Private schools

[??????????]

I went to private school for 12 years. Its a good atmosphere and you can easily learn.

[??????????]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Though I completely agree that parents are responsible for their children's ideological education, i'd like to further that in saying that it is the parents moral responsibility to educate their children, not the state. In addition, it is upsurd to say that private schools hold any more ideology than public ones. When I went to public school, they started teaching us from kindergarten about the gay and lesbian movement, and how some children have a mom and a dad, and others have a mom and a mom, and both are perfectly fine. They even legitimicized poligamy. The exact reason why I want to abolish public schools is what you claim private schools do. In my experience, it is the oppsiate. In Catholic schools, sure, you have to learn the prayers, but that's certainly not forcing religion on you. Several Jews go to Catholic schools in the Bay Area (San Francisco has 200 thousand Jews), and they don't have problems. For my last point, not all schools have ideologies. I can name a few schools in San Francisco alone that don't have any sort of ideology- University High School; Synergy Grammar School; Discovery School; et cetera.

Whatever the school, parents are the sole educators of children and should not rely on any school to be fully responsible for their educational development.

If you are not happy with the ideology of the public schools, you can change it through the political process.  This is not true of private schools.  

I think that at young ages, children should be taught what the consensus of society believes they should be taught.  They should not be excluded from society because their parents disagree with it.  If parents want to teach their children about their religion or ideas, they can do this in addition to a public education, not instead of it.

Once a child reaches high school age, I think they are old enough to make judgements about which interests and ideologies to pursue on their own, which is why I don't think private high schools are as troubling.

Nice version of freedom you have there. That's what scares me so much about the Dhimmicrats.

[??????????]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Though I completely agree that parents are responsible for their children's ideological education, i'd like to further that in saying that it is the parents moral responsibility to educate their children, not the state. In addition, it is upsurd to say that private schools hold any more ideology than public ones. When I went to public school, they started teaching us from kindergarten about the gay and lesbian movement, and how some children have a mom and a dad, and others have a mom and a mom, and both are perfectly fine. They even legitimicized poligamy. The exact reason why I want to abolish public schools is what you claim private schools do. In my experience, it is the oppsiate. In Catholic schools, sure, you have to learn the prayers, but that's certainly not forcing religion on you. Several Jews go to Catholic schools in the Bay Area (San Francisco has 200 thousand Jews), and they don't have problems. For my last point, not all schools have ideologies. I can name a few schools in San Francisco alone that don't have any sort of ideology- University High School; Synergy Grammar School; Discovery School; et cetera.

Whatever the school, parents are the sole educators of children and should not rely on any school to be fully responsible for their educational development.

If you are not happy with the ideology of the public schools, you can change it through the political process.  This is not true of private schools.  

I think that at young ages, children should be taught what the consensus of society believes they should be taught.  They should not be excluded from society because their parents disagree with it.  If parents want to teach their children about their religion or ideas, they can do this in addition to a public education, not instead of it.

Once a child reaches high school age, I think they are old enough to make judgements about which interests and ideologies to pursue on their own, which is why I don't think private high schools are as troubling.

Nice version of freedom you have there. That's what scares me so much about the Dhimmicrats.

Whose freedom...the parents' or the child's?  
I believe a child's freedom is enhanced by not having a parent's ideology imposed on them from birth.

It is the parents RIGHT[/i][/u] to teach their children their views of the world. I see nothing at all wrong w/that. If the child wishes to see otherwise when they get older that is their right. However their is no problem with parents teaching thier children as they wish.

[??????????]

It is the parents RIGHT[/i][/u] to teach their children their views of the world. I see nothing at all wrong w/that. If the child wishes to see otherwise when they get older that is their right. However their is no problem with parents teaching thier children as they wish.

I guess I just don't see it that way.  A child should not be treated like property of their parents to be used for whatever ends the parents wish.  Children are entrusted to parents on the condition that they look out for the best interests of the child.   They should not be allowed to indoctrinate their children in a way that will be harmful to the child's moral and intellectual development.

A child is bound to respect the rules of the parent. Thats the way it is and should stay. The problem is people think children are really "little adults". When it reality children are naive and clueless to the real world and need to be taught by their parents about decisions, choices and consequences. It doesn't take a village to raise a child. It takes two parents, plain and simple.

[??????????]

My god...think about this statement for a second...

"CHILDREN ARE ENTRUSTED TO THEIR PARENTS"

If that doesn't sound like Communism to me...wow

NickG, my man, you are scaring the living sh*t out of me. I never pictured you in the same category as guys like BetterRedThanDead and some of the other true marxists, but you may be in that category based on some of the things you've said tonight.

The schools are teaching kids this garbage Mark.

[??????????]

As it put it, you can either have a tiny elite who succeed and bring about new successes or you can have no elite.

OH THANK YOU! A Democrat who gets how the world works.

He's barely a Democrat. He's one of our Europeans whos a conservative and hates to admit it. (Much like Gustaf and Likader)

[??????????]

Most schools have mandatory student IDs the kids have to carry at all times.  Mine had mandatory IDs that were also lunch cards, and the school had cameras.

I never attended a public school that had any of this. I'm sure they have it now, but 20 years ago we had a lot more freedom. A LOT[/i] more!

After Columbine security got a lot tougher. Kids don't have as many freedoms as they should.

How much freedom should children really have? I mean they are only children. When you have children you will understand that giving children to much freedom is a very bad idea.

[??????????]

I mean they are only children.

"Only children." The usual B.S.

Yeah, they're "only children." They'll never be worth anything, you seem to be saying.

[??????????]

I mean they are only children.

"Only children." The usual B.S.

Yeah, they're "only children." They'll never be worth anything, you seem to be saying.

Now lets not put words into my mouth please. What I am saying is children under the age of 18 do not have the same legal rights as those past that age. Children should be slightly protected from the outside world yet they still should be shown how rough the world is. My opinion is children are growing up far to soon.

[??????????]

The Constitution doesn't say the Bill of Rights doesn't apply if you're under 18.

America needs to stop treating children like property.

Children aren't property but they certainly are supposed to respect their parents.