Are conservatives correct? Do parents have a right to design their children's curriculum so they'll grow up pro American?
Is that one of their rights as parents?
56-60, F
Top | Newest First | Oldest First
JoeyFoxx · 56-60, M
We all have choices.
We can choose where to live. We can choose who to elect. We can choose to serve.
Anyone can do whatever the fuck they want.
But, when you choose to live in civil society, you agree to the limits that society imposes. Adults should not be rewarded for stamping their collective feet and whining about decisions made by the rest of society.
Most of these douchebags are not making the US a better place. They just want everyone to suck it up and worsip a damn flag as if it's a goddamn religion.
Ok. Where's my flamethrower?
We can choose where to live. We can choose who to elect. We can choose to serve.
Anyone can do whatever the fuck they want.
But, when you choose to live in civil society, you agree to the limits that society imposes. Adults should not be rewarded for stamping their collective feet and whining about decisions made by the rest of society.
Most of these douchebags are not making the US a better place. They just want everyone to suck it up and worsip a damn flag as if it's a goddamn religion.
Ok. Where's my flamethrower?
View 22 more replies »
JoeyFoxx · 56-60, M
LamontCranston · M
@JoeyFoxx It may not yet have reached that point. It will only if you make sophistry part of your essential being.
Confined · 56-60, M
Every parent has the responsibility to teach their kids to be good citizens. I grew up hearing all about WWII and how food was rationed, black outs, nuclear attack drills in schools.
Dont ask what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. ALL Democrats want people to hate our country and every one should be bad citizens that depend totally on their government to tell them what to do.
Dont ask what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. ALL Democrats want people to hate our country and every one should be bad citizens that depend totally on their government to tell them what to do.
Confined · 56-60, M
@ImperialAerosolKidFromEP United states
ImperialAerosolKidFromEP · 51-55, M
@Confined I had no idea it had food rationing. I didn't even think Canada had it
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
Adstar · 56-60, M
@BohemianBabe 😊 Oh i understand alright.. I know whats been happening in the west university system since the mid 1960's it started out as a soviet mind ops program but it ended up being a dead mans hand program because the soviet union did not survive.. It failed because socialist Marxism AlWAYS fails.. But the program kept running and the universities pumped out the primary and high school teachers who brought their brain dead leftist indoctrination to the kids..
So now we have an entire generation that has been indoctrinated in this leftist PC mind rot form pre-school to the end of university and they are going out to undermine the prosperity of the west. Preparing the way for a Soviet invasion that will never come.. Useful idiots like you are part of their dumbed down populace.. Their program ends with societal disaster and extreme austerity. Hopefully we shall avoid the starvation that killed 20 million Chinese socialists when China launched it's cultural Marxist revolution..
So now we have an entire generation that has been indoctrinated in this leftist PC mind rot form pre-school to the end of university and they are going out to undermine the prosperity of the west. Preparing the way for a Soviet invasion that will never come.. Useful idiots like you are part of their dumbed down populace.. Their program ends with societal disaster and extreme austerity. Hopefully we shall avoid the starvation that killed 20 million Chinese socialists when China launched it's cultural Marxist revolution..
BohemianBabe · M
@Adstar Can you define Marxism?
Also, do you know where the term "Cultural Marxism" actually came from?
Also, do you know where the term "Cultural Marxism" actually came from?
SW-User
They have a right to homeschool them if they do not think the schools available to them will educate them adequately. 🤷♂️
Unfortunately in the U.S. especially, we have this idea of "children as property", so they are pretty much yours to mold however you see fit, barring actual abuse (but even that is sometimes not adequately defined).
I think parents would do well to try to instill in their children an ability to think critically and come to their own conclusions about what to believe, instead of simply trying to turn them into dutiful little copies of themselves.
Unfortunately in the U.S. especially, we have this idea of "children as property", so they are pretty much yours to mold however you see fit, barring actual abuse (but even that is sometimes not adequately defined).
I think parents would do well to try to instill in their children an ability to think critically and come to their own conclusions about what to believe, instead of simply trying to turn them into dutiful little copies of themselves.
JoeyFoxx · 56-60, M
@SW-User is it though?
SW-User
@JoeyFoxx I think it is, yes, when parents fail to recognize their child as an individual. There is a sense among some parents that children have little more agency than pets. I think it explains a lot of the rage seen at school board meetings across the nation.
Stopmakingsense · 56-60, F
@JoeyFoxx I'm afraid it seems real enough.
Roadsterrider · 56-60, M
Roadsterrider · 56-60, M
@BohemianBabe I am a conservative and I have no ideas on Catholics destroying Christianity, I always thought that they were part of Christianity. No different than Methodists or Baptists. There was a mainstream anti Catholic sentiment when JFK was running for office, not conservatives or democrats, but mainstream. I don't know how it only became a conservative thing to you.
On "safe places" if you haven't been watching the news and reading about it, I guess you don't really know if it is stupid or not.
Mental illness has very little to do with most criminal activity, it is just poor choices and blame. I grew up in poverty, I knew it was up to me to get out of it. I never resorted to selling drugs of stealing from others, I joined the military and got out. To some, it may be a never ending cycle, generational, to others who seek other opportunities and quit blaming their lot in life on everyone else, they succeed. How do you reduce crime on a systemic level? According to The Cato Institute, we have spent $15 Trillion dollars to eradicate poverty, there is a higher percentage of people in poverty than when this all started in the 1960s. Every progressive plan hatched has become a money laundering scheme from welfare to planned parenthood.
On "safe places" if you haven't been watching the news and reading about it, I guess you don't really know if it is stupid or not.
Mental illness has very little to do with most criminal activity, it is just poor choices and blame. I grew up in poverty, I knew it was up to me to get out of it. I never resorted to selling drugs of stealing from others, I joined the military and got out. To some, it may be a never ending cycle, generational, to others who seek other opportunities and quit blaming their lot in life on everyone else, they succeed. How do you reduce crime on a systemic level? According to The Cato Institute, we have spent $15 Trillion dollars to eradicate poverty, there is a higher percentage of people in poverty than when this all started in the 1960s. Every progressive plan hatched has become a money laundering scheme from welfare to planned parenthood.
BohemianBabe · M
@Roadsterrider
That's because you're a conservative in the twenty-twenties. If you were a conservative in the fifties, you'd be hearing people like Lauren Boebert rage against Catholics, instead of Muslims. But now, that Catholics have become assimilated, and Muslims are the new religious minority, they have to be the scary ones.
No, the Left at the time didn't have an issue with JFK being Catholic. This was only an issue for conservative Protestants who were afraid that America was becoming too Catholic.
Alright, you didn't answer me, so you don't actually know what a safe space is. Should I explain it to you?
This is a child's understand of how the world works. Yes, if you're born into poverty, you should do everything you can to get out of it. But the point is that people who live in poverty are more likely to turn to crime for survival. What you're basically saying is there are no problems at the systemic level. Black people living under Jim Crow should have just worked harder.
Yeah, because economic policies have moved drastically to the Right in recent years. The rich are paying less in taxes for welfare programs today than they were back before these programs even started.
America has gone Left on social issues, but on economics, we're still being screwed by Reaganomics.
I am a conservative and I have no ideas on Catholics destroying Christianity, I always thought that they were part of Christianity.
That's because you're a conservative in the twenty-twenties. If you were a conservative in the fifties, you'd be hearing people like Lauren Boebert rage against Catholics, instead of Muslims. But now, that Catholics have become assimilated, and Muslims are the new religious minority, they have to be the scary ones.
There was a mainstream anti Catholic sentiment when JFK was running for office, not conservatives or democrats, but mainstream. I don't know how it only became a conservative thing to you.
No, the Left at the time didn't have an issue with JFK being Catholic. This was only an issue for conservative Protestants who were afraid that America was becoming too Catholic.
On "safe places" if you haven't been watching the news and reading about it, I guess you don't really know if it is stupid or not.
Alright, you didn't answer me, so you don't actually know what a safe space is. Should I explain it to you?
I grew up in poverty, I knew it was up to me to get out of it.
This is a child's understand of how the world works. Yes, if you're born into poverty, you should do everything you can to get out of it. But the point is that people who live in poverty are more likely to turn to crime for survival. What you're basically saying is there are no problems at the systemic level. Black people living under Jim Crow should have just worked harder.
According to The Cato Institute, we have spent $15 Trillion dollars to eradicate poverty, there is a higher percentage of people in poverty than when this all started in the 1960s.
Yeah, because economic policies have moved drastically to the Right in recent years. The rich are paying less in taxes for welfare programs today than they were back before these programs even started.
America has gone Left on social issues, but on economics, we're still being screwed by Reaganomics.
Roadsterrider · 56-60, M
@BohemianBabe I live in reality, not my imagination. Instead of saying that Lauren Boebert would have been raging out against Catholics, this idea is purely from your imagination. Who were the republicans who raged because JFK was a Catholic. I have read quite a bit about JFK, and the problem of being Catholic was both parties, Ds and Rs. The feeling is that it would allow the Pope to influence the president.
It wasn't that America was becoming too Catholic, it was that the Pope might be able to influence the president and nobody wanted the Catholic Church to have the president's ear.
I don't think that safe spaces today are anything like what they were when the term was coined in the 1960s. Back in the 60s, it was primarily a place where the LGBTQ crowd could go, night clubs and such, where they would be safe from homophobes. Today it is considered a place where dissent and open discussion is not tolerated, there may be no diversity of opinion in a "safe space".
Jim Crow was separate but equal, not sure how we got there because I never mentioned race, just poverty. I may have a child's understanding of it, but it worked. I figured out that if I didn't want to remain poor, I needed to do something to make myself worth more to an employer. I couldn't afford to go to college. The military was the next choice, I learned how to work on aircraft in the military, and after getting out, getting a certification through the FAA to work on them in the civilian world, I have never looked back. If a person doesn't like where they are in life it is up to them to change it. If you want to make more money, make yourself more valuable. As I was figuring this out for myself, I did a stint as an apprentice welder for $1 an hour. I worked as an apprentice mechanic for $3.35 an hour. Thirty years later, I am still a mechanic, but I am the answer guy, when guys can't fix something, they call me. I could have stayed where I grew up and sold pot, meth, and sat on the porch and drank like most of my peers, that would have been easy enough. I am more appreciative of my parents and the way I was raised every time I go back and realize how far I have gotten in life compared to those who chose the easy way.
As far as taxes go, I can only hope that you get a great job and, in a few years start moving up the economic ladder. And the same would go for your significant other. As you make more money, you will realize how much what you pay in changes, The top 20% of wage earners pay about 70% of the taxes collected by the government. The bottom 20% of earners pay about 2% of the total collected.
https://itep.org/who-pays-taxes-in-america-in-2019/?gclid=Cj0KCQiA15yNBhDTARIsAGnwe0XOVxRpjNGYgYX4HocMh0bXUoZSy_PArDaesHxbMtmFLSHBVd_HU5gaAmUREALw_wcB
When liberal politicians want to tax wealthy people, who already pay more or they want to tax businesses to put more into social engineering programs, they are not helping anyone. Taxes are the cost of doing business, the consumer pays those taxes with no respect to whether he is in the top 20% or the bottom 20% of earners.
Maybe it is only a nickel on a gallon of gas but when the independent carpenter fills up his tank and it costs an extra dollar, it starts adding up, in the state I live in, fuel costs have doubled. Nothing is free in this world, welfare, medicaid, medicare, roads and bridges, the rest of the pork barrel projects. The government doesn't make money, they can't fund anything without first collecting money from someone else in the form of taxes. Income tax as we know it started in the early 1900s, before that most of the revenue collected by the US government was from import and export tariffs. There was no income tax.
Personally, I would like to see a flat tax, across the board, 10%, 15%. If you make $1000, you pay $100 if you make $100,000 you pay $10,000. In reality that would go over like a fart in church, whether Catholic or Protestant. Because it would be equal across the whole field. No more Earned Income Credit, no more hidey holes, no shelters.
There are systemic problems, the government can't pay for the fix though. It will require some assistance and the will of the individual to accept responsibility and take actions to fix problems in society.
It wasn't that America was becoming too Catholic, it was that the Pope might be able to influence the president and nobody wanted the Catholic Church to have the president's ear.
I don't think that safe spaces today are anything like what they were when the term was coined in the 1960s. Back in the 60s, it was primarily a place where the LGBTQ crowd could go, night clubs and such, where they would be safe from homophobes. Today it is considered a place where dissent and open discussion is not tolerated, there may be no diversity of opinion in a "safe space".
Jim Crow was separate but equal, not sure how we got there because I never mentioned race, just poverty. I may have a child's understanding of it, but it worked. I figured out that if I didn't want to remain poor, I needed to do something to make myself worth more to an employer. I couldn't afford to go to college. The military was the next choice, I learned how to work on aircraft in the military, and after getting out, getting a certification through the FAA to work on them in the civilian world, I have never looked back. If a person doesn't like where they are in life it is up to them to change it. If you want to make more money, make yourself more valuable. As I was figuring this out for myself, I did a stint as an apprentice welder for $1 an hour. I worked as an apprentice mechanic for $3.35 an hour. Thirty years later, I am still a mechanic, but I am the answer guy, when guys can't fix something, they call me. I could have stayed where I grew up and sold pot, meth, and sat on the porch and drank like most of my peers, that would have been easy enough. I am more appreciative of my parents and the way I was raised every time I go back and realize how far I have gotten in life compared to those who chose the easy way.
As far as taxes go, I can only hope that you get a great job and, in a few years start moving up the economic ladder. And the same would go for your significant other. As you make more money, you will realize how much what you pay in changes, The top 20% of wage earners pay about 70% of the taxes collected by the government. The bottom 20% of earners pay about 2% of the total collected.
https://itep.org/who-pays-taxes-in-america-in-2019/?gclid=Cj0KCQiA15yNBhDTARIsAGnwe0XOVxRpjNGYgYX4HocMh0bXUoZSy_PArDaesHxbMtmFLSHBVd_HU5gaAmUREALw_wcB
When liberal politicians want to tax wealthy people, who already pay more or they want to tax businesses to put more into social engineering programs, they are not helping anyone. Taxes are the cost of doing business, the consumer pays those taxes with no respect to whether he is in the top 20% or the bottom 20% of earners.
Maybe it is only a nickel on a gallon of gas but when the independent carpenter fills up his tank and it costs an extra dollar, it starts adding up, in the state I live in, fuel costs have doubled. Nothing is free in this world, welfare, medicaid, medicare, roads and bridges, the rest of the pork barrel projects. The government doesn't make money, they can't fund anything without first collecting money from someone else in the form of taxes. Income tax as we know it started in the early 1900s, before that most of the revenue collected by the US government was from import and export tariffs. There was no income tax.
Personally, I would like to see a flat tax, across the board, 10%, 15%. If you make $1000, you pay $100 if you make $100,000 you pay $10,000. In reality that would go over like a fart in church, whether Catholic or Protestant. Because it would be equal across the whole field. No more Earned Income Credit, no more hidey holes, no shelters.
There are systemic problems, the government can't pay for the fix though. It will require some assistance and the will of the individual to accept responsibility and take actions to fix problems in society.
BohemianBabe · M
Only to a degree. Parents do not have the right to teach their kids objectively wrong things. When it comes to what they teach their kids at home, there is a huge grey area, but when it comes to public schools, it's much easier to control.
So when parents say that schools should teach kids that the "gay agenda" is Satanic Cultural Marxism, schools should have the right to tell them no, we teach reality here.
So when parents say that schools should teach kids that the "gay agenda" is Satanic Cultural Marxism, schools should have the right to tell them no, we teach reality here.
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
@BohemianBabe I'm sorry to tell you this, because I disagree with people teaching their kids that crap, but I'm afraid it's not illegal. They just have to find a school that teaches a bullshit curriculum.
BohemianBabe · M
@LordShadowfire There are some schools that teach that insanity, but they're almost only private schools. Generally speaking, public schools teach truth. At least when it comes to science. With history, we still have a lot to fix.
Justmeraeagain · 56-60, F
They have a duty to protect.
If the schools didn't pass out graphic sexual literature or have teachers hitting on students or in my day teachers being abusive to the students, perhaps parents would have more confidence in the system?
Do parents have no rights?
Should they turn them exclusively over to the schools?
There is no one size fits all on either side.
Are not other free people's pro whatever thier country is?
If you mean as in exclusively better than all others(which is egotistical) or living in isolation (that is an impossiblity now and a pipe dream), I wouldn't agree with that.
I don't believe we are better than anyone else,but freedom is a good thing and parents should have some rights with accordance with their kids.
I don't pretend to know what all conservites want for their child nor how much liberals wish to absolve(if they even do) thier own parental responsibility.
I don't play the us against them game.
If the schools didn't pass out graphic sexual literature or have teachers hitting on students or in my day teachers being abusive to the students, perhaps parents would have more confidence in the system?
Do parents have no rights?
Should they turn them exclusively over to the schools?
There is no one size fits all on either side.
Are not other free people's pro whatever thier country is?
If you mean as in exclusively better than all others(which is egotistical) or living in isolation (that is an impossiblity now and a pipe dream), I wouldn't agree with that.
I don't believe we are better than anyone else,but freedom is a good thing and parents should have some rights with accordance with their kids.
I don't pretend to know what all conservites want for their child nor how much liberals wish to absolve(if they even do) thier own parental responsibility.
I don't play the us against them game.
LamontCranston · M
This is a provocatively and asinine-ly asked question.
The question should be: do parents have a right to educate their children as they see fit (as long as basic skill subjects (reading, writing,'rithmetic) are taught-this is where the community has a say.
OR do parents have a right to speak out and influence what subjects and manner their children are taught.
See Virginia state elections and varios recall petitions and protests around the country.
Even Merrick Garland, the most political AG since Eric Holder, at least publicly agrees.
The question should be: do parents have a right to educate their children as they see fit (as long as basic skill subjects (reading, writing,'rithmetic) are taught-this is where the community has a say.
OR do parents have a right to speak out and influence what subjects and manner their children are taught.
See Virginia state elections and varios recall petitions and protests around the country.
Even Merrick Garland, the most political AG since Eric Holder, at least publicly agrees.
independentone · M
Fukfacewillie · 56-60, M
Yes.
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
Sadly, yes. As parents, they have the legal right to fill their children's heads with whatever nonsense they choose.