32 ms·

Proverbs 22:6 "Train up a child in the way he should go, And when he is old he will not depart from it." the elites don't want "unapproved" ideas getting int

Proverbs 22:6 "Train up a child in the way he should go, And when he is old he will not depart from it." the elites don't want "unapproved" ideas getting into the minds of malleable youth...shaping the minds of youth is solely the province of our benevolent elites...

threatofrain 4y ago
A lot of parents don't want unapproved media to reach their kids. If something like this passes, it's going to be at least because of parental support.
- JohnWhigham 4y ago
  Funny thing is that I guarantee a lot of the parents in support of dumb shit like this lose their minds at sexual education classes in public schools. Just shows that most people don't have the IQ necessary to be competent parents.
  - RobertRoberts 4y ago
    Which do you prefer? 1) We should have school districts teaching _Republican_ ideals because the local schools support it. 2) We should have school districts teaching _Democrat_ ideals because the local schools support it. 3) No to both 1 and 2. You simply can't have it both ways, therefore the reasonable option is to say no to both.
    - 8note 4y ago
      2) is actually "We should have school districts _not_ teaching _Republican_ ideals because the local schools support it. 3) is then a contradiction, in that there is nothing that could be taught, since everything is either republican ideals or not-republican ideals
    - joe5150 4y ago
      good luck teaching much beyond colors and shapes without overlapping with some "Republican ideals" or "Democrat ideals". especially given the ever-widening scope of what so many Republicans claim constitutes Democratic political indoctrination in schools.
    - vineyardmike 4y ago
      If 3, what are schools teaching? Hopefully students learn something beyond the reality that their education is a political pawn.
      - RobertRoberts 4y ago
        Reading and math seem like they would be useful skills taught in school.
    - veilrap 4y ago
      The problem with this is that Republicans in power today equate things like evolution with Democrat ideals. When facts get labeled as bias it's impossible to remove both from the classroom and still have a functional classroom.
      - _-david-_ 4y ago
        Can you name two Republicans who "equate things like evolution with Democrat ideals"?
        germinalphrase 4y ago
        Anti-Evolution Legislation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-evolution_legislation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-evolution_legislation
        _-david-_ 4y ago
        The OP said "Republicans in power today". You provided a link of legislations from 10 plus years ago most of which didn't even go anywhere.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - freemint 4y ago
      Well i could wish for correct ideals to be taught which happen to be overwhelmingly not the republican ones.
      - RobertRoberts 4y ago
        Why not just teach math, reading and science and other non-political skills?
        freemint 4y ago
        Because then you end up with a society with extreme STEM brain. You will not raise citizens but a politically uneducated servant class in a society vulnerable to extreme fracturing as common frameworks to think about politics were not established. Poltical education has been part of the education for the rulers since forever and since the enlightenment it has been more and more become part of education of everybody. By not teaching politics to a class of people you make them unable to work as lawyers, judges or (suprise) politicians taking away their control and feedback into how society develops. Those positions will be taken up instead by a different class of people by the accident of whom they have been birth been found deserving to get such an education. I hope do not elaborate why that is bad. You could argue that people could get the same education from the internet. However as long as the internet is not censored people will spread versions of political education that are not aligned along country borders and not constrained by being a reproductive, self sustaining system of thought. This leaves the political order highly vulnerable. We teach politics so that nations do not fall apart into local fiefdoms ruled by an elite class tied to who the parents are. By proposing to axe political education you are proposing to get onto a path to pre-enlightment political structures. This is not hyperbole. Political education goes beyond "how do i vote and how does my government work", it includes all of history, large parts of art, literature and so on. Political education like that is an pre-requisite to be able to find your own individual political opinion and it is a prerequisite for contributing to shape society. If you take away that power (in particular along a public/private education line) you kneecap one side of the politics of power and possibly irreversibly trigger a run-away feedback leading to a categorical change/tipping point how society works. I hope i could persuade you that this is an extremely bad idea.
    - mbg721 4y ago
      There are plenty of school districts in localities where there's no meaningful Republican presence; how are they doing?
  - _gabe_ 4y ago
    If you lose your mind about a sexual education class, I agree that's misguided, but saying they have a low IQ because of that? Maybe a low EQ if they can't control their emotions, but it's absurd to automatically equate emotions with intelligence. We've all acted stupidly because we've been emotionally invested in an idea. To pretend otherwise is disingenuous at best, and probably indicative of a low IQ at worst ;) Anyways, lots of people and religions have wildly different ideas on the sanctity (or lack of sanctity) of sex. Some people don't like it when a public school decides to teach their child something different. Whether that's a school teaching that heterosexual monogamy is the one true way, or homosexualism or polygamy or whatever. People have very different opinions on this and that's OK.
    - JohnWhigham 4y ago
      Don't think you got my point. I'd wager most parents that don't like sexual education courses don't see the hypocrisy in supporting this bill. They're essentially letting the state do the parenting for them.
      - _gabe_ 4y ago
        Ah gotcha. Yep I agree with that completely and must have misread your original sentiment :)
    - bbor 4y ago
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- InitialLastName 4y ago
  In that case, they are free to take responsibility for the media their children have access to.
  - edgyquant 4y ago
    Good luck. My uncles kid was always on dating sites etc at a young age. I did everything for them setting up restrictions, ensuring the kid had an account that only could access a few sites. They took away their tablet and phone etc. The kid still managed to get caught hooking up with older men via Grindr.
    - vineyardmike 4y ago
      Maybe teach the child how to think about their decisions in a responsible manner instead of trying to hide the world from them? You won’t win and the child won’t know why you’re hiding it from them. If they knew why, you wouldn’t need to hide it because they’d understand what to avoid on their own. I was certainly on Grindr before I was 18 because I was a curious child and was never exposed to queer people. I was thankfully raised by parents that also taught me why making decisions like hooking up with old men could be bad. So I never did that. My parents banned the internet from me as a kid -until i was 18- except in controlled manners. I flashed Linux on a school computer, used it to make a bootable VM of android that I could use to run apps on my person computer. I was particularly technically literate but there’s endless ways to avoid your parents wishes.
    - InitialLastName 4y ago
      In 20 years, do you think the kid will think the gratuitously restrictive parenting or the hooking up with older men caused more damage?
      - edgyquant 4y ago
        Both
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

threatofrain 4y ago

A lot of parents don't want unapproved media to reach their kids. If something like this passes, it's going to be at least because of parental support.

JohnWhigham 4y ago
Funny thing is that I guarantee a lot of the parents in support of dumb shit like this lose their minds at sexual education classes in public schools. Just shows that most people don't have the IQ necessary to be competent parents.
- RobertRoberts 4y ago
  Which do you prefer? 1) We should have school districts teaching _Republican_ ideals because the local schools support it. 2) We should have school districts teaching _Democrat_ ideals because the local schools support it. 3) No to both 1 and 2. You simply can't have it both ways, therefore the reasonable option is to say no to both.
  - 8note 4y ago
    2) is actually "We should have school districts _not_ teaching _Republican_ ideals because the local schools support it. 3) is then a contradiction, in that there is nothing that could be taught, since everything is either republican ideals or not-republican ideals
  - joe5150 4y ago
    good luck teaching much beyond colors and shapes without overlapping with some "Republican ideals" or "Democrat ideals". especially given the ever-widening scope of what so many Republicans claim constitutes Democratic political indoctrination in schools.
  - vineyardmike 4y ago
    If 3, what are schools teaching? Hopefully students learn something beyond the reality that their education is a political pawn.
    - RobertRoberts 4y ago
      Reading and math seem like they would be useful skills taught in school.
  - veilrap 4y ago
    The problem with this is that Republicans in power today equate things like evolution with Democrat ideals. When facts get labeled as bias it's impossible to remove both from the classroom and still have a functional classroom.
    - _-david-_ 4y ago
      Can you name two Republicans who "equate things like evolution with Democrat ideals"?
      - germinalphrase 4y ago
        Anti-Evolution Legislation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-evolution_legislation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-evolution_legislation
        _-david-_ 4y ago
        The OP said "Republicans in power today". You provided a link of legislations from 10 plus years ago most of which didn't even go anywhere.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
  - freemint 4y ago
    Well i could wish for correct ideals to be taught which happen to be overwhelmingly not the republican ones.
    - RobertRoberts 4y ago
      Why not just teach math, reading and science and other non-political skills?
      - freemint 4y ago
        Because then you end up with a society with extreme STEM brain. You will not raise citizens but a politically uneducated servant class in a society vulnerable to extreme fracturing as common frameworks to think about politics were not established. Poltical education has been part of the education for the rulers since forever and since the enlightenment it has been more and more become part of education of everybody. By not teaching politics to a class of people you make them unable to work as lawyers, judges or (suprise) politicians taking away their control and feedback into how society develops. Those positions will be taken up instead by a different class of people by the accident of whom they have been birth been found deserving to get such an education. I hope do not elaborate why that is bad. You could argue that people could get the same education from the internet. However as long as the internet is not censored people will spread versions of political education that are not aligned along country borders and not constrained by being a reproductive, self sustaining system of thought. This leaves the political order highly vulnerable. We teach politics so that nations do not fall apart into local fiefdoms ruled by an elite class tied to who the parents are. By proposing to axe political education you are proposing to get onto a path to pre-enlightment political structures. This is not hyperbole. Political education goes beyond "how do i vote and how does my government work", it includes all of history, large parts of art, literature and so on. Political education like that is an pre-requisite to be able to find your own individual political opinion and it is a prerequisite for contributing to shape society. If you take away that power (in particular along a public/private education line) you kneecap one side of the politics of power and possibly irreversibly trigger a run-away feedback leading to a categorical change/tipping point how society works. I hope i could persuade you that this is an extremely bad idea.
  - mbg721 4y ago
    There are plenty of school districts in localities where there's no meaningful Republican presence; how are they doing?
- _gabe_ 4y ago
  If you lose your mind about a sexual education class, I agree that's misguided, but saying they have a low IQ because of that? Maybe a low EQ if they can't control their emotions, but it's absurd to automatically equate emotions with intelligence. We've all acted stupidly because we've been emotionally invested in an idea. To pretend otherwise is disingenuous at best, and probably indicative of a low IQ at worst ;) Anyways, lots of people and religions have wildly different ideas on the sanctity (or lack of sanctity) of sex. Some people don't like it when a public school decides to teach their child something different. Whether that's a school teaching that heterosexual monogamy is the one true way, or homosexualism or polygamy or whatever. People have very different opinions on this and that's OK.
  - JohnWhigham 4y ago
    Don't think you got my point. I'd wager most parents that don't like sexual education courses don't see the hypocrisy in supporting this bill. They're essentially letting the state do the parenting for them.
    - _gabe_ 4y ago
      Ah gotcha. Yep I agree with that completely and must have misread your original sentiment :)
  - bbor 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
InitialLastName 4y ago
In that case, they are free to take responsibility for the media their children have access to.
- edgyquant 4y ago
  Good luck. My uncles kid was always on dating sites etc at a young age. I did everything for them setting up restrictions, ensuring the kid had an account that only could access a few sites. They took away their tablet and phone etc. The kid still managed to get caught hooking up with older men via Grindr.
  - vineyardmike 4y ago
    Maybe teach the child how to think about their decisions in a responsible manner instead of trying to hide the world from them? You won’t win and the child won’t know why you’re hiding it from them. If they knew why, you wouldn’t need to hide it because they’d understand what to avoid on their own. I was certainly on Grindr before I was 18 because I was a curious child and was never exposed to queer people. I was thankfully raised by parents that also taught me why making decisions like hooking up with old men could be bad. So I never did that. My parents banned the internet from me as a kid -until i was 18- except in controlled manners. I flashed Linux on a school computer, used it to make a bootable VM of android that I could use to run apps on my person computer. I was particularly technically literate but there’s endless ways to avoid your parents wishes.
  - InitialLastName 4y ago
    In 20 years, do you think the kid will think the gratuitously restrictive parenting or the hooking up with older men caused more damage?
    - edgyquant 4y ago
      Both
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]