protect our children from anti-family forces out to corrupt them! - Page 9 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-19-2006, 01:24 AM   #121
The Fly
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 33
Local Time: 07:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


You're the detective. Why don't you use your sleuthing skills and find it? I shouldn't have to do all the work for you.

Melon
Typical liberal response. "There's scientific evidence to prove it!"

Typical conservative repsonse. "Let's see that scientific evidence."

Liberal response: "Find it yourself"

MY RESPONSE: Thanks for not making up your evidence. Next time, be prepared to prove yourself.
__________________

__________________
Chewystick69 is offline  
Old 03-19-2006, 01:25 AM   #122
The Fly
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 33
Local Time: 07:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Do you have a reason for being here?
To contradict you and your assinine responses!
__________________

__________________
Chewystick69 is offline  
Old 03-19-2006, 01:26 AM   #123
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:11 PM
American Academy of Pediatrics:

http://www.aap.org/advocacy/archives/febsamesex.htm

"The statement says there is a considerable body of professional literature that suggests children with parents who are homosexual have the same advantages and the same expectations for health, adjustment and development as children whose parents are heterosexual."


American Psychiatric Association:

http://www.psych.org/news_room/press...ting121802.pdf

"Research over the past 30 years has consistently demonstrated that children raised by gay or lesbian parents exhibit the same level of emotional, cognitive, social and sexual functioning as children raised by heterosexual parents. The research also indicates that optimal development for children is not based on the sexual orientation of the parents, but on stable attachments to committed and nurturing adults."


American Psychological Association:

http://www.apa.org/pi/parent.html

"In summary, there is no evidence to suggest that lesbians and gay men are unfit to be parents or that psychosocial development among children of gay men or lesbians is compromised in any respect relative to that among offspring of heterosexual parents. Not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents. Indeed, the evidence to date suggests that home environments provided by gay and lesbian parents are as likely as those provided by heterosexual parents to support and enable children's psychosocial growth."
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 03-19-2006, 01:27 AM   #124
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Chewystick69
MY RESPONSE: Thanks for not making up your evidence. Next time, be prepared to prove yourself.
Read the post above me. I never said I wasn't prepared. You make far too many assumptions.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 03-19-2006, 01:30 AM   #125
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 01:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Chewystick69


To contradict you and your assinine responses!
And what exacatly is assinine about my responses? You're the one that is trying to prove an agenda that hasn't shown any proof...
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 03-19-2006, 03:13 AM   #126
Sizzlin' Sicilian
Forum Administrator
 
Sicy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 69,297
Local Time: 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Chewystick69
You go Melon. Keep of suckin! Hopefully any kids of yours will be straight.
Quote:
Originally posted by Chewystick69
To contradict you and your assinine responses!
Please refrain from personal attacks and stereotypical insults.


We have Rules here.
__________________
Sicy is offline  
Old 03-19-2006, 04:06 AM   #127
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 03:11 PM
I always know when Sicy posts here that someone's been acting like an ass.
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 03-24-2006, 06:09 AM   #128
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
intedomine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 7,949
Local Time: 05:11 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Firstly there are often situations where private schools share their facilities. Secondly they should not be under any duress to do so. Facilities are part of school property, if it is a private school then the school should have the right to choose if people can use their facilities and for what price.

Forcing owners of private property to share undermines the principle of property ownership. That is a form of idealism that I find abhorent.
Should schools be privatised then? If it is undermining the potential for a caring and sharing relationship between schools, who are (or at least should be), aiming for the same thing, then maybe private education should be eliminated.

To ensure that EVERY student is given every opportunity possible, to do absolutely ANYTHING they aspire to. That might be idealistic, but it is only fair on the not-so-well-off kids.

Remember it's not their fault that they are not-so-well-off, and nor is it necessarilly the parents.


Quote:
But I don't think the solution to improving education is to eliminate the competition. Name one industry where having one choice has resulted in a good product. Instead, I think turning education into an open and competitive atmosphere is a good idea. Then public schools would be forced to compete for their money, rather than just sitting back, churning the same old crap, and begging for even more money that eventually gets wasted.

I think I'd have a good laugh at seeing more than a few existing public schools close for lack of attendance someday.

Melon

No one said that there is anything wrong with competition. But the main focus should be centered on competition BETWEEN THE CHILDREN rather than a battle for cash and reputation between schools. That is what must be promoted.

That is not to say that competition between the schools should be discouraged. In academia, sport and the arts, schools should be attempting to outdo each other in frequent competitions. What better learning curve for the children, and what better way of introducing children to the dog eat dog world that awaits them.


What we are seeing is a world in which most high-flyers, especially in sport, the arts and in business hail from private schools, What a disheartening thing it is for the poorer parents (and possibly in the years to come, for the children), to know that just because the child did not attend a private school, his or her hopes of achieving their dreams were dashed by an unfortunate case of dilapidated facilities or a school's inability to offer a broad range of opportunities.

In Australia especially, there is a horribly huge discrepancy between private and public schools in both the quality and range of opportunities offered to children in the sporting arena. It is an utter disgrace.

Whereas a private school footy team can afford it's own weights room, swimming pool, professional coach, a well-maintained oval, and is able to organise a proper competition against other schools, that is recognised in the media....

....a public school footy team will compete on just one day a year, in matches that last for just two 20 minute halves on sub-standard ovals with fellow students forced to umpire the games.

Rectification is necessary.

The answer lies beyond feeling obligated to maintain old school tie traditions and traditional capitalist principles of private ownership.

The idea of "don't-have-to, don't-wanna" must not apply to education. Equal opportunity for children, innocent and unaware must be achieved, through whatever means...
__________________
intedomine is offline  
Old 03-24-2006, 08:20 AM   #129
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by intedomine
Should schools be privatised then? If it is undermining the potential for a caring and sharing relationship between schools, who are (or at least should be), aiming for the same thing, then maybe private education should be eliminated.

To ensure that EVERY student is given every opportunity possible, to do absolutely ANYTHING they aspire to. That might be idealistic, but it is only fair on the not-so-well-off kids.

Remember it's not their fault that they are not-so-well-off, and nor is it necessarilly the parents.
You seem to equate the concept of "good education" with "complete lack of difference." The public school lobby has certainly drilled this into people's heads. However, I doubt this would ever improve education, because, frankly, most of the people running schools in this country are idiots and to give them no alternative would be a ticket to further mismanagement and stupidity.

I look at my own small town as a shining example of why local governance does not work. They're happiest when they elect "good ol' boys" who are related to the rest of the town. Nevermind that they are completely uneducated, and, in the case of the school board, these people should never be within 1000 feet of a school. Ever. To take away private education would be to give these mindnumbingly idiotic people a monopoly on education around here. I cannot, in any circumstance, support that.

The poor deserve more options, not less.

Quote:
No one said that there is anything wrong with competition. But the main focus should be centered on competition BETWEEN THE CHILDREN rather than a battle for cash and reputation between schools. That is what must be promoted.

That is not to say that competition between the schools should be discouraged. In academia, sport and the arts, schools should be attempting to outdo each other in frequent competitions. What better learning curve for the children, and what better way of introducing children to the dog eat dog world that awaits them.
This is where I love Ayn Rand. If you tie the cash to the children and no one else, you'll achieve both at once. Schools will compete for children, because they are the cash. Altruism is generally a fallacy, which is why sometimes you have to craft legislation around people's greed in a positive manner.

And, sure, there should be more competition, but at this stage in the game, schools are busy competing on who has the largest cutbacks. When you are a local monopoly, you can always cry "poverty" and what can you do about it?

Quote:
What we are seeing is a world in which most high-flyers, especially in sport, the arts and in business hail from private schools, What a disheartening thing it is for the poorer parents (and possibly in the years to come, for the children), to know that just because the child did not attend a private school, his or her hopes of achieving their dreams were dashed by an unfortunate case of dilapidated facilities or a school's inability to offer a broad range of opportunities.

In Australia especially, there is a horribly huge discrepancy between private and public schools in both the quality and range of opportunities offered to children in the sporting arena. It is an utter disgrace.

Whereas a private school footy team can afford it's own weights room, swimming pool, professional coach, a well-maintained oval, and is able to organise a proper competition against other schools, that is recognised in the media....

....a public school footy team will compete on just one day a year, in matches that last for just two 20 minute halves on sub-standard ovals with fellow students forced to umpire the games.
I think you have a rather stereotypical definition of private education. While there are some elite $10,000+ a year private schools in America, I went to a Catholic school where the facilities were not as good as some of the public schools in the county (but, as a testament to the stupidity of my local town, the Catholic school was much better maintained).

Quote:
Rectification is necessary.

The answer lies beyond feeling obligated to maintain old school tie traditions and traditional capitalist principles of private ownership.

The idea of "don't-have-to, don't-wanna" must not apply to education. Equal opportunity for children, innocent and unaware must be achieved, through whatever means...
All this will achieve in America is an educational system where every child is equally left behind. I do not trust our public school hierarchy to ever get their heads out of their ass, and to give them a monopoly on education is to invite even more mismanagement and ineptitude than we already have.

I think for the United States, a model similar to Belgium's educational system would be a better fit.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com