Cultural Separation from Parents

[Soloist]

Eph 4:29  Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.
Eph 4:30  And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.
Eph 4:31  Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice:
Eph 4:32  And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.

It’s one thing to make accusations with evidence, but your whole stance is discredited when you choose to discredit someone seeking to warn you. I disagree with Ken, but those words you chose are vindictive and only show your character, rather than Ken’s.

[temporal1]

P.20:

Why SHOULD public schools be teaching about gender and all the other questions you raise?

- - - - - - -

This seems to me to imply, that in the public education of children, these questions you raise SHOULD be the primary focus of education and after getting these questions answered correctly, THEN you move on to the less important things like reading, writing and math.

This is what many of us are saying is wrong with the education systems of our day.

i was so hoping GaryK would weigh in this morning.

[Szdfan]

From my experiences, whenever I see someone present explanationswrite multiple serial postings of great length trying to justify secular sins and perversions, that is a possible sure sign of mental issues and addictions.

In the case of defending the sexualisation of children, the questions that emerge for me are:
-Does this person have an addiction to child porn?
-If so, does this person work with children?
-Does this person victimise children?
-Is this person supporting the sexualisation of children to create a new supply of victims?

This would be a much better way of expressing the thought without targeting. I underlined the I statements that identify that this is a personal opinion. I think this is a legitimate expression, but needed to be less targeted.

A clarifying question:

Would you still consider it a legitimate expression if I wrote:

"In my experience, whenever I see someone write multiple posts attacking queer and trans people and describing them in the worst and most dehumanizing ways possible sure sign of mental health issues.

In the case of demonizing and condemning LGBTQ people, the questions that emerge for me:

• Is this person secretly LGBTQ?
• Does this person have unresolved feelings of attraction to people of the same sex that is causing them to lash out against openly LGBTQ people?
• Has this person engaged in same-sex sexual behavior that they are ashamed of because of their religious beliefs?
• Is this person a self-hating queer hiding behind religious piety?"

Would this be considered by you to be a legitimate perspective and opinion if I wrote this about a particular person on this forum? Max of course can believe and think whatever he wants, but this doesn't change the fact that his was post was targeted directly against Ken (and I suppose me if I had the energy and interest to argue with the same tenacity as Ken) and I think completely over the line.

There are of course other reasons than pedophilia for why someone might support trans students just as there are other reasons other than secret gay feelings about why someone might oppose the growing acceptance and inclusion of LGBTQ people in society.

[Falco Knotwise]

You still haven't answered the question. How do you think LGBT students should be treated in schools? And how should students be taught to treat their fellow students and citizens who are different from them?

If you could teach "diversity and inclusion" in a way that doesn’t also advance gender ideology (teaching gender is optional) then parents might be more accepting, but I don't think that's possible, hence the inevitable clash.

Do you agree that parents should at least be able to opt their children out of sexuality and gender curriculum they think inappropriate for their child?

Also, an optional religious course that teaches gender issues from a Christian perspective but that also teaches to respect and not harass others of different beliefs in school might be another possibility to consider.

[Ken]

1) .. And by the way, the majority of teachers that you are criticizing are Christian.

2) .. What you are defining as "Christian" is actually a minority of Christianity.

1) Do you have a source for this claim? (i’ve never seen one for gov school teachers.)
There are stats reflecting the majority are political Democrats.

Teaching is a very middle class profession and most teachers are from (and reflect) the communities in which they work. The wealthy elite very much discourage their children from going into teaching because it lacks the status and wealth of other professions. So they push their children into business, law, medicine, and finance. The very poor tend not to get the college education required, they are more likely to go straight into the workforce after HS. And those from poor backgrounds who go on to college tend to seek higher paying professions because they are more likely to be the primary source of income in their families. Whereas teachers tend to be married to other middle class folks and have dual income families.

Most teachers attend regional public or Christian universities close to home and tend to work in the geographic areas where they are from. When I taught in Waco TX there were more teachers from Baylor than anyplace else. Followed by Texas A&M and other nearby regional colleges like Tarleton State. Few were from out of state so I was the odd one out. Here in Southwest Washington the bulk of teachers attended local regional schools like Central Washington, Western Washington, Washington State, and various regional private Christian colleges like Pacific Lutheran, Gonzaga, University of Portland (Catholic), Whitworth (Presbyterian) and Linfield (Baptist).

In terms of the above to points that most teachers are Christian and that most Christians do not endorse the rigid anti-LGBT views expressed here?

First, teachers also generally reflect the communities in which they are from religiously. Here is one poll that found 37% of teachers are evangelical Christians, https://www.christianheadlines.com/cont ... finds.html which is actually higher than the general population in which 24% identify as evangelical Christian: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/20 ... ffiliated/ And here is another survey https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/c ... ar-schools that found:

First, most public school teachers in the sample (94%) believe in God or a higher power. Approximately half of the public school teachers surveyed consider religion to be "very important" to them, and an additional third feel that it is somewhat important. Thus public school teachers are only slightly less religious than the general national population, 60% of whom report religion to be very important. Over 91% of public school teachers we surveyed indicate that they pray, closely matching the national figure of 90%. Approximately 60% of the teachers in the sample claim to "pray regularly," with an additional 26% indicating doing so in times of need or at formal worship services. Thus, like the national population, the vast majority of public school teachers in this study are people of faith, and they take seriously their spiritual beliefs and practices.

Second, not only do many teachers personally believe and engage in spiritual practices, but many also implicitly connect their spirituality to their professional lives. Remarkably, over half of the public school teachers in the sample felt a deep knowing or mission to teach--or "‘called' by God," as the survey phrased it. Many public school teachers report praying about their professional lives, with over 60% indicating that prayer has benefited them professionally. Of the over 91% of public school teachers who pray, 93% believe that prayer has given them comfort during difficult times or professional crises, and more than three-quarters believe that praying has helped them foster better relationships with students.

Of the teachers who pray, 84% indicate that prayer has helped them to cope better with job-related stress; and approximately 70% believe that praying has enabled them to maintain enthusiasm for teaching and has reduced professional burnout. Thus, not only do teachers turn to their faith when faced with a professional problem, but most perceive that spiritual practices help them cope with job-related stress.

Finally as to the second point? Yes, public opinion polling finds that a majority of Christians do, in fact, broadly support LGBT rights and it is only a minority of Christians who hold to the rigidly conservative viewpoints that we find expressed here on this forum. Conservative Anabaptists are not representative of Christians in general: https://www.prri.org/research/findings- ... ues-atlas/

And yes, teachers do tend to trend more Democratic. But the biggest reason for that is because Democrats are far more supportive of public education than Republicans and have been for decades. Both today and in the past it is almost always Republicans who attack teachers and public education for cheap political advantage. Villainizing a profession turns out not the way to gain its support. Imagine that.

[temporal1]

Ken:
1) .. And by the way, the majority of teachers that you are criticizing are Christian.

^^ok.
using many words, you failed to substantiate your claim about “majority.”

If you could teach "diversity and inclusion" in a way that doesn’t also advance gender ideology (teaching gender is optional) then parents might be more accepting, but I don't think that's possible, hence the inevitable clash.

Do you agree that parents should at least be able to opt their children out of sexuality and gender curriculum?

Also, an optional religious course that teaches gender issues from a Christian perspective but that also teaches to respect and not harass others of different beliefs in school might be another possibility to consider.

“The ship has sailed” on promotion of gender ideology, as biden formally announced from the White House lawn.
It’s now ABOUT TAXPAYER DOLLARS, and legal protections and power. The fox is in the henhouse, and, lovin’ it.

Falco,
your proposal is what was done in recent decades THAT RESULTED IN the present quagmire. We wouldn’t otherwise be “here.”

Too many trusted too much for too long.
The price has come due.

As long as religion is taught by “gov-approved” Christians (aka, Christians/Catholics in label only) - waste of time.
(They would be more than happy to do so!) Just ask hillary, obama, biden, pelosi, durbin, et al. They aren’t shy about their motivations.

[Falco Knotwise]

Ken:
1) .. And by the way, the majority of teachers that you are criticizing are Christian.

^^ok.
using many words, you failed to substantiate your claim about “majority.”

If you could teach "diversity and inclusion" in a way that doesn’t also advance gender ideology (teaching gender is optional) then parents might be more accepting, but I don't think that's possible, hence the inevitable clash.

Do you agree that parents should at least be able to opt their children out of sexuality and gender curriculum?

Also, an optional religious course that teaches gender issues from a Christian perspective but that also teaches to respect and not harass others of different beliefs in school might be another possibility to consider.

“The ship has sailed” on promotion of gender ideology, as biden formally announced from the White House lawn.
It’s now ABOUT TAXPAYER DOLLARS, and legal protections and power. The fox is in the henhouse, and, lovin’ it.

Falco,
your proposal is what was done in recent decades THAT RESULTED IN the present quagmire. We wouldn’t otherwise be “here.”

Too many trusted too much for too long.
The price has come due.

As long as religion is taught by “gov-approved” Christians (aka, Christians/Catholics in label only) - waste of time.
(They would be more than happy to do so!) Just ask hillary, obama, biden, pelosi, durbin, et al. They aren’t shy about their motivations.

Good point, temp. It's not hard to see how whatever is "allowed" could be hollowed out and made to serve radically secular ends.

There is a suit right now in which parents are suing for the right of parents to opt their children out of sexuality and gender courses.

https://eppc.org/news/eppc-amicus-brief ... urriculum/

[Ken]

You still haven't answered the question. How do you think LGBT students should be treated in schools? And how should students be taught to treat their fellow students and citizens who are different from them?

If you could teach "diversity and inclusion" in a way that doesn’t also advance gender ideology (teaching gender is optional) then parents might be more accepting, but I don't think that's possible, hence the inevitable clash.

Do you agree that parents should at least be able to opt their children out of sexuality and gender curriculum they think inappropriate for their child?

Also, an optional religious course that teaches gender issues from a Christian perspective but that also teaches to respect and not harass others of different beliefs in school might be another possibility to consider.

Yes I have no problem with parents who want to opt out of specific lessons or classes. Around here school has become more or less "a la carte" anyway. At the HS level I usually have some students who homeschool and then show up for STEM classes like chemistry and for extracurricular stuff like sports, band, theater. There are many students who trade time between the home high school and local tech schools and community colleges. And some who trade time between religious and public schools. You can assemble your degree requirements any way you wish to. So if you want to take your health or language or math requirements through an alternative way like a private online school you are free to do so. Around here the only place LGBT issues specifically come up is in health class and then only within one short unit.

And here in Washington parents have the right to opt out of lessons they object to. That is in state law. If there are some states or districts elsewhere in the country who don't allow that they are just unnecessarily and stupidly asking for trouble in my mind.

After school religion classes are also common in many communities. Around here Mormons have their own religion classes before school every single day. And other groups like Muslims and conservative Jews do much the same in various ways. Nothing is stopping other groups from doing the same.
There are also a wide variety of Christian-oriented after school programs such as Young Life that do the sort of thing you want. So what you are asking already exists: https://younglife.org/

[temporal1]

There’s lots written on the overall partisan divide in education, Pre-K through college, inclusive of unions,
being insultingly vague isn’t helpful. A moderate report:

Pew Research / Public school district mission statements in Democratic-voting areas mention some terms more
than those in areas that voted Republican in 2020
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads ... divides_8/

THOMAS SOWELL has addressed the glaring partisan problems. Has anyone not witnessed/experienced it?


There are questions about many teachers being lower-ranked college graduates.

“Why teachers are under the microscope”
https://fordhaminstitute.org/ohio/comme ... microscope

Paywall: WAPO / “Do teachers really come from the bottom third of college graduates?”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/an ... _blog.html

[temporal1]

Ken:
1) .. And by the way, the majority of teachers that you are criticizing are Christian.

^^ok.
using many words, you failed to substantiate your claim about “majority.”

If you could teach "diversity and inclusion" in a way that doesn’t also advance gender ideology (teaching gender is optional) then parents might be more accepting, but I don't think that's possible, hence the inevitable clash.

Do you agree that parents should at least be able to opt their children out of sexuality and gender curriculum?

Also, an optional religious course that teaches gender issues from a Christian perspective but that also teaches to respect and not harass others of different beliefs in school might be another possibility to consider.

“The ship has sailed” on promotion of gender ideology, as biden formally announced from the White House lawn.
It’s now ABOUT TAXPAYER DOLLARS, and legal protections and power. The fox is in the henhouse, and, lovin’ it.

Falco,
your proposal is what was done in recent decades THAT RESULTED IN the present quagmire. We wouldn’t otherwise be “here.”

Too many trusted too much for too long.
The price has come due.

As long as religion is taught by “gov-approved” Christians (aka, Christians/Catholics in label only) - waste of time.
(They would be more than happy to do so!) Just ask hillary, obama, biden, pelosi, durbin, et al. They aren’t shy about their motivations.

Good point, temp. It's not hard to see how whatever is "allowed" could be hollowed out and made to serve radically secular ends.

There is a suit right now in which parents are suing for the right of parents to opt their children out of sexuality and gender courses.

https://eppc.org/news/eppc-amicus-brief ... urriculum/

(i think) it’s important to “connect the dots” and take personal responsibility .. i know, in my (very average family) education and higher ed were VERY VALUED, and, to a great extent, parents everywhere were intimidated by teachers, they trusted and WANTED to trust, they wanted what was best for their children. TONS of personal sacrifice involved.

Some people were alert all along. Some saw warning signs along the way. The majority feel blind-sided.
i was not “early to the party.”

(i think) it’s important, esp for the blind-sided, to dissect the history, to learn from it.
And, to not shy from admission of error.

Scriptures warn about sleeping. There is a price.