Some Parents Angry About "Gay Fairy Tale" Book In School - Page 6 - 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 04-21-2006, 05:11 AM   #76
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
ILuvLarryMullen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: in the sunshine
Posts: 6,904
Local Time: 12:00 PM
__________________

__________________
ILuvLarryMullen is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 05:12 AM   #77
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
ILuvLarryMullen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: in the sunshine
Posts: 6,904
Local Time: 12:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by blueyedpoet
More than likely, the kid would shrug it off and just accept it.
and exactly is where they see the problem.
__________________

__________________
ILuvLarryMullen is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 08:43 AM   #78
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,997
Local Time: 03:00 PM
I just want to say that I see nothing wrong with icelle and other dedicated parents wanting the right and the choice to discuss this with their children before the school does and to know about ANY book that their children are reading in school that is part of the curriculum. I don't make the logical leap that any such parent believes that the school is thus "indoctrinating" their children or that any such parent has hatred and/or bigotry towards homosexuals. For me that's not fair and I would make an effort not to do it. Until the person/parent makes it obvious what their agenda is (if any exists) I give them the benefit of the doubt. My feelings about kids eventually having to live outside of the sphere of their parents' influence and having to be able to deal with diversity still stand, but that doesn't mean I would ever paint all such parents with the same brush. But I just don't and can't agree with that woman's statement that her child is being "indoctrinated".
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 08:58 AM   #79
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 03:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




yes, but America and the African-American churches are simply wrong.

i mean, they are. history will not be on their side, and they'll all look like a bunch of George Wallace's in 20 years.

and it still doesn't change the fact that gay families exist. why make this fact predicated upon the will of the parents?
I agree they are wrong....but....the reality is they do not equate it as civil rights.

I made my case for why parents should have a say. You make more friends than enemies giving a choice in this matter. I can almost guarentee that parents are more likely to side with the bigot over this choice thing. By taking a stance that they have no choice you are creating more people against the book, and hurting your cause.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 09:02 AM   #80
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 03:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by WildHoneyAlways
Edit: Perhaps this is more of a grade school issue? I'm not aware of these types of meeting at the high school level.
I think you see my point. These precious little children who walk through my school doors in Kindergarten at the age of 5-6 have lived reasonably sheltered lives. Protecting their innocence for as long as possible and letting them be children is ALWAYS an issue in an elementary school. That is not a "gay family" issue. It is an issue surrounding everything that goes on through the year. Parents in an elementary school, especially for their firstborn child, are extremely likely to want to shelter their child from the issues of the world, that ADULTS find difficult to deal with.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 09:26 AM   #81
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:00 PM
Good points Mrs. Springsteen and Dread, I agree wholeheartedly. That's part of being a responsible parent.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 10:21 AM   #82
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 03:00 PM
but, again, i don't see why we'd offer the right to shelter our children from the existence of gay families but we never would against other sorts of non traditional families.

i take Dread's points about the political efficiacy of offering choice in regards to this issue, but i still don't understand why this particular issue needs to be treated with so much more delicacy than others.

(actually, i suppose i do, but i feel like catering to people's prejudices only makes things worse, and i feel as if the only way to combat such prejudice and, bluntly, sheer idiocy of fears of "indoctrination" is to treat gay families as utterly boring and normal as any other non-traditional family unit)
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 10:53 AM   #83
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
WildHoneyAlways's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: In a glass case of emotion
Posts: 8,158
Local Time: 02:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox

Protecting their innocence for as long as possible and letting them be children is ALWAYS an issue in an elementary school. That is not a "gay family" issue. \
Then why all the fuss over this book? Because of this thread I was looking through my friend's, who teaches 1st grade, collection of read aloud books. The book she's reading to her class this week is about a young girl being raised by her grandmother. No phone calls or letters home, no eyebrows raised. If were are talking about protecting children's innocence shouldn't the idea that both of their parents could die raise some concern?
__________________
WildHoneyAlways is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 11:10 AM   #84
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 03:00 PM
I can comment from the POV of somebody who immigrated to North America as a child, and we experienced complete culture shock. Suddenly you live in a multicultural society with people of many faiths, where gays although discriminated against still live far better lives in the public than in most of the rest of the world and so on. And my parents understood that we live in a global society and this is the future of the world. So instead of trying to bend the world to be the way we would have it, we adapted to our new surroundings. You have to be socialized eventually and nobody lives in a bubble. And I understand that these parents want to raise their children the way they see fit, but on this issue, they are dead wrong. Their kids live in a different world today and they need to understand those realities if they are to move beyond their parents' views, which frankly, they will have to. The world is fluid and we evolve along with the tide.

As a parent you certainly have the right to try to rear your children in a way you think it's best. But perhaps these parents should consider what is best for the kids longterm and not what is best for the parents themselves. They will grow up, become teenagers, move away and form their own views one day. Is it not better to allow them a fuller picture of the society in which they live than to restrict their vision to views which are no longer realistic in this world. That's the bottom line here.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 11:50 AM   #85
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,461
Local Time: 03:00 PM
baby steps to equallity.

people are, inherently, stupid. it sucks, but it's reality. how long was the civil rights debate? more than a century? and yet we still have groups of people who just can't give it up.

i'm sure a book about an inter-racial couple having children in the 1950s would have caused quite a stir. and while i'm sure there are still those out there who don't want their children "exposed" to a book like that, well, tough shit. get over it. for the most part it's a non issue.

god willing (that comment alone made me chuckle) the same evolution of thought will happen, only quicker, and in 10-15 years if someone breaks out this book to read to a class, it's also a non issue.


the problem, ultimately, is, as has already been stated, that many can not seperate gay sex from just being gay. frankly, to be honest, neither could i until i got to college and was introduced to things that aren't discussed in white bread township.

the solution, as is the solution to most problems, is education.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 04-21-2006, 12:26 PM   #86
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 03:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
I can comment from the POV of somebody who immigrated to North America as a child, and we experienced complete culture shock. Suddenly you live in a multicultural society with people of many faiths, where gays although discriminated against still live far better lives in the public than in most of the rest of the world and so on. And my parents understood that we live in a global society and this is the future of the world. So instead of trying to bend the world to be the way we would have it, we adapted to our new surroundings. You have to be socialized eventually and nobody lives in a bubble. And I understand that these parents want to raise their children the way they see fit, but on this issue, they are dead wrong. Their kids live in a different world today and they need to understand those realities if they are to move beyond their parents' views, which frankly, they will have to. The world is fluid and we evolve along with the tide.

As a parent you certainly have the right to try to rear your children in a way you think it's best. But perhaps these parents should consider what is best for the kids longterm and not what is best for the parents themselves. They will grow up, become teenagers, move away and form their own views one day. Is it not better to allow them a fuller picture of the society in which they live than to restrict their vision to views which are no longer realistic in this world. That's the bottom line here.


__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 01:41 PM   #87
Refugee
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: LA, California, USA
Posts: 1,349
Local Time: 08:00 PM
I'm thinking of writing a gay fairy tale story involving Bill O'Reilly and Michael Savage.
Devils in America

But, then I wouldn't want to give homosexuals a bad name.
__________________
blueyedpoet is offline  
Old 04-24-2006, 07:56 AM   #88
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,997
Local Time: 03:00 PM
Lexington gay rights event fuels debate


By James Vaznis, Globe Staff | April 24, 2006

LEXINGTON -- School leaders are bracing for protesters at the high school on Wednesday, when some students will be participating in a ''Day of Silence," an annual national event in which the participants do not talk to one another to sympathize with gays and lesbians.

Lexington is once again facing a conflict over how it should handle making gay and lesbian students or children of gay and lesbian parents comfortable in school.

The Day of Silence controversy comes as two elementary school parents have complained about a second-grade teacher reading a fairy tale about gay marriage -- the second set of parents to complain about a children's book with a gay theme in it in less than a year.

Lexington High School principal Michael Jones outlined the appropriate ways for students to voice their support of or opposition to the Day of Silence event in a letter sent out earlier this month.

Last year's Day of Silence, during which some students and teachers wore buttons that read ''vocal supporter" or ''silent supporter," prompted opposition from some students and residents.

''Free speech in a public school is protected by constitutional law and Supreme Court decisions," wrote Jones, emphasizing the event is not sponsored by the high school. ''As principal of this school, I cannot forbid students or teachers from wearing buttons, stickers, armbands, or T-shirts in expressing their views."

Wednesday's event already has generated public controversy.

John Moriarty, chairman of Citizens for Freedom, a local group that describes itself as concerned about good government, urged school officials in a letter last week to cancel the Day of Silence event. He said he believes the school is endorsing the event by allowing it to be held during school hours.

The event, he said, divides the community, creates stress, and leads to name-calling on both sides.

''The school should not be endorsing events, programs, or groups that portions of the community are uncomfortable with," he said by telephone. ''That would be politicizing the issue."

But school leaders contend they have a duty to create an atmosphere that fosters acceptance of all students and all kinds of families, including those headed by same-sex parents, and those lessons need to begin when students first enter school as kindergartners.

''We know there are some parents who will be uncomfortable with it, but we want to include all families and children in our school district," said Helen Cohen, chairwoman of the Lexington School Committee.

On Wednesday, Rob and Robin Wirthlin made public their objection to their son's teacher reading the book ''King & King," which featured a prince marrying another prince with the two kissing at the book's end.

In April 2005, Lexington parent David Parker was arrested on trespassing charges because he refused to leave Eastabrook school grounds until the administration allowed him to remove his son from classroom discussions about same-sex parents. Parker objected to his son bringing home from his kindergarten classroom a book called ''Who's in a Family?," which depicted same-sex parents along with other types of families. His stand prompted national groups to come to Lexington and other communities to protest gay rights.

Despite the complaints, Bonnie Brodner, who moved here nine years ago with her partner to raise a family, said she feels as welcomed in Lexington as she ever did. ''The only thing that has changed is people are more open about their support of same-sex parents," said Brodner, a stay-at-home mother of two boys, 6 and 10. ''We haven't gotten any negative reactions."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 04-24-2006, 04:46 PM   #89
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 03:00 PM
you know, i was thinking about this thread when i was running this morning, and i am willing to place a bet: for every bigot parent that protests, 5 other parents will roll their eyes decide to distance themselves from the fundies.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-24-2006, 04:49 PM   #90
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,997
Local Time: 03:00 PM
The eye rollers are overlooked by the media and maybe by all of us. Squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that.
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen 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 03:00 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