I don't understand why people have such a problem doing something like this. If your child learns something at school that you think is "wrong", then why can you not address with your child what you think is wrong and move forward? Do you have such a bad relationship with your kid that you cannot talk to them? If so, perhaps there's a larger issue at play than "you liberals taught my baby things I dont like, and my idea cant stand up to scrutiny so what am I going to do now, huh?"
Can parents have discussions about evolution? I know for sure I had this discussion with my mom about common descent and genetic drift and filling niches back in high school. Nothing fancy but she didn't know enough about evolution to counter it; to her, it's as simple as we 'grew' from monkeys. We just stopped talking about it altogether after two or three of these discussions.
Parents certainly can have discussions about evolution. Parents who don't bother to learn about it before having said discussion, however, will not be terribly successful. I fail to see how this is a flaw in the model.
I don't understand why people have such a problem doing something like this. If your child learns something at school that you think is "wrong", then why can you not address with your child what you think is wrong and move forward? Do you have such a bad relationship with your kid that you cannot talk to them? If so, perhaps there's a larger issue at play than "you liberals taught my baby things I dont like, and my idea cant stand up to scrutiny so what am I going to do now, huh?"
Can parents have discussions about evolution? I know for sure I had this discussion with my mom about common descent and genetic drift and filling niches back in high school. Nothing fancy but she didn't know enough about evolution to counter it; to her, it's as simple as we 'grew' from monkeys. We just stopped talking about it altogether after two or three of these discussions.
Parents certainly can have discussions about evolution. Parents who don't bother to learn about it before having said discussion, however, will not be terribly successful. I fail to see how this is a flaw in the model.
Why, it's a crippling flaw! Parents have the right to decide what their children believe, and if they can't be expected to ask a teacher when sex ed happens (that's why we send forms home!), they definitely can't be expected to hold their own in a scientific debate with their fifteen-year-old.
nescientist on
0
Options
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
edited May 2009
Every kid (heck, every ignorant parent) in Alberta should watch this video:
Evolution is a property of life, just as being three-sided is a property of triangles.
And you can argue till you're blue in the face for a four-sided triangle, but it isn't going to happen. :P
Really it's not every parent that is causing this. Like many things in Canadian politics, this is no doubt the cause of a very small and very vocal minority.
Really it's not every parent that is causing this. Like many things in Canadian politics, this is no doubt the cause of a very small and very vocal minority.
Squeaky wheel gets the grease, eh
What happens when these same minorities aren't satisfied with choice and want to also teach young earth creationism? Really, are they going to stop just because teaching evolution is optional or will they want more changes?
Thread hasn't been active for awhile but this is recent news. I find it so silly that sex is a controversial topic. Everything says sex, religion and sexual orientation topics are now scary, but I don't see any specifics on evolution. So I'm hoping that teaching evolution in a science class (hint: it has nothing to do with teaching about religion), does not require parental approval.
Thread hasn't been active for awhile but this is recent news. I find it so silly that sex is a controversial topic. Everything says sex, religion and sexual orientation topics are now scary, but I don't see any specifics on evolution. So I'm hoping that teaching evolution in a science class (hint: it has nothing to do with teaching about religion), does not require parental approval.
This is why Alberta can not have nice things.
Seriously though, This particular law hugely undermines any sort of health, biology, or history courses; How exactly are they supposed to have a comparable education to folks from virtually any other province?
Thread hasn't been active for awhile but this is recent news. I find it so silly that sex is a controversial topic. Everything says sex, religion and sexual orientation topics are now scary, but I don't see any specifics on evolution. So I'm hoping that teaching evolution in a science class (hint: it has nothing to do with teaching about religion), does not require parental approval.
This is why Alberta can not have nice things.
Seriously though, This particular law hugely undermines any sort of health, biology, or history courses; How exactly are they supposed to have a comparable education to folks from virtually any other province?
Well the majority will still get the proper comparable education. But the ones with repressive parents will stay repressed and it's sad.
It bears repeating that this has been true in Alberta for decades. Again, the only thing this new law does is move the requirement from the School Act into the Human Rights Act, and the reason this sucks is that it subject Teachers to the potential of being hauled in front of a tribunal when a complaint is filled, instead of complaints being fielded by the local board and superintendent.
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
edited June 2009
Giving parents the right to remove their kids from a class they really don't care about is meh, but I don't think is entirely objectionable. Moving it from just the regular School Act to the Human Rights Act...that's going to be a problem if a complaint ever does get filed (which it probably will).
Having an opt out for sex ed isn't something new, I had to get permission from my parents every year since the 4th grade to go through the sex ed stuff each year. The decision to include religion seems odd though, how often would topics of religion come up in school?
edit: I will say that adding sexual orientation to that list is fucking retarded, way to demonize those gays even more Conservatives
Giving parents the right to remove their kids from a class they really don't care about is meh
I'd be less outraged if this wasn't a right to be removed from important classes like science, and was instead a right to be removed from less important classes like French.
DanHibiki on
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
The decision to include religion seems odd though, how often would topics of religion come up in school?
The right of religious school boards to exist is contained within Section 29 of the Charter, and in this case, Alberta (along with Ontario & Quebec) is one of the provinces that has separate school boards. So presumably, the language regarding religion refers in part to the possibility of alternate religious discussion in the province that parents may not be comfortable with. Alternatively, just any religious discussion in the public school system.
Giving parents the right to remove their kids from a class they really don't care about is meh
I'd be less outraged if this wasn't a right to be removed from important classes like science, and was instead a right to be removed from less important classes like French.
, considering Canada.
I don't really think the content of the class should matter with the right, especially since this is a voluntary, individual right and not a right that one parent can apply to another family's child.
Thread hasn't been active for awhile but this is recent news. I find it so silly that sex is a controversial topic. Everything says sex, religion and sexual orientation topics are now scary, but I don't see any specifics on evolution. So I'm hoping that teaching evolution in a science class (hint: it has nothing to do with teaching about religion), does not require parental approval.
This is why Alberta can not have nice things.
Seriously though, This particular law hugely undermines any sort of health, biology, or history courses; How exactly are they supposed to have a comparable education to folks from virtually any other province?
AFAIK Alberta has one of the top education systems in the country. But hey, at least we are not in Quebec, now that is a useless education.
Really it's not every parent that is causing this. Like many things in Canadian politics, this is no doubt the cause of a very small and very vocal minority.
Squeaky wheel gets the grease, eh
What happens when these same minorities aren't satisfied with choice and want to also teach young earth creationism? Really, are they going to stop just because teaching evolution is optional or will they want more changes?
Thread hasn't been active for awhile but this is recent news. I find it so silly that sex is a controversial topic. Everything says sex, religion and sexual orientation topics are now scary, but I don't see any specifics on evolution. So I'm hoping that teaching evolution in a science class (hint: it has nothing to do with teaching about religion), does not require parental approval.
This is why Alberta can not have nice things.
Seriously though, This particular law hugely undermines any sort of health, biology, or history courses; How exactly are they supposed to have a comparable education to folks from virtually any other province?
AFAIK Alberta has one of the top education systems in the country. But hey, at least we are not in Quebec, now that is a useless education.
I'm seeing a pretty big hit coming to those numbers in the near future.
Seriously though, If you don't want your kid to learn things like evolution or how science routinely contradicts religion that's fine. Just sign your kid up for homeschooling where you can teach him whatever retarded crap your heart desires, and leave quality eductaion to all the other peoples kids.
Gaddez on
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
Thread hasn't been active for awhile but this is recent news. I find it so silly that sex is a controversial topic. Everything says sex, religion and sexual orientation topics are now scary, but I don't see any specifics on evolution. So I'm hoping that teaching evolution in a science class (hint: it has nothing to do with teaching about religion), does not require parental approval.
This is why Alberta can not have nice things.
Seriously though, This particular law hugely undermines any sort of health, biology, or history courses; How exactly are they supposed to have a comparable education to folks from virtually any other province?
AFAIK Alberta has one of the top education systems in the country. But hey, at least we are not in Quebec, now that is a useless education.
I'm seeing a pretty big hit coming to those numbers in the near future.
Seriously though, If you don't want your kid to learn things like evolution or how science routinely contradicts religion that's fine. Just sign your kid up for homeschooling where you can teach him whatever retarded crap your heart desires, and leave quality eductaion to all the other peoples kids.
Or...they could do what Alberta just did and opt to participate in the public school system while retaining the right to remove their children from limited topics to which they aren't comfortable with. Unless you're asserting the quality of the education system as a whole is somehow going to decrease because of this bill.
Seriously though, If you don't want your kid to learn things like evolution or how science routinely contradicts religion that's fine. Just sign your kid up for homeschooling where you can teach him whatever retarded crap your heart desires, and leave quality eductaion to all the other peoples kids.
Uh, how is this any better? A parent withdrawing his child from a class in public school isn't taking quality education from all the other people's kids.
Bama on
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
Seriously though, If you don't want your kid to learn things like evolution or how science routinely contradicts religion that's fine. Just sign your kid up for homeschooling where you can teach him whatever retarded crap your heart desires, and leave quality eductaion to all the other peoples kids.
Uh, how is this any better? A parent withdrawing his child from a class in public school isn't taking quality education from all the other people's kids.
Well, the legitimate complaint that almost everyone in the CBC arguing is worried about is moving the complaint process to the human rights act, which is worrisome in terms of watching what one teaches such that they're not subjected to the tribunals. But noone seems to be worried that the very act of removing one's own children from classes is harming the school system, since all that is being required of teachers is to just add a few more parent notification slips.
Seriously though, If you don't want your kid to learn things like evolution or how science routinely contradicts religion that's fine. Just sign your kid up for homeschooling where you can teach him whatever retarded crap your heart desires, and leave quality eductaion to all the other peoples kids.
Uh, how is this any better? A parent withdrawing his child from a class in public school isn't taking quality education from all the other people's kids.
At least it takes the load off me, the payer of taxes!
Until the kid turns 20 and goes on welfare I mean.
Seriously though, If you don't want your kid to learn things like evolution or how science routinely contradicts religion that's fine. Just sign your kid up for homeschooling where you can teach him whatever retarded crap your heart desires, and leave quality eductaion to all the other peoples kids.
Uh, how is this any better? A parent withdrawing his child from a class in public school isn't taking quality education from all the other people's kids.
Education should not be the equivelant of a trip to harveys where your meal is made to order to your parents specifications. It should be a standardized system that applies to all students, with the only choices made being the elective courses that the students select.
If this is too terrifying (what with talk about evolution and how to unroll a condom), the parent should begin home schooling.
And in case you missed it: yes, I am advocating for sex education to be mandatory.
I just don't see how the a la cart approach is hurting anyone other than the kid who would be hurt (even worse, in some cases) by homeschooling.
And I don't see why Parents should get a veto on what there children learn.
Because parents own/are responsible for "there" children and can bring them up however they want?
I think it has been firmly established by relevant court cases and legislation that parents can only bring up children "however they want" to an extent. If that means your parents have a religious-based hostility to mathematics, you unfortunately do not get to get out of math class because it is far better for you to take mathematics. Everyone should have an equal education and we should not be catering to people who want to raise their children to be academic idiots.
DoctorArch on
Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
I just don't see how the a la cart approach is hurting anyone other than the kid who would be hurt (even worse, in some cases) by homeschooling.
And I don't see why Parents should get a veto on what there children learn.
Because parents own/are responsible for "there" children and can bring them up however they want?
I think it has been firmly established by relevant court cases and legislation that parents can only bring up children "however they want" to an extent. If that means your parents have a religious-based hostility to mathematics, you unfortunately do not get to get out of math class because it is far better for you to take mathematics. Everyone should have an equal education and we should not be catering to people who want to raise their children to be academic idiots.
And yet, the legislation is providing temporary exemptions based on specific & limited material as opposed to wholesale course exemptions. Similarly, in dealing with social matters as opposed to strictly scientific matters (ala, mathematics) and the fact that high school graduation (or a GED) is still required to attain entrance into university (to which these people would still be attaining since they're not withdrawing completely from all education), I'm failing to see how this is resulting in the raising of children to be academic idiots.
I just don't see how the a la cart approach is hurting anyone other than the kid who would be hurt (even worse, in some cases) by homeschooling.
And I don't see why Parents should get a veto on what there children learn.
Yes you do. You're saying they should get to veto the entire course along with developing half decent social skills, resulting in a complete fundie who, when they find their ideas don't match up with the rest of the world, won't know how to deal with the people around them that keep saying things they're certain are wrong.
Edit: Which isn't to say this is a good law either, but saying they should home school instead is far worse than them not learning about evolution.
Quid on
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
I think it has been firmly established by relevant court cases and legislation that parents can only bring up children "however they want" to an extent. If that means your parents have a religious-based hostility to mathematics, you unfortunately do not get to get out of math class because it is far better for you to take mathematics. Everyone should have an equal education and we should not be catering to people who want to raise their children to be academic idiots.
As far as I know, there's never been an actual case where parents objected to mathematical teaching on religious grounds, although there have been quirky religious views on math in the past. And, as has been mentioned, there's always homeschooling.
Parents religious liberties are usually taken to extend pretty far: the Amish, for instance, are given special dispensation to pull their kids out of school at a younger age. Sure, you can't withhold life-saving medicine from your kid, but you're given free reign to fuck him up in the head. Or enlighten him, depending on whose perspective you're taking.
MrMister on
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
edited June 2009
The homeschool favourite maths textbooks you can buy are opposed to Set Theory on the basis of its ungodliness.
I just don't see how the a la cart approach is hurting anyone other than the kid who would be hurt (even worse, in some cases) by homeschooling.
And I don't see why Parents should get a veto on what there children learn.
Because parents own/are responsible for "there" children and can bring them up however they want?
This is actually not true at all, parents do not own their children. The state does. All minors are wards of the state, the care of whom is the responsibility of a legal guardian (usually the parent). Don't tell the Albertans though, they'll go apeshit.
And yeah this bill is pretty much complete bullshit, I hope some teacher gets taken to court over it because they will win
Parents are just going to find out and force their kids to learn about God anyway.
Learning about evolution will be the new Playboy in your brother's closet that you bring to school. Kids huddled around, getting all excited over opposable thumbs.
edit: Also, ololol Alberta parents "pull out" when it's time for sex.
The homeschool favourite maths textbooks you can buy are opposed to Set Theory on the basis of its ungodliness.
Is that true? Because it would be awesome.
My dad managed to get a grant from the Templeton (read: god) foundation for his research into the nature of infinity. That's actually something that generated some controversy in the set theory community: whether they wanted to accept god-money in order to further their math-research, even though they knew full and well that their research into the nature of mathematical infinity had nothing to do with the Templeton crew's interest in theological infinity.
Posts
Why, it's a crippling flaw! Parents have the right to decide what their children believe, and if they can't be expected to ask a teacher when sex ed happens (that's why we send forms home!), they definitely can't be expected to hold their own in a scientific debate with their fifteen-year-old.
Evolution for ID-iots (version 2.0)
Evolution is a property of life, just as being three-sided is a property of triangles.
And you can argue till you're blue in the face for a four-sided triangle, but it isn't going to happen. :P
Squeaky wheel gets the grease, eh
I never finish anyth
What happens when these same minorities aren't satisfied with choice and want to also teach young earth creationism? Really, are they going to stop just because teaching evolution is optional or will they want more changes?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1msS71xL00&feature=related
I watched this the whole way through.
Hmmm... I wonder where you'd have to go to see all of Jesus's ancestors stacked up perfectly in order with their birth certificates...
Is he talking about this?
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2009/06/02/alberta-human-rights-school-gay-education-law.html?ref=rss
Thread hasn't been active for awhile but this is recent news. I find it so silly that sex is a controversial topic. Everything says sex, religion and sexual orientation topics are now scary, but I don't see any specifics on evolution. So I'm hoping that teaching evolution in a science class (hint: it has nothing to do with teaching about religion), does not require parental approval.
Seriously though, This particular law hugely undermines any sort of health, biology, or history courses; How exactly are they supposed to have a comparable education to folks from virtually any other province?
Well the majority will still get the proper comparable education. But the ones with repressive parents will stay repressed and it's sad.
Your statement of certainty displeases me. Blah Alberta. You hear me Alberta? BLAH!
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
edit: I will say that adding sexual orientation to that list is fucking retarded, way to demonize those gays even more Conservatives
The right of religious school boards to exist is contained within Section 29 of the Charter, and in this case, Alberta (along with Ontario & Quebec) is one of the provinces that has separate school boards. So presumably, the language regarding religion refers in part to the possibility of alternate religious discussion in the province that parents may not be comfortable with. Alternatively, just any religious discussion in the public school system.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
I don't really think the content of the class should matter with the right, especially since this is a voluntary, individual right and not a right that one parent can apply to another family's child.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
AFAIK Alberta has one of the top education systems in the country. But hey, at least we are not in Quebec, now that is a useless education.
20 billion? He means 14 right?
This was not biased in any possible way.
Seriously though, If you don't want your kid to learn things like evolution or how science routinely contradicts religion that's fine. Just sign your kid up for homeschooling where you can teach him whatever retarded crap your heart desires, and leave quality eductaion to all the other peoples kids.
Or...they could do what Alberta just did and opt to participate in the public school system while retaining the right to remove their children from limited topics to which they aren't comfortable with. Unless you're asserting the quality of the education system as a whole is somehow going to decrease because of this bill.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
Well, the legitimate complaint that almost everyone in the CBC arguing is worried about is moving the complaint process to the human rights act, which is worrisome in terms of watching what one teaches such that they're not subjected to the tribunals. But noone seems to be worried that the very act of removing one's own children from classes is harming the school system, since all that is being required of teachers is to just add a few more parent notification slips.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
At least it takes the load off me, the payer of taxes!
Until the kid turns 20 and goes on welfare I mean.
If this is too terrifying (what with talk about evolution and how to unroll a condom), the parent should begin home schooling.
And in case you missed it: yes, I am advocating for sex education to be mandatory.
And I don't see why Parents should get a veto on what there children learn.
Because parents own/are responsible for "there" children and can bring them up however they want?
I think it has been firmly established by relevant court cases and legislation that parents can only bring up children "however they want" to an extent. If that means your parents have a religious-based hostility to mathematics, you unfortunately do not get to get out of math class because it is far better for you to take mathematics. Everyone should have an equal education and we should not be catering to people who want to raise their children to be academic idiots.
And yet, the legislation is providing temporary exemptions based on specific & limited material as opposed to wholesale course exemptions. Similarly, in dealing with social matters as opposed to strictly scientific matters (ala, mathematics) and the fact that high school graduation (or a GED) is still required to attain entrance into university (to which these people would still be attaining since they're not withdrawing completely from all education), I'm failing to see how this is resulting in the raising of children to be academic idiots.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
Edit: Which isn't to say this is a good law either, but saying they should home school instead is far worse than them not learning about evolution.
As far as I know, there's never been an actual case where parents objected to mathematical teaching on religious grounds, although there have been quirky religious views on math in the past. And, as has been mentioned, there's always homeschooling.
Parents religious liberties are usually taken to extend pretty far: the Amish, for instance, are given special dispensation to pull their kids out of school at a younger age. Sure, you can't withhold life-saving medicine from your kid, but you're given free reign to fuck him up in the head. Or enlighten him, depending on whose perspective you're taking.
And yeah this bill is pretty much complete bullshit, I hope some teacher gets taken to court over it because they will win
Learning about evolution will be the new Playboy in your brother's closet that you bring to school. Kids huddled around, getting all excited over opposable thumbs.
edit: Also, ololol Alberta parents "pull out" when it's time for sex.
3DS Friend Code: 2165-6448-8348 www.Twitch.TV/cooljammer00
Battle.Net: JohnDarc#1203 Origin/UPlay: CoolJammer00
Is that true? Because it would be awesome.
My dad managed to get a grant from the Templeton (read: god) foundation for his research into the nature of infinity. That's actually something that generated some controversy in the set theory community: whether they wanted to accept god-money in order to further their math-research, even though they knew full and well that their research into the nature of mathematical infinity had nothing to do with the Templeton crew's interest in theological infinity.