I hope you didn't lose any IQ points listening to that drival.
Posted on 06/29/2005 7:06:09 AM PDT by NRA1995
The left-wing Kumbaya crowd is quietly grooming a generation of pushovers in the public schools. At a time of war, when young Americans should be educated about this nation's resilience and steely resolve, educators are indoctrinating students with saccharine-sticky lessons on "non-violent conflict resolution" and "promoting constructive dialogues."
Peaceniks are covering our kids from head to toe in emotional bubble wrap.
The latest example of Hand-Holding 101 comes from the New York City public schools. According to Lauren Collins of The New Yorker magazine, the school system is introducing a new curriculum called "Operation Respect: Don't Laugh at Me" into all of its elementary and middle schools. The program is now used in at least 12,000 schools and camps across the country.
Ostensibly, the program helps kids deal with petty meanness and name-calling from insensitive classmates. The organization's stated mission is "to transform schools, camps and organizations focused on children and youth, into more compassionate, safe and respectful environments." Instead of "put downs," teachers encourage "put ups." The Operation Respect website depicts well-adjusted children holding up signs with ego-affirming messages: "Ridicule Free Zone," "No Dissing Here," "U Matter," and "Peace Place."
Among the mindless training exercises teachers undergo is the "Caring Being" session. Collins quotes a conflict-resolution expert in Brooklyn leading middle-school educators through the lesson: "I want you all to share a time in your career as an educator where someone did or said something that made you feel like you were not cared for or respected. . . . Now do the opposite." After drawing figures encompassing their negative and positive experiences, teachers shared their finished products, "Caring Beings," which would be used to "explore creating agreements around behaviors."
Blecchh.
Translation: Therapy and understanding over vigorous self-defense.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Let's not forget having them medicated into zombies so they sit quietly.
Last night I had the fortune of having a condescending liberal UVA grad student tell me that it was hate that drives us to train soldiers to kill, and that it wasn't the military that stopped Hitler, but rather Hitler who stopped Hitler...by killing himself.
OK, and the problem with this would be???
Hey, I'm one of Michelle Malkin's biggest fans, but I don't share her outrage in this story. Kids ought to be taught as early as possible and as much as possible to respect each other, be positive with their dialogue and be non-violent in the way they resolve conflicts. Perhaps then we could prevent more Columbines from happening, reduce bullying and dramatically decrease the number of teen suicides in this country.
I hope you didn't lose any IQ points listening to that drival.
If your a Twerp (or whatever) and I tell you that and you kill yourself... who's fault is that?
Well, I would say, until the whole world thinks like you, which is highly unlikely, a healthy dose of teaching kids to defend themselves and to NOT expect that everyone is going to want to do a group hug is the way to go.
I think teen suicide is probably a much more complicated issue than that. We're talking about kids here. I don't think it's unreasonable at all to teach kids how to be constructive, respectful and non-violent. Should we instead teach kids to be destructive, disrespectful and violent?
Free Ritalin for every child!
Yes. My (homeschooled) son was briefly in school. They taught 'friendship circles' and all the drivel that goes with the feel-good, don't-hate curriculum; girly camp songs too. At 9 he already thought it was RIDICULOUS. All the boys did. They knew better.
Getting along more often includes standing up to bullies/ to evil, and not just trying to understand them. This kind of teaching makes the strong ones doubt their clarity and back away from taking a courageous position for fear of being thought 'judgmental.' And then you get liberals.
PS -- I consider it 'feminization,' too -- this kind of feel-good teaching. More often the women teachers (the bulk of teachers) are into FEELINGS. But this is why I am returning to teaching -- there is a new generation that needs to be taught to name evil, to stand courageously for the truth, to BE competitive, to rise to their capabilities, to care about the future. Come join me. There is work to be done.
You can't teach kids to respect each other. Children learn these things by example. Until parents and other adults start treating each other with a little respect, why should we expect our kids to do the same?
Example, how many of us swear and call other drivers names with our kids in the car? How many of us have had ugly confrontations with salespeople or neighbors? Kids watch these things. This is where they learn it, and schools can teach it until they are blue in the face, but it isn't going to change anything until the kids see the adults in their lives change their behavior.
Yes. My (homeschooled) son was briefly in school. They taught 'friendship circles' and all the drivel that goes with the feel-good, don't-hate curriculum; girly camp songs too. At 9 he already thought it was RIDICULOUS. All the boys did. They knew better.
Getting along more often includes standing up to bullies/ to evil, and not just trying to understand them. This kind of teaching makes the strong ones doubt their clarity and back away from taking a courageous position, for fear of being thought 'judgmental.' And then you get liberals.
Our government treats us like helpless children. Its not surprising that's what we're turning into.
If more kids are constructive and non-violent to begin with, there will be fewer instances where kids will have to defend themselves or even contemplate having to defend themselves. Isn't self defense an instinct we all have anyway? Should schools be boot camps for minors or places of learning?
LOL, I tell my son kids are mean, some will laugh at you, but that he knows he's smart, good looking, funny and a Christian, so he can just ignore them, unless it gets bad, then he can punch them. Of course, that's not very Christian.
Life. People laugh at you sometimes. Grow up.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the planet "children" are being taught how to kill Americans with guns and bombs.
What will happen when these two "children" meet?
You are setting up a false dilemma. Of course you teach your kids to be respectful and polite, not to taunt, not to brag etc etc etc. I even teach my boy never to start fights and to try to walk away from a fight someone else is trying to start. But I also teach him to kick the c$$p out of anyone who doesn't let him walk away and, when it comes to that, not to fight fair.
The important thing is context and your argument ignores context. That is, you argue we teach our kids to be either violent or non-violent. The reality is, there is a time and a place for both. Teaching your kids where the line is between them is much more difficult than telling them 'never hit anyone.' The public schools have always insisted on the blanket rule (no violence none of the time and everyone gets punished for fighting, no matter how it started) and now they are trying some more indoctrination to that effect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.