McCain ad blasts Obama bill that teaches kids
- Thread starter paul_valaru
- Start date
paul_valaru
100% Pure Canadian Beef
YOU are a good parent, I have met your kids, you are the minority it seems.
What is wrong with teaching kids TELL SOMEONE!!
Professur
Well-Known Member
Tell someone? Fine. Describing in detail what they're not supposed to be doing, including a flammin' puppet show .... not fine. The long and short is ... it should be at parental discretion, not dictated by some politician from a town who's most famous citizens in history were criminals.
paul_valaru
100% Pure Canadian Beef
parents CAN opt out of the program, and if uncle billy has been doing this for years, maybe they do need to be taught when they are young.
MrBishop
Well-Known Member
Defining the difference between 'good touching' and 'bad touching' is the way you protect kids from authority figures telling kids "Shhh..it's a secret between you and me" or "Your parents will be angry at you" or any other number of lines that predators feed to their little victims.
A lot of parents don't want to breach the topic of sex with their kids at ANY age...and at that age, it only goes as far as "Don't talk to strangers" or "Don't go into the car with strangers"
It'd be a shame if the molester isn't a stranger, wouldn't it?
Professur
Well-Known Member
Contrary to common belief, there are always signs, and an alert parent will see them. I've got a rather ugly reputation where family and friends are concerned anyhow, and I've encouraged the kids to mention Daddy's love of things that go Boom at school. My kids are as safe as they can be made where people they know are concerned.
As for the opt out ... it should be an Opt -in policy.
tonksy
New Member
Unfortunatley, Prof, a large of parents are not involved much with their children beyond their legal requirements. So they certainly don't heed the signs and they wouldn't go out of their way to opt-in to a program like that. The onus being placed on the parents to opt-out is to protect the kids whose parents couldn't be arsed to opt-in.
Professur
Well-Known Member
Again, pandering to the LCD (lowest common dolt), which you will always find me 100% against. Is it any wonder Jerry Springer is still on TV, and the political debate revolves around the cost of earrings, the maternity of a child, and the religion of someone else ... and not a real damn issue anywhere to be found?
paul_valaru
100% Pure Canadian Beef
I agree we should remove some warning stickers, and let the gene pool clean itself, but now where kids are concerned, it is not their fault that their parents are dumbasses
Another point is no matter how good a parent is, sometimes they miss the signs, and maybe if there was someone teaching this, a child somewhere would speak up a lot earlier than they did.
2minkey
bootlicker
Professur
Well-Known Member
Two points then. Don't take this as a personal attack. You just happened to be the one who tabled them.
It's not the kids fault? Perhaps, but it's not a crack baby's fault it's mom is a doper, but does that mean me and mine should have to constantly deal with the consequences of it's existence? It's not a baby robin's fault that it's parents built a nest in the wrong tree, but that doesn't make it any the less lunch for the neighbour's cat. That's nature for ya. Is it the kid's fault? Doesn't really matter. What matters is whether that kid has the fortitude (ingrained, genetic, or otherwise) to overcome and improve.
Teaching ... ah, that most despised issue. I always have a problem with anyone who 'chooses' to teach my child something they didn't clear with me first. IMHO, public schools should be limited to a few very tightly reigned subjects. Math, writing/reading, geography ... FACTS. Teachers all need to be banned from teaching their 'opinions'. Case in point ... my daughter's class was lagging in math, inept in french, barely capable in handwriting .... yet somehow, they had no problem singing songs about Martin Luther bloody King. Why would anyone consider the US civil rights leader, decades dead, to be a more important subject than ....the local seigneuriel system? The present leadership of the country they currently inhabit? The air speed of an unladen african swallow for that matter? These are the same folk to be trusted with 'teaching' prepubescents sex ... without opening the door to a 6 year old orgy in the common toilets?
spike
New Member
Yet they're not teaching sex. Maybe you should find out what exactly is in the curriculum before you form too many more opinions. Base it in facts and all.
Professur
Well-Known Member
Actually, I shouldn't, given that .. in this specific case ... it's not an issue in my election. You, the US voter ... had damn well better know the details.
But, besides that .... exactly how much 'extra' information do you personally think kids need at that age to form a sexual curiosity? I've got two boys at about that age ... and their hands are pretty well permanently attached to their groins.
BTW ... (and I'm not even going to bother to document this, so stuff it) old sexual studies showed that exposing children to sexual stimulus when they're still pre-hormonal is easily the most common factor in homosexuality. Sexual curiosity is not hormonal related, y'know. But becoming sexually 'aware' before your hormones can turn you on to the opposite sex ....
But I'm sure they didn't have a clue back then, did they?
spike
New Member
I thought you might want to know what you were talking about before you went on about it at great lengths. Tha's ok though.
I suppose we'd have to know what 'extra' information they're giving them wouldn't we?
Well without the study and without knowing if they are exposing the kids to sexual stimulus there's really no conclusions to be drawn. Don't let that stop you though.
Teach your kids about sex but don't teach 'em to read. It's the new way.
In order to opt out, a parent must submit a written objection. How many of you with (K) or higher kids can name 3 things your kid was taught last week? Not generalities, but specifics? It;'s hard to opt out when health class was just talking about teeth brushing & now it's reading Bobby Has Two Mommies & describing what condoms are used for.
In order to opt out, a parent must submit a written objection. How many of you with (K) or higher kids can name 3 things your kid was taught last week? Not generalities, but specifics? It;'s hard to opt out when health class was just talking about teeth brushing & now it's reading Bobby Has Two Mommies & describing what condoms are used for.
Gato_Solo
Out-freaking-standing OTC member
1. Interestingly enough, the entire wording of that bill does not appear on that link. Just Obama's word on it.
2. Interestingly enough, the entire wording of that bill does not appear on that link. Just McCain's word on it.
Just once, I'd like to see substance versus speculation. Look it up for yourself, and then decide whether you believe one person over the other, but that will never happen because its easier to sow the seeds of dissention through this crap. The very last thing either side wants is an informed voter, and, thanks, p_v, you're doing their job of misinformation for them quite well...
tonksy
New Member
I don't know about most people but I get detailed weekly reports of what my children learned. Plus, we monitor their homework so we know that way. Also, we have found a way to get them to speak a little about their day over dinner via a game....so, yes, I can name more than 3 things for each child.
You can know what's up and be involved. You just have to put forth the effort and THAT'S the problem with a lot of parents.