New mccain ad

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2759535
then send them to a christian school.
And you can talk about the history of the events and why they occured by giving both points of view... As a christian.. I could talk about Islam, Buddism, Confusist, etc... and be able to talk about them as part of culture and a people's beilef structure... just like we talk about the greek and roman gods... we are taught that... a teach should teach not try to convert or push and idelogy or belief... simple as that... there should not be a purely religious class in public school
I guess you can't see the forest for the trees. I am arguing religion shouldn't be taught as part of a curriculum in public school.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2759577
I guess you can't see the forest for the trees. I am arguing religion shouldn't be taught as part of a cirrocumuli in public school.

I agree with ya on that actually. Of course, "religion" comes in many forms. Christian, Islam, Secularism, etc.
I have no problem with HS students having "religious History" as an elective, however.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2759542
okay... kids no this... right?
We'll how come it seems to be more m-olesters than ever before... I know people are more likely to speak up now than before... but that is because of education.
I know a good # of people that have share with me that they have been abused in this age range... and -ex ed is more than just "the birds and the bees" it about knowing your body, and it would seem to me that people are ashamed of the human body... this is the 21st century.
I think you answered your own question

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2759587
I agree with ya on that actually. Of course, "religion" comes in many forms. Christian, Islam, Secularism, etc.
I have no problem with HS students having "religious History" as an elective, however.
An elective might be fine, I mean I wouldn't oppose it but I sure wouldn't expect it to be unbiased. I am pretty open minded about religion but I would have a hard time being totally objective about it. I actually think an atheist might be the perfect teacher for such a class. They would despise all of them equally

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2759445
Rylan, please show me the evidence of this:
*I've read the Bill
*I've read the curriculum
You are absolutely wrong. That is NOT correct.
Instead of repeating the talking points, how about posting some proof from the actual curriculum or legislation???
I saw the link to the bill. Where's the link to the specific curriculum for each grade? I hope you're not just going by what was written in this bill for your argument about what they plan to teach in grades K - 6. What's written in the bill is just a blanket statement that covers all the required criteria that should be considered when taught in these classes. It would be ridiculous to expect the schools to use this bill as the defacto standard of what will be taught in all grade levels. I would think their Legislature would have the common sense to let the School Board, teachers, and parents decide specifically what can or can't be taught at each grade level. I know Texas had a recent debate about certain content changes in various books that would be used in the upcoming school years. The deciders were the Board Of Education, and a Board consisting of teachers and parents. That's the way it should be.

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2759590
I think you answered your own question
because we are stressing early education to people you say are too young... and again... I its not a week that goes by that I don't read or hear a news report about a m-olester... or violaters who are caught living near schools...
this is just McCain's and his supporters misleading people about Obama... as I said anyone who believes what this commercial is insinuating lacks good common sense.

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2759577
I guess you can't see the forest for the trees. I am arguing religion shouldn't be taught as part of a curriculum in public school.

Religion can be taught as history ... or theory ... but not as idealogy or with the intent to preach or convert...
As I said... why is it okay to teach about Roman and Greek gods?
I do agree that in public schools that entire classes should not be devoted to these types of classes...
"the forest through the trees?" or "for the trees"

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2759618
I saw the link to the bill. Where's the link to the specific curriculum for each grade? I hope you're not just going by what was written in this bill for your argument about what they plan to teach in grades K - 6. What's written in the bill is just a blanket statement that covers all the required criteria that should be considered when taught in these classes. It would be ridiculous to expect the schools to use this bill as the defacto standard of what will be taught in all grade levels. I would think their Legislature would have the common sense to let the School Board, teachers, and parents decide specifically what can or can't be taught at each grade level. I know Texas had a recent debate about certain content changes in various books that would be used in the upcoming school years. The deciders were the Board Of Education, and a Board consisting of teachers and parents. That's the way it should be.
I posted earlier the name of Obama's spokeman and the curriculum he sited...

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2759685
because we are stressing early education to people you say are too young... and again... I its not a week that goes by that I don't read or hear a news report about a m-olester... or violaters who are caught living near schools...
this is just McCain's and his supporters misleading people about Obama... as I said anyone who believes what this commercial is insinuating lacks good common sense.
Common sense doesn't overrule the truth.
Rylan, I'll ask you again... Show a quote from the Bill saying the "K" education consists of predator avoidance... Sorry. That's not what the Bill says or was about. That's not even what Obama himself said it was about.
You're defending Obama, once again, but wholly spinning the truth. We've quoted the Bill that says what "K" would be taught. (HIV prevention among other things), I've referred you to the explicit curriculum. We've quoted Obama himself.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2759685
because we are stressing early education to people you say are too young... and again... I its not a week that goes by that I don't read or hear a news report about a m-olester... or violaters who are caught living near schools...
this is just McCain's and his supporters misleading people about Obama... as I said anyone who believes what this commercial is insinuating lacks good common sense.
Let's see, Obama has no problem allowing a baby born as the result of a botched late term abortion left to slowly die, I'd say in light of that anything is possible.