California’s indoctrination of children reaches new lows

Originally posted by beezzer
T'is why I will never set foot in California.

Yah - and the south is all rednecks - and the midwest is all hicks - yadda yadda yadda

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Liquesence


Totally.

Homeschool our kids so we can teach them whatever biased, intolerant, and racially charged or lifestyle prejudiced thing we can. Let's just have a diverse array of racist rednecks, gay bashing, honky hatin', liberal loons and republicans rats running around all learnt from maw and paw, etc.

To hell with wholesomeness, let's just teach our kids to believe whatever the heck we as parents want, regardless of rationality, reality or truth. To heck with "facts!"

Let's condition our kids to hate! Let's teach them intolerance!

#sarcasm.

Maybe you would better educate your children with the injustice and revisionist history being taught in schools!!

Letting your children watch Disney's Pocahontas,and actually teaching your kids it WASN'T a love story would be grand start! (BTW,my youngest watched that crap school)

Second,Who says I cant teach my children tolerance? Who says I have to leave it up to teachers?

How Naive!

Ill let my kids go on a field trip to the state capital,have them pimped out by their teacher,have them sing songs AGAINST the Governor,and let it all slide..............

Including letting the teacher get a slap on the wrists,for plugging his viewpoint,and letting the teachers union,not fire him,on my way to intolerance of it all.......? Whos PAYING for this?

Example:

Video of "pint-sized protesters" at state Capitol stirs debate

No agenda here...................

I agree about Pocahontas, but it's meant as entertainment, nothing more, even though at such a young age i do not think it's really necessary to say "this is what really happened," (nor do i think they would really comprehend, unless they are constantly exposed to it, but kids DO like to watch these things over and over), it's more about getting the initial interest to such young kids (even though i agree to start early with proper education) and..to make money off the film. Have to start somewhere.

As far as revisionist history, i direct you to a quotation from this post of mine in this thread:

I also think sometimes revisionist history is a good thing. Without revising certain histories (by certain people wo write them), the way we perceive some histories, we might still think that Columbus was a brave, admirable explorer instead also a murderer who tortured natives, sometimes for fun. The most well rounded and accurate histories should include as much factual information as possible to get the most accurate picture, and not a subjective slice of whoever wrote it. And that is what we should strive to achieve.

[sic]

Disney's Pocahontas is not revisionist.

As far as the rest of your post, i don't watch videos online, but based upon what is written i do NOT think this is appropriate, but that seems to be a minority, and one cannot judge the entire system (of anything) because of a minority--across the board. This is why standards are set.

I am talking a general well-rounded, diversified education, not using children as pawns, that includes as many diverse perspective as possible. And even though i AM a fan of homeschooling, and, even though it must currently follow curriculum guidelines, i was sarcastically reacting to your post simply because if left to a large number of people without guidelines intolerance would be bred.

Just look at some of these kids now. Their beliefs (the entire spectrum of beliefs) come from their families and their homes, at least the begin (before influences by peers). If left totally up to parents without guidelines, again, all kinds of even more and worse craziness would be bred.

'Course, there's always the "don't tell me how to raise/teach my kids crowd," usually from..uh, well...

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by beezzer
T'is why I will never set foot in California.

Yah - and the south is all rednecks - and the midwest is all hicks - yadda yadda yadda

My choice.
My childs education.

It's still a free country (marginally).

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by beezzer
T'is why I will never set foot in California.

Yah - and the south is all rednecks - and the midwest is all hicks - yadda yadda yadda

My choice.
My childs education.

It's still a free country (marginally).

Whatever.

I'm sure they will learn stereotyping from you.

Originally posted by Liquesence


I agree about Pocahontas, but it's meant as entertainment, nothing more, even though at such a young age i do not think it's really necessary to say "this is what really happened," (nor do i think they would really comprehend, unless they are constantly exposed to it, but kids DO like to watch these things over and over), it's more about getting the initial interest to such young kids (even though i agree to start early with proper education) and..to make money off the film. Have to start somewhere.

As far as revisionist history, i direct you to a quotation from this post of mine in this thread:

I also think sometimes revisionist history is a good thing. Without revising certain histories (by certain people wo write them), the way we perceive some histories, we might still think that Columbus was a brave, admirable explorer instead also a murderer who tortured natives, sometimes for fun. The most well rounded and accurate histories should include as much factual information as possible to get the most accurate picture, and not a subjective slice of whoever wrote it. And that is what we should strive to achieve.

[sic]

Disney's Pocahontas is not revisionist.

As far as the rest of your post, i don't watch videos online, but based upon what is written i do NOT think this is appropriate, but that seems to be a minority, and one cannot judge the entire system (of anything) because of a minority--across the board. This is why standards are set.

I am talking a general well-rounded, diversified education, not using children as pawns, that includes as many diverse perspective as possible. And even though i AM a fan of homeschooling, and, even though it must currently follow curriculum guidelines, i was sarcastically reacting to your post simply because if left to a large number of people without guidelines intolerance would be bred.

Just look at some of these kids now. Their beliefs (the entire spectrum of beliefs) come from their families and their homes, at least the begin (before influences by peers). If left totally up to parents without guidelines, again, all kinds of even more and worse craziness would be bred.

'Course, there's always the "don't tell me how to raise/teach my kids crowd," usually from..uh, well...

I know you were being sarcastic!(you stated it on the bottom)

Sorry,but if they are going to watch the movie,they should tell the children that its just that,a movie,and not make it to be something else. Teach the children the history behind it,not a 2 hr break from teaching,while kids eat popcorn. Hell I could do that. Bring children to protest,and claiming their isnt an agenda? Preposterous. Thats happening more frequently.

My children are tolerant of everything. It becomes intolerant when tolerance is used as a crutch to push agenda.
I pay teachers to teach. Not protest,or forcing my kids to sing political songs for Obama,Occupy Wall street, or ousting a sitting Governor. Seriously,for those who dont want to see that's happening,continue to wear the horse blinds.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by beezzer
T'is why I will never set foot in California.

Yah - and the south is all rednecks - and the midwest is all hicks - yadda yadda yadda

My choice.
My childs education.

It's still a free country (marginally).

Even though it's all relative, and even though i dislike government telling people how to raise kids, there needs to be some type of line. There is an ethical consideration (who decides what that ethical boundary is, i know).

One should not, say, have the right to raise a kid in an openly antisemitic (or other) way (even though it happens all the time) that conditions his or her thinking and behavior that is a detriment to his or her future as an adult.

(And i know this argument is a very slippery territory, which is why it is so relativistic, but i hope you all get the point i'm making)

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Liquesence


I agree about Pocahontas, but it's meant as entertainment, nothing more, even though at such a young age i do not think it's really necessary to say "this is what really happened," (nor do i think they would really comprehend, unless they are constantly exposed to it, but kids DO like to watch these things over and over), it's more about getting the initial interest to such young kids (even though i agree to start early with proper education) and..to make money off the film. Have to start somewhere.

As far as revisionist history, i direct you to a quotation from this post of mine in this thread:

I also think sometimes revisionist history is a good thing. Without revising certain histories (by certain people wo write them), the way we perceive some histories, we might still think that Columbus was a brave, admirable explorer instead also a murderer who tortured natives, sometimes for fun. The most well rounded and accurate histories should include as much factual information as possible to get the most accurate picture, and not a subjective slice of whoever wrote it. And that is what we should strive to achieve.

[sic]

Disney's Pocahontas is not revisionist.

As far as the rest of your post, i don't watch videos online, but based upon what is written i do NOT think this is appropriate, but that seems to be a minority, and one cannot judge the entire system (of anything) because of a minority--across the board. This is why standards are set.

I am talking a general well-rounded, diversified education, not using children as pawns, that includes as many diverse perspective as possible. And even though i AM a fan of homeschooling, and, even though it must currently follow curriculum guidelines, i was sarcastically reacting to your post simply because if left to a large number of people without guidelines intolerance would be bred.

Just look at some of these kids now. Their beliefs (the entire spectrum of beliefs) come from their families and their homes, at least the begin (before influences by peers). If left totally up to parents without guidelines, again, all kinds of even more and worse craziness would be bred.

'Course, there's always the "don't tell me how to raise/teach my kids crowd," usually from..uh, well...

I know you were being sarcastic!(you stated it on the bottom)

Sorry,but if they are going to watch the movie,they should tell the children that its just that,a movie,and not make it to be something else. Teach the children the history behind it,not a 2 hr break from teaching,while kids eat popcorn. Hell I could do that. Bring children to protest,and claiming their isnt an agenda? Preposterous. Thats happening more frequently.

My children are tolerant of everything. It becomes intolerant when tolerance is used as a crutch to push agenda.
I pay teachers to teach. Not protest,or forcing my kids to sing political songs for Obama,Occupy Wall street, or ousting a sitting Governor. Seriously,for those who dont want to see that's happening,continue to wear the horse blinds.

I agree with most of what you say, and I think we're pretty much on the same page.

Sounds like you have raised your kids well, too.

Sometimes i have to reiterate my sarcastic intentions. I am sarcastic quite a bit, and i don't always say i am being so.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by beezzer
T'is why I will never set foot in California.

Yah - and the south is all rednecks - and the midwest is all hicks - yadda yadda yadda

My choice.
My childs education.

It's still a free country (marginally).

Whatever.

I'm sure they will learn stereotyping from you.

Oh!!! You mean stereotype like redneck, hick, hayseed, hillbilly, right-winger, teabagger, etc, etc.

Ahhhh....gotcha!

Despite your post being coated in right-wing extremism, I agree with you that that it is wrong.

I kind of misread your post at first and thought you complaining about gay history, mainly because I've seen people who actually believe acknowledging famous figures who were gay as part of some gay agenda, which is nothing short of idiotic but I digress..

Originally posted by DrChuck

Originally posted by buster2010
Some of the rednecks are just going to have to learn there are gay people in this world and they are part of American history. Oh this person did something important but we can't talk about him because he's gay. Now who is squashing free speech?

Why do our children need to know that specific person was gay? Who gives a sh#t about the historical figures sexual orientation?

Homophobes who rail against the idea teaching people that yes, there are gay people out there who can accomplish great things, just as straight people can. Also, if you truly didn't care about someone's sexual orientation in a history textbook, then you wouldn't be complaining about someone's sexual orientation in a history textbook.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by beezzer
T'is why I will never set foot in California.

Yah - and the south is all rednecks - and the midwest is all hicks - yadda yadda yadda

My choice.
My childs education.

It's still a free country (marginally).

Whatever.

I'm sure they will learn stereotyping from you.

If by stereotyping you mean;
not judging people based on skin colour like liberals
not judging people based on their wealth like liberals
not judging people based on their geographical location like liberals

Then yes.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by beezzer
T'is why I will never set foot in California.

Yah - and the south is all rednecks - and the midwest is all hicks - yadda yadda yadda

My choice.
My childs education.

It's still a free country (marginally).

Whatever.

I'm sure they will learn stereotyping from you.

If by stereotyping you mean;
not judging people based on skin colour like liberals
not judging people based on their wealth like liberals
not judging people based on their geographical location like liberals

Then yes.

But only by their religion or lack thereof (they ain't christian!); political affiliation (dang commie Marxist liberals!); sexual orientation (freakin' gays!); yes, skin color (dirty arab rag heads!); yes, wealth (quit takin' my hard earned money, freeloaders!) like conservatives?

Sounds about right, then.

reply to post by seabag


WWRPD
what would Ron Paul do?

Ron Paul wouldn't live in California, and he would assume the people who do, who come up with their own state laws, know whats best for raising their own damn children the way they damn well please.

how does this hurt anyone else? why the hell should anyone care about this?

*shrug*

a good "golden rule" for living in a real democracy is, "if my business is not your business, then your business is not mine."

freedom is a funny thing.
the KKK are free to be jackasses, but black people are not free to attend their rallies and be happy about it.
you see what im saying here?
californians are free to raise their children in schools governed by silly rules, but you are not free to let your kids go to those schools and grow up to be hillbillies.
however you are free to move to kentucky...

i imagine it would help if you thought of the states as what they are truly supposed to be, small countries, instead of thinking this whole huge nation is supposed to be homogeneous and bland.

people in germany dont learn french in school(i assume)
people in kentucky dont learn about gay people

it may also help you to find something more important to care about.

What I'd like to know is why it's necessary for the sexual orientation of historical figures to be emphasized to schoolchildren. When I was in school, it was never pointed out whether a historical figure was heterosexual or not. If you're going for diversity of sexual orientations, why stop there? Why not be sure to include sexual sadists, masochists, voyeurists, pedophiles, etc. and highlight their "diverse" sexuality? Asinine notions such as this infiltrating our "education" system is why illiteracy rates are on the rise and children can't even do basic math. One can only hope it really does all end this year. There is absolutely no progress or prosperities that the future holds in our society- just a dumbed-down, doped up, violent population.

Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion: Not a Hoax

DESTRUCTIVE EDUCATION

3. Do not suppose for a moment that these statements are empty words: think carefully of the successes we arranged for Darwinism (Evolution), Marxism (Communism), Nietzsche-ism (Socialism). To us Jews, at any rate, it should be plain to see what a disintegrating importance these directives have had upon the minds of the GOYIM.

8. Who is going to verify what is taught in the village schools? But what an envoy of the government or a king on his throne himself may say cannot but become immediately known to the whole State, for it will be spread abroad by the voice of the people.

9. In order to annihilate the institutions of the GOYIM before it is time we have touched them with craft and delicacy, and have taken hold of the ends of the springs which move their mechanism. These springs lay in a strict but just sense of order; we have replaced them by the chaotic license of liberalism. We have got our hands into the administration of the law, into the conduct of elections, into the press, into liberty of the person, BUT PRINCIPALLY INTO EDUCATION AND TRAINING AS BEING THE CORNERSTONES OF A FREE EXISTENCE.

Google UNESCO.

Ignorance is just damn scary.

I was raised "People are their Heart". To see past everything except the heart.

Maybe because my mom was a polio victim - - - maybe because she was just a very smart mom - - - she raised me and my 2 brothers without prejudice. Prejudice of any kind. People are their heart.

One day when I was high school age - - she said something very racist. I asked her about it. She told me that is how she was raised. But - that was her generation - - not mine. She said - - I raised you to live in your generation of acceptance - - not mine of prejudice.

Parents who raise their children to continue in ignorance and bigotry - - - are not doing them any favors.

Originally posted by 1nOne
PRINCIPALLY INTO EDUCATION AND TRAINING AS BEING THE CORNERSTONES OF A FREE EXISTENCE.

Google UNESCO.

Could you please just speak plainly?

Great UNESCO is: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

And . . . . . . . . ?

Originally posted by Charmed707
What I'd like to know is why it's necessary for the sexual orientation of historical figures to be emphasized to schoolchildren. When I was in school, it was never pointed out whether a historical figure was heterosexual or not. If you're going for diversity of sexual orientations, why stop there? Why not be sure to include sexual sadists, masochists, voyeurists, pedophiles, etc. and highlight their "diverse" sexuality? Asinine notions such as this infiltrating our "education" system is why illiteracy rates are on the rise and children can't even do basic math. One can only hope it really does all end this year. There is absolutely no progress or prosperities that the future holds in our society- just a dumbed-down, doped up, violent population.

Are you one of those who equates homosexuality with pedophile? You left out beastiality.

The Christian stranglehold on this country - - "whitewashed" any reference to homosexuality in history or anything else for that matter.

Now that that stranglehold is being ripped away (YAY!) - - - truth may reveal itself that not everyone from our past was a straight married hetero.

Isn't it interesting. "Those who Have - don't recognize those that don't Have". Heteros just float through life with their blinders on and think everything is a rose garden. Why disturb things by recognizing (Heaven forbid - the Devil's at my door) that not everyone is hetero. Nor was every historical figure hetero.

It doesnt surprise me and I dont agree with it. That means they cant teach about 9/11 or for that matter the pilgrims the crusades the Inquisition the previous World Wars etc

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by 1nOne
PRINCIPALLY INTO EDUCATION AND TRAINING AS BEING THE CORNERSTONES OF A FREE EXISTENCE.

Google UNESCO.

Could you please just speak plainly?

Great UNESCO is: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

And . . . . . . . . ?

Annee, you must do your own research. Study:

The history of Zionism;
Marxism;
Financiers behind the Russo-Japanese War;
October Revolution 1917;
Bolshevism and its outcomes;
Who were the Bolsheviks: Lenin, Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev, (later) Stalin real name Dzhugashvili;
Murder of Czar Nicholas II of Russia, Christian persecution: 20 million dead;
League of Nations re: Palestine; Jewish powerbrokers;
Creation of the UN re: Israel;
Ethnic makeup of Jewish population of Israel;
Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion;
UNESCO's Communist agenda: Head: Irina Bokova;
Rothschild family; Central Banks; Fractional Reserve Banking; Usury;
NWO, ZOG, Illuminati, Bible Prophecy

Just a start...

Annee: Giving you a head start on UNESCO's leadership and agenda:

Wiki: The history of Christianity in the Soviet Union was not limited to repression and secularization. Soviet policy toward religion was based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism, which made atheism the official doctrine of the Soviet Union. Marxism-Leninism has consistently advocated the control, suppression, and, ultimately, the elimination of other religious beliefs.[1]

The state was committed to the destruction of religion,[2][3] and to this effect it destroyed churches, mosques and temples, ridiculed, harassed and executed religious leaders, flooded the schools and media with atheistic propaganda, and generally promoted 'scientific atheism' as the truth that society should accept.[4][5]

Head of UNESCO: Irina Georgieva Bokova, Bulgarian politician, incumbent Directors-General of UNESCO. She was member of the Bulgarian Parliament from the Bulgarian Socialist Party for two terms. Irina Bokova is the daughter of the controversial communist-era politician Georgi Bokov, editor-in-chief of Rabotnichesko Delo, the official newspaper and organ of the Bulgarian Communist Party.[3] By descent Bokova is Bulgarian from Macedonia.[4] Bokova is a graduate of the Moscow State Institute of International Relations. Subsequently, she worked at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria, eventually becoming Minister in the winter of 1996 - 1997. She has been a member of the Bulgarian communist party until 1990.


UNESCO Declaration on the Role of Religion excerpt:

6. Religions have contributed to the peace of the world, but they have also
led to division, hatred, and war. Religious people have too often betrayed
the high ideals they themselves have preached. We feel obliged to call for
sincere acts of repentance and mutual forgiveness, both personally and
collectively.

8. Peace entails that we understand that we are all interdependent…. collectively responsible for the common good.

11. We must… cultivate a spirituality which manifests itself in action...