Should Kids Read Porn For School?

[Bianca_Sommerland]

I was associated with public schools for much of my professional life. Based on my observations and experiences I conclude that public schools relentlessly pursue a policy of operating outside and apart from the jurisdictions of community, state, and nation, while demanding an ever increasing portion of public resources.

Unless kids are having sex on campus, condoms arent the business of schools.

Kids probably are, but that's not the point. I'm not saying the schools should have to provide condoms. I just think if they want to it's a good way to promote safe sex.

As for the rest, what I don't get is the constant whining of the schools demanding parents show more interest, but when they do show interest, or concern, their opinions are mowed over. It shouldn't have needed to go to court. If there was something controversial in the book that concerned the parents there should have been an alternative. JMO.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

BIANCA

The school book issue isnt new, and there is a provision for the problem in state law. There are 500 approved books designated for the IB program. State Law says the parents have the right to select an alternate from the approved list. The IB already approved the alternate list. And it seems apparent the school chose to violate state law to impose its will on the student and parents.

I write porn and I'm not okay with minors reading it. Now, I'm okay with sexual subjects if theyre treated as an issue or stage of development people struggle with or adapt to. Its helpful for all kids to get some idea of what gays deal with, or even the rare soul who cant be less interested in sex period or doesnt want it this minute. Ha! I recall a girl who told me no! no! no! no! no!, tackled me, and was insulted because I was bewildered by the abrupt change (then used her anger as more excuse not to).

In college I took a required human sexuality course, and all it was, was porno films of people fucking. I laughed my ass off at the people taking notes, like we were gonna be quizzed on blow-jobs.

 

[Bianca_Sommerland]

BIANCA

The school book issue isnt new, and there is a provision for the problem in state law. There are 500 approved books designated for the IB program. State Law says the parents have the right to select an alternate from the approved list. The IB already approved the alternate list. And it seems apparent the school chose to violate state law to impose its will on the student and parents.

I write porn and I'm not okay with minors reading it. Now, I'm okay with sexual subjects if theyre treated as an issue or stage of development people struggle with or adapt to. Its helpful for all kids to get some idea of what gays deal with, or even the rare soul who cant be less interested in sex period or doesnt want it this minute. Ha! I recall a girl who told me no! no! no! no! no!, tackled me, and was insulted because I was bewildered by the abrupt change (then used her anger as more excuse not to).

In college I took a required human sexuality course, and all it was, was porno films of people fucking. I laughed my ass off at the people taking notes, like we were gonna be quizzed on blow-jobs.

LMAO. I would like to see a teacher try and get that past the board.

As for porn, I guess as a general rule I agree minors shouldn't read it. In school, definately not. What I don't understand is why, if there are laws governing such things to protect the rights of the parents and students, is that school even trying to get away with forcing the issue with that book?

What's with the hard on for the book?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

BIANCA

I've lived in this county since 1973, almost 37 years. For whatever reasons, school officials are hardnosed about virtually everything that conflicts with their preferences. In my professional capacity I locked horns with them on many occasions, when they violated state and federal laws. And the conflicts are different from one school to the next.

Some officials resist allowing victims of physical-sexual abuse to be interviewed by police. And you have to threaten to arrest them for obstruction of justice. Some refuse to abide by the Americans With Disabilities Act. Some charge foster kids for school lunches knowing they cannot, and that the state pays the school district for the lunches; but staff still harass foster parents and refuse to feed the kids until you get a lawyer to phone the school board, then you have the same problem a week later.

 

[bronzeage]

BOOTA

The school lost the fight. The parents' attorney cited state law that prohibits forcing kids to read text that offends the parents, so the school must substitute the book in question with something the parents approve of, provided the substitute is on the approved reading list. The school was stubborn and violated state law; control issues.

No government entity ought have final say on what books are banned or imposed. The parents' religious convictions are protected by the Constitution, like it or dont.

When an Islamic parent wants special treatment for their child because the school's curriculum conflicts with their view of the Koran, will they be given the same consideration?

If the parents had complained that the science teacher was presenting non-Biblical accounts of natural history, would this also be protected by the Constitution?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

BRONZEAGE

Why dont you have the balls to make a statement about what you believe things oughta be?

 

[bronzeage]

BRONZEAGE

Why dont you have the balls to make a statement about what you believe things oughta be?

You made the post. I ask questions. If you don't want to answer them, that is your prerogative.

Where you seem keen to make certain we know how you feel about everything, I don't think you are at all interested in my views.

In this case, a parent has signed their child up for an elective course of studies and then objected to the subject matter. They put their child in this predicament and now want special treatment for her. Why should the fact that the curriculum offends their Christian sensibilities give them special privileges?

If you think Christians should be singled out for special treatment, just have the balls to say so.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

You made the post. I ask questions. If you don't want to answer them, that is your prerogative.

Where you seem keen to make certain we know how you feel about everything, I don't think you are at all interested in my views.

In this case, a parent has signed their child up for an elective course of studies and then objected to the subject matter. They put their child in this predicament and now want special treatment for her. Why should the fact that the curriculum offends their Christian sensibilities give them special privileges?

If you think Christians should be singled out for special treatment, just have the balls to say so.

Uh, I'm not interested in your views; I think youre stupid and selectively disregard facts when facts conflict with your opinions.

State law says parental convictions prevail over bureaucrat policy, and this is the basis for the parents' right to reject the book. The law also says they have 499 other books to choose from. So Muslims are covered, too.

The teacher is inconvenienced, but so fucking what? She's a public employee! She prepared a lesson plan for the novel she selected, and now she has to bone-up on a 2nd book. Too bad, so sad, boo hoo.

 

[bronzeage]

Uh, I'm not interested in your views; I think youre stupid and selectively disregard facts when facts conflict with your opinions.

State law says parental convictions prevail over bureaucrat policy, and this is the basis for the parents' right to reject the book. The law also says they have 499 other books to choose from. So Muslims are covered, too.

The teacher is inconvenienced, but so fucking what? She's a public employee! She prepared a lesson plan for the novel she selected, and now she has to bone-up on a 2nd book. Too bad, so sad, boo hoo.

Calm down JB. That's a lot of disinterested effort and a valiant display of internet courage.

I can't help if your presentation of facts leaves questions you don't want to answer. Now you say there is a state law that gives religious convictions priority. Are the children of Creationists really exempt from geology lessons?

Is the local school board preparing a curriculum for every religion's creation story? That is multi-cultural diversity at it's finest. That could get expensive. I expect you will be happy to vote yes for the next school tax election.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

BRONZEAGE

Would a home economics teacher force a Jew to prepare and eat non-Kosher? We can chase our tails with other issues that touch on parental consent. What you try to do is elevate a specific class to a general class, higher on the ladder of abstraction, and claim theyre identical. Like, if dogs and cats are mammals, cats must be dogs, too.

The issue here is pornography and the parents objections to it. In this issue the law clearly backs the parent's right to choose. The law may not support their objection to geology books. I dont know.

 

[bronzeage]

BRONZEAGE

Would a home economics teacher force a Jew to prepare and eat non-Kosher? We can chase our tails with other issues that touch on parental consent. What you try to do is elevate a specific class to a general class, higher on the ladder of abstraction, and claim theyre identical. Like, if dogs and cats are mammals, cats must be dogs, too.

The issue here is pornography and the parents objections to it. In this issue the law clearly backs the parent's right to choose. The law may not support their objection to geology books. I dont know.

Apparently in your state, the law would allow a special standard for Jewish Home Economics students. Can any parent claim a religious conviction, or is some proof of piety required?

Your syllogism is silly. This is a case of a person claiming special privilege based on religion. It just happens to involve sex. If you give a privilege to a specific class (Christian parents), why would the privilege be prohibited to other religious parents. Why restrict it to formal religious tenets? Why can't an Atheist parent object to a book being removed for religious reasons?

In the US Constitution, it says Congress may not make a law to establish a religion. It doesn't say anything about consideration of anyone's particular beliefs. A little further down the page, it does guarantee "equal protection under the law."

Silly emotional arguments like the one you present run out of steam when they have to be applied to the real world. Get real.

 

[xssve]

The IB program is itself apparently, a strictly voluntary, college level program, not a requirement - there are other programs available.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

BRONZEAGE

The state law applies to all parents regardless of their religious beliefs, its not even necessary to hold religious convictions, but religious convictions arent disqualified.

I think youre hot for government coercion and enforcement of bureaucrat policies but lack the balls to assert it.

 

[bronzeage]

BRONZEAGE

The state law applies to all parents regardless of their religious beliefs, its not even necessary to hold religious convictions, but religious convictions arent disqualified.

I think youre hot for government coercion and enforcement of bureaucrat policies but lack the balls to assert it.

Thank you for your interest in my balls. I appreciate that.

Now your law (you seem to be able to amend it will) has no regard for religion, just a parent's preferences or prejudices. This would mean equal weight would have to be given to Peta parents, Greenpeace parents, even Neo-Nazi parents, who might object to the unfair portrayal of Hitler in the history classes.

In this case, the government is coercing a local school to give special consideration to the whims of any parent.

If anyone involved in the case had balls, the solution is easy. Tell the girl to sit down, read the book and write the report, or get out of the program.

Standing up for your principles was never meant to be cost free.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

BRONZEAGE

You confirmed my suspicion.

 

[bronzeage]

BRONZEAGE

You confirmed my suspicion.

I have never had any doubts about you.

I would love to see the law that "applies to all parents regardless of their religious beliefs, its not even necessary to hold religious convictions, but religious convictions arent disqualified."

That is a formula for quality education.

 

[CharleyH]

The teacher is not valiant, and she's certainly not anteing up the intellectual value with this book. She merely made a stupid maneuver that might land her school district in trouble. All because SHE didn't do her homework. A teacher follows a rule: If you can't say it aloud to the kids, you shouldn't be saying it at all.

There are hundreds of other books to choose from. All great, all worthy of reading.

I think that learning a bit more about sex is a good thing. If I learn about incest, cannibalism, rape, virgin sacrifice and murder in school (through curriculum books like Oedipus Rex, Lord of the Flies, Tess of the D'urbervilles ) then what is wrong about reading stories that are about sex?

 

[bronzeage]

I think that learning a bit more about sex is a good thing. If I learn about incest, cannibalism, rape, virgin sacrifice and murder in school (through curriculum books like Oedipus Rex, Lord of the Flies, Tess of the D'urbervilles ) then what is wrong about reading stories that are about sex?

If a sixteen year old high school student's psyche is to be damaged by reading a sexually explicit text in a novel, then the parents have done a poor job of preparing her for the real world.

People who want to filter all the information their children absorb are called "home schoolers". This is the best option for people who want their children graded on a sliding scale.

 

[xssve]

Again, it's designed to simulate a college level class, where you have to read three books and write a 1500 word essay - it's the International Baccalaureate program, the other books were 100 yrs of Solitude by Marquez and Kafka's Metamorphosis. Murakami was presumably chosen to represent an non-occidental POV (magical realism in these books was the theme of the paper).

Magical realism as a theme is naturally going to limit the list somewhat - I might have chosen Rushdie's Shame, but The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle is a legitimate choice - Murakami is huge right now.

In short, if she isn't ready to follow the curriculum, she isn't ready for college where you damn well read what they tell you to read - no?

 

[xssve]

I had to read Foucoult's Madness and Civilization, for example, which radically altered my previous naive, romantic notions about medieval European civilization, which would have been very traumatic for JBJ I imagine.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

XSSVE

My ancestors were most of the bad mother-fuckers who dominated Europe prior to 1600 when their kids came to America to create new empires and leave the girly-men behind.

 

[Bianca_Sommerland]

I'm curious. You see, from what I understood in highschool there are math books, history books, science and biology. All those books are standard, reviewed by the education board and are used by teachers in all the schools under that board. In those classes sometimes there are projects where students would need to do research in other books or online. This would be done at the students discretion.

Now in the courses, like english, where the teacher can pull whatever book they want out of their ass I don't see why the parent, or the child, can't choose not to read the book. Alternatives should be offered.

Not everyone (adults included) enjoy books with sex, and parents have the right to be concerned if they don't think it's appropriate for their child to be reading about it. In my district all parent can choose to keep their children our of religious education and put them in moral (which I have done) and if your kid doesn't want to cut up frogs guess what, all you have to do is send a note and the teacher must provide other ways for the student to pass the course.

And by the way, there are laws. Here's a few. IMO just because that girl was in an advanced course does not mean she should be forced to read a book her or her parents find tasteless. And what's more, it's illegal.

Landmark Court Cases -- Parental Rights at School
Legal Resources
1. Morrow v. Wood, 35 Wis. 59, 17 Am. Rep. 47 471 (1874)

The schools cannot compel the child to pursue study that is forbidden by the parents.

2. State Ex Rel Sheibley v. School District #1 of Dixon County Et AL. 31 Neb. 552, 48 NW 393 (1891)

The right of the parent . . . to determine what studies his child shall pursue is paramount to that of trustees or teachers.

3. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923); Yoder; Pierce

The individual citizen has the fundamental right to direct the upbringing of his own children.

4. Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1924)

The court ruled that the state may not unreasonably interfere with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control.

A child is not the mere creature of the state.

5. Hardwick v. Bd. of Trustees, 205 p. 49 Cal. (1921)

The court commented that religious reasons were not the only basis for legitimate parental objection. It can also be a question of morals which may concern the conscience of those who are not affiliated with any particular religious sect. The court wrote that this involves:

The right of parents to control their own children — to require them to live up to the teachings and the principles which are inculcated in them at home under the parental authority. Has the state the right to enact a law . . . the effect of which would be to alienate in a measure the children from parental authority? . . . to answer . . . in the affirmative would be to give sanction to a power over home life that might result in denying parents their natural as well as their constitutional right to govern within the scope of just parental authority, their own progeny.

6. Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944)

Parental rights of bringing up children cannot be interfered with, and there must be freedom from all substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints.

7. Van Allen v. McCleary, 27 Mis. 2d 81; 211 NYS 2d 501 (1961)

Despite the compulsory school attendance laws, the parent retains the right to direct the education of his child.

8. Pie v. Ullman, 367 U.S. 497 (1961)

Parental rights of bringing up children cannot be interfered with, and there must be freedom from all substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints. (Identical to Prince v. Massachusetts.)

9. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 486 (1965)

The state cannot interfere with the rights of a parent to control his child’s education.

10. Finot v. Pasadena City Board of Education, 58 Cal., Rptr. 520; 250 Cal. 2d 226 (1967)

The state cannot interfere with a parent’s right to make affirmative decisions concerning his child’s disposition, particularly where spiritual, cultural or psychological factors are involved.

11. People Ex Rel. Vollmar v. Stanley, 255 p. 610 Colo. (1927)

Children cannot be compelled to take instruction not essential to good citizenship. The school board’s control over instruction does not mean that every child should be required to take every subject which the board puts on the list.

12. Dickens v. Emesto, 37 A.D. 2d 102, 322 NYS 2d 581 (1971)

The state cannot interfere with a parent’s right to make affirmative decisions concerning his child’s disposition, particularly where spiritual, cultural or psychological factors are involved. (Identical to Finot v. Pasadena.)

13. Vermont v. LaBarge, 357 Atl. Rptr. 2d 121 (1976)

Compulsory school attendance must yield to First Amendment concerns.

14. Wisconsin v. Yodar, 406 U.S. (1972)

The state cannot assert the role of parents (patriae), over the parents’ interest. The state’s interest in universal education, however highly we rank it, is not totally free from a balancing process when it impinges on other fundamental rights and interests, such as those specifically protected by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment and the traditional interest of parents with respect to the religious upbringing of their children.

15. Minnesota v. Lundsten, Beltrami County, MN (1980)

Compulsory attendance statutes cannot violate parents’ First Amendment right to free exercise of religion and rights to privacy in family relations.

16. Michigan v. Nobel, Nos. S-791-0114-A, S-791-0115-A (57th O. Ct., City of Allegan, Michigan, Filed 12/12/79.)

State statutes must give way to the documented and sincere religious beliefs of the parents to educate their children.

17. Kentucky v. Rudasill, 589 SW 2d 877 (Oct. 9, 1979)

No one can be compelled to send his child to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed.

18. Ohio v. Whisner, 47 Ohio st. 2d, 181 (1979)

State Department of Education minimum standards cannot deprive parents of their traditional interest to direct the upbringing and education of their children by violating their First and Fourteenth Amendments rights to the U.S. Constitution.

19. Valent v. New Jersey State Bd. of Education, 274 A. 2d 832 N.J. (1971)

Reversed on procedural grounds 288 a. 2d 52 (N.J. 1972).

Concerned parents raised religious objections to their children being required to take a compulsory course entitled Human Sexuality. The school board’s evidence indicated that 70% of the local citizens believed that sex education courses were necessary and beneficial for the students. The court noted that this was not an issue to be decided by majority vote. The judge wrote, “If majority vote were to govern in matters of religion and conscience, there would be no need for the First Amendment, which was adopted to protect the one percent who is sincere in a conscientious religious conviction. In conclusion, the court notes that: If educators are not careful about what they compel, parental discipline and respect will diminish as the great sovereign state forces its way into the home as a foster parent.”

The following list of cases all ruled on The Ultimate Right of Parent to Govern or Control His Own Progeny. (Exact wording of the ruling follows list)

20. Hardwick v. Bd. of Trustees of Fruitridge School District, 54 Cal. App. 696 205 p 49 (1921)

21. Trustees of Schools v. The People Ex Rel Markin Van Allen, 87 111. 303 (1877)

22. State v. Zobel, 81 S.D. 260, 134 NW 2d 101 (1965)

23. Shepherd v. State, 306 p. 2d 346 (1957)

The parent has the ultimate constitutional right to govern or control his own progeny. . . . It would be revolutionary and possibly subversive to hold that any such overreaching powers exist in the state or any of its agencies.

24. From Parental Rights And Responsibilities, Joel S. Moskowitz, 50 Washington Law Review 623 (1975)

When the state chooses to override a parent’s wish, the burden is on the state to establish that in order to function effectively as a citizen one must be versed in the subject to which the parent objects.