of library books only to students who have obtained parental permission infringes upon the First Amendment rights of the students."

I did read it.  Try the 1st paragraph...  the words "elementry aged students" mean anything here?

Once children reach a certain age then I'm in agreement with the Judge. Until they pass a certain age I firmly disagree with the Judge.  What that age should be will vary with each child.  Some don't SEEM to reach that age until well past 17.  If one only considers their actions, words and deeds and ignores their age sadly they may never reach that age.

If this Judge is refering to elementary school children, possibly even some middle school children, then I find myself inclined to say, perhaps that Judge should NOT be a Judge.  Not so much because I disagree with the Judges ruling but find myself questioning the Judges reasoning in reaching that ruling.

Judges are people just like the rest of us.  They do make mistakes.

[Horn]

Originally posted by wrag
I did read it.  Try the 1st paragraph...  the words "elementry aged students" mean anything here?

Um, this quote?

"It's Perfectly Normal, aimed at elementary age students, she did what any concerned parent would do: she went to the administration and asked that it be removed, along with two other books with similar themes.."

It just says she has "school age children"--is that what you mean?

Ahh you edited a bit so here's mine:

Once children reach a certain age then I'm in agreement with the Judge. Until they pass a certain age I firmly disagree with the Judge. What that age should be will vary with each child. Some don't SEEM to reach that age until well past 17. If one only considers their actions, words and deeds and ignores their age sadly they may never reach that age.

So you would feel comfortable dictating, for all parents, everywhere, what could and could not be read in a school? How did you manage to get so qualified? See what I'm getting at? Your bias--like mine--gets in the way. You have a problem allowing anything sexual in schools. I don't--within already legislated obscenity laws-- and my trust in school boards and their mostly native conservatism because I taught my kids at home what was right and what wasn't and I trust them to make decisions.

Will they always make smart decisions? No. They must be allowed their own mistakes, however. Besides, what are you really protecting them from?

Not so much because I disagree with the Judges ruling but find myself questioning the Judges reasoning in reaching that ruling.

Perhaps it would be worthwhile to read the actual ruling as opposed to forming your judgement from one sentence on an ultra-right website?

[nirvana]

Originally posted by lazs2
Yep... auto shop.   Private schools could cater to kids who might not want to be accountants ar graphic artists or even continue higher education.

Truth is... we will allways need machinists and mechanics and construction workers.

Self centered Public schools have been ignoring this fact for decades.

lazs

As a product of a public school auto shop class, I can say it does what it's there for, to teach basic stuff.  When I go through advanced auto technology next year i'll let you know.  Truth is, they are all jobs that require backbreaking work and kids these days....they expect to have everything handed to them on a silver platter.

[lukster]

Like I said, liberals are fine with letting the state control what kids learn so long as they are in control of the schools. They were a bunch of obnoxious loud mouths when they weren't in control though. I submit school prayer as exhibit "a". There will come a time when the libs aren't in control of the schools. When that happens, don't say you weren't warned.

[Dead Man Flying]

I wish I frequented a website that told me about which issues I should become righteously indignant.

-- Todd/Leviathn