NationStates Jolt Archive

edited out upon consultation.

I visited your link, and it provides no support for your claim that 13 year olds would be unable to grasp the exercise that was assigned in this case. If you feel that it provides supports, please describe them (specifically).

Just to warn you, I'm working on my PhD in neuroscience. ;)

I've been reading quite a few books on neuroscience. It seems to be one of the most interesting and growing fields in science. I'll get back to you on a book I just started (can't remember the title), maybe you can tell me if it is bunk or not.

:rolleyes:

There's a difference between holding debates and seeking for answers and making rational descisions. A fifteen year old can decide that they are an anarchist, and go around beleiving that they are one. That doesn't mean that said fifteen year old has made a mature or reasonable descision.

Christ almighty, it isn't fucking complicated!

To get back on topic here... what part of the assignment required any form of rational decisionmaking on the part of the kids?
They were simply and purely asked to use their available personal levels of empathy and to imagine themselves as part of a minority due to their sexual orientation. They did know about sexual orientation, as that had been part of the lessons taught in advcance to the assignment. They are capable of imagining themselves in another person's place. There is not a thing in this assignment that would present an unsurmountable challenge, even to children much younger than that.

The kid thought she could get out of doing a piece of work by playing the religion card. It went bad so she went crying to mother about how the nasty school is corrupting her faith. Big deal, get over it because in the real world your beliefs and faiths get tested every day

Its up to the parents what views they rais their children with, whether religiosly motivated or not. The school didnt have any choice but the fail her. A system of gradings knowledge and inteligence cant work on a personalise question basis. All children should get the same question. I hate all religions, the idea of such a thing offends me, but yet i had to write essays on christian views for my GCSE's (UK school). If i had refused then i would have been failed just as the girl was. The question was asking oppinions and beliefs, so she really had grounds to refuse to do the question. She could have simply answered the question her own way, much as everyone in the class would have.

You have been just as narrow minded as that little, believing that this sort of thing is for a southern states. Also you have stated the obvious, all the time all sides of the arguement are wrong, its compleatly dependant on ones point of view.

EDIT: And as for your statement about things relying entirely on ones point of view. I totally agree. If that werent the case forums like these would be pretty dull.

She should have done the question. period. No-one failed but her.

The impression i got was that they failed her for a term/semester for the one assignment. Obviously they had to fail her for the assignment, but i dont think that justifies failing her for the whole unit unless she was performing badly elsewhere. If they only failed her for the assignment and i misinterpreted the information in the article i retract my statement and wholeheartedly agree that she should have failed.

Also i stated in another post that i think she should have done the assignement regardless of her world view.

I dont think it is FOR the southern states. Or anyone for that matter. But judging by population make-ups and the percentage of fundamentalist religions within the greater population i would imagine this sort of thing more likely in places such as the southern states of america where the proportion of fundamentalists is much higher than somewhere such as here. If its narrow minded of me to base my assumption of probability of this sort of occurance on the composition of the relative populations then so-be-it.

I've been reading quite a few books on neuroscience. It seems to be one of the most interesting and growing fields in science. I'll get back to you on a book I just started (can't remember the title), maybe you can tell me if it is bunk or not.
I'm a biased source, of course, because I think neuroscience rawks. :D

Why is this front page news? Continue to read:

A 13-YEAR-OLD student was failed after she refused to write an assignment on life in a gay community, because of her religious and moral beliefs.

Her outraged mother, Christian groups and the State Opposition want an investigation into the treatment of the Year 9 student at Windaroo Valley State High School, south of Brisbane. ù

(omissis)

Because heaven forbid, she actually be confronted with how her viewpoints actually affect people. The reaction of this girl and her mother demonstrate to me that both should be forced to do the assignment in question, to teach them a thing or two about tolerance, understanding and reading comprehension. The assignment didn't actually ask her to imagine she was gay, agree with the homosexual orientation, or even debate homosexuality. What it did was ask her to imagine what it would feel like to be in a minority.

And for fuck's sake, what did she expect for refusing to do the assignment? Why should I go to extra work for her just because she has offensive and bigoted views?

When I was 13, if I ever said a thing like that to my teacher, my parents would've skinned me alive. And telling a teacher "I won't do my work because it is against my religion, you're discriminating me because of religion" not only makes you look like a real-life Calvin (from "Calvin and Hobbes" comics), but also insults the memory of those who have been actually tortured and put to death because of their religion or race.

This is the problem with religions. A lot of religious people try to impose religion as the MOST important thing in the world, above education, discipline, logics, and evidence.
And there's always some bastard who won't refrain from exploiting the idiocy of a teen-ager or the bigotry of a mother to further his own political ends.

Wow.

The thought police are out in force on this one.

Wow.

The thought police are out in force on this one.How so?

How so?
My guesses:

1) Because asking people to write down what they think about any topic constitutes "policing" their thoughts.

2) Because expecting people to apply critical thinking to their beliefs is cruel and unusual punishment.

3) Because when somebody basically volunteers the fact that their personal opinions can't stand up to even the lightest personal scrutiny, you are being the "thought police" if you suggest that maybe this means they should think seriously about the beliefs they are trying to hold on to.

4) Because some people's religious beliefs tell them that they're allowed to get special perks and special privaledges, and denying them these perks constitutes an infringement of their religious freedom.

5) Because the existence of disagreement directly blocks religious students from having opinions, much like the existence of homosexuals blocks homophobic students from being able to have their opinions.

4) Because some people's religious beliefs tell them that they're allowed to get special perks and special privaledges, and denying them these perks constitutes an infringement of their religious freedom.To be honest, I don't have so much of a problem with that. Members of the Jewish faith at our school got their religious holidays off if they wanted them while everyone else was expected to show up in class...

To be honest, I don't have so much of a problem with that. Members of the Jewish faith at our school got their religious holidays off if they wanted them while everyone else was expected to show up in class...
If all students are permitted to take holidays in accordance with their religious or philosophical belief system, then that's not a "special perk." However, if only Jewish students are allowed this freedom, then it is a problem. My own school observed Jewish holidays instead of Christian ones because we had a majority Jewish population, but all students were allowed to take holidays for their own religious observation.

My guesses:

1) Because asking people to write down what they think about any topic constitutes "policing" their thoughts.

2) Because expecting people to apply critical thinking to their beliefs is cruel and unusual punishment.

3) Because when somebody basically volunteers the fact that their personal opinions can't stand up to even the lightest personal scrutiny, you are being the "thought police" if you suggest that maybe this means they should think seriously about the beliefs they are trying to hold on to.

4) Because some people's religious beliefs tell them that they're allowed to get special perks and special privaledges, and denying them these perks constitutes an infringement of their religious freedom.

5) Because the existence of disagreement directly blocks religious students from having opinions, much like the existence of homosexuals blocks homophobic students from being able to have their opinions.

I swear, Bottle, if I signatured everything of yours I like, I'd be thrown off the forum for blowing out Jolt's storage just with the size of my signature! :D

To be honest, I don't have so much of a problem with that. Members of the Jewish faith at our school got their religious holidays off if they wanted them while everyone else was expected to show up in class...

Holidays are fine. But when they think their views can excuse them from things directly related to the cirriculum that is when there is an issue.

Holidays are fine. But when they think their views can excuse them from things directly related to the cirriculum that is when there is an issue.
Exactly. If a Jewish student requests to be permitted to observe her religious holidays, that's not really a problem as far as I'm concerned. However, if said Jewish student asks that she be given an automatic "A+" for any assignments given out on her religious holidays, that would be bullshit.

Exactly. If a Jewish student requests to be permitted to observe her religious holidays, that's not really a problem as far as I'm concerned. However, if said Jewish student asks that she be given an automatic "A+" for any assignments given out on her religious holidays, that would be bullshit.

More and more i see that validity of Farnhamia's last post

How so?

It's like :

ZOMG an immature 13 year old girl feels ickey about gay people!!!111uno

She must be reprogrammed rather than given the chance to mature and learn about other people in her own time.

And She's a Kkkristain too!!!une!!1 Ooohes nooes... the sky is falling the sky is falling. They'll take over the schools and hound homosexuals out!



Seriously.. take any 13 year old and they'll be feeling a bit odd about this stuff. Give 'em time to feel less ickey about their own sexuality (hell - stastically assuming a class of 30 about three of the kids are gay anyway... what the hell will this do for them coming to terms with their sexuality?) and THEN let them leran a bit about other sexualities.

Hell - storeylines in Soap Operas that don't depict gay people as being leather thong wearing perverts, or 'fairies' but instead depict them as ordinary people who prefer their own gender probably do much more for helping break down prejudice than a crappy essay that will probably just teach half the class to hide their prejudices better rather than to grow out of them.

If this girl does feel ickey about gay people then would you rather she wrote empty words on a school assignment that she did not believe or would you rather she actually admitted it?

If this girl does feel ickey about gay people then would you rather she wrote empty words on a school assignment that she did not believe or would you rather she actually admitted it?

The whole point of thew discussion is that she refused to write that she thinks they're ickey. Had she done that, that would have been fine.

The point is that she refused to write anything. She was asked how she would feel and told the teacher she's "not going there".

The whole point of thew discussion is that she refused to write that she thinks they're ickey. Had she done that, that would have been fine.

The point is that she refused to write anything. She was asked how she would feel and told the teacher she's "not going there".
I meant would you prefer she lied and wrote some empty words about the issue that she did not believe? Like I bet a good deal of the class did.

Though somehow I doubt it would have gone smoothly if she had said she did not like gay people....

But look at it - a 13 year old does not hame the maturity not to feel ickey about gay people. Shock! Horror! Reprogram Her!

Could not possibly let her work these things out in her own time...

She must be reprogrammed rather than given the chance to mature and learn about other people in her own time.



Well considering how her family environemt sounds, I dont think she would develop any respect for homosexuals, or any other group disagreeable to christian conservatives 'in her own time'. I think her feelings of disagreement would strengthen, possibly to the point of prejudice rather than mere discomfort.

So i'd be all for reprogramming if that were the only other alternative.

Well considering how her family environemt sounds, I dont think she would develop any respect for homosexuals, or any other group disagreeable to christian conservatives 'in her own time'. I think her feelings of disagreement would strengthen, possibly to the point of prejudice rather than mere discomfort.

So i'd be all for reprogramming if that were the only other alternative.

Yeah! Don't give the kid a chance to grow up first or anything...

And it's hardly common for kids to decide their parents ideas are bunk someway through their teenage years anyway...

It is such a shame that the liberal atheistic/agnostic minority in this country is trying to force their agenda down the throats of the right-wing Christian majority. :mad:

Um, not an Atheist or an Agnostic here . . .

Silly me and my agenda of teaching tolerance to narrow minded Jackasses who let their church and parents do all their thinking for them.

I meant would you prefer she lied and wrote some empty words about the issue that she did not believe? Like I bet a good deal of the class did.

Though somehow I doubt it would have gone smoothly if she had said she did not like gay people....

But look at it - a 13 year old does not hame the maturity not to feel ickey about gay people. Shock! Horror! Reprogram Her!

Could not possibly let her work these things out in her own time...

Did you read what the assignment was about? It wasn't asking her to lie, it was asking her how she would feel. If she would feek ickey, then that's what she should have written.
It's her opinion, she's fully entitled to it. But she was asked to give it in a school asignment and didn't. And now she's being portrayed as a poor little overstrained kid who couldn't cope with being asked to imagine herself in the minority and write about her feelings resulting from that...

Yeah! Don't give the kid a chance to grow up first or anything...

And it's hardly common for kids to decide their parents ideas are bunk someway through their teenage years anyway...

:rolleyes: You seem to assume this kid is going to rebel against her parents and come to the conclusion on her own that she should respect the rights of the groups her parents disagree with. I personally wouldnt bet on it. Not on million to one odds.

The kid is in the process of growing up. By the time she has GROWN up it will, most likely, be too late to change or broaden her mind. I would much rather her mind is broadened in her formative years so she can get input from a range of opinions rather than to only allow those of her parents (the most influential factor in any childs life) to be expressed to her.

Just for the record, I hope that the sane NS Christians will be able to see why crap like this inclines some of us to hold less-than-favorable opinions of members of their faith. I know, it's not fair of me to generalize the actions of a few loud idiots to cover all members of a faith, but you've got to admit...we have yet to see a single person coming in to this thread talking about how Vishnu hates fags, or how Allah will make the homos burn in Hell. It can be very difficult for a non-hetero to keep a positive view of a faith that produces creatures like these.

Well, Eris hates fags, they cause lung cancer.

And it wouldnt be 'reprogramming' as you put it. There is a difference between forcing something down someones throat and exposing them to the opinions and situations of others.

Well, Eris hates fags, they cause lung cancer.

You win the thread!

Forcing people to become tolorent will never work, never has, and always backfires. I think if anything, it will make people hate them more. Forced tolorence is a joke and dosnt work. Want to know how to make it, shows that show them as normal and meeting them who are kind. Saying "BE TOLORENT OR YOU FAIL BWAHAHAHAHAH FEAR ME" makes you go stronger in your feelings

My argument is that the kid is too young to be presented with something like this, hell it's just not right. I mean, her mind is too young for a topic such as this, most kids that age are thinking about the person they have a crush on, not wether or not they may or may not be gay.


I'm pretty sure a kid at that age knows if he's got a crush on one of the cheerleaders, or one of the football players.

I swear, Bottle, if I signatured everything of yours I like, I'd be thrown off the forum for blowing out Jolt's storage just with the size of my signature! :D
Aww shucks. :)

So should Rastafarian kids be allowed to smoke pot in their lunchbreak?

Yes.

I meant would you prefer she lied and wrote some empty words about the issue that she did not believe? Like I bet a good deal of the class did.

So what? A lot of things people write will make others unhappy. People disagree. So?

If she'd actually written about her beliefs, in accordance with the assignment, and had THEN been given a failing mark, I would call bullshit on that. But she didn't.


Though somehow I doubt it would have gone smoothly if she had said she did not like gay people....

If she just wrote, "I don't like gay people," that wouldn't have fulfilled the requirements of the assignment. However, if she completed the assignment and expressed her truthful views on the subject, then I would be at the head of the line of people defending her right to be graded fairly (as opposed to being flunked merely for being homophobic).


But look at it - a 13 year old does not hame the maturity not to feel ickey about gay people. Shock! Horror! Reprogram Her!

For the 10 millionth time: nobody was trying to "reprogram her." She could have completed the assignment and expressed her views, whatever they may be. Instead, she decided to not do the work and then yell about it when she took a failing mark for that. Boo hoo hoo.

Well, Eris hates fags, they cause lung cancer.

BIGOT!!! Seize this Eris Rising, and ready the Re-Education Camps for a new victim!!!

It was an example..

I don't know how to phrase this differently. If the object of the assignment was to teach her to think about homosexuality, well, she's clearly already thought about it, and it upsets her, and she does not want to write about it.

It looks more like her parents thought about it for her.

If she just wrote, "I don't like gay people," that wouldn't have fulfilled the requirements of the assignment. However, if she completed the assignment and expressed her truthful views on the subject, then I would be at the head of the line of people defending her right to be graded fairly (as opposed to being flunked merely for being homophobic).


For the 10 millionth time: nobody was trying to "reprogram her." She could have completed the assignment and expressed her views, whatever they may be. Instead, she decided to not do the work and then yell about it when she took a failing mark for that. Boo hoo hoo.
At which point I guess you would accept her homophobia, or what?

She expressed her views on the subject and she is being pretty much hounded for her views by a fair few on here. Fair enough she gets failed for not completing the work, but that does not seem to be why people are so against her.

And the sentiment seems to be that she should be 're-educated'/reprogrammed rather than let to hopefully grow up a bit and feel stupid later in life for her views.

Incidently - one of the first respondants said they'd be happy for 'reprograming' before deciding to rephrase the methodology. And quite a few have said that she more than anyone needs to take such lessons - forced 'education'...

Prove that it's real and not a form of phsychosis... (wait for it) ... to Fred Phelps. If you can't convince everyone on the planet, don't call it a truth.

Then the earth is realy flat?

if a muslim was forced to write a paper about what it would be like to be a christian what and if they said no, and were failed for doing it. would you say that muslim bigiot got just waht was coming to them

ONE MORE BLOODY TIME! She was not asked to write about being Homosexual, she was asked to write about being a Heterosexual minority in a Homosexual society.

At which point I guess you would accept her homophobia, or what?

She expressed her views on the subject and she is being pretty much hounded for her views by a fair few on here. Fair enough she gets failed for not completing the work, but that does not seem to be why people are so against her.

And the sentiment seems to be that she should be 're-educated'/reprogrammed rather than let to hopefully grow up a bit and feel stupid later in life for her views.

Incidently - one of the first respondants said they'd be happy for 'reprograming' before deciding to rephrase the methodology. And quite a few have said that she more than anyone needs to take such lessons - forced 'education'...

Of course most of us wouldn't agree with her stance but that's not the point - the point is, she wouldn't have FAILED.

You win the thread!

TY, TYVM. I'm waiting for someone humor/british slang impared to get all pissed off with me over that coment . . .

One thing that really confuses me is that people keep harping on about her maturity

Firstly, I was much younger than her when I started to think about and discuss contraversial issues
Second, just because you feel a bit uncomfortable with something doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. Part of my old english class involved a spoken presentation, and a friend of mine was incredibly nervous about it. She did it anyway. Good for her.
Thirdly, she is too young to even discuss homosexuality (We're talking morality, not technique), yet she was perfectly old enough to be taught about and indoctrinated into a religion that lays down a complete moral code for her for the rest of her life!

What evidence do you have that they were trying to "indoctrinate" any such thing? They were simply asking children to imagine what it would be like to be in the minority - to be one of the few heterosexuals in a majority homosexual society. This doesn't, in any way, require the student to believe or state that the two are "equivalent to" or "interchangeable with." The student could just as well do the assignment from the point-of-view of being the "rose among thorns", as it were.

If they were "simply asking children to imagine what it would be like to be in the minority," they could have asked the white children to imagine that the aboriginal population was the majority in Australia and they were the minority. Or that they had all been transplanted to China. Or that they all had orange eyes, for that matter. But they didn't.

The selection of homosexuals as the "majority" --a biologically illiterate and preposterous selection at that--and normal students the "minority", was clearly intended to inculcate into the captive student audience the notion, "they're just the same as we are". In other words, to advance the "gay is OK" agenda. Denying that obvious truth insults the intelligence of students and parents alike.

If any such idiocy were attempted in a school any of my children attended, there would be a lawsuit filed faster than that school board could say "Rosie O'Donnell."

If they were "simply asking children to imagine what it would be like to be in the minority," they could have asked the white children to imagine that the aboriginal population was the majority in Australia and they were the minority. Or that they had all been transplanted to China. Or that they all had orange eyes, for that matter. But they didn't.

The selection of homosexuals as the "majority" --a biologically illiterate and preposterous selection at that--and normal students the "minority", was clearly intended to inculcate into the captive student audience the notion, "they're just the same as we are". In other words, to advance the "gay is OK" agenda. Denying that obvious truth insults the intelligence of students and parents alike.

If any such idiocy were attempted in a school any of my children attended, there would be a lawsuit filed faster than that school board could say "Rosie O'Donnell."
Gah, where is that picture of the kid throwing his hands up captioned "I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS SHIT!" when you need it? Because I need it now. As you may have noticed.

At which point I guess you would accept her homophobia, or what?

Would I accept that homophobia is good? No. Would I accept that she is homophobic, and has the right to believe what she chooses? Sure, I already accept as much.


She expressed her views on the subject and she is being pretty much hounded for her views by a fair few on here. Fair enough she gets failed for not completing the work, but that does not seem to be why people are so against her.

She is being hounded for refusing to do work and then complaining when she wasn't given credit for the work she didn't do. The fact that she is also a homophobe is just gravy. :P


And the sentiment seems to be that she should be 're-educated'/reprogrammed rather than let to hopefully grow up a bit and feel stupid later in life for her views.

She deserves to have somebody explain to her that in the real world you don't get to use Jesus as a shield to get you out of doing your job. You don't get to cry "oppression" when people expect you to live according to the same rules as everybody else.


Incidently - one of the first respondants said they'd be happy for 'reprograming' before deciding to rephrase the methodology. And quite a few have said that she more than anyone needs to take such lessons - forced 'education'...
Kids who can't read tend to need reading lessons more than kids who can already read. People who already know how to tie their shoes rarely require lessons in shoe-tying. Why should this subject be any different?

Incidently - one of the first respondants said they'd be happy for 'reprograming' before deciding to rephrase the methodology. And quite a few have said that she more than anyone needs to take such lessons - forced 'education'...

I assume you're refering to my response. If you read carefully you'll see I said something about 'only other option' i had to rephrase it because you didnt quite grasp the concept that there are other methods that are far more reasonable, likely, and acceptable but as a last resort i would be willing to 'reprogram' rather than let the world fill up with yet more bigotry and intolerance. Maybe for your sake i should have spelt it out a little more simply.

Edit: I would prefer ,where appropriate, to see children exposed to differing ideas and points of view so they dont just get the world-according-to-mum/mom-and-dad. But then you'll probably think this is still interferring in letting them grow up.

In other words, to advance the "gay is OK" agenda. Denying that obvious truth insults the intelligence of students and parents alike.


Holy mother of non-existent God, he went there.

It's like :

ZOMG an immature 13 year old girl feels ickey about gay people!!!111uno

She must be reprogrammed rather than given the chance to mature and learn about other people in her own time.

And She's a Kkkristain too!!!une!!1 Ooohes nooes... the sky is falling the sky is falling. They'll take over the schools and hound homosexuals out!



Seriously.. take any 13 year old and they'll be feeling a bit odd about this stuff. Give 'em time to feel less ickey about their own sexuality (hell - stastically assuming a class of 30 about three of the kids are gay anyway... what the hell will this do for them coming to terms with their sexuality?) and THEN let them leran a bit about other sexualities.

Hell - storeylines in Soap Operas that don't depict gay people as being leather thong wearing perverts, or 'fairies' but instead depict them as ordinary people who prefer their own gender probably do much more for helping break down prejudice than a crappy essay that will probably just teach half the class to hide their prejudices better rather than to grow out of them.

If this girl does feel ickey about gay people then would you rather she wrote empty words on a school assignment that she did not believe or would you rather she actually admitted it?Did you bother reading the thread at all? We were talking about how not believing in fairies is no excuse for not doing an assignment. I don't think ANYONE mentioned "reprogramming" her, and if they did, the vast majority of us didn't, so the whole "thought police" tripe is pretty off target.

I don't like her opinion, but there's nothing I can do to reprogram her. I can deny that she can use her opinion as a valid excuse not to do her homework.

If they were "simply asking children to imagine what it would be like to be in the minority," they could have asked the white children to imagine that the aboriginal population was the majority in Australia and they were the minority. Or that they had all been transplanted to China. Or that they all had orange eyes, for that matter. But they didn't.

The selection of homosexuals as the "majority" --a biologically illiterate and preposterous selection at that--and normal students the "minority", was clearly intended to inculcate into the captive student audience the notion, "they're just the same as we are". In other words, to advance the "gay is OK" agenda. Denying that obvious truth insults the intelligence of students and parents alike.

If any such idiocy were attempted in a school any of my children attended, there would be a lawsuit filed faster than that school board could say "Rosie O'Donnell."

Firstly, the whole idea of a minority is that there is some significant difference between them and the majority. This eliminates the orange eyes issue.

Second, Ifthe culture was predominatly not Christian, she could have objected on similar grounds.

Third, a community can be a few hundred people, and there are more gay people than that in the world - combined with iVF and adoption, this means such a community could easily exist and be sustained.

Fourth, "normal students"?

Finally, being asked as to how you would deal with living in a society you fundamentally dissaprove, does not always mean you will take the side of the majority. If everyone did, society would remain the same forever and ever. People challenging society change it. She could have easily challenged this one in her essay but she didnt.

Holy mother of non-existent God, he went there.

sadly, he doesn't seem to realize that the gay agenda is really nothing but a front group for the john birch society to cover up their plan to force everyone to have sex with clowns.

At which point I guess you would accept her homophobia, or what?No, but that's rather irrelevant.
She expressed her views on the subject and she is being pretty much hounded for her views by a fair few on here. Fair enough she gets failed for not completing the work, but that does not seem to be why people are so against her.Her views on the subject are comparable to me refusing to do a paper on the Clean Air Act because I don't believe in Nixon.

She also gets defended by some people, simply for her views, even though she had no valid reason for not doing her assignment. You yourself admitted that its fair she got failed for not doing work. I think her bigoted opinion is wrong and I'd be lying if I said I didn't receive more satisfaction from a homophobe failing an assignment she didn't do than someone more tolerant, but it doesn't mean I believe in hounding her if she had done an appropriate assignment.

And the sentiment seems to be that she should be 're-educated'/reprogrammed rather than let to hopefully grow up a bit and feel stupid later in life for her views.No. The sentiment is that she should be forced to come into contact with part of reality that she's shut herself off from in the hopes that she'll be a better person afterwards. That isn't reprogramming.

Incidently - one of the first respondants said they'd be happy for 'reprograming' before deciding to rephrase the methodology. And quite a few have said that she more than anyone needs to take such lessons - forced 'education'...In over 30 pages, yes, there probably are a lot of such quotes. They still form a minority of the total.

But prove me wrong. Quote and count them.

sadly, he doesn't seem to realize that the gay agenda is really nothing but a front group for the john birch society to cover up their plan to force everyone to have sex with clowns.

Did you know that they only want to force clown-sex on the population because some idiot mis-spelled "clones" on the manifesto?

If they were "simply asking children to imagine what it would be like to be in the minority," they could have asked the white children to imagine that the aboriginal population was the majority in Australia and they were the minority. Or that they had all been transplanted to China. Or that they all had orange eyes, for that matter. But they didn't.

The selection of homosexuals as the "majority" --a biologically illiterate and preposterous selection at that--and normal students the "minority", was clearly intended to inculcate into the captive student audience the notion, "they're just the same as we are". In other words, to advance the "gay is OK" agenda. Denying that obvious truth insults the intelligence of students and parents alike.

If any such idiocy were attempted in a school any of my children attended, there would be a lawsuit filed faster than that school board could say "Rosie O'Donnell."I see. Do you have similar reservations about black people? No? I see.

The whole point of the exercise was to utilize something that might not sprout a "Of course I accept people different than me!" response and actually force someone to think about how much they accept and how tolerant they are.

Did you know that they only want to force clown-sex on the population because some idiot mis-spelled "clones" on the manifesto?

or so mi5 would have you believe...

Imagine living as a heterosexual among a mostly homosexual colony on the moon

Lots and lots of buttsex. I'm straight, and I'd cave after that long. I wouldn't last 6 months.

I could learn to dress fabulously and decorate my apartment properly. It would be one big Queer Eye!!!!! WOO! Go stereotyping!

Third, a community can be a few hundred people, and there are more gay people than that in the world - combined with iVF and adoption, this means such a community could easily exist and be sustained.If you assume that homosexuality can be taught, which, to my knowledge, is not the case.

NM's original point was utter bunk in the first place, though. It's not like the moon is currently inhabitable or that the biological viability of such a community was the important part of the assignment.

If they were "simply asking children to imagine what it would be like to be in the minority," they could have asked the white children to imagine that the aboriginal population was the majority in Australia and they were the minority. Or that they had all been transplanted to China. Or that they all had orange eyes, for that matter. But they didn't.

The selection of homosexuals as the "majority" --a biologically illiterate and preposterous selection at that--and normal students the "minority", was clearly intended to inculcate into the captive student audience the notion, "they're just the same as we are". In other words, to advance the "gay is OK" agenda. Denying that obvious truth insults the intelligence of students and parents alike.

If any such idiocy were attempted in a school any of my children attended, there would be a lawsuit filed faster than that school board could say "Rosie O'Donnell."


Yes, they could have. They didn't though. Are you trying to imply that one form of discrimination (against people with different skin/hair/eyecolour) is inacceptable and therefore a good subject for school, whereas another form (based on the sexual orientation of the individuals) is perfectly acceptable and should therefore not be presented as morally dubious at school?

If you assume that homosexuality can be taught, which, to my knowledge, is not the case.

NM's original point was utter bunk in the first place, though. It's not like the moon is currently inhabitable or that the biological viability of such a community was the important part of the assignment.

I'm not saying all homosexual parents would bring up homosexual kids, but they wouldn't oppress homosexuality, so some might. Plus, a community that was mostly homosexual would likely be very supportive of homosexuals, so more would come into the area

imagine you're not white...
imagine you're not smart...

imagine you're you...

I know, bad dreams are not permited for 13 years old girls.
But you are not 13.

Until your supreme race is still without sex kontrol, chimps have their chance to create the next great religion.


:fluffle:

I'm not saying all homosexual parents would bring up homosexual kids, but they wouldn't oppress homosexuality, so some might. Plus, a community that was mostly homosexual would likely be very supportive of homosexuals, so more would come into the areaThat's not what NM was talking about. NM was attacking the realistic possibility of such a situation. Technically, it isn't, but that's completely beside the point and therefore not a valid criticism of the assignment.

If this assignment is part of the curriculum then it is part of the curriculum.
If the student did not do the assignment then how can any mark other than zero be assigned?

I say shame on that little brat. People of colour don't get persecuted by the Pope, even Islam isn't. But he takes great aim on homosexuality.

So an assignment asking how you would feel in that situation doesn't seem that absurd. The girl could put how she hates all gays and they will burn forever in hell, but she would at least have finished the assignment. And if egads, her eyes were opened up a little bit more,and she showed a little bit more empathy and compassion.. I see nothing wrong with that. It's not going to make her gay, but it might stop her from singling out a known homosexual and trying to belittle them. And if that even happened, that would be great.

But alas if at this point she's already freaking out over it, she's probably lost.

Why should someone be failed because they are against using animals in that way?

They wouldn't be, any more than this girl was failed because she is homophobic. They would be failed for the *exact* same reason as this girl, failing to do their assigned work.


I'm still amused by the blatant double standard in this thread. I would be unsuprised if many of the people who are laughing it off became highly offended if a homosexual was failed for refusing an assignment that asked them to come to the conclusion that opressing a sexual minority because it was a threat was the proper action for a majority to take (Don't think that the opposite wasn't the intention of the assignment in the first place).

There is absolutely no reason to believe that the goal of this assignment was to make students take any particular position. In fact, I would be opposed to any assigment that "asked them to come to the conclusion that [insert philosophical/moral/religious conclusion here]." The purpose should never be to get a particular conclusion. It should be to get the students thinking about it.

Unfortunately, this girl chose to turn her brain off and refuse to do the assignment altogether, when she could have simply used it to express her views.

Yes, she was wrong. Yes, I dissagree with her. That does not make it anything but hypocrisy to ignore the fact that children should not feel that their ideologies are going to be directly challenged when they enter the classroom (At least, not by a teacher or an assignment).

Of course their ideologies, whatever they may be, should be challenged in the classroom! That is a part of learning and forming your own opinions.

"Sources said the students were told not to discuss the assignment with their parents and that it was to be kept in-class."

To be asked to keep something from your parents is the sign of a guilty conscience to me.

The statement doesn't say that parents couldn't be told or that the students were supposed to keep it from parents. It says they were not to discuss the assignment with parents. In other words, "Do your own work. Don't ask your parents for *their* opinions - give your own."

In any case, the teacher should have had the responsibility to either not give/take any points or give an alternative assignment.

The teacher's responsibility was to grade the work done. This girl did no work. The grade is then zero.

Well if all of you are solely protesting with such vigor only because an immature 13 year old refused to do a homework and expected some sort of leinency then fine. Personally I agree with that.

However the vigor, and a fair few comments, seem to indiacte a large portion of the passion in going after this immature 13 year old seems to be fueled by more than simply her refusal to do the homework, but more the fact the homophobia she demonstrats, and her religious intepretation add fuel to the fire.

I seriously doubt that if this was about someone refusing to write an essay on ID/Creationism set by their science teacher on the basis of creationism being junk science that many of the people condeming her would be doing so with such vigor. And if it is ONLY because she refused to do an assignment and wanted special treatment the subject matter and the total lack of relevence between homosexuality and creationism should have no matter here.

And - I also maintain it's a dumb project to give to kids who are still working out their own sexualities.

I also think the general response is a bit harsh. Less stick, more carrot - particulary since she has a good few years ahead of her in which she can form opinions from a more mature perspctive. If you hound her (and be honest - a large part of this seems to be hounding her because she draws odd conclusions from a book she has probably been instructed in rather than read herself) you'll only alienate her further and seriously reduce the chance she'll come even close to your point of view as she'll get all defensive.

There's reasons why we don't let 13 year olds vote - they have not had life experience to make descisions like that. They do not have the life experience to look at the world around them in a mature way. I think before attacking someone for an irrational belief you should at least wait until they are mature enough to know better.

Finally - Somethings fishey here anyway - the school should have contacted her parents about her refusal at the time, seems odd that they would suggest she leave the school over an issue they did not raise when it was happening. I don't believe she did not tell her parents about this. And I don't believe the school waited until the end of term to talk about it. My money would be on her telling her parents, her parents instructing her not to tell anyone and to refuse to do it and now her parents trying to make some fundie political point. Which if true would really make her a pawn used by adults with a large control over her life and a victim here. If not then the school looks like it really sucks for not calling the parents until after they failed the girl.

Well if all of you are solely protesting with such vigor only because an immature 13 year old refused to do a homework and expected some sort of leinency then fine. Personally I agree with that.

However the vigor, and a fair few comments, seem to indiacte a large portion of the passion in going after this immature 13 year old seems to be fueled by more than simply her refusal to do the homework, but more the fact the homophobia she demonstrats, and her religious intepretation add fuel to the fire.

And - I also maintain it's a dumb project to give to kids who are still working out their own sexualities.

I also think the general response is a bit harsh. Less stick, more carrot - particulary since she has a good few years ahead of her in which she can form opinions from a more mature perspctive. If you hound her (and be honest - a large part of this seems to be hounding her because she draws odd conclusions from a book she has probably been instructed in rather than read herself) you'll only alienate her further and seriously reduce the chance she'll come even close to your point of view as she'll get all defensive.

There's reasons why we don't let 13 year olds vote - they have not had life experience to make descisions like that. They do not have the life experience to look at the world around them in a mature way. I think before attacking someone for an irrational belief you should at least wait until they are mature enough to know better.

Finally - Somethings fishey here anyway - the school should have contacted her parents about her refusal at the time, seems odd that they would suggest she leave the school over an issue they did not raise when it was happening. I don't believe she did not tell her parents about this. And I don't believe the school waited until the end of term to talk about it. My money would be on her telling her parents, her parents instructing her not to tell anyone and to refuse to do it and now her parents trying to make some fundie political point. Which if true would really make her a pawn used by adults with a large control over her life and a victim here. If not then the school looks like it really sucks for not calling the parents until after they failed the girl.

The longer you wait to teach kids about tolerance, the harder it is to get through to them. There's a quite pertinent song in South Pacific, though the subject isn't homophobia:

You've got to be taught
To hate and fear,
You've got to be taught
From year to year,
It's got to be drummed
In your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught before it's too late,
Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!

I'm not saying that parents sit their kids down and drill them in whom to hate, but kids pick it up at home, it seeps into them day after day. So this girl was probably a lost cause before the assignment was given. I hate to say that, but it's probably true. Certainly now, as her parents have reinforced her attitude for her.

Yeah, what if she had gotten away with it like some of you are saying? She could skip biology and chemistry and any other science class she wanted to just because it supports evolution and her religion doesn't believe in it!

Oh and history class too, forget that. Dinosaurs? Fuck you! I don't believe in dinosaurs. No work for me.

The longer you wait to teach kids about tolerance, the harder it is to get through to them. There's a quite pertinent song in South Pacific, though the subject isn't homophobia:


Who wrote that? If it's a pacific islander song as seems to be the inference then I am very very surprised that a native language of the pacific islands translates so nicely into rhyme and verse when put into english.

Yeah, what if she had gotten away with it like some of you are saying? She could skip biology and chemistry and any other science class she wanted to just because it supports evolution and her religion doesn't believe in it!

Oh and history class too, forget that. Dinosaurs? Fuck you! I don't believe in dinosaurs. No work for me.

When did you talk about dinosaurs in history?

Yeah, what if she had gotten away with it like some of you are saying? She could skip biology and chemistry and any other science class she wanted to just because it supports evolution and her religion doesn't believe in it!


Should you be allowed to skip an ID lecture because you don't believe in it?

If (and I hope this does not happen) your school introduced ID in it's science class would you have gone along with it? Or refused as you did not believe in it? Should you be failed for it?

Remember - the issue is refusing to do a homeowrk. Any homework.

Should you be allowed to skip an ID lecture because you don't believe in it?

If (and I hope this does not happen) your school introduced ID in it's science class would you have gone along with it? Or refused as you did not believe in it? Should you be failed for it?

Remember - the issue is refusing to do a homeowrk. Any homework.

I think that's kind of what (s)he was saying.

Who wrote that? If it's a pacific islander song as seems to be the inference then I am very very surprised that a native language of the pacific islands translates so nicely into rhyme and verse when put into english.

Erm ... Oscar Hammerstein II (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Hammerstein_II) wrote it. It's in the musical South Pacific. When a movie was made of that show, movie house owners in the US South protested, wanting that song and the scene around it cut from the film.

Should you be allowed to skip an ID lecture because you don't believe in it?

If (and I hope this does not happen) your school introduced ID in it's science class would you have gone along with it? Or refused as you did not believe in it? Should you be failed for it?

Remember - the issue is refusing to do a homeowrk. Any homework.

I shudder at any school child having to confront ID in a science class, the implications are horrendous. However, were I the parent, I'd tell my kid to suck it up and make the best of it. I would, however, be on the phone to my attorney.

When did you talk about dinosaurs in history?

Sophomore history class. We talked about the eras of time and how we know how old something is through carbon dating and such.

Sophomore history class. We talked about the eras of time and how we know how old something is through carbon dating and such.

Ah. Freshman history currently, and we talked about evolution, but not dinosaurs...

Should you be allowed to skip an ID lecture because you don't believe in it?

If (and I hope this does not happen) your school introduced ID in it's science class would you have gone along with it? Or refused as you did not believe in it? Should you be failed for it?

Remember - the issue is refusing to do a homeowrk. Any homework.

While ID does absolutly not belong in a science class ...

If ya failed to do the homework you deserve a bad grade for it.

It is up to the rest of us to make sure that ID does not end up in the science class

Why should I go to extra work for her just because she has offensive and bigoted views?

So being a christian is an offensive view? Asshole

So being a christian is an offensive view? Asshole

Often yes ... not all

Thankfully a lot of christians dont have the stupid view that this girl apparently had

So being a christian is an offensive view? Asshole

Not believing in homosexuals is an offensive view...

No, actually, it's just plain hilarious.

"There's no such thing as fags! There's no such thing as fags!"

Heh.

So being a christian is an offensive view? Asshole

She should be glad they don't have lions in Australia.

If you read through thread, many people have pointed out that the assignment offered her a perfect escape clause: all she would have had to do was answer the questions and say she would pray and try to show the homosexual majority the error of their ways, etc. I said and several others also did, that if she had done the assignment in this manner and the school then punished her for her answers, we would have been behind her all the way.

im surprised yall liberals arent jumping on that "its her right not to do that report":p

im surprised yall liberals arent jumping on that "its her right not to do that report":p

why would someone have the right to refuse to do a compleatly reasonable assingment?

Religious and moral beliefs have no place in the Public school system. The entire basis of the public school system is to teach students the facts of life without any basis on Religion or Spirituality. The fact that this girl refused to do this shows a childish desire to not relate with things that are outside of her beliefs. It's thinking like this that made Hitler start off with the whole "Anti-semetist" thing.

Religious schoolgirl, :upyours: I salute you.

Screw you all, I say. If she and her mother didnt belive in the assingment, and they thought it affending, she should not have to do it. I men, no every one agrees with homosexuality. Im not one of them, but still....

im surprised yall liberals arent jumping on that "its her right not to do that report":p

Mr. Montoya would have a word with you about the definition of 'liberal'.

Screw you all, I say. If she and her mother didnt belive in the assingment, and they thought it affending, she should not have to do it. I men, no every one agrees with homosexuality. Im not one of them, but still....

Ah, fuck you in the ass. Square in the asshole. Like a block of concrete being shoved through a knot of wood, fuck you in the asshole.

You didn't read the article, you didn't read the thread, you don't know what the assignment was. You have the right to be laughed at, now.

im surprised yall liberals arent jumping on that "its her right not to do that report":p

she has the right to not do the work, she excercised it which is fair enough, I guess I'm not the best at homework but she (and her parent's) should have been prepared for the consequences of her actions.

Screw you all, I say. If she and her mother didnt belive in the assingment, and they thought it affending, she should not have to do it. I men, no every one agrees with homosexuality. Im not one of them, but still....

By your logic I should have been given a free pass out of Physical Education because I sure as hell didn't believe in running around in bloomers at 8:30 in the morning.

Religious and moral beliefs have no place in the Public school system. The entire basis of the public school system is to teach students the facts of life without any basis on Religion or Spirituality. The fact that this girl refused to do this shows a childish desire to not relate with things that are outside of her beliefs. It's thinking like this that made Hitler start off with the whole "Anti-semetist" thing.

Religious schoolgirl, :upyours: I salute you.

You too.

EDIT: To clarify, I mean to salute him for his viewpoint, as he salutes the girl, but without the sarcasm.

Screw you all, I say. If she and her mother didnt belive in the assingment, and they thought it affending, she should not have to do it. I men, no every one agrees with homosexuality. Im not one of them, but still....

Then she should have though about it, discussed her feelings, supported them, answer the questions handed the assignment in and gotten her due mark.

Ah, fuck you in the ass. Square in the asshole. Like a block of concrete being shoved through a knot of wood, fuck you in the asshole.

You didn't read the article, you didn't read the thread, you don't know what the assignment was. You have the right to be laughed at, now.

uh, yeah, I did, or I wouldn be replying to anything. No, I dont. I was just giving an opinion ass hole:upyours:

Screw you all, I say. If she and her mother didnt belive in the assingment, and they thought it affending, she should not have to do it. I men, no every one agrees with homosexuality. Im not one of them, but still....

She did have that right ... she excercized it ... and she got a deserved failing grade

uh, yeah, I did, or I wouldn be replying to anything. No, I dont. I was just giving an opinion ass hole:upyours:

Instead of petty name calling why don't you just defend you belief. You obviously did not understand the assignment because it had nothing to do with being okay with homosexuality it was just thinking about it she can have whatever opinion she likes.

By your logic I should have been given a free pass out of Physical Education because I sure as hell didn't believe in running around in bloomers at 8:30 in the morning.

Well, that has nothing to do with religion, or belifes, or morals. Theres nothing wrong with running, because it doesnt ofent anyone in anyway, exept the lazy people

uh, yeah, I did, or I wouldn be replying to anything. No, I dont. I was just giving an opinion ass hole:upyours:

Asshole is one word.

If you had read it, then you're simply stupid. You fail to realize that it never asked her to pretend to be gay or even to accept gay people for who they are, but to pretend she was a heterosexual minority in a community of gay majority. Nothing in the bible says that's a sin, so she was a fucking dumbass for saying her 'religion' is against the assignment, and so are you if you agree with her. Dear god I hope you realize your error now.

Well, that has nothing to do with religion, or belifes, or morals. Theres nothing wrong with running, because it doesnt ofent anyone in anyway, exept the lazy people

This assingment was not against any christian morality I have ever heard.

Well, that has nothing to do with religion, or belifes, or morals. Theres nothing wrong with running, because it doesnt ofent anyone in anyway, exept the lazy people

And homosexuality doesn't offend anyone in anyway, except the christians. Who's to say who has more right than the other? Certainly not you.

She did have that right ... she excercized it ... and she got a deserved failing grade

Well, in my district the teacher would have been fired. Why didnt she just exuser, or give her a difirent topic?

This assingment was not against any christian morality I have ever heard.

It's against ignorance. Judging by many Christians this moral is held dear.

Well, that has nothing to do with religion, or belifes, or morals. Theres nothing wrong with running, because it doesnt ofent anyone in anyway, exept the lazy people

Trust me, I could even then have made it against my religion. For instance, it would be against my religion to undress in front of all those other girls. Or to have to shower with them. Or to show my legs (as lovely as they were, even then).

I suppose we shouldn't be so hard on a 13-year-old, but she did make a poor choice. But hey, she doesn't go to that school any longer, so she got what she wanted in the end, she doesn't have to acknowledge homosexuals in class.

That assignment sounds like it would have been at home in Occidental College but not a freaking middle school.

Well, in my district the teacher would have been fired. Why didnt she just exuser, or give her a difirent topic?

Then whoever fired her would be wrong

Because the first topic was compleatly reasonable

Screw you all, I say. If she and her mother didnt belive in the assingment, and they thought it affending, she should not have to do it. I men, no every one agrees with homosexuality. Im not one of them, but still....

*sheesh

Please read the article. The assignment wasn't about homosexuality. It was about minorities defined by their sexual orientation. She wasn't asked to confront homosexuality in any way, she was asked how she would feel if her sexual orientation made her part of a minority.
If she didn't agree with homosexuality, she could have writen about that, the assignment clearly allowed for that.

Well, that has nothing to do with religion, or belifes, or morals. Theres nothing wrong with running, because it doesnt ofent anyone in anyway, exept the lazy people

Oh, so lazy people have no right not to be offended, then? Says who?

Well, in my district the teacher would have been fired. Why didnt she just exuser, or give her a difirent topic?

Because that was the assignment and it causes the teacher more trouble to write a new one besides, it would be unfair for the kids that did the assignment and the fact that she had a problem with that assignment makes that assignment actually worthwhile.

I am of the opinion that a 13 year old cannot be expected to rationally and independantly wrestle with complex moral questions. I consider racism, meat-eating, and corporal punishment to all be cases where a rational descision would be beyond the means of a child of that age. However, an especially active issue, like that of homosexual rights is one where students are double handicapped, because of the big rhetoric thrown around.

What are we supposed to do? Keep them from dealing with complex questions until they reach the ripe old age of 18 and then expect them to be complete adults?

I don't expect a 13-year old to fully work through complex moral questions. I do expect them to begin thinking about it. I doubt this teacher was intending to grade papers on the level expected of college students. The assignment was looking for a 13-year old's take on the issue.

Well, in my district the teacher would have been fired. Why didnt she just exuser, or give her a difirent topic?

Fired on what grounds?
Why would that student deserve special treatment that all others didn't deserve?

Well, in my district the teacher would have been fired. Why didnt she just exuser, or give her a difirent topic?

I ask with baited breath where the hell you live and what the coordinates are so that I may petition a bombing.

That assignment sounds like it would have been at home in Occidental College but not a freaking middle school.

This sort of thing NEEDS to be presented to kids around this age or younger ... trying to get them to think about being a part of a minority ... maybe it can help stop some of the violence

That assignment sounds like it would have been at home in Occidental College but not a freaking middle school.

Right, because you have to recieve a college education to create an essay based on ten questions.

I pray to god that where you live that's not true. Unless it's Arkansas, in which case it would make sense.

Unless it's Arkansas, in which case it would make sense.

Oh Snap!

It's like :

ZOMG an immature 13 year old girl feels ickey about gay people!!!111uno

She must be reprogrammed rather than given the chance to mature and learn about other people in her own time.

Cute, but unrelated to the thread. You're just spouting strawmen at this point.

Seriously.. take any 13 year old and they'll be feeling a bit odd about this stuff. Give 'em time to feel less ickey about their own sexuality (hell - stastically assuming a class of 30 about three of the kids are gay anyway... what the hell will this do for them coming to terms with their sexuality?) and THEN let them leran a bit about other sexualities.

This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. These kids, at 13, are already dealing with issues with sexuality. Waiting to teach them abut it until they've already got it all figured out would be like handing a 16 year old a car, telling them you won't teach them how to drive until they've already figured it out, and then counting how many wrecks they get into in the meantime.

If this girl does feel ickey about gay people then would you rather she wrote empty words on a school assignment that she did not believe or would you rather she actually admitted it?

No, I would rather she actually admitted it by doing the assignment. Since she chose not to do the assignment, she fails. Period.

If they were "simply asking children to imagine what it would be like to be in the minority," they could have asked the white children to imagine that the aboriginal population was the majority in Australia and they were the minority. Or that they had all been transplanted to China. Or that they all had orange eyes, for that matter. But they didn't.

Probably has a lot to do with the fac that his was in health class, where they most likely discussed sexuality. If it had been in history or social studies, the aboriginal question would be pertinent.

The selection of homosexuals as the "majority" --a biologically illiterate and preposterous selection at that--and normal students the "minority", was clearly intended to inculcate into the captive student audience the notion, "they're just the same as we are". In other words, to advance the "gay is OK" agenda. Denying that obvious truth insults the intelligence of students and parents alike.

It isn't obvious. You are attaching your own biases to the assignment in question. This assignment could have been completed by a student who would imagine being surrounded by so many "immoral evildoers" and described it as such.

If any such idiocy were attempted in a school any of my children attended, there would be a lawsuit filed faster than that school board could say "Rosie O'Donnell."

And the lawsuit would be completely baseless.

Why is this front page news? Continue to read:

Teen failed for stand on gays
Darrell Giles
October 08, 2006 12:00am


A 13-YEAR-OLD student was failed after she refused to write an assignment on life in a gay community, because of her religious and moral beliefs.

Her outraged mother, Christian groups and the State Opposition want an investigation into the treatment of the Year 9 student at Windaroo Valley State High School, south of Brisbane.


"It's no wonder our kids are struggling with the basics when the Government is allowing this sort of rubbish to be taught in the classroom," Opposition Leader Jeff Seeney told The Sunday Mail yesterday.

The uproar came as Federal Education Minister Julie Bishop this week announced plans for Canberra to take control of school curriculums from the states, accusing "ideologues" of hijacking the education system .

The girl was among a class of 13 and 14-year-olds asked to imagine living as a heterosexual among a mostly homosexual colony on the moon as part of their health and physical education subject.

They had to answer 10 questions, including how they felt about being in the minority and what strategies they would use to help them cope.

They were also asked to discuss where ideas about homosexuality came from.

Sources said the students were told not to discuss the assignment with their parents and that it was to be kept in-class.

They said many of the students were uncomfortable with the subject matter or did not understand the questions.

The 13-year-old girl instantly refused to do the assignment on religious and moral grounds.

"It is against my beliefs and I am not going there," she told the teacher, who responded by failing her.

After a series of discussions between the school and her mother, it was suggested the girl would be better off leaving the state education system and attending an independent school.

The girl's mother said yesterday she did not learn of the assignment until reading her daughter's report card several weeks later and discovered a first-ever fail mark for health and physical education.

"I went to the school thinking there might have been a personality clash with the teacher," said the mother, who asked to be identified only as Bronwyn.

She said she was shown the assignment. "When I started to read it I thought, 'Oh my God' . . . I was shocked by the content," she said.

"My daughter said she didn't want to do the assignment because she did not believe in homosexuality and did not want to answer the questions.

"She was being challenged, but she should not be challenged like that at her age."

Bronwyn was concerned that her daughter was not given an alternative scenario.

She said the school claimed it was powerless to change the curriculum.

Bronwyn said the school seemed more concerned about how parents found out about the assignment.

"That's what concerns me most . . . the parents had no opportunity to even see the assignment," Bronwyn said.

Ms Bishop said the incident highlighted her concerns.

"This is another example of a politically-correct agenda masquerading as curriculum," she said yesterday.

"Parents need to know the content of school curriculum so they can be confident their children are receiving a high quality education that is also consistent with their values."

The State Opposition and Australian Christian Lobby demanded an investigation.

Mr Seeney said Queensland needed common sense back in the classroom.

"The Beattie Labor Government has created a system that tries to tell kids what to think instead of teaching them how to think," he said.

"It is completely out of line for students to be graded on their moral beliefs.

"It's not the job of our schools to politicise our children. It is their function to provide our kids with the basics, like reading, writing and maths."

Christian Lobby state director Peter Earle said the assignment was not about education, rather a teacher or school pushing their own agenda on young minds.

"The subject matter was totally inappropriate," he said.

After being approached by The Sunday Mail, an Education Queensland spokeswoman late yesterday said the school had decided to drop the assignment from its curriculum and would work with the girl and her family to achieve a "satisfactory resolution".

"The aim of the assignment was to encourage students to think about diversity, culture and belief systems," she said.

"Schools can offer alternative assessment topics in consultation with parents, if the school is aware of concerns about an assignment."

_________________________________________________________________

Because heaven forbid, she actually be confronted with how her viewpoints actually affect people. The reaction of this girl and her mother demonstrate to me that both should be forced to do the assignment in question, to teach them a thing or two about tolerance, understanding and reading comprehension. The assignment didn't actually ask her to imagine she was gay, agree with the homosexual orientation, or even debate homosexuality. What it did was ask her to imagine what it would feel like to be in a minority.

And for fuck's sake, what did she expect for refusing to do the assignment? Why should I go to extra work for her just because she has offensive and bigoted views?

Wait...

So, how about this -

Your child is told she has to do a project about the Bible.

Problem is, your child happens to be Atheist and staunchly anti-religion. She really doesn't want to study about something she has really put off doing her entire life, and tells the teacher front up that she really doesn't want to do it. So, the teacher fails her on the Project.

What do you do?

And don't say 'The teacher shouldn't be forcing students to study about the Bible.' because, quite frankly, a teacher shouldn't force a student to study about homosexuality. Religion is a way of life, so is homosexuality. We shouldn't be forced to do something which contradicts with our personal believe, infact it is unlawful to be punished because it goes against your own believe. Teachers are supposed to help find another subject, or a make up assignment.

But, no. Some kids actually want to do the paper, and think it is unfair. Well, good for them. But they shouldn't expect their peers to like the same thing. And, before I continue, I really have nothing against anything at all except for people who go 'OH NO, SOME RELIGIOUS PERSON DOESN'T WANT TO DO SOMETHING BECAUSE IT GOES AGAINST THEIR MORAL! THEY ARE DUMB!' but if it is vise versa...

Oh man...it's another story.

Hell, I'm probably more anti-Religion than you are but I don't believe anyone should be endowed the right to go around saying anything or anyone religious is fucking stupid and deserves everything that happens to them if it is bad.

I'm tired of seeing people giving religious people shit, and even uber religious people telling a gay person to go die. The people who say all religious people are over-zealous, and cram their beliefes down others mouths and refuse to listen to other beliefes are the same as the people wh oactually are that way.

It's like saying all Muslims hate America. When, truthfully, many probably do dislike some things about us but it does not constitute all of them as hating us when there are tiny sects attacking us.

I mean, it isn't different when you say - 'All Muslims are terrorists!' and 'All Christians force their beliefes down other people's throats!'.

It's fucking moronic, and yes if I saw you in person making fun of a religious person because she or he didn't like something ( ie Homosexuality ) I would right there knock you the fuck out.

The same goes if I saw you in person making fun of a Gay person because she or he admitted it, looked like it, acted like it, anything w/e. I would still knock you the fuck out.

And not because I think of my self as a tough shit, but I think you deserve to get your ass kicked.

Wait...

So, how about this -

Your child is told she has to do a project about the Bible.

Problem is, your child happens to be Atheist and staunchly anti-religion. She really doesn't want to study about something she has really put off doing her entire life, and tells the teacher front up that she really doesn't want to do it. So, the teacher fails her on the Project.

What do you do?

And don't say 'The teacher shouldn't be forcing students to study about the Bible.' because, quite frankly, a teacher shouldn't force a student to study about homosexuality. Religion is a way of life, so is homosexuality. We shouldn't be forced to do something which contradicts with our personal believe, infact it is unlawful to be punished because it goes against your own believe. Teachers are supposed to help find another subject, or a make up assignment.

But, no. Some kids actually want to do the paper, and think it is unfair. Well, good for them. But they shouldn't expect their peers to like the same thing. And, before I continue, I really have nothing against anything at all except for people who go 'OH NO, SOME RELIGIOUS PERSON DOESN'T WANT TO DO SOMETHING BECAUSE IT GOES AGAINST THEIR MORAL! THEY ARE DUMB!' but if it is vise versa...

Oh man...it's another story.

Hell, I'm probably more anti-Religion than you are but I don't believe anyone should be endowed the right to go around saying anything or anyone religious is fucking stupid and deserves everything that happens to them if it is bad.

I'm tired of seeing people giving religious people shit, and even uber religious people telling a gay person to go die. The people who say all religious people are over-zealous, and cram their beliefes down others mouths and refuse to listen to other beliefes are the same as the people wh oactually are that way.

It's like saying all Muslims hate America. When, truthfully, many probably do dislike some things about us but it does not constitute all of them as hating us when there are tiny sects attacking us.

I mean, it isn't different when you say - 'All Muslims are terrorists!' and 'All Christians force their beliefes down other people's throats!'.

It's fucking moronic, and yes if I saw you in person making fun of a religious person because she or he didn't like something ( ie Homosexuality ) I would right there knock you the fuck out.

The same goes if I saw you in person making fun of a Gay person because she or he admitted it, looked like it, acted like it, anything w/e. I would still knock you the fuck out.

And not because I think of my self as a tough shit, but I think you deserve to get your ass kicked.


Ok, let's assume te assignment was "Imagine you're an atheist in a predominantly Christian society"... oh, wait. :rolleyes:

She could have written about how and why she objected to homosexuality, the assignment clearly allowed for that. She didn't write anything, and that's why she got failed.

I would definitely be in favour of my kid learning about religions and different believes, if school didn't teach them the facts, I probably would. I want my kids to be educated one every important issue in society, and religion is one of them. I'm agnostic, I wouldn't be too happy if my kids decided to either become atheists or religious, but I would accept it either way.

Wait...

So, how about this -

Your child is told she has to do a project about the Bible.

Problem is, your child happens to be Atheist and staunchly anti-religion. She really doesn't want to study about something she has really put off doing her entire life, and tells the teacher front up that she really doesn't want to do it. So, the teacher fails her on the Project.


I've studied the bible, I don't belive in it but in the case of this assignment I'd probably go on about the inconsistances between the books/science and discuss my opinion doing the assignment

But, no. Some kids actually want to do the paper, and think it is unfair. Well, good for them. But they shouldn't expect their peers to like the same thing. And, before I continue, I really have nothing against anything at all except for people who go 'OH NO, SOME RELIGIOUS PERSON DOESN'T WANT TO DO SOMETHING BECAUSE IT GOES AGAINST THEIR MORAL! THEY ARE DUMB!' but if it is vise versa...
we do study the effect of religion on history in schools we acknowledge it we think about it we do projects on it. I've never seen anyone make a fuss.

I seriously doubt that if this was about someone refusing to write an essay on ID/Creationism set by their science teacher on the basis of creationism being junk science that many of the people condeming her would be doing so with such vigor. And if it is ONLY because she refused to do an assignment and wanted special treatment the subject matter and the total lack of relevence between homosexuality and creationism should have no matter here.

A student who was asked, in science class, to do a project or essay relating to ID or Creationism should write about how it is junk science, not refuse to do it. In fact, learning about why these ideas are not science would be a perfect science assignment.

Now, if a child were failed for writing this about ID/Creationism, *that* would be something that should be reversed. If the teacher were teaching religion as science, the teacher should be removed from her position.

And - I also maintain it's a dumb project to give to kids who are still working out their own sexualities.

Because we should wait until after kids have been driving for years before we actually teach them to drive. We should wait until after kids have dealt with a person dying before we actually talk to them about death.

Personally, I think 13 is too late to start discussing sexuality.

Finally - Somethings fishey here anyway - the school should have contacted her parents about her refusal at the time, seems odd that they would suggest she leave the school over an issue they did not raise when it was happening.

They are asking her to leave the school because her parents obviously aren't going to shut up unless she receives special treatment.

Meanwhile, I have never been at a school where parents were called over every missed assignment. When parents are called about a great deal of missed work, half the time they do nothing.

I don't believe she did not tell her parents about this. And I don't believe the school waited until the end of term to talk about it. My money would be on her telling her parents, her parents instructing her not to tell anyone and to refuse to do it and now her parents trying to make some fundie political point. Which if true would really make her a pawn used by adults with a large control over her life and a victim here. If not then the school looks like it really sucks for not calling the parents until after they failed the girl.

None of this would surprise me. Of course, it also wouldn't surprise me if a 13-year old refused to do work, and then waited until the grades came home to let her parents in on the little secret.

Ok, let's assume te assignment was "Imagine you're an atheist in a predominantly Christian society"... oh, wait. :rolleyes:

She could have written about how and why she objected to homosexuality, the assignment clearly allowed for that. She didn't write anything, and that's why she got failed.

I would definitely be in favour of my kid learning about religions and different believes, if school didn't teach them the facts, I probably would. I want my kids to be educated one every important issue in society, and religion is one of them. I'm agnostic, I wouldn't be too happy if my kids decided to either become atheists or religious, but I would accept it either way.

Nice to see we have a smart ass.

Okay, but you got my point. Something highly objectable to your child is asked to be written of her, even though she can write to object it. Well, what if she was raised on it being so wrong but wasn't given the facts? See, now no this may be considered a contradiction...if I were religious. Remember, my other post, I am anti-religious and pretty Agnostic.

Now, I am not saying that it is wrong that the teacher asked her to write the assignment. I believe it is wrong that the student was not allowed to look into other alternatives being equally as interesting and equally as difficult. It could have ben the Eytmology of Pain Killers, or hell just 'The War in Iraq'. But, this teacher obviously wanted to get at the kid. Probably not out of being anti-religious, but for the teacher him/herself being a fucking ass hole.

It is great to see that you would, and do, want your kids *or your future ones, not one to say you do or don't atm* to have that freedom. It is wonderful to, but it is the child's choice to not want to learn something. It may be wrong, depending to who and what it is about, but it does not entitle anyone to fail her about it. My friend supports animal rights. We had a project where we had to cut into dead frogs at school. Cool, they are already dead but to him it is a great disrespect.

Thankfully, however, the teacher did not oppose it. *Weirdly enough, he was uberly religious to the point where he was just too damn jolly for my own tastes*.

I like you for your own standing, and I respect you for not going out of your way to be an ass about it. And I hope 'smart ass' wasn't too bad...hell, atleast it wasn't dumb ass :-P.

Wait...

So, how about this -

Your child is told she has to do a project about the Bible.

Problem is, your child happens to be Atheist and staunchly anti-religion. She really doesn't want to study about something she has really put off doing her entire life, and tells the teacher front up that she really doesn't want to do it. So, the teacher fails her on the Project.

What do you do?

She fails and takes her grade.

And don't say 'The teacher shouldn't be forcing students to study about the Bible.' because, quite frankly, a teacher shouldn't force a student to study about homosexuality. Religion is a way of life, so is homosexuality. We shouldn't be forced to do something which contradicts with our personal believe, infact it is unlawful to be punished because it goes against your own believe. Teachers are supposed to help find another subject, or a make up assignment.

No, they aren't. You don't do the work, you fail. If a teacher chooses to give you an alternate assignment and can be relatively sure that the difficulty and goal of the alternate are pretty much the same, that is fine. If the teacher does not, then the student fails. Period.

I've studied the bible, I don't belive in it but in the case of this assignment I'd probably go on about the inconsistances between the books/science and discuss my opinion doing the assignment

Good for you. I would have too, but the point is...what if it was a year where Religion really got on your nurves...okay bad example...but imagine it being something you really don't want to write about. Like 'Write about a bad experience relating to this' and there is only one thing you can think of, but you don't want to write about it. And it has to be fact, and not something you pulled out of your ass. And, well, I wouldn't want to make anything up like that anyways. And you tell your teacher, and the teacher says 'Fine, you get a zero.' all because the ass wants you to write about something painful.

Now, granted, the Gay thing for this girl probably wasn't painful if she had to write about it. But it still conflicted with her enough to make the thought of 'I don't wanna do it' pop up.

And another thing I forgot to bring up was -

Maybe she doesn't want to do it because she is truely afraid of her parents disowning her, or disagreeing with her. Trust me, that is cause enough. I know this problem all too well, it is hard for me to express my more Moderate-Leftist thoughts around my parents because it turns to a conflict. And, one way or another, your parents find out about you writing a project.

Like, lets say I am fascinated by parts of Socialism. I am asked to write about it. Well, I want to and it really doesn't bother me...but my parents would disagree with it. So I would say no.

I'd expect you to do the same thing, not about the same subject of course but about something.


we do study the effect of religion on history in schools we acknowledge it we think about it we do projects on it. I've never seen anyone make a fuss.

Yes, but that just means everyone around you didn't have the courage to want to stand up or just didn't care and were not in the control of perhaps parents *as in scared of* or perhaps they all really didn't object to it. Maybe most were somewhat religious, and enjoyed writing about something they...well...enjoy.

I don't think it is wrong to be told to write about something at all. Unless it is when you write your own thoughts, and you get failed although you were supposed to write your own opinion about it. Perhaps the Iraq War. And you write 'for' it but then you get failed because your teacher is 'against' it.

Also, it was a poor example I used. Meh!

Now, I am not saying that it is wrong that the teacher asked her to write the assignment. I believe it is wrong that the student was not allowed to look into other alternatives being equally as interesting and equally as difficult. It could have ben the Eytmology of Pain Killers, or hell just 'The War in Iraq'. But, this teacher obviously wanted to get at the kid. Probably not out of being anti-religious, but for the teacher him/herself being a fucking ass hole.

If my chemistry class is learning about and doing a project related to transition metals, should I be able to do my work on Newton's laws instead? Would that assignment cover the same material? Would it be possible to grade it to the same standards as the other?

It is great to see that you would, and do, want your kids *or your future ones, not one to say you do or don't atm* to have that freedom. It is wonderful to, but it is the child's choice to not want to learn something.

And she should take the consequences of that choice, which are to get no credit for the assignment.

It may be wrong, depending to who and what it is about, but it does not entitle anyone to fail her about it.

Yes, it does. She failed to do the work. A failing grade is perfectly reasonable.

My friend supports animal rights. We had a project where we had to cut into dead frogs at school. Cool, they are already dead but to him it is a great disrespect.

Then he should refuse to do it. And take his zero for the day.

She fails and takes her grade.

So your standpoint is more of the 'Well, person deserves it because she must be lazy or stupid.'

Right, please....complicate this?


No, they aren't. You don't do the work, you fail. If a teacher chooses to give you an alternate assignment and can be relatively sure that the difficulty and goal of the alternate are pretty much the same, that is fine. If the teacher does not, then the student fails. Period.

Understandable, if it is something like a sheet of algebra for example. But you are being asked to write an opinionated paper, and maybe there is more to the story. You don't want to write about it because you don't agree with the thing you are writing about, but at the same time feel scared to write against it because then you would look 'bad' to others. Granted, you most likely are the person to say 'Who gives a shit' but many are not.

It a teacher choses to give me an assignment where I know it's wrong, atleast to me, and I don't want to state an opinion, I give that teacher the finger if that teacher becomes an ass hole about it. If the teacher really couldn't find an alternative assignment, and tried, then I would simply take the grade. Well, me personally...I'd decide to try on it. But this person would probably just take the grade.

If the teacher just doesn't, though, then the teacher is an ass. Period.

Good for you. I would have too, but the point is...what if it was a year where Religion really got on your nurves...okay bad example...but imagine it being something you really don't want to write about. Like 'Write about a bad experience relating to this' and there is only one thing you can think of, but you don't want to write about it. And it has to be fact, and not something you pulled out of your ass. And, well, I wouldn't want to make anything up like that anyways. And you tell your teacher, and the teacher says 'Fine, you get a zero.' all because the ass wants you to write about something painful.

Depending on the class, that could be a very good assignment. A student who doesn't do it absolutely should get a zero.

Now, granted, the Gay thing for this girl probably wasn't painful if she had to write about it. But it still conflicted with her enough to make the thought of 'I don't wanna do it' pop up.

If we gave students a free pass every time they didn't want to do their work, they'd never learn anything.

And another thing I forgot to bring up was -

Maybe she doesn't want to do it because she is truely afraid of her parents disowning her, or disagreeing with her. Trust me, that is cause enough. I know this problem all too well, it is hard for me to express my more Moderate-Leftist thoughts around my parents because it turns to a conflict. And, one way or another, your parents find out about you writing a project.

According to these parents, they only found out about it because of her final grade in the class.

Like, lets say I am fascinated by parts of Socialism. I am asked to write about it. Well, I want to and it really doesn't bother me...but my parents would disagree with it. So I would say no.

And you would deserve a grade of "zero."

So your standpoint is more of the 'Well, person deserves it because she must be lazy or stupid.'

No. They deserve it because it is precisely what they deserve for the amount of work they put in. If I don't do an assignment, then I should not get credit for that assigment. I shouldn't expect special treatment just because I take issue with it. I can certainly make the choice, for any number of reasons, not to do it, but I must then take responsibility for that action and accept the grade I earned.

Understandable, if it is something like a sheet of algebra for example. But you are being asked to write an opinionated paper, and maybe there is more to the story. You don't want to write about it because you don't agree with the thing you are writing about, but at the same time feel scared to write against it because then you would look 'bad' to others. Granted, you most likely are the person to say 'Who gives a shit' but many are not.

These sorts of feelings are precisely what someone should address when writing an opinion paper.

Good for you. I would have too, but the point is...what if it was a year where Religion really got on your nurves...okay bad example...but imagine it being something you really don't want to write about. Like 'Write about a bad experience relating to this' and there is only one thing you can think of, but you don't want to write about it. And it has to be fact, and not something you pulled out of your ass. And, well, I wouldn't want to make anything up like that anyways. And you tell your teacher, and the teacher says 'Fine, you get a zero.' all because the ass wants you to write about something painful.

Now, granted, the Gay thing for this girl probably wasn't painful if she had to write about it. But it still conflicted with her enough to make the thought of 'I don't wanna do it' pop up.

And another thing I forgot to bring up was -

Maybe she doesn't want to do it because she is truely afraid of her parents disowning her, or disagreeing with her. Trust me, that is cause enough. I know this problem all too well, it is hard for me to express my more Moderate-Leftist thoughts around my parents because it turns to a conflict. And, one way or another, your parents find out about you writing a project.

Like, lets say I am fascinated by parts of Socialism. I am asked to write about it. Well, I want to and it really doesn't bother me...but my parents would disagree with it. So I would say no.

I'd expect you to do the same thing, not about the same subject of course but about something.



Yes, but that just means everyone around you didn't have the courage to want to stand up or just didn't care and were not in the control of perhaps parents *as in scared of* or perhaps they all really didn't object to it. Maybe most were somewhat religious, and enjoyed writing about something they...well...enjoy.

I don't think it is wrong to be told to write about something at all. Unless it is when you write your own thoughts, and you get failed although you were supposed to write your own opinion about it. Perhaps the Iraq War. And you write 'for' it but then you get failed because your teacher is 'against' it.

Also, it was a poor example I used. Meh!

You seem to have good intentions, but you just don't understand the situation.

She wasn't asked to do anything that ACCEPTED homosexuality. At all. In fact, she could've bashed homosexuality and called them all freaks and still got an A as long as she answered the damned questions.

It's not up to the teacher to do something that fits the student's perspective in life, it's their job to challenge them to look at themselves in every way possible. And no, it couldn't have been about the war in Iraq - it's a paper about being different in a very fundamentally major way and how she would deal with it. It's sex-ed, so a paper about sexuality is kind of expected.

Please. Your mind is so open it's getting dirt sucked in - use a bit of logic.

If my chemistry class is learning about and doing a project related to transition metals, should I be able to do my work on Newton's laws instead? Would that assignment cover the same material? Would it be possible to grade it to the same standards as the other?

Wow, so again...you really have no solid thing to say other than take an extreme edge of it to make it seem as if what I say is unreasonable. Sure, it may be unreasonable, but you really get an A+ on arrogance.

The problem is, I don't think they would be teaching Transition Metals in most Highschool Chemistry classes. And last time I checked, studying about Transition Metals wasn't against a single person's faith or believe. Unless you get a hard on for wood, and the Metal is Satan. Otherwise, this has nothing to do with the argument.


And she should take the consequences of that choice, which are to get no credit for the assignment.


Good to know you only chose to write big on one thing, and make the others ones fairly easy to laugh at.

Now, if it were to be something like 'Transition Metals' and she refused to do it, yes she deserve an F.

If it is something about Social Culture that goes against her own beliefe, she doesn't deserve an F. The Teacher deserves to find a new job.


Yes, it does. She failed to do the work. A failing grade is perfectly reasonable.


I really think you and I are only repeating our selves every paragraph...


Then he should refuse to do it. And take his zero for the day.

Yea the problem is he didn't get a zero. Because the teacher of that class happened to be as generous as they get.

So, was it right for him to refuse it?

Tell me. Was it right for my friend to refuse cutting into a frog's abdomen and disecting it's golblatter?

Since you are so irrelevant to the argument, I'll take my turn to branch out just a bit before I bring up another thing.

So your standpoint is more of the 'Well, person deserves it because she must be lazy or stupid.'

Right, please....complicate this?

Complicate? Why? She failed.

So your standpoint is more of the 'Well, person deserves it because she must be lazy or stupid.'

Right, please....complicate this?



Understandable, if it is something like a sheet of algebra for example. But you are being asked to write an opinionated paper, and maybe there is more to the story. You don't want to write about it because you don't agree with the thing you are writing about, but at the same time feel scared to write against it because then you would look 'bad' to others. Granted, you most likely are the person to say 'Who gives a shit' but many are not.

It a teacher choses to give me an assignment where I know it's wrong, atleast to me, and I don't want to state an opinion, I give that teacher the finger if that teacher becomes an ass hole about it. If the teacher really couldn't find an alternative assignment, and tried, then I would simply take the grade. Well, me personally...I'd decide to try on it. But this person would probably just take the grade.

If the teacher just doesn't, though, then the teacher is an ass. Period.

IT'S NOT OPINIONATED! IT'S BASED ON THE STUDENT'S OPINION. END OF STORY.

"It is completely out of line for students to be graded on their moral beliefs."

Well, yes. But as far as I can tell from the article, the student received a failing grade based on her utter failure to complete the assignment. No work, no credit. Makes sense to me. Am I missing something here? :confused:

Nice to see we have a smart ass.

Okay, but you got my point. Something highly objectable to your child is asked to be written of her, even though she can write to object it. Well, what if she was raised on it being so wrong but wasn't given the facts? See, now no this may be considered a contradiction...if I were religious. Remember, my other post, I am anti-religious and pretty Agnostic.

Now, I am not saying that it is wrong that the teacher asked her to write the assignment. I believe it is wrong that the student was not allowed to look into other alternatives being equally as interesting and equally as difficult. It could have ben the Eytmology of Pain Killers, or hell just 'The War in Iraq'. But, this teacher obviously wanted to get at the kid. Probably not out of being anti-religious, but for the teacher him/herself being a fucking ass hole.

It is great to see that you would, and do, want your kids *or your future ones, not one to say you do or don't atm* to have that freedom. It is wonderful to, but it is the child's choice to not want to learn something. It may be wrong, depending to who and what it is about, but it does not entitle anyone to fail her about it. My friend supports animal rights. We had a project where we had to cut into dead frogs at school. Cool, they are already dead but to him it is a great disrespect.

Thankfully, however, the teacher did not oppose it. *Weirdly enough, he was uberly religious to the point where he was just too damn jolly for my own tastes*.

I like you for your own standing, and I respect you for not going out of your way to be an ass about it. And I hope 'smart ass' wasn't too bad...hell, atleast it wasn't dumb ass :-P.



The thing is, she was given the fact. It was a "Health education" class, and I would assume that the assignment was given in the course of teaching the children about different sexual orientations. Even if she hadn't been given the necessary information in class itself, what would have stopped her to go to the library and read up on it? Or are you trying to argue that kids should only be asked things they know?

Providing alternative assingments without valid reason would be giving special treatment to someone because of their religion, and basically unfair towards all of the other students. Had she been asked to imagine being homosexual herself, that argument would have been valid, but that wasn't the case. And "I don't believe in homosexuals, so I won't imagine being a heterosexual" simply is nonsense and I can't imagine it being backed in any way by christian faith. It's a bit like saying "I don't believe in sin, so I won't imagine living in a world where things I regard as sinful are the norm". As far as I understand Christianity, that is what they do believe to begin with.

And no, children should have no choice to learn some things. There are curricula which apply to all students, not just those who don't make a fuss. Children have to learn how to peacefully live together in society, it's one of the most important lessons school can teach, and they bloody well have to be taught to think for themselves.

And I like the way how you call me an ass, only to try and turn it into a compliment a few lines down :p

Now, if it were to be something like 'Transition Metals' and she refused to do it, yes she deserve an F.

If it is something about Social Culture that goes against her own beliefe, she doesn't deserve an F. The Teacher deserves to find a new job.

It doesn't go either way with beliefs. She could have very well made a homophobic rant and passed with flying colors. She did nothing, her grade is nothing, zero.

Yea the problem is he didn't get a zero. Because the teacher of that class happened to be as generous as they get.

So, was it right for him to refuse it?

Tell me. Was it right for my friend to refuse cutting into a frog's abdomen and disecting it's golblatter?

Since you are so irrelevant to the argument, I'll take my turn to branch out just a bit before I bring up another thing.

It was his right to do so, sure, and he had a nice teacher, lucky for him. This isn't about animal rights, however.

"teen faild from assignment"

Arbeids mach frei.
what ever, if it means good,i'm for critical learning

Hey, I just saw I got a telegram from Free Land of the Fogs United. He couldn't post, so he wanted me to pass this on. Sorry it's a bit late:

"Greetings,
Sorry, my E-mail stuff is messwed up, would you post this message for me about the girl refusing to do the assignment?
I don't disagree with gay rights at all, as a matter of fact, though both my parents are CHRISTIAN PASTORS I'm very pro-gay/lesbian rights. I also yell at people who use the term "gay" to mean lame and stupid until they are running from the room. And YES people who are anti-gay are bigoted, just as much as people who are anti-muslim, or anti-black. And I for one AM SICK OF IT! and that's my rant on the subject. P.S. she should fail, it wasn't asking her anything outrageous, nobody would refuse to do an assignment if it was about being a WHITE minority. Or even a Black, asian, African, just any old minority ever possible, so why should Homosexuality be any different?"

Hope this is okay!

Depending on the class, that could be a very good assignment. A student who doesn't do it absolutely should get a zero.

Get a zero because Uncle Buck touched you and your English teacher is asking you to write a paper about it, and even though the counselor may have been involved and this teacher knows that is the problem goes 'Well, either you write about it or I fail you.' you just...deserve the fail?


If we gave students a free pass every time they didn't want to do their work, they'd never learn anything.


So, your believe is that if a Student doesn't want to write about a subject highly controversial not only to her self but society...suddenly she is trying to get out of doing school work?

No, as a student, I don't believe we should be given a free pass each time we are asked to right about 'Things Fall Apart Ch #'. If we refuse, then we are simply lazy or stupid. We deserve the F. If I'm asked to do something I really don't want to do because I don't agree with the subject, does that constitute that all I'm trying to do is get a free pass to lay down my head and snooze?


According to these parents, they only found out about it because of her final grade in the class.

Yes, you just now blew a hole in your own defense.

Most parents who have children who do not do work at school generally are informed about a project a few days before or the day of the project's assignment. Trust me, back when I didn't do anything at all at school...my parents knew about a Lewis & Clark paper about a week before I got the requirement sheet between my fingers.

If her parents didn't know about this until the very end than either -

This kid is very slick, which here is my own stereotype against richies/religious people/stuck ups/etc, which I very much doubt because she was religious enough to not want to write about this subject.

or

This kid does do everything she is asked, and this is the first time she has refused to do it because it truthfully, whole-heartedly conflicted with her own believes.

Teachers are supposed to respect your believes. It is a part of their job, and if they fail to do that then they need to go back and re-do the entire process of obtaining their teaching license.


And you would deserve a grade of "zero."

Sure, I'd see my self recieving the zero no matter what, but I don't think I would deserve that zero.

So, I deserve to fail because I'm fearful of my parents giving me shit and perhaps thinking very ill of me? And the teacher even finds this out as I'm explaining why I didn't do the assignment, but because I'm scared of having to argue with the ones I love the most just...wow...

Complicate? Why? She failed.

Complicate your theory, as in give it actual thought other than providing me with a sentance only saying 'She failed, deserved it.'

Get a zero because Uncle Buck touched you and your English teacher is asking you to write a paper about it, and even though the counselor may have been involved and this teacher knows that is the problem goes 'Well, either you write about it or I fail you.' you just...deserve the fail?



So, your believe is that if a Student doesn't want to write about a subject highly controversial not only to her self but society...suddenly she is trying to get out of doing school work?

No, as a student, I don't believe we should be given a free pass each time we are asked to right about 'Things Fall Apart Ch #'. If we refuse, then we are simply lazy or stupid. We deserve the F. If I'm asked to do something I really don't want to do because I don't agree with the subject, does that constitute that all I'm trying to do is get a free pass to lay down my head and snooze?



Yes, you just now blew a hole in your own defense.

Most parents who have children who do not do work at school generally are informed about a project a few days before or the day of the project's assignment. Trust me, back when I didn't do anything at all at school...my parents knew about a Lewis & Clark paper about a week before I got the requirement sheet between my fingers.

If her parents didn't know about this until the very end than either -

This kid is very slick, which here is my own stereotype against richies/religious people/stuck ups/etc, which I very much doubt because she was religious enough to not want to write about this subject.

or

This kid does do everything she is asked, and this is the first time she has refused to do it because it truthfully, whole-heartedly conflicted with her own believes.

Teachers are supposed to respect your believes. It is a part of their job, and if they fail to do that then they need to go back and re-do the entire process of obtaining their teaching license.



Sure, I'd see my self recieving the zero no matter what, but I don't think I would deserve that zero.

So, I deserve to fail because I'm fearful of my parents giving me shit and perhaps thinking very ill of me? And the teacher even finds this out as I'm explaining why I didn't do the assignment, but because I'm scared of having to argue with the ones I love the most just...wow...

FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK.



Are you just purposely ignoring all my posts!? They explain all this shit perfectly!

Sure, I'd see my self recieving the zero no matter what, but I don't think I would deserve that zero.

You've done something to earn a better grade?

IT'S NOT OPINIONATED! IT'S BASED ON THE STUDENT'S OPINION. END OF STORY.

The paper isn't opinionated.

I said 'opinionated response' and if I mis-worded that, then I am very sorry for your displeasure of reading it.

Lets face it... its PD
What are the consequences of her failing? All other questions asside.
She is not going to have to repeat the year.
She is not going to have a future employer refuse her because she failed PD at 13
It won't effect her School Certificate or her HSC
In fact it will have no effect what so ever except to alert her parents to the fact that she is failing to learn about herself and the society she lives in. It sounds like they were alerted. Mission accomplished.....

Schools basic function is to teach kids to learn how to learn. Not to teach them facts and figures. If she has learnt that she doesn't like learning by displaying empathy for her fellow members of society then valuable lesson learnt, for both her and the people around her ;)

Complicate your theory, as in give it actual thought other than providing me with a sentance only saying 'She failed, deserved it.'

Thought? Why make it more complicated than it is. She didn't earn a grade higher than zero, therefore she did not recieve a grade higher than zero.

You've done something to earn a better grade?

Don't people read entire things and not pick out words? It's like a Republican going 'How would you define Minor.'

No, I do deserve that zero. Why? Because there is nothing there to provide for a grade. I would want that teacher to atleast give me an alternative assignment.

Remember people, I'm talking about a damn essay over something Social-like. Not a paper on Quantum Physics.

If I'm asked to do a paper on Quantum Physics and I don't want to do it, yea I deserve to get the 0 on that fine report card.

And by 'deserve' I mean in a world of right or wrong.

It was not wrong to detest against something against my own believe. We are raised, taught, and told to stand up for our selves. To preserve our freedoms of Religion, Speech, Free Press, etc etc etc etc etc etc.

It is highly advised to stand up and say 'No. I do not agree with having to write a paper about the creation of Hemp' or something. If you are in a subject of that class where you've spent about a week on that subject, and are asked to do a paper on it, then it is a different story.

When it is a variety of things to do with a subject, then told to do one specific subject which just happens to detest your own believe then you don't entirely deserve a zero. In all literal senses, you do. But in the world of right or wrong, you don't.

Thought? Why make it more complicated than it is. She didn't earn a grade higher than zero, therefore she did not recieve a grade higher than zero.

Complicate it as in give me a reason why you truely believe so.

Otherwise, that fact that she has a 0 so just has a 0 doesn't give you any standing position other than 'Look at me, I poke fun at others.'

You seem to have good intentions, but you just don't understand the situation.

She wasn't asked to do anything that ACCEPTED homosexuality. At all. In fact, she could've bashed homosexuality and called them all freaks and still got an A as long as she answered the damned questions.

It's not up to the teacher to do something that fits the student's perspective in life, it's their job to challenge them to look at themselves in every way possible. And no, it couldn't have been about the war in Iraq - it's a paper about being different in a very fundamentally major way and how she would deal with it. It's sex-ed, so a paper about sexuality is kind of expected.

Please. Your mind is so open it's getting dirt sucked in - use a bit of logic.

This was, specifically, the post I wanted you to see.

Once you understand that she could've done the assignment without any kind of compromise of her 'morals' (or lack thereof), you see there was no reason for her to bitch and complain. Her excuse was bullshit, she was just a lazy and bigoted bitch.

Complicate it as in give me a reason why you truely believe so.

Otherwise, that fact that she has a 0 so just has a 0 doesn't give you any standing position other than 'Look at me, I poke fun at others.'

She turned in nothing, nothing = 0, 0 = her grade. How fucking complicated do you want this explanation to be?

It doesn't go either way with beliefs. She could have very well made a homophobic rant and passed with flying colors. She did nothing, her grade is nothing, zero.

Yes, and she perhaps knew very damn well being very homophobic would have gotten her expelled. Trust me, it would have.

It was his right to do so, sure, and he had a nice teacher, lucky for him. This isn't about animal rights, however.

No, it isn't. But it isn't about Metal Transition either, friend.

Complicate it as in give me a reason why you truely believe so.

Otherwise, that fact that she has a 0 so just has a 0 doesn't give you any standing position other than 'Look at me, I poke fun at others.'

You act as though this whole thing actually matters. It's literally "Newsflash: Student Fails Assignment She Didn't Do". I'm supposed to form a belief about this?

She turned in nothing, nothing = 0, 0 = her grade. How fucking complicated do you want this explanation to be?

No, she didn't turn in nothing. She detested it, told her teacher it conflicted with her own believe and was told 'Well, tough shit.'

You act as though this whole thing actually matters. It's literally "Newsflash: Student Fails Assignment She Didn't Do". I'm supposed to form a belief about this?

No, no belief.

But why you stand on agreement that she deserves a zero?

Sure, it's a 'NEWS FLASH' but you must be some special kind of stupid to not expect somebody to come on here and ask why you support the teacher giving her a 0.

Yes, and she perhaps knew very damn well being very homophobic would have gotten her expelled. Trust me, it would have.


No, it isn't. But it isn't about Metal Transition either, friend.

Being homophobic does no such thing. You're making false assumptions and it would behoove you to promptly stop.

No, she didn't turn in nothing. She detested it, told her teacher it conflicted with her own believe and was told 'Well, tough shit.'

Because A: it DID NOT conflict with her belief - how many fucking times do I have to say that to you?, and B: You don't get to not do something because you don't believe in it - she'll have to go to science and history class as well and she won't be able to bitch her way out of it.

The paper isn't opinionated.

I said 'opinionated response' and if I mis-worded that, then I am very sorry for your displeasure of reading it.

How is it opinionated? It's not even asking for the students' opinions, it's simply asking them to state how they think they would feel, and what they would try to do to cope with the situation. It's open in all directions.

This was, specifically, the post I wanted you to see.

Once you understand that she could've done the assignment without any kind of compromise of her 'morals' (or lack thereof), you see there was no reason for her to bitch and complain. Her excuse was bullshit, she was just a lazy and bigoted bitch.

Nice to see you are a one sighted, half minded, extreme little boy who was dropped on the head a few many times.

I read your post, and it was the very essence of bullshit.

You know as well as I do that a paper bashing a sex, sexuality, race, etc is grounds for expulsion.

You are just trying to find a way to hold onto something that isn't even close to being credible anymore.

Yes, and she perhaps knew very damn well being very homophobic would have gotten her expelled. Trust me, it would have.

Prove it. Then, sue the school for it. Until then, I figure it's bullshit.


No, it isn't. But it isn't about Metal Transition either, friend.

Me Dinaverg, not Dempublicents. I cut out the crap about frogs and chemistry.

Nice to see you are a one sighted, half minded, extreme little boy who was dropped on the head a few many times.

I read your post, and it was the very essence of bullshit.

You know as well as I do that a paper bashing a sex, sexuality, race, etc is grounds for expulsion.

You are just trying to find a way to hold onto something that isn't even close to being credible anymore.
An expert on grounds for expulsion at an Austrailian school, are we?

No, no belief.

But why you stand on agreement that she deserves a zero?

Sure, it's a 'NEWS FLASH' but you must be some special kind of stupid to not expect somebody to come on here and ask why you support the teacher giving her a 0.

It's obvious she didn't do the assignment, where would the merit for anything other than zero come from?

How is it opinionated? It's not even asking for the students' opinions, it's simply asking them to state how they think they would feel, and what they would try to do to cope with the situation. It's open in all directions.

The point in writing a paper on a subject is to state an opinion unless otherwise asked to do the following, and no this is just one example of the following -

Write about so and such war, what had happened in so and such battle, and the name of an important figure in so and such event.

That is a non-opinionated paper.

This is -

I feel that it is unjust for Bush to incur such pain and be so deligerent in his delivery of war.

Nice to see you are a one sighted, half minded, extreme little boy who was dropped on the head a few many times.

I read your post, and it was the very essence of bullshit.

You know as well as I do that a paper bashing a sex, sexuality, race, etc is grounds for expulsion.

You are just trying to find a way to hold onto something that isn't even close to being credible anymore.

No, no it is NOT grounds for expulsion. If she was afraid of bashing them, she could've expressed her distate for homosexuality in a less 'bashing' way if she felt it was necessary, but she didn't even ATTEMPT to create a paper, she just outright denied it. She probably didn't even read the entire assignment, rather she just saw the word "homosexual" and automatically said "Nope, not doin it, against my religion, lawl"

In all literal senses, you do. But in the world of right or wrong, you don't.

Incidentally, school has a whole lot to do with the literal sense of things.

Prove it. Then, sue the school for it. Until then, I figure it's bullshit.[/quote[

The fact that all public schools take a very anti-racist/sexist/sexualist stance on society?

[quote]
Me Dinaverg, not Dempublicents. I cut out the crap about frogs and chemistry.

Wow, you talk like caveman too!

Nice to see you are a one sighted, half minded, extreme little boy who was dropped on the head a few many times.

I read your post, and it was the very essence of bullshit.

You know as well as I do that a paper bashing a sex, sexuality, race, etc is grounds for expulsion.

You are just trying to find a way to hold onto something that isn't even close to being credible anymore.

Who says she had to go bashing them?
I said it before, I'll say it again : She could have outlined how uncomfortable that situation would make her feel, due to the fact that she regards homosexulality as immoral. She could have pointed out that she would object to the sinful behaviour presented by a society like that.
Regarding coping with the situation, she could have opted for isolating herself, retreating into the exclusive company of other heterosexual christians, or else she could have chosen to try and evangelise.

None of that is bashing, it's enough to write several pages about, and it's not even difficult to find sources and material to back up all that if needs be.

The fact that all public schools take a very anti-racist/sexist/sexualist stance on society?

I've yet to get evidence of someone being expelling for giving an opinion, when asked for an opinion.

Wow, you talk like caveman too!

Nevermind the fact that your name would be pronounced "Piss-cho-ticka".

The fact that all public schools take a very anti-racist/sexist/sexualist stance on society?

If that's true, you must know a few news stories you could link to, or at least an article detailing the universal stance of countries all over the world against racist/sexist/sexualist views.

We'll wait.

Wow, now this is entertaining.

I have gotten just about everyone of you to refrain from really using fact and sensfulness and reduce your statements to Internet short-words for Laugh.

It's getting pathetic in all other senses as well, being as none of you really are defending a stance but attacking one. You don't care if it is right or wrong, you are just like any other person who wants to look at a news article and submit to the masses of finding it an atrosity or a laugh factory.

I for one see it as neither, I only see the peoples' response as being...simply put, for this subject, a laugh factory.

You have all resorted to using words which really have nothing to do with things. You think saying that someone being illogical makes you right. When, really, saying illogical really makes both of us wrong.

Anyways, my ride is almost here. And yes, I pretty much did use you all to pass the time. Anyways, I could give a shit care less about your own belief on the thing.

Honestly, I think of you a bit less than credible of being able to post an argument.

Since the most humane know when it is to stop, and the dog keeps it going until it is worn out or has been beaten down physically just simply doesn't give up until one or the other happens.

Anyways...

So, what are you all doin?

The point in writing a paper on a subject is to state an opinion unless otherwise asked to do the following, and no this is just one example of the following -

Write about so and such war, what had happened in so and such battle, and the name of an important figure in so and such event.

That is a non-opinionated paper.

This is -

I feel that it is unjust for Bush to incur such pain and be so deligerent in his delivery of war.

Oh, so it's the fact that she wasn't supposed to be writing about something she could read up and copy from somewhere else that you object to?
She actually had to think for this assignment. Even worse, she had to consider her feelings. And that's what makes it opinionated?

The point in writing a paper on a subject is to state an opinion unless otherwise asked to do the following, and no this is just one example of the following -

Write about so and such war, what had happened in so and such battle, and the name of an important figure in so and such event.

That is a non-opinionated paper.

This is -

I feel that it is unjust for Bush to incur such pain and be so deligerent in his delivery of war.


Actually history is all about opinions... there is a small kernel of "Facts" around which a whole bunch of opinions are formed.

Writing about Captain Cooks landing in Australia in 1970 could be done in two very different ways depending on whether you were looking from the perspective of an Aboriginal australian or a later immigrant.

If that's true, you must know a few news stories you could link to, or at least an article detailing the universal stance of countries all over the world against racist/sexist/sexualist views.

We'll wait.

No use.

I could spend the rest of my life video taping Principals from around the world responding to someone who stated something against their own belief, and you would call it hollywood.

I could get a biography which has been accountedly approved of, and admitted as non-fiction by over a thousand people. To you, it'd just be Peter Pan.

Honestly, it's just nice to get a rise out of people to see the pathetic things they'll say in defense.

The fact that all public schools take a very anti-racist/sexist/sexualist stance on society?Are you talking about Australian or American schools here, and if Australian, how do you know if you live in Nebraska, and if American, your point is moot: The American school system is totally and utterly irrelevant in this case.

Wow, now this is entertaining.

I have gotten just about everyone of you to refrain from really using fact and sensfulness and reduce your statements to Internet short-words for Laugh.

It's getting pathetic in all other senses as well, being as none of you really are defending a stance but attacking one. You don't care if it is right or wrong, you are just like any other person who wants to look at a news article and submit to the masses of finding it an atrosity or a laugh factory.

I for one see it as neither, I only see the peoples' response as being...simply put, for this subject, a laugh factory.

You have all resorted to using words which really have nothing to do with things. You think saying that someone being illogical makes you right. When, really, saying illogical really makes both of us wrong.

Anyways, my ride is almost here. And yes, I pretty much did use you all to pass the time. Anyways, I could give a shit care less about your own belief on the thing.

Honestly, I think of you a bit less than credible of being able to post an argument.

Since the most humane know when it is to stop, and the dog keeps it going until it is worn out or has been beaten down physically just simply doesn't give up until one or the other happens.

Anyways...

So, what are you all doin?

I'm assuming this 'ride' of yours includes men in white coats and butterfly nets.

Verily so.

Oh, so it's the fact that she wasn't supposed to be writing about something she could read up and copy from somewhere else that you object to?
She actually had to think for this assignment. Even worse, she had to consider her feelings. And that's what makes it opinionated?

Sure. Whatever makes you feel obligated to post, that can be it.

I know you all think I am giving up, but honestly...I have a life to get back too.

Honestly, it's just nice to get a rise out of people to see the pathetic things they'll say in defense.For example:

No use.

I could spend the rest of my life video taping Principals from around the world responding to someone who stated something against their own belief, and you would call it hollywood.

I could get a biography which has been accountedly approved of, and admitted as non-fiction by over a thousand people. To you, it'd just be Peter Pan.

No use.

I could spend the rest of my life video taping Principals from around the world responding to someone who stated something against their own belief, and you would call it hollywood.

I could get a biography which has been accountedly approved of, and admitted as non-fiction by over a thousand people. To you, it'd just be Peter Pan.

Honestly, it's just nice to get a rise out of people to see the pathetic things they'll say in defense.

Yeah but the funny thing is, you've gotten us none of these things. You've provided assumptions and assertions to fallacies. You're just wrong, and it's very sad to see you think otherwise at this point.

...

It was not wrong to detest against something against my own believe. We are raised, taught, and told to stand up for our selves. To preserve our freedoms of Religion, Speech, Free Press, etc etc etc etc etc etc.

...

so if as a Christian, she were asked in biology class to do a paper on her opinion on the theory of evolution, should she have the right to refuse to do it and ask for an alternative like her opinion on ID?

Are you talking about Australian or American schools here, and if Australian, how do you know if you live in Nebraska, and if American, your point is moot: The American school system is totally and utterly irrelevant in this case.

You and the butterfly net caught my attention.

One - Nebraska has nothing to do with this. What did the corn fields do to you, :-P. [/sarcasm]

Two - I was using one general thing, in where a lot of American and Canadian and British school systems are like.

If you didn't notice in the latter of my postings, I mentioned something about spending the rest of my life doing something where it would have no ability to change someone's opinion.

Wow, so again...you really have no solid thing to say other than take an extreme edge of it to make it seem as if what I say is unreasonable. Sure, it may be unreasonable, but you really get an A+ on arrogance.

How so? I'm not "taking an extreme edge." The students were discussing sexuality and how it affects society, and you proposed that she write about painkillers instead. That is an entirely different subject, and would not serve the same educational goal.

The problem is, I don't think they would be teaching Transition Metals in most Highschool Chemistry classes.

I learned it. It would be a pretty crappy intro chemistry class if it wasn't covered.

And last time I checked, studying about Transition Metals wasn't against a single person's faith or believe. Unless you get a hard on for wood, and the Metal is Satan. Otherwise, this has nothing to do with the argument.

Last time I checked, discussing homosexuality isn't against a single person's faith or beliefs either. Supporting it might be, but she wasn't be asked to do so.

Now, if it were to be something like 'Transition Metals' and she refused to do it, yes she deserve an F.

If it is something about Social Culture that goes against her own beliefe, she doesn't deserve an F. The Teacher deserves to find a new job.

How can a question go against her beliefs? She had every opportunity to do the assignment within her belief system. She wasn't asked to write about, "Why homosexuals are great people."

Yea the problem is he didn't get a zero. Because the teacher of that class happened to be as generous as they get.

And gave him credit where no credit was due, apparently. I wish I could get out of doing my work and still get the same credit for it as my coworkers. That would be wonderful.

So, was it right for him to refuse it?

If he truly believes it to be wrong, yes. But it was wrong for him to think he deserved special treatment because of his beliefs.

*snip* Honestly, it's just nice to get a rise out of people to see the pathetic things they'll say in defense.

Isn't that the definition of trolling? :p

No use.

I could spend the rest of my life video taping Principals from around the world responding to someone who stated something against their own belief, and you would call it hollywood.

I could get a biography which has been accountedly approved of, and admitted as non-fiction by over a thousand people. To you, it'd just be Peter Pan.

Honestly, it's just nice to get a rise out of people to see the pathetic things they'll say in defense.

To me? I just wanted to know what you know that I don't. Part of the whole point of being on this forum is learning new things and understanding other points of view, for me at least. I've never called into question evidence before, and the assumption that I would from only two questions says a lot about you and your respect for everyone else here, just as your failure to produce evidence says a lot about the accuracy of your argument.

Namely, you have none of either.

so if as a Christian, she were asked in biology class to do a paper on her opinion on the theory of evolution, should she have the right to refuse to do it and ask for an alternative like her opinion on ID?

See the thing there is that -

Evolution is a Scientific Theory, not a Social Subject.

But, if she really didn't want too, then good for her. Sadly, schools in most english speaking countries I know of have clauses where they respect that.

---

ATTN BUTTERFLY GUY

No, I'm sure the little bus you ride each day looks like that to you.

But...my ride contains guys in pink suits, sorry.

so if as a Christian, she were asked in biology class to do a paper on her opinion on the theory of evolution, should she have the right to refuse to do it and ask for an alternative like her opinion on ID?

No because that is the curriculum. No task completion, no reward.

Now if it were something actually objectionable...

Isn't that the definition of trolling? :p

Not unless I say something like -

'Your mother is a whore' and try to see how you'll respond to me.

The point of argument is for one to relieve one self of stress. I, for one, didn't exactly have a lot of stress. Just some free time to kill.

If I truely wanted to get a rise out of you, I would have been insulting. Now, go have fun trying to get me introuble. If I get introuble, then I guess I said too much. But oh well.

The only credible people on these boards I can think of are Moderators.

Sure. Whatever makes you feel obligated to post, that can be it.

I know you all think I am giving up, but honestly...I have a life to get back too.

Yes, see, that's the sad thing. None of us here have a life, or a family.
How does that answer my question, though?

Get a zero because Uncle Buck touched you and your English teacher is asking you to write a paper about it, and even though the counselor may have been involved and this teacher knows that is the problem goes 'Well, either you write about it or I fail you.' you just...deserve the fail?

If a teacher actually asked students to share a time that they were sexually abused, that would be an inappropriate assignment all around. But it has nothing whatsoever to do with this discussion.

So, your believe is that if a Student doesn't want to write about a subject highly controversial not only to her self but society...suddenly she is trying to get out of doing school work?

Yes. Schoolwork should involve controversial subjects. It should get students thinking about these things and working out their own positions on them. A student who refuses is refusing to think, to work, and to learn.

No, as a student, I don't believe we should be given a free pass each time we are asked to right about 'Things Fall Apart Ch #'. If we refuse, then we are simply lazy or stupid. We deserve the F. If I'm asked to do something I really don't want to do because I don't agree with the subject, does that constitute that all I'm trying to do is get a free pass to lay down my head and snooze?

How can you "not agree with the subject." People don't disagree with subjects, they disagree with positions on a subject. But this girl wasn't asked to write from the point-of-view of a position she disagreed with. She was asked to provide her own opinions and her own thoughts on a subject.

Yes, you just now blew a hole in your own defense.

Most parents who have children who do not do work at school generally are informed about a project a few days before or the day of the project's assignment.

This is completely and totally incorrect. Most parents don't even know what their kids are doing in school, much less every assignment or project handed out. My mother only knew when my assignments were due because I told her. This has been the same in every school I have ever interacted with. The only instance in which a parent was informed of these things is a student who had a track record of failing - when the parent asked to be specially informed of such things.

Teachers are supposed to respect your believes. It is a part of their job, and if they fail to do that then they need to go back and re-do the entire process of obtaining their teaching license.

There was nothing disrespectful about this assignment. A student who thought that homosexuality was an evil, immoral disease could complete it just as easily as a student with homosexual parents.

Sure, I'd see my self recieving the zero no matter what, but I don't think I would deserve that zero.

If you don't do the work, how could you deserve anything more?

So, I deserve to fail because I'm fearful of my parents giving me shit and perhaps thinking very ill of me? And the teacher even finds this out as I'm explaining why I didn't do the assignment, but because I'm scared of having to argue with the ones I love the most just...wow...

First of all, doing an assignment does not put you in any position to argue with the ones you love. That is an exaggeration of epic proportions.

Second of all, if you truly had a reason to fear your parents over an issue and told her teacher, she should be taking that case to DEFACS. At the very least, she could agree to keep the assignment confidential.

I recall writing numerous papers about Christianity in high school. The subject is unavoidable in our society, as is homosexuality. Dante's Inferno and selections from St. Augustine were required reading at my school. I am Buddhist, and even though I personally find modern day christianity to be a pale imitation of spirituality, I never once refused to do the work I was assigned. As a result I learned a great deal about the nature of the religion, and was all the better for it. I used to be rabidly opposed to Christianity, but thanks to those readings I managed to see past my prejudices. That is one of the many purposes of education.

I was given an assignment, and though I grumbled and griped I did my job. If she fails to do her part and learn about the world around her, then the only one who loses is her. If she fails to do her job and write a paper about homosexuals, then she is negligent in her duty as a student. She could have used it as a forum to voice her opinions on homosexuals, instead she chose to sit back and avoid the subject. My verdict: Failure.

See the thing there is that -

Evolution is a Scientific Theory, not a Social Subject.

But, if she really didn't want too, then good for her. Sadly, schools in most english speaking countries I know of have clauses where they respect that.

---

ATTN BUTTERFLY GUY

No, I'm sure the little bus you ride each day looks like that to you.

But...my ride contains guys in pink suits, sorry.

*sigh* I fear for the school system in Nebraska if this guy is any indication.

Why not just object to every assignment until it becomes something you're really good about talking about, even though it has nothing to do with the class and there was no reason for the assignment to be objected to?

Yeah, perfectly logical. You're a scary kid.

This is completely and totally incorrect. Most parents don't even know what their kids are doing in school, much less every assignment or project handed out. My mother only knew when my assignments were due because I told her. This has been the same in every school I have ever interacted with. The only instance in which a parent was informed of these things is a student who had a track record of failing - when the parent asked to be specially informed of such things.

That's mostly been my experience, also, although some of my teachers have sent home permission slips for things like showing PG-13 movies to sixth graders when they were relevant to the curriculum. Other than that, a major assignment might be mentioned in a school newsletter, but for most assignments, the parents only know about them if their kid tells them.


If you don't do the work, how could you deserve anything more?


That's exactly how I feel about that.

No, I do deserve that zero. Why? Because there is nothing there to provide for a grade. I would want that teacher to atleast give me an alternative assignment.

So you don't deserve a zero because you somehow deserve special treatment?

Remember people, I'm talking about a damn essay over something Social-like. Not a paper on Quantum Physics.

If I'm asked to do a paper on Quantum Physics and I don't want to do it, yea I deserve to get the 0 on that fine report card.

But if you are asked to write about your own thoughts on a social subject, that is different? Is there some sort of logic behind this idea?

It was not wrong to detest against something against my own believe. We are raised, taught, and told to stand up for our selves. To preserve our freedoms of Religion, Speech, Free Press, etc etc etc etc etc etc.

It is highly advised to stand up and say 'No. I do not agree with having to write a paper about the creation of Hemp' or something. If you are in a subject of that class where you've spent about a week on that subject, and are asked to do a paper on it, then it is a different story.

Guess what? In a health class, you are going to discuss sexuality (if it is a decent health class, anyways). They probably even spent a significant amount of time on it.

And how the hell would it be ok to not do a paper on the creation of hemp? Do you know people who are morally opposed to rope or even discussing rope?

How can an entire subject be against your beliefs? A particular stance on a particular subject might be, but this girl wasn't be asked to write about a particular stance on homosexuality.

Yes, and she perhaps knew very damn well being very homophobic would have gotten her expelled. Trust me, it would have.

I highly doubt it. And, if she had gotten failed or expelled for doing the assignment from her point-of-view, then I would be the first to stand up and complain.

*sigh* I fear for the school system in Nebraska if this guy is any indication.

Why not just object to every assignment until it becomes something you're really good about talking about, even though it has nothing to do with the class and there was no reason for the assignment to be objected to?

Yeah, perfectly logical. You're a scary kid.


she already admitted to being a troll by saying stuff just to rile people up. poor kid just wants attention. its pointless to even debate with her.

The point in writing a paper on a subject is to state an opinion unless otherwise asked to do the following, and no this is just one example of the following -

Write about so and such war, what had happened in so and such battle, and the name of an important figure in so and such event.

That is a non-opinionated paper.

This is -

I feel that it is unjust for Bush to incur such pain and be so deligerent in his delivery of war.

If students were asked to write a paper concerning their opinions on the Iraq war and one student's submission had the thesis, "I feel that it is unjust for Bush to incur such pain and be so deligerent(sic) in his delivery of war," that would be perfectly appropriate (other than the apparent mispelling of belligerent), so long as the student backed that thesis up with reasons.

Of course most of us wouldn't agree with her stance but that's not the point - the point is, she wouldn't have FAILED.

If I was a teacher I'd have given her an A+ had she written a well supported assignment on her anti gay beliefs. I'd just be happy she thought about it.

Who wrote that? If it's a pacific islander song as seems to be the inference then I am very very surprised that a native language of the pacific islands translates so nicely into rhyme and verse when put into english.

LOL South Pacific is the name of a movie.

See the thing there is that -

Evolution is a Scientific Theory, not a Social Subject.

Why are students supposed to be exempt to learning and thinking about social subjects?

Understandable, if it is something like a sheet of algebra for example. But you are being asked to write an opinionated paper, and maybe there is more to the story. You don't want to write about it because you don't agree with the thing you are writing about, but at the same time feel scared to write against it because then you would look 'bad' to others. Granted, you most likely are the person to say 'Who gives a shit' but many are not.
I've written the opposite of what I have believed on many opinion pieces. Children should be thought to think about their beliefs and if she refuses to think then she should fail.


If the teacher just doesn't, though, then the teacher is an ass. Period.



No, the teachers job is to teach if you refuse to learn they can't make you.

"It is completely out of line for students to be graded on their moral beliefs."

Well, yes. But as far as I can tell from the article, the student received a failing grade based on her utter failure to complete the assignment. No work, no credit. Makes sense to me. Am I missing something here? :confused:


The idiots?

While ID does absolutly not belong in a science class ...

If ya failed to do the homework you deserve a bad grade for it.

It is up to the rest of us to make sure that ID does not end up in the science class

**five pints of stella post**

I agree it should not be in ANY science class ANYWHERE outside of isolates communities who are harmless enough to let babble to each other about this junk.

But really I doubt that people would be going after this girl with such vittriol if she had been failed for refusing to do an ID assignment as a protest.

And i've a feeling some here who are after this girls blood would be supporting someone who refused to do such a project. I would. No reason to let a kid be indoctrinated.

Well.... you would have people going after someone who refused to do an asignment on ID, but they would be the fundies... different crowd.


okok... South Pacific... movie... gotcha... missed that one. Sue me for assuming the context of the quoter meant a poem from the south pacific.

Yes, she was wrong. Yes, I dissagree with her. That does not make it anything but hypocrisy to ignore the fact that children should not feel that their ideologies are going to be directly challenged when they enter the classroom (At least, not by a teacher or an assignment).

The unexamined life is not worth living.

So... which is it?

**five pints of stella post**

I agree it should not be in ANY science class ANYWHERE outside of isolates communities who are harmless enough to let babble to each other about this junk.

But really I doubt that people would be going after this girl with such vittriol if she had been failed for refusing to do an ID assignment as a protest.

And i've a feeling some here who are after this girls blood would be supporting someone who refused to do such a project. I would. No reason to let a kid be indoctrinated.

Well.... you would have people going after someone who refused to do an asignment on ID, but they would be the fundies... different crowd.


*sigh*

If she refused to do an assignment in which she was supposed to discuss what she would do if she lived in a society in which the majority of people believed in ID, she would deserve a zero just as much as she currently does.

As it has been pointed out many, many, many, many, many times now in this thread, the girl had a perfect opportunity for airing her views about homosexuality - the actual assignment. Instead of expressing her views, she chose not to do the assignment, and therefore received no credit for the assignment. This is really not compicated.

I meant the complex philosophical and personal descision of "How should we treat X group, knowing what we know."

I know that at age 13, we may have thought ourselves Gods (we probably did at 16 as well, when we drove our car over the side-railing of the road), but we were, in fact, not all that wise. There are descision making skills that are not present in the minds of 13 year-olds, and it abuses them both to ask them to use them, and to give them pre-packaged beleifs before they are too young to analyze them.

"Susan, we don't hit people and snatch their toys away. How would you feel if Johnny had pushed you down and taken your truck?"

Seems to me that preschoolers are often asked to put themselves in other's shoes.

Do you think a 13 year old would have had the backbone to stand up to questions like the ones thrown at me, because I appear to be the sole dissenting voice on this thread? No! They'd break down quickly, and give up (not that I'm not that close, it's impossible to manage 5 different people at once and still keep a coherant debate going).

And on that note, I'm gonna have to stop posting, because I have class to get to. I'm sure there'll be another 25 to 30 posts coming back telling me how I'm at fault for the lynchings of the south.

Oh. They'd back down just like the young lady who refused the assignment did, right?

Few 13 year olds who think they are right are backing down. They will stand there and tell you that they don't care what consequences they face, you can't make them do X.

"Put the phone away or I'll have to confiscate it."
"Yes, sir."

or

"Put the phone away or I'll have to confiscate it."
"Fuck you, you're not taking my phone!"

Which scenario is more likely?

So... which is it?

The part where we don't confront children in schools. You, of all people, should know that schools need to feel safe to children.

The part where we don't confront children in schools. You, of all people, should know that schools need to feel safe to children.

Feel safe to not be beat up not feel safe from actually having to use your brain or even *gasp* learn.

Feel safe to not be beat up not feel safe from actually having to use your brain or even *gasp* learn.

Learning and having moral values dictated to you are two very different things.

I wonder how people would feel if the teacher had instead tried to teach conservative values. I expect we would see outrage from the very crowd who condemns this girl.

Learning and having moral values dictated to you are two very different things.

I wonder how people would feel if the teacher had instead tried to teach conservative values. I expect we would see outrage from the very crowd who condemns this girl.

Or, worse, a communist. :O

Who wrote that? If it's a pacific islander song as seems to be the inference then I am very very surprised that a native language of the pacific islands translates so nicely into rhyme and verse when put into english.

South Pacific is a musical, and a rather well-known one at that.

A paradox does this present because by them seeking to prompt acceptance they themselves fail to take into account the beliefs and rights of other groups.

Learning and having moral values dictated to you are two very different things.

I wonder how people would feel if the teacher had instead tried to teach conservative values. I expect we would see outrage from the very crowd who condemns this girl.
Where had the teacher tried to teach anything? He just asked for opinions from the students.

A paradox does this present because by them seeking to prompt acceptance they themselves fail to take into account the beliefs and rights of other groups.

Actually, I see it as more of a Minority's Rights vs Tyranny Of The Majority type of thing... somehow...

No, she didn't turn in nothing. She detested it, told her teacher it conflicted with her own believe and was told 'Well, tough shit.'

"I am not doing it" and not handing in the paper = handing in nothing.

The only credible people on these boards I can think of are Moderators.

Glad to hear it. You've been insulting to people, and trolling. Now stop.

The part where we don't confront children in schools. You, of all people, should know that schools need to feel safe to children.

You still have not proven that this assignment made her feel unsafe, or that being asked in a class where sexuality is the topic to think about what it would be like to be in the minority is threatening.

You, as a teenager, should be insulted to have people think so patronizingly of you that they think you can't cope with a simple assignment.

Learning and having moral values dictated to you are two very different things.

No one dictated anything. "Describe how you might feel."

Learning and having moral values dictated to you are two very different things.


I'm sorry, maybe I'm just not getting something but how was she having moral values dictated to her the teacher was asking for her opinion.

All it was was an assignment to describe feelings. Nothing more.

The scummy little urchin does her work or fails. Doesn't matter if she hates jews or niggers or whoever her kind pick to hate these days, she does her assignment or she doesn't get credit, same as everyone else.

The scummy little urchin does her work or fails. Doesnt matter if she hates jews or niggers or whoever her kind pick to hate these days, she does her assingment or she doesnt get credit, same as everyone else.

w00t!

That does not make it anything but hypocrisy to ignore the fact that children should not feel that their ideologies are going to be directly challenged when they enter the classroom (At least, not by a teacher or an assignment).

What!? Why the hell not? That is definitely one of the most important experiences of an education--to challenge ideologies, and have one's own ideologies questioned. You know concepts like; discourse, critical thinking, empirical evidence, open minded investigation, building knowledge.....

I'm sorry, maybe I'm just not getting something but how was she having moral values dictated to her the teacher was asking for her opinion.

Sheer and complete Disengenuousity.

It was not "merely" asking for her opinion. It was asking for her opinion in a pointed manner. If the question had been "How do you feel about homosexuality?" or "How do you feel about the treatment of homosexuals.", it would have been a reasonable question.

But that's not what the question was.

What it was, was bullying the student. She has no defense against a teacher's shots at her values. How are we to teach her that attack the morals of one who has no defense against you is wrong, if you we attack her morals while she has no defense?

What!? Why the hell not? That is definitely one of the most important experiences of an education--to challenge ideologies, and have one's own ideologies questioned. You know concepts like; discourse, critical thinking, empirical evidence, open minded investigation, building knowledge.....

For a 13 year old? Fuck no! That's a question for a 17 year old, or a 19 year old, but not for a 13 year old.

We've already played through this loop once. I'm not going through it again. Suffice to say that what it was, was bullying, plain and simple, and it was unfair.

Sheer and complete Disengenuousity.

It was not "merely" asking for her opinion. It was asking for her opinion in a pointed manner. If the question had been "How do you feel about homosexuality?" or "How do you feel about the treatment of homosexuals.", it would have been a reasonable question.

But that's not what the question was.

What it was, was bullying the student. She has no defense against a teacher's shots at her values. How are we to teach her that attack the morals of one who has no defense against you is wrong, if you we attack her morals while she has no defense?How exactly do you come to this conclusion that that was the intent of the question "Describe what you would feel like in this situation"?

For a 13 year old? Fuck no! That's a question for a 17 year old, or a 19 year old, but not for a 13 year old. No.

How exactly do you come to this conclusion that that was the intent of the question "Describe what you would feel like in this situation"?

Don't play stupid.

The question is created to go along the following route: "How would I feel about being a heterosexual in a homosexual community?"

which becomes "How do homosexuals feel in a heterosexual community"

Which draws up the social pre-conditioning of the harm principal.

That means that it points to a conclusion. We should not be pointing people at conclusions at that age, because they lack the ability to effectively argue back. It is bullying.

No.

How rational. :rolleyes:

Should I respond "Yes."?

How rational. :rolleyes:

Should I respond "Yes."?I could have put it in more complex terms, but basically, you did say "yes" in that post. All it was was a statement with nothing to back it up other than "I've said this before". I replied in kind, only wasting less space and keystrokes. ;)

I could have put it in more complex terms, but basically, you did say "yes" in that post. All it was was a statement with nothing to back it up other than "I've said this before". I replied in kind, only wasting less space and keystrokes. ;)

Fair enough. I think this is why there used to be a max-posts rule for threads... You can only argue the same thing so many times, I suppose. :P

Don't play stupid.

The question is created to go along the following route: "How would I feel about being a heterosexual in a homosexual community?"

which becomes "How do homosexuals feel in a heterosexual community"

Which draws up the social pre-conditioning of the harm principal.

That means that it points to a conclusion. We should not be pointing people at conclusions at that age, because they lack the ability to effectively argue back. It is bullying.If they're 13 and you claim they're too young to understand, how would their fragile minds be capable of reasoning that out and thus become warped?

You're building a forgone conclusion out of air. Basically, you're saying because you feel it implies an agenda, it's bullying. That's not a valid conclusion.

If they're 13 and you claim they're too young to understand, how would their fragile minds be capable of reasoning that out and thus become warped?

You're building a forgone conclusion out of air. Basically, you're saying because you feel it implies an agenda, it's bullying. That's not a valid conclusion.

I love how words get shoved into my mouth. The ability to make rational descisions based off of reason and long-term analysis does not emerge until the 20's (that's why we don't let children vote). That also means that children are much more open to emotional manipulation. A child is not incapable of following a line of very easy logic, they are just incapable of constructing an adequate one of their own.

I don't mean to say that a 13 year-old can't have an opinion. They can. Hell. They should. It's good for them. I'm saying that they cannot rationally defend that opinion at the level an adult can. That makes it intellectual bullying for an adult to take shots at their ideology. We don't want them to pick on those who have no recourse to defense (Homosexuals), and so we should not teach them it is wrong by picking on them on the issue when they have no defense. I call that creul and hypocritical.

I'm saying that they cannot rationally defend that opinion at the level an adult can.No shit. Swathing them in comfortable bandages isn't going to get them to the point where they can defend that opinion at the level an adult can.

No shit. Swathing them in comfortable bandages isn't going to get them to the point where they can defend that opinion at the level an adult can.

Time will. If the question were asked "What are your opinions on the way homosexuals are treated", I would be all over it as a question and as a learning opportunity. However, that isn't what it was. It was a pointed question, and in that regard, an attack on a defenseless child. That kind of question isn't a learning opportunity, because all that is learned is "It is OK to bully those weaker than you."

Don't play stupid.

The question is created to go along the following route: "How would I feel about being a heterosexual in a homosexual community?"

which becomes "How do homosexuals feel in a heterosexual community"

Which draws up the social pre-conditioning of the harm principal.

That means that it points to a conclusion. We should not be pointing people at conclusions at that age, because they lack the ability to effectively argue back. It is bullying.

The fact that a question would be answered in the same way by most members of society does not make it pointed.

The student was being asked to display empathy with another persons situation. It is not suggesting that she should act differently, or adjust her moral viewpoint, just that she imagine the person on the other end of that moral view point. I don't see how that is such a terrible thing to do.

I think the exercise could be performed in many ways. It would be just as important for someone who is homosexual to think about why someone would be homophobic. Its a far more productive thing to do than to just hate someone because of their point of view. If you try and place yourselves in their shoes it may enable you to be more understanding of their situation .. and in the long run might even help you to understand each other.

So often I think people are simply cast.. Hitler for instance is so often displayed as a one dimesional monster. I think this stereotype is counter productive. Very few people see themselves as evil and I doubt very much that Hitler saw himself as an evil man. If you begin to look at him as a person instead of a monster then you can start to learn lessons that might help prevent similar situations in the future. If you put him down to an anomaly then you learn nothing. Being asked to imagine Hitler as a real person does not mean you have to sympathise with him or think he was a great guy, just that he had his own problems, and perhaps that might enable you to recognise similar traits in people around you.

Same with this exercise. The student wasn't asked to say that being gay was ok.. or even acceptable.. just to imagine herself in a situation that was similar to theirs for a second and realise it wouldn't be easy and that choices they make must come from a very different perspective to the one she is used to.

Its a valuable lesson to learn when trying to live as part of a society. And school has a very strong role in easing young people from the strictly controlled confines of the family structure to the much looser social constructs of society as a whole. Its a role that is very difficult for a family to play and one that schooling is and should be very much responsible for.

Time will. If the question were asked "What are your opinions on the way homosexuals are treated", I would be all over it as a question and as a learning opportunity. However, that isn't what it was. It was a pointed question, and in that regard, an attack on a defenseless child. That kind of question isn't a learning opportunity, because all that is learned is "It is OK to bully those weaker than you.":rolleyes:

The kid should be failed on the assignment. I mean, there was a girl who was a jehovah's witness in my biology class in highschool. She didn't believe in evolution, but she still had to learn about it and take the test.

However, I don't know how she managed to fail the entire class on the basis of one assignment.

:rolleyes:

Another rational reply. I am thusly defeated.

The fact that a question would be answered in the same way by most members of society does not make it pointed.

The student was being asked to display empathy with another persons situation. It is not suggesting that she should act differently, or adjust her moral viewpoint, just that she imagine the person on the other end of that moral view point. I don't see how that is such a terrible thing to do.

I think the exercise could be performed in many ways. It would be just as important for someone who is homosexual to think about why someone would be homophobic. Its a far more productive thing to do than to just hate someone because of their point of view. If you try and place yourselves in their shoes it may enable you to be more understanding of their situation .. and in the long run might even help you to understand each other.

So often I think people are simply cast.. Hitler for instance is so often displayed as a one dimesional monster. I think this stereotype is counter productive. Very few people see themselves as evil and I doubt very much that Hitler saw himself as an evil man. If you begin to look at him as a person instead of a monster then you can start to learn lessons that might help prevent similar situations in the future. If you put him down to an anomaly then you learn nothing. Being asked to imagine Hitler as a real person does not mean you have to sympathise with him or think he was a great guy, just that he had his own problems, and perhaps that might enable you to recognise similar traits in people around you.

Same with this exercise. The student wasn't asked to say that being gay was ok.. or even acceptable.. just to imagine herself in a situation that was similar to theirs for a second and realise it wouldn't be easy and that choices they make must come from a very different perspective to the one she is used to.

Its a valuable lesson to learn when trying to live as part of a society. And school has a very strong role in easing young people from the strictly controlled confines of the family structure to the much looser social constructs of society as a whole. Its a role that is very difficult for a family to play and one that schooling is and should be very much responsible for.

I think that you have a very optimistic view of the nature of the question. Given the context in which it was presented, I am not given to so positive an outlook.

I also think that it is disengenuous to ignore the logical direction in which the question will lead for the majority of students. The student was essentially asked to defend their views on homosexuality against an attack by a superior (their teacher).

Another rational reply. I am thusly defeated.
It's like you don't even bother to read what I write. You keep saying that you don't become properly stable until you're twenty and therefore shouldn't have implied questions directed at you. I call bullshit and state that you don't magically become proficient when you're twenty, it's a result of your development that starts long before you're 13.

I think that you have a very optimistic view of the nature of the question. Given the context in which it was presented, I am not given to so positive an outlook.

I also think that it is disengenuous to ignore the logical direction in which the question will lead for the majority of students. The student was essentially asked to defend their views on homosexuality against an attack by a superior (their teacher).You have no problem with that though:

Time will. If the question were asked "What are your opinions on the way homosexuals are treated", I would be all over it as a question and as a learning opportunity. However, that isn't what it was. It was a pointed question, and in that regard, an attack on a defenseless child. That kind of question isn't a learning opportunity, because all that is learned is "It is OK to bully those weaker than you."

It's like you don't even bother to read what I write. You keep saying that you don't become properly stable until you're twenty and therefore shouldn't have implied questions directed at you. I call bullshit and state that you don't magically become proficient when you're twenty, it's a result of your development that starts long before you're 13.

I call bullshit, because the source I've offered twice says the developments start in your 20's.

It's not even implied questions, so much as implied questions from authorities, and it's using implied questions abusively.

You have no problem with that though:

There is a difference between defending beleifs against attack and explaining your beleifs.

I call bullshit, because the source I've offered twice says the developments start in your 20's.

It's not even implied questions, so much as implied questions from authorities, and it's using implied questions abusively.And the person we have studying neuroscience disagrees with your interpretation.

There is a difference between defending beleifs against attack and explaining your beleifs.So why is the scenario that played out an attack on her beliefs?

There are descision making skills that are not present in the minds of 13 year-olds, and it abuses them both to ask them to use them, and to give them pre-packaged beleifs before they are too young to analyze them.


You must mean "...[when] they are too young to analyze them."
I think it is pretty obvious that THIS 13 year old came already "pre-packaged" from home.

Oh, and by the way, for the sake of accuracy--it's bel-I-E-fs.

And the person we have studying neuroscience disagrees with your interpretation.

A biased source who has no proof that they are actually studying neuroscience claims that my unbiased professional source is incorrect, you mean.

Forgive me if I feel slightly more justified in trusting my source.

You must mean "...[when] they are too young to analyze them."
I think it is pretty obvious that THIS 13 year old came already "pre-packaged" from home.

Oh, and by the way, for the sake of accuracy--it's bel-I-E-fs.

A) Thank you grammar Nazi, that was a truly relevant point to the debate.

B) Guess what? A parent is not the state. For better or for worse, parents have more rights and responsibilities towards their children than the state does. Now, the parents are wrong, I'd say, but unlike in the case of the state, I don't have the right to change anything.

The same is, arguably, true in this case, since I'm not Australian.

If they're 13 and you claim they're too young to understand, how would their fragile minds be capable of reasoning that out and thus become warped?

You're building a forgone conclusion out of air. Basically, you're saying because you feel it implies an agenda, it's bullying. That's not a valid conclusion.

It's a goverment conspiracy you know! *shifty eyes*

A biased source who has no proof that they are actually studying neuroscience claims that my unbiased professional source is incorrect, you mean.

Forgive me if I feel slightly more justified in trusting my source.No, the potentially biased source says your interpretation of your own source is incorrect. If you'll link it again, I'll take a look myself, but I'm not going to go searching through the plethora of posts we already have for it.

B) Guess what? A parent is not the state. For better or for worse, parents have more rights and responsibilities towards their children than the state does. Now, the parents are wrong, I'd say, but unlike in the case of the state, I don't have the right to change anything.


The state also has to make sure kids are poperly edumacated as there are many stupid parents.

Parents have input. But deciding what will be taught! Good lord no!

I can hear it now. "That offends God!"

I think that you have a very optimistic view of the nature of the question. Given the context in which it was presented, I am not given to so positive an outlook.

I also think that it is disengenuous to ignore the logical direction in which the question will lead for the majority of students. The student was essentially asked to defend their views on homosexuality against an attack by a superior (their teacher).

See I think this is where we differ, I have trouble seeing the attack on the girl?

Quoting the newspaper article, which appears somewhat biased
"The girl was among a class of 13 and 14-year-olds asked to imagine living as a heterosexual among a mostly homosexual colony on the moon as part of their health and physical education subject.

They had to answer 10 questions, including how they felt about being in the minority and what strategies they would use to help them cope.

They were also asked to discuss where ideas about homosexuality came from."

It would be great to have the actual questions asked... but I guess we will have to make do with whats there.

After re reading it, I am actually assuming the trouble she had was with the "discuss where ideas about homosexuality came from" rather than the imagine what its like to be a minority which is what I first thought. But it doesn't really seem to be an attack on her to me? Just asking a 13 year old to question where they get their information from.

Its an important question.. and one they are unlikely to have asked themselves earlier. I can see how it could be confronting to some, but in any discussion it is important to think about your sources... and the inherent bias there in. She probably didn't like the idea that perhaps her parents weren't the only valid source of information.. and not surprisingly, neither did her parents. The attack seems to be more squarely aimed at her parents than the 13 y.o. girl, perhaps why they were "apparently" (though it does seem dubious to me) not to discuss it with their parents??

I actually think that 13 is not too early an age to start questioning your parents as the soul influence on your source of moral judgement. I can see how others might disagree... but sadly schooling is only really aimed at dealing with the averages.. and I would think that for the average child their teenage years would be an appropriate time to start questioning their parents role in their life.

If you say that its not the role of school to ask people to question the validity of their information sources.. then who's role is it, surely its something that should be brought up at some point.. if not at highschool , then when?

If no then, then never...

Unless you are a collegiate, but that is a little late.

I think that you have a very optimistic view of the nature of the question. Given the context in which it was presented, I am not given to so positive an outlook.

I also think that it is disengenuous to ignore the logical direction in which the question will lead for the majority of students. The student was essentially asked to defend their views on homosexuality against an attack by a superior (their teacher).

No how can she be pressed to defend her views if she took the lazy way out and never presented them?

Don't play stupid.

The question is created to go along the following route: "How would I feel about being a heterosexual in a homosexual community?"

which becomes "How do homosexuals feel in a heterosexual community"

Which draws up the social pre-conditioning of the harm principal.

That means that it points to a conclusion. We should not be pointing people at conclusions at that age, because they lack the ability to effectively argue back. It is bullying.

What this prompts is empathy ... such a bad thing to have:rolleyes:

What this prompts is empathy ... such a bad thing to have:rolleyes:


selective empathy. These "thinking" exercises are not balanced, epecially when one reaches the university level. Public Schools and Colleges are like a liberal recruiting ground. The professors serve as missionaries for their ideology.

imagine an exercise where you had to take the role of an unborn fetus in the second trimester who can hear his mother talking about getting an abortion...

now that would be a provocative excercise, but dear god the inhumanity of it all! conservative agenda! pro-life indoctrination! help! thought police!

What relevance does gay culture have in a middle school? For what subject did she have to write a paper on? It just doesn't make any sense at all for why she had to write a paper on gay culture. I didn't even study about homosexuality til U.S. history.