Government Should Teach Traditional Values

[Samson]

The blessings of liberty the Founders gave us were intended to replace the caste system with no limits leaving each of us to make of that what we can. Many make the most of what they can; others coast; others sit on their hands and resent what others have. That is why the poorest of the poor so often rise to that 'elite class' and why some born into the 'elite class' wind up bankrupt or in prison or otherwise in less than noble circumstances than their parents.

Nobody is required to stay where they are. The fact that some choose to do so does not create a CASTE system.

The founders wouldn't have let you vote, and it would be very unlikely that you would be allowed to work outside the home, so don't begin the "blessings of liberty the Founders gave us" routine.

True, there is no REQUIREMENT that anyone "stay where they are."

But its a little silly to expect most of the wealthy to try to leave their class, or to throw their children into the public school system to try to give them a better chance of living like Archie Bunker.

The Founders included the mechanism which allowed those of us of the distaff persuasion to change the condition to which you refer.

That foresight is a major part of the equation that is America; why do you ignore it.

No, The Founders specifically included the disenfranchisement of large portions of american society, but I suppose in your imaginary little world, involking "The Founders" is some sort of Talisman used to ward off reality: Barriers do exist between different socioeconomic groups in The Land of The Free.

The fact that there are a few able to overcome these barriers doesn't eliminate the fact that they exist.
The fact that the government doesn't promote these barriers doesn't eliminate the fact that they exist.
The fact that most Americans are happy being in their current socioeconomic class doesn't eliminate the fact that they exist.

But you go ahead and consider that, despite human nature, "the Founders" emplaced a barrier-free socioeconomic state in which everyone is drinking bubble-up, and eating rainbow stew.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Ummm, that's why it was a question? I could guess what your answer is, but I prefer to ask.

Exactly what do you mean by morality?

The dictionary definition, but I'll make it more specific pertaining to the OP: "traditional values".

I honestly didn't think it was a complicated question and meant nothing by it.

"I honestly didn't think it was a complicated question and meant nothing by it."
Actually, I asked because I feel it is a complicated question, but I apologize if you felt that I was...offended, or challenged.
I love the debate and the examination of this sort of question.

mo·ral·i·ty/məˈralətē/Noun: 1.Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

Too vague....

How about including the idea that schools should teach the combination of skills, and traits that are identified above, and that add to the chances that both the individual and the society would be most successful.

It seems to me that you can probably guess where I'm coming from, and several of my posts in this thread would add to the answer I'm about to give, but what do you think about these...and are they 'morality'?

1. Rather than the anti-capitalism screeds, as in "The Story of Stuff," I want schools to identify and extoll the economic system that has proven most efficacious: free-market capitalism.
a. the reasons for taxation, and the dangers of excessive taxation.
b. competition
c. entrepreneurship

2. The societal and individual benefits of marriage and a two parent family, and the deleterious results of having children out of wedlock.

3.Schools should take a more proactive stance in the face of criminal behavior: do not shy away from removing student who have exhibited same.


Is that a start?

 

[PoliticalChic]

3. "I doubt they qualified for food stamps."
Why? You just admitted "I'm not certain what happened to the other 75%."

If your idea of critical thinking is to wonder if the 75% of the "super rich" fell from that category into qualifying for food stamps then there's not much hope for you.

Still smarting, eh?

 

[eots]

3. "I doubt they qualified for food stamps."
Why? You just admitted "I'm not certain what happened to the other 75%."

If your idea of critical thinking is to wonder if the 75% of the "super rich" fell from that category into qualifying for food stamps then there's not much hope for you.

Still smarting, eh?

back in the kitchen woman

 

[PoliticalChic]

If your idea of critical thinking is to wonder if the 75% of the "super rich" fell from that category into qualifying for food stamps then there's not much hope for you.

Still smarting, eh?

back in the kitchen woman

Stop peeking!

 

[Samson]

3. "I doubt they qualified for food stamps."
Why? You just admitted "I'm not certain what happened to the other 75%."

If your idea of critical thinking is to wonder if the 75% of the "super rich" fell from that category into qualifying for food stamps then there's not much hope for you.

Still smarting, eh?

Indeed: You should offer free Tylenol for anyone attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If your idea of critical thinking is to wonder if the 75% of the "super rich" fell from that category into qualifying for food stamps then there's not much hope for you.

Still smarting, eh?

Indeed: You should offer free Tylenol for anyone attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you.

Beware: I don’t have a license to kill, but I do have a learners’ permit.

 

[Samson]

Still smarting, eh?

Indeed: You should offer free Tylenol for anyone attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you.

Beware: I don’t have a license to kill, but I do have a learners’ permit.

Readers of PoliticalChic assume some risk of permanent brain damage, and even death.

I understand that the US Surgeon General is going to require this warning on the USMB banner.

 

[caela]

It's not the school's place to teach morality or "traditional values". It is the school's place to teach my child to read, write, do arithmetic, history, science, civics etc. It is also a school's duty to reinforce such lessons as honesty and integrity through the policies they put in place to deal with children who are less than such.

It is NOT their place to teach my child that having children out of wedlock, or having premarital sex is wrong. It is not their place to teach my child that the only acceptable relationship is that of a man/woman. It is not their place to indoctrinate my child into whatever value system they feel is appropriate. The only values they should have any interaction in trying to teach a child are those that specifically have to do with how a child acts while on school grounds (for classes or school related functions) such as not fighting, not cheating, finishing their work in the appropriate time to earn full credit.

Anything concerning general values are MY prerogative to teach to my child...not theirs. It is my job to teach my child that she is special and loved. It is my job to teach her the value of hard work and the value of the education she will be getting in school. It is my job to teach her to respect ALL people regardless of social or economic class or any other arbitrary labels we like to put on people. It is my job to teach her about relationships, love, respect for herself and others, and any other value you would like to name.

Let the school do their job, I'll do mine.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Indeed: You should offer free Tylenol for anyone attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you.

Beware: I don’t have a license to kill, but I do have a learners’ permit.

Readers of PoliticalChic assume some risk of permanent brain damage, and even death.

I understand that the US Surgeon General is going to require this warning on the USMB banner.

"Readers of PoliticalChic assume some risk of permanent brain damage,"

Well, then, good news: you have absolutely no chance of any deleterious effects.

As a dyslexic, I bet you got lousy grades- but never knew it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It's not the school's place to teach morality or "traditional values". It is the school's place to teach my child to read, write, do arithmetic, history, science, civics etc. It is also a school's duty to reinforce such lessons as honesty and integrity through the policies they put in place to deal with children who are less than such.

It is NOT their place to teach my child that having children out of wedlock, or having premarital sex is wrong. It is not their place to teach my child that the only acceptable relationship is that of a man/woman. It is not their place to indoctrinate my child into whatever value system they feel is appropriate. The only values they should have any interaction in trying to teach a child are those that specifically have to do with how a child acts while on school grounds (for classes or school related functions) such as not fighting, not cheating, finishing their work in the appropriate time to earn full credit.

Anything concerning general values are MY prerogative to teach to my child...not theirs. It is my job to teach my child that she is special and loved. It is my job to teach her the value of hard work and the value of the education she will be getting in school. It is my job to teach her to respect ALL people regardless of social or economic class or any other arbitrary labels we like to put on people. It is my job to teach her about relationships, love, respect for herself and others, and any other value you would like to name.

Let the school do their job, I'll do mine.

Hard to see how you can 'do your job' since you don't realize that there is hardly an objective way to include 'history, science, civics, ect."
Herein is the entre to Left wing views for children.

Further, would you really object if you could be convinced there are "skills, and traits that are identified above, and that add to the chances that both the individual and the society would be most successful."

Really?

 

[Foxfyre]

It's not the school's place to teach morality or "traditional values". It is the school's place to teach my child to read, write, do arithmetic, history, science, civics etc. It is also a school's duty to reinforce such lessons as honesty and integrity through the policies they put in place to deal with children who are less than such.

It is NOT their place to teach my child that having children out of wedlock, or having premarital sex is wrong. It is not their place to teach my child that the only acceptable relationship is that of a man/woman. It is not their place to indoctrinate my child into whatever value system they feel is appropriate. The only values they should have any interaction in trying to teach a child are those that specifically have to do with how a child acts while on school grounds (for classes or school related functions) such as not fighting, not cheating, finishing their work in the appropriate time to earn full credit.

Anything concerning general values are MY prerogative to teach to my child...not theirs. It is my job to teach my child that she is special and loved. It is my job to teach her the value of hard work and the value of the education she will be getting in school. It is my job to teach her to respect ALL people regardless of social or economic class or any other arbitrary labels we like to put on people. It is my job to teach her about relationships, love, respect for herself and others, and any other value you would like to name.

Let the school do their job, I'll do mine.

Hard to see how you can 'do your job' since you don't realize that there is hardly an objective way to include 'history, science, civics, ect."
Herein is the entre to Left wing views for children.

Further, would you really object if you could be convinced there are "skills, and traits that are identified above, and that add to the chances that both the individual and the society would be most successful."

Really?

I agree with Caela that schools should not be teaching that premarital sex or having kids out of wedlock etc. is right or wrong, good or bad. I think you are right, however, that a good education includes information on the statistics of poverty and other economic and social factors re those who enter into traditional marriage versus single parents, etc.

There is a problem when the government school imposes a moral value on the facts.

The same goes with information on landmark court decisions, acts of Congress, various government policies, key elements of history and culture etc. Again the student should not be instructed that one thing is good while the other is bad, but should be providing honest and complete objective information by which the student can make value judgments.

There is no problem with teaching the facts that will provide sufficient information for the student to consider what values he or she wants to guide his/her life.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It's not the school's place to teach morality or "traditional values". It is the school's place to teach my child to read, write, do arithmetic, history, science, civics etc. It is also a school's duty to reinforce such lessons as honesty and integrity through the policies they put in place to deal with children who are less than such.

It is NOT their place to teach my child that having children out of wedlock, or having premarital sex is wrong. It is not their place to teach my child that the only acceptable relationship is that of a man/woman. It is not their place to indoctrinate my child into whatever value system they feel is appropriate. The only values they should have any interaction in trying to teach a child are those that specifically have to do with how a child acts while on school grounds (for classes or school related functions) such as not fighting, not cheating, finishing their work in the appropriate time to earn full credit.

Anything concerning general values are MY prerogative to teach to my child...not theirs. It is my job to teach my child that she is special and loved. It is my job to teach her the value of hard work and the value of the education she will be getting in school. It is my job to teach her to respect ALL people regardless of social or economic class or any other arbitrary labels we like to put on people. It is my job to teach her about relationships, love, respect for herself and others, and any other value you would like to name.

Let the school do their job, I'll do mine.

Hard to see how you can 'do your job' since you don't realize that there is hardly an objective way to include 'history, science, civics, ect."
Herein is the entre to Left wing views for children.

Further, would you really object if you could be convinced there are "skills, and traits that are identified above, and that add to the chances that both the individual and the society would be most successful."

Really?

I agree with Caela that schools should not be teaching that premarital sex or having kids out of wedlock etc. is right or wrong, good or bad. I think you are right, however, that a good education includes information on the statistics of poverty and other economic and social factors re those who enter into traditional marriage versus single parents, etc.

There is a problem when the government school imposes a moral value on the facts.

The same goes with information on landmark court decisions, acts of Congress, various government policies, key elements of history and culture etc. Again the student should not be instructed that one thing is good while the other is bad, but should be providing honest and complete objective information by which the student can make value judgments.

There is no problem with teaching the facts that will provide sufficient information for the student to consider what values he or she wants to guide his/her life.

"...having kids out of wedlock etc. is right or wrong, good or bad."

This has nothing to do with the "government school imposes a moral value on the facts."

Rather, it has do with preparing children to be successful.
These are the facts:
"Here is the lottery ticket that single mothers are handing their innocent children by choosing to raise them without fathers: Controlling for socioeconomic status, race, and place of residence, the strongest predictor of whether a person will end up in prison is that he was raised by a single parent. By 1996, 70 percent of inmates in state juvenile detention centers serving long-term sentences were raised by single mothers. Seventy-two percent of juvenile murderers and 60 percent of rapists come from single-mother homes. Seventy percent of teenage births, dropouts, suicides, runaways, juvenile delinquents, and child murderers involve children raised by single mothers. Girls raised without fathers are more sexually promiscuous and more likely to end up divorced.

A 1990 study by the Progressive Policy Institute showed that after controlling for single motherhood, the difference between black and white crime rates disappeared."
From “Guilty” by Ann Coulter


BTW...
The numbers cited by Coulter come from the Department of Justice's Bureau of Statistics report, "Intimate Partner Violence in the United States." The survey found that "on average from 2001 to 2005, both females and males who were separated or divorced had the greatest risk of nonfatal intimate partner violence while persons who were married or widowed reported the lowest risk of violence." Between 2001 and 2005, 1.2 out of 1,000 married women reported physical abuse by an "intimate partner" (in this case, their husband), versus 5.5 out of 1,000 among women who never married.
In short, Coulter cites the numbers accurately.
PolitiFact | Coulter says husbands rarely beat up their wives


If children are lucky enough to have shop class, I know that you would agree that they should be warned about the dangers of the equipment....so....
...you get the idea.

How about it....do we include " teaching that premarital sex or having kids out of wedlock etc. is right or wrong, good or bad."

 

[caela]

It's not the school's place to teach morality or "traditional values". It is the school's place to teach my child to read, write, do arithmetic, history, science, civics etc. It is also a school's duty to reinforce such lessons as honesty and integrity through the policies they put in place to deal with children who are less than such.

It is NOT their place to teach my child that having children out of wedlock, or having premarital sex is wrong. It is not their place to teach my child that the only acceptable relationship is that of a man/woman. It is not their place to indoctrinate my child into whatever value system they feel is appropriate. The only values they should have any interaction in trying to teach a child are those that specifically have to do with how a child acts while on school grounds (for classes or school related functions) such as not fighting, not cheating, finishing their work in the appropriate time to earn full credit.

Anything concerning general values are MY prerogative to teach to my child...not theirs. It is my job to teach my child that she is special and loved. It is my job to teach her the value of hard work and the value of the education she will be getting in school. It is my job to teach her to respect ALL people regardless of social or economic class or any other arbitrary labels we like to put on people. It is my job to teach her about relationships, love, respect for herself and others, and any other value you would like to name.

Let the school do their job, I'll do mine.

Hard to see how you can 'do your job' since you don't realize that there is hardly an objective way to include 'history, science, civics, ect."
Herein is the entre to Left wing views for children.

Further, would you really object if you could be convinced there are "skills, and traits that are identified above, and that add to the chances that both the individual and the society would be most successful."

Really?

It's not at all hard to be objective with school lessons.

History: This is what happened on this date. These are the possible causes according to historians.

Civics: This is the way our gov't works. This is the way other gov't systems work.

Science: If you can't teach science objectively you're an idiot, things like chemistry and biology aren't open to a lot of interpretation.

Leaving topic open for the children to ask questions and have discussions is of course a good thing and should be encouraged, feeding them your own personal bias and shutting down discussions you don't like, is not.

As for what's successful, that in itself can be a moral judgement. If someone can show me that what they want to teach my child is to her benefit, or that they can teach it in a more sound way than I can, I am willing to listen. But I will not just arbitrarily hand over the shaping of my child's values and mores to a school system.

@FoxFyre, I have no problem with them being given the statistical facts of situations if that information is appropriate to the class being taught. Ex. Stats on how many single parent households there are in an urban vs. rural setting, would be totally acceptable in a sociology class, or a statistics class. What I object to is a school system, or teacher, taking it upon themselves to add their value judgements to them.

 

[caela]

<snipped for length>

If children are lucky enough to have shop class, I know that you would agree that they should be warned about the dangers of the equipment....so....
...you get the idea.

How about it....do we include " teaching that premarital sex or having kids out of wedlock etc. is right or wrong, good or bad."

No we don't. You give them the statistics and leave the moral judgments off it and let them come to their own conclusions.

 

[daws101]

somebody would first have to explain what traditional values are ,as they vary from state to state, home to home, person to person .
then discard the traditions the interfere with individuals rights...
toss out all the traditions that are based on ignorance and bigotry.
then you might be getting somewhere.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It's not the school's place to teach morality or "traditional values". It is the school's place to teach my child to read, write, do arithmetic, history, science, civics etc. It is also a school's duty to reinforce such lessons as honesty and integrity through the policies they put in place to deal with children who are less than such.

It is NOT their place to teach my child that having children out of wedlock, or having premarital sex is wrong. It is not their place to teach my child that the only acceptable relationship is that of a man/woman. It is not their place to indoctrinate my child into whatever value system they feel is appropriate. The only values they should have any interaction in trying to teach a child are those that specifically have to do with how a child acts while on school grounds (for classes or school related functions) such as not fighting, not cheating, finishing their work in the appropriate time to earn full credit.

Anything concerning general values are MY prerogative to teach to my child...not theirs. It is my job to teach my child that she is special and loved. It is my job to teach her the value of hard work and the value of the education she will be getting in school. It is my job to teach her to respect ALL people regardless of social or economic class or any other arbitrary labels we like to put on people. It is my job to teach her about relationships, love, respect for herself and others, and any other value you would like to name.

Let the school do their job, I'll do mine.

Hard to see how you can 'do your job' since you don't realize that there is hardly an objective way to include 'history, science, civics, ect."
Herein is the entre to Left wing views for children.

Further, would you really object if you could be convinced there are "skills, and traits that are identified above, and that add to the chances that both the individual and the society would be most successful."

Really?

It's not at all hard to be objective with school lessons.

History: This is what happened on this date. These are the possible causes according to historians.

Civics: This is the way our gov't works. This is the way other gov't systems work.

Science: If you can't teach science objectively you're an idiot, things like chemistry and biology aren't open to a lot of interpretation.

Leaving topic open for the children to ask questions and have discussions is of course a good thing and should be encouraged, feeding them your own personal bias and shutting down discussions you don't like, is not.

As for what's successful, that in itself can be a moral judgement. If someone can show me that what they want to teach my child is to her benefit, or that they can teach it in a more sound way than I can, I am willing to listen. But I will not just arbitrarily hand over the shaping of my child's values and mores to a school system.

@FoxFyre, I have no problem with them being given the statistical facts of situations if that information is appropriate to the class being taught. Ex. Stats on how many single parent households there are in an urban vs. rural setting, would be totally acceptable in a sociology class, or a statistics class. What I object to is a school system, or teacher, taking it upon themselves to add their value judgements to them.

1. What, do you live under a rock?

History....teaching how all of the evil that has happened can be laid at the foot of America.

Civics...the benefits of big government, and how it is necessary to restrain the evil corporations.

Science...global warming caused by people, and worship of the earth.

2. "...feeding them your own personal bias and shutting down discussions you don't like, is not."
I wonder if you could identify who and where this was proposed in this thread? If not, it might be an indication that education is necessary. Remedial education.

3. "If someone can show me that what they want to teach my child is to her benefit, or that they can teach it in a more sound way than I can, I am willing to listen." Fair enough...I'm with you here.

4. "But I will not just arbitrarily hand over the shaping of my child's values and mores to a school system."
Unless you homeschool, that is exactly what you have done.

5. What is your objection to the stats in post #193?
All true.
You want children to be aware of same, children who are being given sex lessons as early as "a proposal to extend sex education to children as young as kindergarten age."
Read more: Montana Parents Weigh In On Proposed Kindergarten Sex Ed | Fox News

You down with that?

 

[PoliticalChic]

No we don't. You give them the statistics and leave the moral judgments off it and let them come to their own conclusions.

You said it better than I did....give them the stats from post #193 and there is no doubt as to the conclusion children will determing.

We may be in agreement.

 

[daws101]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMhwddNQSWQ]"Weird Al" Yankovic - Dare To Be Stupid - YouTube[/ame]

 

[caela]

Hard to see how you can 'do your job' since you don't realize that there is hardly an objective way to include 'history, science, civics, ect."
Herein is the entre to Left wing views for children.

Further, would you really object if you could be convinced there are "skills, and traits that are identified above, and that add to the chances that both the individual and the society would be most successful."

Really?

It's not at all hard to be objective with school lessons.

History: This is what happened on this date. These are the possible causes according to historians.

Civics: This is the way our gov't works. This is the way other gov't systems work.

Science: If you can't teach science objectively you're an idiot, things like chemistry and biology aren't open to a lot of interpretation.

Leaving topic open for the children to ask questions and have discussions is of course a good thing and should be encouraged, feeding them your own personal bias and shutting down discussions you don't like, is not.

As for what's successful, that in itself can be a moral judgement. If someone can show me that what they want to teach my child is to her benefit, or that they can teach it in a more sound way than I can, I am willing to listen. But I will not just arbitrarily hand over the shaping of my child's values and mores to a school system.

@FoxFyre, I have no problem with them being given the statistical facts of situations if that information is appropriate to the class being taught. Ex. Stats on how many single parent households there are in an urban vs. rural setting, would be totally acceptable in a sociology class, or a statistics class. What I object to is a school system, or teacher, taking it upon themselves to add their value judgements to them.

1. What, do you live under a rock?

History....teaching how all of the evil that has happened can be laid at the foot of America.

Civics...the benefits of big government, and how it is necessary to restrain the evil corporations.

Science...global warming caused by people, and worship of the earth.

2. "...feeding them your own personal bias and shutting down discussions you don't like, is not."
I wonder if you could identify who and where this was proposed in this thread? If not, it might be an indication that education is necessary. Remedial education.

3. "If someone can show me that what they want to teach my child is to her benefit, or that they can teach it in a more sound way than I can, I am willing to listen." Fair enough...I'm with you here.

4. "But I will not just arbitrarily hand over the shaping of my child's values and mores to a school system."
Unless you homeschool, that is exactly what you have done.

5. What is your objection to the stats in post #193?
All true.
You want children to be aware of same, children who are being given sex lessons as early as "a proposal to extend sex education to children as young as kindergarten age."
Read more: Montana Parents Weigh In On Proposed Kindergarten Sex Ed | Fox News

You down with that?

1) History....teaching how all of the evil that has happened can be laid at the foot of America.

That's not how history is meant to be taught and there is a lot more of it that happened before America become a country than has happened since. I would LOVE to hear a teacher explain how something like the fall of Rome is the fault of America.

Civics...the benefits of big government, and how it is necessary to restrain the evil corporations.

Corporations are not a form of gov't despite their current ability to buy politician and leaders the world over. Again, not how the class should be taught. A civic class should be a comparison of types of gov't, their good points and their faults, not a moral judgement on any specific current gov't.

Science...global warming caused by people, and worship of the earth.

Most people will not argue global warming in and of itself, many will argue over whether we caused it, helped it along, or it is just a natural trend of the Earth itself. I see no problem with putting all the ideas on the table and letting people make their own choices but this is a discussion that is pretty far beyond most primary and junior high kids who are focusing on basic chemistry (hey lets blow things up!) and biology (ewwwww, I have to dissect what?!!!).

2) You're right, I didn't see that suggested in this thread. It was a bias carried over from another thread I was reading.

3) Covered above in your post.

4) No, having my child in a public school isn't handing over the raising of her. It is handing over her education to people who are trained to teach her basic skills like reading and writing. Though in all honesty I am taking that responsibility on myself already (my daughter is 3) because my child has an innate love of learning and wants to learn new things all the time so I work on teaching her the best I can. I know I don't do it as well as a trained teacher, but we seem to be doing all right and she is already starting to read, is trying to make letters, and is working on, very, basic math skills.

5) I didn't say I had any objection to the aforementioned stats. Just that I don't want them presented along with a moral judgement. Part of the point of an education is to teach children to learn to be thinking adults. They won't learn that skill if we don't let them think for themselves.

Leave teaching morals to the parents, let the schools give them facts and figures, and let them come to their own conclusions somewhere in the middle.